Title
PLN24-0286 - Administrative Variance - 139 Mecartney Road. Applicant: Joseph Brajkovich and Mohsen Khalaji. A public hearing to consider a Variance due to a remapping of the legal lot lines that will establish the lot as a legal building site, allow a reduction of non-conforming lot size and setbacks, increase allowable lot coverage, and allow reasonable development potential of an oddly shaped lot, pursuant to AMC 30-21.2. The project is categorically exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15305 - Class 5 - minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including minor lot line adjustments, side yard and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcels.
Body
CITY OF ALAMEDA
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
PUBLIC HEARING STAFF REPORT
PLN24-0286 - Administrative Variance - 139 Mecartney Road. Applicant: Joseph Brajkovich and Mohsen Khalaji. A public hearing to consider a Variance due to a remapping of the legal lot lines that will establish the lot as a legal building site, allow a reduction of non-conforming lot size and setbacks, increase allowable lot coverage, and allow reasonable development potential of an oddly shaped lot, pursuant to AMC 30-21.2. The project is categorically exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15305 - Class 5 - minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including minor lot line adjustments, side yard and setback variances not resulting in the creation of any new parcels.
Zoning: R-1, Residential District.
General Plan: Low Density Residential.
Staff Recommendation: Approve with conditions.
Public Notice: A notice for this hearing was mailed to property owners and residents within 300 feet of the site, published in local newspapers and posted in public areas near the subject property. Staff received no public comments on this proposed project at the time this report was written.
Exhibits:
1. Project Plans
2. Allowable Yards
Summary and Analysis: The applicant has requested the approval of a variance due to a re-mapping of the legal lot lines on the property which recognizes existing legal lot lines which have been erroneously understood in the past. This action will establish the lot as a legal building site, allow a reduction of non-conforming lot size and setbacks, increase allowable lot coverage, so that there remains reasonable development potential of an oddly shaped lot, pursuant to AMC 30-21.2.
The lot is being reduced in size to address a court-ordered remapping of the lot lines to correct a mapping error that goes back to the original construction of the dwelling, creation of the lot over 100 years ago, and in subsequent mapping and lot sales in the neighborhood. Instead of considering the fence line as the lot line, the true lot line will be established 3.65 feet from the back of the main portion of the dwelling; a rear addition to the building that crosses the line will be removed.
The lot is currently non-conforming and will remain so, at 4,461 square feet where 5,000 square feet is required. The lot is wedge-shaped, with a long frontage on Mecartney Road of 110 feet and a shallow depth of between 20 and 68 feet. The existing building is located in a manner that results in a non-conforming front yard (approximately 12 feet where 20 feet is required) and rear yard of 3.65 feet where 20 feet is required.
The subject lot is located on a residential block with no curb, gutter or sidewalk, making it difficult to infer the actual front yard area. The subject lot and adjacent lot have an angled frontage as well, resulting in a jigsaw pattern of front building walls and yards. Continuing the lines of the existing building as the permissible front, side and rear yards will maintain adequate openness on the lot and allow reasonable development potential.
There is no proposed development at this time. Future development, whether an addition to the existing building or a new building, would be subject to Design Review (unless exempt pursuant to the ordinance) pursuant to AMC Section 30-37.2. Besides the variance, no other discretionary review is requested or required at this time. Pursuant to AMC Section 30-21.2, an Administrative Variance may be approved for variances to lot size, lot coverage, yards and open space requirements on residential properties if the findings in AMC Section 30-21.1 can be made.
RECOMMENDED ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE FINDINGS:
1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applying to the property involved or to the proposed use of this property. The unique and substandard configuration of the lot precludes compliance with the zoning development standards. As a result of the lot configuration, before and after the adjustment, the buildable portion of the lot is wedge-shaped. This variance is conditioned on a new set of reduced yard dimensions, shown in Exhibit 2, that will allow reasonable development in line with existing conditions on the lot and in the area while retaining consistent open areas facing the street.
2. Because of such exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, the literal enforcement of specified provisions of the zoning code would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship such as to deprive the applicant of substantial property right possessed by other owners of property in the same class of district. Most other lots in the neighborhood are rectangular and/or of sufficient dimension to allow reasonable development and generally conforming yard areas. One other lot on this side of the street has an angled frontage, but the lot depth is greater and the lot is more square overall. In addition, the subject property was erroneously mapped and developed for over a hundred years; this variance is required to address the resulting lot dimensions after the settlement of litigation among the neighbors. Adjusting the required lot size, yards and coverage is an equitable result.
3. The granting of the variance will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to persons or property in the vicinity. The proposed reduced setbacks and increased lot coverage will provide reasonable development potential, adequate openness, and separation from the street and neighbors. Any future development would be subject to Design Review and Building Code standards.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Compliance with Approved Plans: The lot size, yards and allowable lot coverage for any future construction or development shall be in compliance with Exhibit 2, based on plans prepared by PLS Surveys, Inc, dated June 27, 2024.
2. A copy of this Approval shall be printed on the cover of any future Design Review and/or Building Permit plans.
3. Vesting: This approval is valid upon adoption and will not expire.
4. Changes to Approved Plans: This approval is limited to the scope of the project defined in the project description and does not represent a recognition and/or approval of any work completed without required City permits.
5. Flooding Mitigation. All habitable floors and associated mechanical equipment for new buildings or substantial improvements to existing buildings shall be constructed at least one foot above the base flood elevation in accordance with Chapter 20 of the Alameda Municipal Code and current building code requirements. The base flood elevation on this site is Elevation 10 feet, NAVD88 Datum.
6. HOLD HARMLESS. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the applicant (or its successor in interest) shall defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Alameda, its City Council, City Planning Board, officials, employees, agents and volunteers (collectively, “Indemnitees”) from and against any and all claims, actions, or proceedings against Indemnitees to attack, set aside, void or annul an approval by Indemnitees relating to this project. This indemnification shall include, but is not limited to, all damages, losses, and expenses (including, without limitation, legal costs and attorney’s fees) that may be awarded to the prevailing party arising out of or in connection with an approval by the Indemnitees relating to this project. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and the City shall cooperate in the defense. The City may elect, in its sole discretion, to participate in the defense of said claim, action, or proceeding and the applicant (or its successor in interest) shall reimburse the City for its reasonable legal costs and attorneys’ fees.
Prepared by: Steven Buckley, Planning Services Manager