My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
SR 05:132
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2005
>
SR 05:132
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2005 1:16:41 PM
Creation date
6/2/2005 1:11:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/7/2005
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
SR 05:132
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
To read as follows: <br /> <br /> "13. Fencing over six (6) ft. in height shall not be allowed on Lots 1-12. Side and <br /> rear yard fencing on Lots 1-12 shall conform to the fencing plan submitted <br /> in ExhibitA dated "Received August 13~ 1999". On Lots 1-12, solid <br /> privacy fencing is not allowed unless it adheres to one of the two <br /> following exceptions: (1) except as shown on Exhibit "A" dated <br /> "Received April 6~ 2005"[ or (2) except when it is not located in a required <br /> yard and it is screened by landscaping. On Lots 1-12, fencing shall not be <br /> allowed between the front of the home and the property line except for low <br /> open fences thirty (30) inches or less in height." <br /> <br />DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Staff believes all outstanding issues have been adequately addressed. Staff believes that the <br />applicant has done a good j ob of positioning the proposed fences such that they would not be <br />highly visible from Foothill Road, other public roads, and areas east of Foothill Road. Staff <br />believes the proposal would meet the spirit of the WFRCOD regulations. Since the fencing <br />would not be highly visible, staff does not believe that it would negatively impact the rural <br />character of the development. Staff believes that the proposed solid fencing should be supported <br />as conditioned in Exhibit B. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />On April 27, 2005, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed project. By a 4 to 1 vote, <br />the Planning Commission recommended approval of the attached draft ordinance. The Planning <br />Commission added four recommended conditions of approval which have been incorporated <br />into the draft ordinance: <br /> <br /> "5. A design for the solid fencing shown on Exhibit A dated "Received April 6, <br /> 2005" and additional landscaping by the solid fencing shall be submitted to the <br /> Planning Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of a Building <br /> Occupancy Permit for the lots on which the solid fencing shall be located. The <br /> fence design shall be compatible with the approved architectural house <br /> components and shall not include lattice. The additional landscaping species <br /> shall be ones which shall grow to a reasonable height and not obscure the solid <br /> fences. Staff will work with the developer to ensure fencing on the lots affected <br /> by this approval will have 30 days from the effective date of this approval to <br /> submit the required information to the Planning Director. <br /> <br /> SR05:132 <br /> Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.