My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
022112
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/14/2012 1:48:21 PM
Creation date
2/14/2012 1:44:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/10/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
View images
View plain text
THE CITY OF 12 <br /> CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT <br /> PL£ASANTONe <br /> February 21, 2012 <br /> January 10, 2012 <br /> Community Development <br /> Planning Division <br /> TITLE: P11-0731, CONSIDER AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING <br /> COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN <br /> REVIEW APPLICATION TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATELY <br /> 74-FOOT LONG FENCE, VARYING IN HEIGHT FROM 72 INCHES <br /> TO 83 INCHES, BETWEEN 3647 AND 3633 GLACIER COURT <br /> NORTH. ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IS R-1-6,500 (ONE- <br /> FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT <br /> APPELLANT: Carl Pretzel <br /> APPLICANT: Robert Baker <br /> SUMMARY <br /> Mr. Carl Pretzel and Mr. Robert Baker are adjoining neighbors on Glacier Court North. <br /> In the summer of 2011, they agreed to reconstruct the existing fence located on the side <br /> property line separating the properties. The cost of the fence material was shared; Mr. <br /> Baker provided labor. The subject fence was over six feet in height; neither Mr. Pretzel <br /> nor Mr. Baker obtained prior City approval for an overheight fence. As a result of code <br /> enforcement action, on August 31, 2011, Mr. Baker submitted an application for <br /> Administrative Design Review approval for the subject fence. Mr. Pretzel was the co- <br /> applicant of this application. Notice concerning the overheight fence was sent to <br /> adjoining property owners and a request for a Zoning Administrator hearing was made. <br /> Meanwhile, on October 5, 2011, Mr. Pretzel notified staff that he wanted to withdraw his <br /> name as the co-applicant. He stated that he opposed the overheight fence and <br /> requested that the fence height be reduced to six feet. Mr. Pretzel appealed the Zoning <br /> Administrator's approval of the subject fence to the Planning Commission. The <br /> Planning Commission heard the subject matter and denied the appeal. Mr. Pretzel <br /> subsequently filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to uphold the <br /> Zoning Administrator's action. The appeal is therefore before the City Council. <br /> ZONING ADMINSTRATOR ACTION <br /> Approved the overheight fence subject to Conditions of Approval (Attachment 4). <br /> PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> The Planning Commission unanimously denied the appeal, thereby upholding the <br /> Zoning Administrator's approval of the overheight fence subject to Conditions of <br /> Approval as listed in the Zoning Administrator's approval fetter (Attachment 4). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.