pages: CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf, 4
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2008-08-05 | 4 | Proponent : Ed Hirshberg, Appellant. There being no further speakers, Mayor Johnson closed the public portion of the Hearing. Mayor Johnson inquired whether decks are required now, to which the Appellant responded in the affirmative. Mayor Johnson inquired whether the proposed decks conform to the new code. The Appellant responded the size of the back yard is not quite in conformance and current code would require a deck for all four units. Councilmember deHaan inquired how tenants access the yard currently. The Appellant responded tenants walk through the Elk's property; the yard is not used very much; the decks would improve access. Councilmember deHaan inquired whether tenants in the other two units would be able to use the remaining portion of the yard, to which the Appellant responded in the affirmative. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the privilege has been extended to other properties, to which the Planning Services Manager responded that he is aware of one other instance, a single- family dwelling with an unusually shaped lot. Mayor Johnson inquired about the nature of the opposition to the decks. The Planning Services Manager responded the Planning Board was concerned about future uses anticipated for the adjacent area. In response to Mayor Johnson's inquiry about whether the adjacent property use would occur, the Planning Services Manager stated staff believes so, but nothing has been submitted. Vice Mayor Tam inquired how the decks would infringe upon the neighbors. The Planning Services Manager stated the noise created from the adjacent building might disturb people using the decks. Councilmember Matarrese inquired whether the same noise issue would apply with use of the backyard as it is now, to which the Planning Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 4 August 5, 2008 | CityCouncil/2008-08-05.pdf |