Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves site development permit and setback variance for 10320 Raleigh Road with conditions
Summary
After extensive neighbor testimony about historic encroachments and fire risk, the Planning Commission approved a site development permit and limited variance to remodel the nonconforming portion of a house at 10320 Raleigh Road. Approval includes standard conditions, two uncovered parking spaces, relocation of AC units out of setbacks, an open‑space easement over steep slope, removal of a shed in the easement and a request that the owner provide any historical documentation to the History Committee.
The Planning Commission voted Jan. 27 to approve a site development permit and a variance to remodel a nonconforming section of the house at 10320 Raleigh Road (File SD‑209 / Variance 2015).
Staff explained the parcel’s history: the home was built in 1937 while under county jurisdiction, later annexed and now contains nonconforming elements (garage and bedroom within the 30‑foot side setback). The applicant’s proposal would demolish most of the existing home and build a new single‑story 4,611 square‑foot residence while retaining and remodeling the existing portion that encroaches in the setback. Staff and the Open Space Committee recommended an open‑space easement over steep slopes on the property; the History Committee asked that any historic photos or documentation be provided before demolition.
Neighbors testified at length about the house’s history and alleged prior property line manipulations and unpermitted additions. Several speakers noted fire‑safety concerns and asked whether the project would affect neighbors’ ability to obtain insurance or the availability of fire‑truck access. The applicant and designer said they had consulted the fire marshal and planned a compliant fire‑truck turnaround using the existing driveway; they also emphasized efforts to reduce visual and privacy impacts by minimizing windows on the neighbor side.
Commissioners discussed the narrow nature of the variance — staff described the request as focused on a limited change in building volume for an existing nonconformity rather than a new encroachment. After deliberation, the commission adopted staff’s recommendation for a categorical CEQA exemption (15301, 15303) and approved the project with conditions: two uncovered, non‑tandem parking spaces outside setbacks, relocation of AC equipment out of setback areas, removal of a shed within the proposed open‑space easement, and a recommendation that the owner provide historical documentation to the History Committee. The approval passed on a roll call vote; the decision is subject to a 21‑day appeal period.
