My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12 ATTACHMENTS
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
022112
>
12 ATTACHMENTS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2012 12:57:00 PM
Creation date
2/14/2012 1:45:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/10/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
14 ATTACHMENTS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
57
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
MINUTES ATTACHMENT 5 <br /> ZONING ADMINISTRATOR <br /> Pleasanton, California <br /> Small Conference Room <br /> 200 Old Bernal Avenue, Pleasanton <br /> Thursday, October 25, 2011 <br /> CALL TO ORDER <br /> The meeting was called to order at 2:30 p.m. by Janice Stern, Planning Manager <br /> Present: Mr. Robert Baker, Applicant; Mr. Carl Pretzel, neighbor at 3633 Glacier Court N; Todd <br /> Deike, neighbor at 3642 Carlsbad Way; Dottie Fink, neighbor at 3656 Carlsbad Way; <br /> Janice Stern, Zoning Administrator; and Jenny Soo, Associate Planner. <br /> P11-0731, Application for administrative design review approval to construct an approximately <br /> 74-foot long redwood fence between 3647 and 3633 Glacier Court North, varying in <br /> height from 72 inches to 83 inches <br /> Ms. Stern explained the Zoning Administrator hearing process. <br /> Mr. Pretzel commented that a hearing may not be necessary because he paid for half the fence and the <br /> fence is his property as much the neighbor's property. He noted that the fence is on the community <br /> property line and that he never cededthe land. He stated it is an over-height fence, against the code, and <br /> that he has every right to cut it down. He mentioned that it was built without his approval. He continued <br /> that he does not want it that high and asked what prevents him from cutting it down. <br /> Ms. Stern commented that it would be a civil matter between you and your neighbor regarding cutting the <br /> fence. She explained that the hearing today is because a request for a Zoning Administrator hearing was <br /> made. <br /> Ms. Stern introduced Jenny Soo, Associate Planner, who presented the application. <br /> Ms. Stern explained the over-height fence regulations allow for fences taller than six feet if certain findings <br /> can be made. <br /> The public hearing was opened. <br /> Mr. Baker stated that he measured the fence on his side and it ranged from the highest being six-foot, ten- <br /> inches to the lowest of six-foot, four-inches in height. He did not find a section that reached seven-foot, but <br /> that could be possible. He explained that prior to the construction of the fence he met with Mr. Pretzel. He <br /> stated that Mr. Pretzel had two requirements; (I) he asked that 2x12 heavy-duty baseboards be attached to <br /> the 4x4 posts on my side to hold back the higher level of soil due to the grading from my swimming pool; <br /> and (2) that cardboard cones be used to increase the amount of concrete around the 4x4 post bases. <br /> Mr. Baker stated his only requirement was that no red paint be used on Mr. Pretzel's side to avoid it <br /> bleeding through to his side. He commented that Mr. Pretzel agreed to that requirement. <br /> Mr. Baker explained that he put the new face boards on his side for Mr. Pretzel's convenience and he <br /> agreed to let Mr. Pretzel put up his old painted fence. He mentioned that Mr. Pretzel paid for half the <br /> fence. <br /> Mr. Baker stated that there was no discussion or demand for a height restriction prior to construction. <br /> .11imetes. Zoning Administrator, P11-0-31 October 25, 2011 <br /> Page 1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.