PC 082201 - Laserfiche WebLink

,.- 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS a. PCUP-36, Dale Morris Application for a conditional use permit to serve alcoholic beverages after 10:00 p.m. at the Toby's restaurant to be located at 30 W. Neal Street, Suite 110. Zoning for the property is PUD (Planned Unit Development) - CoO (Commercial-Office) District. Continued to September 12,2001. b. P AP-23 (P ADR-365, David and Katherine Campbell) Appellant: Martin Miller Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's approval of an application to extend an open patio cover with the posts located 12 feet, 4 inches and the eave overhang located ten feet, 4 inches from the rear property line for the existing residence located at 625 Abbie Street. Zoning for the property is R-I-6,500 (single-family residential) District. ,.- Mr. Pavan presented the staff report, providing a description of the proposal and background on the application. He noted that the appellant, Mr. Miller, has expressed concern with respect to privacy impacts as a result of the proposal, and the applicant proposed to plant a tree in an area that would provide screening over time. Mr. Pavan reported that following the Zoning Administrator hearing, Mr. Miller appealed the Zoning Administrator approval. He advised that Mr. Miller feels the solution to this situation would be the installation of an eight-foot tall fence along the shared property line. Mr. Pavan commented that staff feels there are several factors that serve to minimize the impact of the proposal and staff is recommending that the Planning Commission support the Zoning Administrator's approval and deny the appeal. Mr. Pavan noted that an eight-foot tall fence would require Zoning Administrator approval, but that this proposal could be applied for at any time. Martin Miller, 4754 Peaceful Lane, the appellant, provided additional photos for the Planning Commission's review. Mr. Miller commented that when they purchased their home, one of the deciding factors was the amount of privacy they were allowed in this neighborhood. He noted that they have two deciduous trees that lose all their leaves for three to four months each year and the view depicted in the photos opens up. He stated that he also planted a redwood tree in the spring and that it is not doing very well. He advised that he was proactive in providing screening prior to the submittal of the Campbell's application. He noted that he has other fence issues and he has a bid for the fence. He further stated that he feels that because of the problem with the discontinuity of visibility into his home, they could solve two problems with one solution. Mr. Miller referenced Mr. Campbell's comments in the minutes of the Zoning Administrator's hearing which acknowledges that a higher fence would be a better method of screening. Mr. Miller noted that is what he is after. He advised that information on a 24" box tree does not provide a clear understanding of the girth or height of a 24" box tree. He stated that he understands the Campbells' position regarding the expense that would be incurred and that it would look funny having an extension on a just a portion of their fence. He further stated that he does not want to impose on all of the Campbells' neighbors. Mr. Miller noted that he has offered to share in the cost of the fence along his property. He advised that he wants the project to go forward, but he wants more satisfaction regarding the clarity of what a 24" box tree means. ~. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 22, 2001 Page 10