|
Project Title: |
Variance and Small Lot Design Review for Residential Additions |
|
County File(s): |
CDVR25-01036 |
|
Applicant: |
Darrin Derita |
|
Owners: |
Darrin Derita & Tina M. Straub Derita |
|
Zoning: |
Single-Family Residential (R-20) |
|
General Plan: |
Residential Low Density (RL) |
|
Site Address/Location: |
236 Angela Avenue, Alamo, CA 94507 (APN: 192-090-007) |
|
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Status: |
Categorically Exempt: CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e), regarding additions to “Existing Facilities” |
|
Project Planner: |
Syd Sotoodeh, Senior Planner; (925) 655-2877; syd.sotoodeh@dcd.cccounty.us |
|
Staff Recommendation: |
Partial Approval (See Section II for Full Recommendation) |
I. PROJECT SUMMARY
The applicant requests approval of a Variance Permit to allow a 19-foot front setback (where 25 feet is required) and small lot design review for the construction of an approximately 106-square-foot addition to an existing garage and improvements to an approximately 200-square-foot living space addition constructed within the garage without permits. The applicant also requests approval of small lot design review for the construction of an approximately 1,255 square-foot living space addition on the eastern side of the home located on a substandard lot.
II. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the County Zoning Administrator:
1. OPEN the public hearing, RECEIVE testimony, and CLOSE the public hearing;
2. DETERMINE that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e);
3. DENY the variance for a 19-foot front setback (where 25 feet is the minimum required) and small lot design review for an addition to the garage and improvements to a living space addition constructed without permits within the garage, County File #CDVR25-01036, based on not being able to make the necessary Findings for approval as required by Section 26-2.2006 of the County Code (see attached findings).
4. APPROVE the small lot design review for an approximately 1,255 square-foot addition to the eastern side of the home located on a substandard lot.
5. APPROVE the findings in support of the small lot design review and the conditions of approval;
6. DIRECT the Department of Conservation and Development to file a CEQA Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk.
III. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. General Plan: The subject property is located within an RL, Residential Low Density (RL) land use designation.
B. Zoning: The subject property is located within a R-20, Single-Family Residential (R-20) district.
C. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Compliance: The proposed project is categorically exempt under CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e), regarding “Existing Facilities” which exempts the construction of an addition to an existing structure provided that the addition does not result in an increase of more than “50 percent of the floor area of the structure, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is less.” The proposed addition of 1,561 square feet of garage and living space does not exceed 2,500 square feet and would increase the floor area of the existing 2,057-square-foot residence by 43 percent.
D. Lot Creation: The parcel that comprises the project site is a portion of Rancho San Ramon. Based on the issuance of building permits for residential improvements, including for interior renovations issued on September 30, 2013, the parcel is considered a lawful lot pursuant to Section 66499.34 of the California Subdivision Map Act.
E. Prior County Files Related to the Property:
1. ZI-86-58: County Application Permit Center records indicate an application was submitted for the subject property; however, the file is missing or misnumbered. There are no other Planning files related to the property.
IV. SITE/AREA DESCRIPTION
The subject property is an approximately 25,265-square-foot (0.58-acre) lot with an average width of 101 feet (where 120 feet is required) fronting Angela Avenue, a private road. The project site is located approximately 550 feet north of Bolla Avenue and 300 feet south of Ina Court. Topographically, the lot is fairly flat with no rise in elevation. Typical of the surrounding area, the property located in a R-20 single-family residence zoning district is developed with a one-story, 1,657-square-foot residence with an attached 400-square-foot garage, driveway, and 120-square-foot shed. Other uses in the surrounding area of unincorporated Alamo include Stone Valley Middle School, east of and adjacent to the subject property.
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant requests approval of a Variance Permit to allow a 19-foot front setback (where 25 feet is the minimum) for the construction of an approximately 106-square-foot addition to the existing 400-square-foot garage for an existing single-family residence at the western (front) side of the home and improvements to an approximately 200-square-foot living space addition constructed within the garage without permits. According to the applicant’s written statement included with the application, a prior owner’s expansion of living space into the garage left the garage depth at less than 12 feet. Thus, the project would shift the garage west towards the front property line to accommodate the living space encroaching into the garage. The project also proposes an approximately 1,255-square-foot addition at the eastern (rear) side of the home. Approval of a small lot design review for the construction of the residential improvements on a substandard lot has also been requested.
