My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 121411
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
PC 121411
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
2/2/2012 11:28:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
12/14/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />out and will be unattractive. He stated that Pleasanton is a community of acceptance, <br />and there is no community acceptance when two neighbors do not agree about a <br />mismatched fence. <br /> <br />Mr. fence is required for pool <br />safety; however, it need not be seven feet tall, as opposed to six feet. He indicated that <br />this was a lack of judgment on the part of his neighbor, who is looking for reasons, <br />whether logical or not, to support building a seven-foot tall fence. He added that if <br />privacy is the issue, then Mr. Deike should put plantings on his side of the fence, but the <br />height of the fence is not warranted. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel stated that there were also issues regarding paying for half of the cost of the <br />fence because he did not want to pay $700 for a fence he did not want. He added that <br />he has constructed and maintained his own fence. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel stated that the staff report omitted issues regarding the concrete footings. <br />He indicated that the portion of the fence constructed by the previous neighbor is good, <br />unlike that constructed by Mr. Deike, which has mold and is rotten. He added that <br />another neighbor, Ms. Fink, who is present and can talk for herself, also has issues with <br />the fence. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank asked Mr. Pretzel what he wanted to see happen with respect to <br />the fence. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel replied that he wanted the fence to six feet tall to match his <br />existing six-foot tall fence. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank asked Mr. Pretzel if he wanted two fences. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel said yes and added that he wanted to build his own fence. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson requested clarification about the red fence shown in one of the <br />slides presented and asked Mr. Pretzel if he owned that fence. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel replied that it is the common fence between Mr. Deike and himself. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pentin inquired if this fence was approved and if this was its condition <br />since 1998. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel replied that the fence deteriorated after 1998 because it was not maintained. <br /> <br />Todd Deike, Applicant, apologized to the Commissioners for taking their time. He <br />related the history of his interactions with Mr. Pretzel over the fencing issue and the <br />timeline from when the fence began to fall down to when a new fence was required by <br />Code Enforcement because of his pool. He noted that he received approval for a <br />six-foot six-inch tall fence in 1998, and two months ago, he received approval for his <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 14, 2011 Page 12 of 22 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.