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 />the report referring to the required fences as well as secured gates with latches <br />surrounding swimming pools. He indicated that Mr. fencing would not <br />have passed his inspection and that his existing fence provides a secure barrier for his <br />pool. He added that he is sensitive to safety and emphasized that children have lost <br />their lives due to pools without fencing. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker stated that Mr. old materials is not <br />acceptable and would not pass inspection where a pool is involved. He noted that <br />modifying Mr. ecure with respect to the pool. He added <br />that this would not affect Ms. Fink as she has no pool. <br /> <br />Referring to one of the pictures displayed, Commissioner Pentin requested confirmation <br />that the fence started to deteriorate in 1998 and inquired how many years it has been in <br />this state of disrepair. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker replied that the fence was in this present state for two or three years. He <br />noted that he could see the rear neighbor one property down from his house. <br /> <br />Commissioner Pentin expressed concern about this condition and asked Mr. Baker if he <br />thought it was reasonable to have no fence. <br /> <br />Mr. Baker said no. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel stated that the Code does not require a seven-foot tall fence for swimming <br />pools and that a six-foot tall fence is applicable. He noted that Ms. <br />fence is by Mr. Deike had no <br />fence or latches around his pool. He added that it was only until this time last year that <br />the fence became illegal and was cited as such by Code Enforcement. He indicated <br />that his red fence meets the Code. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson inquired if the photo submitted by Mr. Baker was current. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel said yes. He added that the picture was taken from his property and that the <br />fence had basically been coming down since a winter storm in January. <br /> <br />Commissioner Olson asked Mr. Pretzel if he owns the fence. <br /> <br />Mr. Pretzel replied that it is a common fence. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank noted that it is the same picture as that submitted by staff but <br />taken from a different angle. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br /> <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank requested staff to present a history of actions and approvals for <br />this fence. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 14, 2011 Page 14 of 22 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.