VI. AGENCY COMMENTS
A. San Ramon Valley Fire District: On an agency comment form dated August 26, 2025, Fire District staff indicated that they have no comments. Please see the attached form for details of their comments.
B. Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (Central San): In correspondence dated September 9, 2025, Central San staff indicated that the project site is within their service area, is currently receiving sewer service, and that prior to receiving a building permit the applicant shall submit improvement plans to the Central San Permit Counter for review. Please see the attached letter for details of their comments.
C. East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD): In correspondence dated September 11, 2025, EBMUD staff indicated that if additional water service is needed, the project sponsor should contact EBMUD’s New Business Office for an estimate. Please see the attached letter for details of their comments.
D. Alamo Improvement Association (AIA): In correspondence received on September 22, 2025, the Chair of the AIA Planning Committee recommended approval of the application as presented as a variance is necessary to accommodate a remodel of the older home on a substandard lot. The Chair indicated that while the garage expansion could be accommodated on another area of the lot, it would not be possible due to the presence of a large valley oak which would have to be removed or would be substantially compromised, that saving a large tree is not granting a special privilege, and that denying the variance would deprive the owner of the reasonable use of the property similar to other properties in the neighborhood. Please refer to the attached form for the details of their comments.
Staff Response: The subject property has a substandard width (approximately 104 feet where 120 feet is required). However, given that there is an existing garage and that the project also proposes an addition to the rear side of the residence, the lot does not exhibit the type of extraordinary physical characteristics that must exist in order to justify relief from the zoning regulations and standards of the R-20, Single-Family Residential zoning district. The lot is located in a residential district and is not further subdividable. Also, based on the site plan, although there are eight oak trees on the subject property, none of the trees on the lot are in a stand of four or more. Thus, none of the trees on the subject property are code-protected. None of the oak trees on the property are proposed for removal due to the proposed addition at the rear of the home or located in an area of the lot that would prohibit additional living space from being constructed at the rear of the home.
E. Alamo Municipal Advisory Council (MAC): In correspondence to Community Development Division (CDD) staff, the Chair of the Alamo MAC indicated that the application was considered at their monthly meeting held on December 2, 2025. The Chair indicated that the Alamo MAC recommends unanimous approval of the application with a recommendation to include a condition requiring that two existing oak trees on the property be preserved to the extent possible, and that any proposed landscaping be consistent with the established character of the neighborhood.
Staff Response: Staff has not included a recommended condition of approval to preserve two existing oak trees on the subject property as it is not clear which two oak trees the Alamo MAC intends to preserve. There are eight oak trees of varying sizes in various locations on the subject property as shown on the site plan submitted with the application, none of which are in an apparent stand of four or more oak trees. In addition, the oak trees are located on a developed lot in a residential zoning district that is not further subdividable. Although the project to construct an addition to the rear of the home appears to encroach slightly into the driplines of two oak trees, none of the oak trees located on the property are code-protected. There is no new landscaping proposed with the application.
F. Contra Costa County, Building Inspection Division: No comments were received from the Building Inspection Division prior to the preparation of this report.
VII. APPLICANT’S REQUEST FOR A ZONING ADMINISTRATOR HEARING
A Notice of Intent to Recommend Denial of Variance for Garage Addition was sent to the applicant on August 26, 2025. In an email received on October 15, 2025, the applicant requested a public hearing. The applicant did not submit a rebuttal to staff’s recommendation for denial. However, below is a summary of the applicant’s written statement of findings submitted with the application and staff’s response:
Reason 1: “Included in [the application] are photos of neighbor's home 224 Angela Ave. By satellite photo program and proprietary measuring tool, it shows only 37'-7" total setback from easement line to structure. Using a laser line on the street as easement line per set spikes, the actual measurement is 43'-6" Either way, the required 50' total setback is not met. We are asking for a greater setback of 45' with only 5' variance.”
Staff Response: Staff reviewed County records related to neighboring properties. According to County records, small lot design review applications were approved since the year 2004 for three neighboring properties, including 224 Angela Avenue, all for new garages that complied with the minimum 25-foot front setback required in an R-20 zoning district which applies to all of the properties in the vicinity.
