My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC-95-77
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
RESOLUTIONS
>
1990-1999
>
1995
>
PC-95-77
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/15/2006 9:33:25 AM
Creation date
4/13/2005 2:50:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
RESOLUTIONS
DOCUMENT DATE
10/11/1995
DOCUMENT NO
PC-95-77
DOCUMENT NAME
AP-95-10/V-95-15/Z-95-168
NOTES
TONY/MARY ANN CRAVOTTA/ROBERT/SUZANNE EARNEST
NOTES 3
EXISTING GAZEBO W/IN REQUIRED FRONTYARD
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 />PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF PLEASANTON <br /> <br />ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO. PC-95-77 <br /> <br />RESOLUTION DENYING CASE AP-95-10 AND APPROVING AN APPLICATION <br />FOR A VARIANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW APPROVAL TO ALLOW AN EXISTING <br />GAZEBO, AS FILED UNDER CASE V-95-15/Z-95-168 <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator approved Case V-95-15/Z-95-168, <br />the application of Robert and Suzanne Ernest for a <br />variance from the Pleasanton Municipal Code and for <br />design review approval to allow an existing, <br />approximately 15' 0" tall open gazebo within the required <br />front yard of a single-family lot located at 17 Foothill <br />Lane; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, zoning for the property is R-1-20,000 single-family <br />residential District; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, within the time specified by the Pleasanton Municipal <br />Code, the decision was appealed by an adjacent neighbor <br />(Tony and Mary Ann Cravotta); and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, at their duly noticed public hearing of October 11, 1995, <br />the Planning Commission considered all public testimony, <br />relevant exhibits and recommendations of the City staff <br />concerning this application; and <br /> <br />WHEREAS, the Planning Commission made the following findings: <br /> <br />1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the <br />property, including its size, shape, topography, <br />location or surroundings, the strict application of <br />the provisions of this chapter deprives the <br />property owners of privileges enjoyed by other <br />property owners in the vicinity of the subject <br />property and under identical zoning classification. <br /> <br />The applicants' property is wedge-shaped having <br />extensive street frontages on two sides. The other <br />properties located in this subdivision are <br />predominantly rectangular- shaped and, except for <br />corner lots, have only a single street frontage. <br /> <br />The previous variance granted by the City in 1988 <br />allowed the front yard fence to be located 10' 0" <br />from the front property line of the applicants' <br />site along Foothi II Lane. The port ion of the <br />technically required front yard is now located <br />behind this fence and is now, visually and <br />functionally, part of the applicants' private <br />rear/side yard area of their site. <br /> <br />- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.