Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance Accessory Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sunnyvale Board approves variance to place accessory structure inside setback at 458 Clay Road
Summary
The Board approved a variance allowing an accessory structure that encroaches approximately four feet into the platted setback at 458 Clay Road, despite staff—recommendation of denial and questions about public-safety exceptions and shared access lanes.
The Sunnyvale Board of Adjustments voted to approve a variance for an accessory structure at 458 Clay Road after staff recommended denial and after the board discussed setbacks, potential public-safety implications and the property—configuration.
Planning staff told the board the applicant sought two accessory buildings; one complied with the platted build line and the second was proposed partially within the required setback. Staff recommended denial because it determined the request did not demonstrate a unique hardship and the UDO setback rules apply. The staff report noted the proposed structure would be approximately four feet into the required setback (the structure would be within the property lines but encroach into the setback area).
There were no members of the public who submitted opposition at the hearing on this item and no public commenters spoke during the hearing. Board members asked for clarifications about the site plan, including whether the structure would be built on another property and whether any shared fire lanes or easements would be impeded. Staff clarified the building would be on the applicant's property and that a marked fire lane and shared access existed nearby; staff said the fire lane would not be impeded by the proposed structure.
One commissioner raised the possibility of applying a public-safety exception; others noted that equipment is currently stored on-site and that enclosing it could reduce visual clutter. After questions and discussion about precedent and the property's particular configuration, a motion to approve the variance was made and seconded. The board then voted in favor of approving the variance as presented. The transcript does not include a roll-call tally by name.
Planning staff noted that each variance is considered on its individual merits and that no written opposition was in the record for this item. The approved variance allows construction of the accessory structure within the setback as presented; the staff recommendation and the transcript indicate the action was granted despite the lack of demonstrated unique hardship in the staff report.