Reason 2: “We purchased this home a few years ago. Some earlier modifications had been made and part of the home was expanded into the garage by 7'-8". This leaves the garage depth at less than 12 feet. Our proposed plans would include the expansion of the garage slightly past the set back by 5 feet to accommodate a regulation depth garage. Construction would also include the rework of the previous 7'-8" section taken from the garage to insure that it meets building code.”
Staff Response: There is no evidence in the records that the prior expansion of living space into the garage was permitted. In addition, the 0.58-acre lot is fairly flat with no rise in elevation. Thus, staff considers that given that there is an existing garage and that an addition of living space on the eastern (rear) side of the residence is proposed, the lot does not exhibit the type of extraordinary physical characteristics that must exist in order to justify relief from zoning regulations and standards of the R-20 zoning district.
Reason 3: “The requested variance substantially meets the intent and purpose of the respective land use district.”
Staff Response: The project would require a variance to allow a reduced 19-foot front setback which does not substantially meet the intent and purpose of the 25-foot minimum setback, which is to provide consistent development, access to light and air, and open space at the front of the residential property.
VIII. STAFF ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
A. General Plan: The subject property is located within a Residential Low Density (RL) General Plan land use designation. The RL designation is primarily intended for residential uses such as single-family residences on lots ranging from approximately 15,000 square feet to 1 acre in size at densities ranging from 1 to 3 units per net acre. The proposed garage expansion would be residential in nature. The proposed residential improvements, including expanding the existing garage, would not change the residential use or density of the subject property or the surrounding area. Thus, the project would be consistent with the RL General Plan designation.
B. Zoning: The R-20 zoning district primarily permits residential uses including garages. Development within the R-20 district requires a 25-foot minimum front setback, 15-foot minimum rear yard, and 15-foot minimum side yard with a 35-foot minimum side yard aggregate. Two off-street parking spaces that are a minimum 9 feet by 19 feet are required for a lot created after September 9, 1971. One off-street parking space is allowed for lots that were legally created prior to September 9, 1971.
The subject property has an existing garage that meets the setback and yard requirements and provides two off-street parking spaces. As proposed, the project would require a variance from the R-20 zoning district standards to allow a reduced 19-foot front setback for construction of a garage expansion at the western (front) side of the home and improvements to a previously unpermitted living space encroachment into the garage. Based on the attached findings, staff cannot support the proposed garage expansion which would require a variance, encroaches into the front setback, and is not essential.
The subject property is substandard in average width (approximately 101 feet where 120 feet is the minimum required) and any development on the property requires a Small Lot Design Review to determine compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. As proposed, the one-story addition of 1,255 square feet of new living space at the eastern (rear) side of the home complies with the maximum height allowed, and the minimum rear and side yard requirements for the R-20 zoning district. Staff considers that the small lot design review findings exist to allow for the construction of the one-story addition at the rear of the home.
C. Appropriateness of Use: The project site is within an established single-family residential neighborhood. The requested variance is to allow for the expansion and relocation of an existing garage. The improvements include extending the garage into the property’s 25-foot front setback in order to improve and enlarge an unpermitted encroachment of living space into the existing garage. Although garage and residential living space improvements are common throughout the County, the location of the garage expansion into the minimum required front setback is not.
The proposed addition of living space at the eastern (rear) side of the home is residential in nature, and consistent with the residential use on the property. Since the project does not change the residential use of the site and has been determined to be consistent with the historical nature of the site, the approximately 1,255 square-foot addition to the rear of the home is an appropriate use for the property.
IX. CONCLUSION
The location of the garage expansion on the western side of the residence is not consistent with the development standards of the R-20 zoning district. Staff recommends that the Zoning Administrator deny the variance requested for a reduced front setback and small lot design review for a garage and living space addition on the western side of the residence as part of County File #CDVR25-01036 based on the attached findings.
The location of the addition to the eastern side of the residence is consistent with the development standards of the R-20 zoning district and findings exist for small lot design review criteria. Therefore, staff recommends partial approval of the small lot design review for the addition to the eastern side of the residence as part of County File #CDVR25-01036 based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of approval.
Attachments:
A. Findings and COA
B. Maps
C. Agency Comments
D. Applicant’s Written Statement
E. Project Plans