03 ATTACHMENT 5 - Laserfiche WebLink

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the attached draft ordinance SUMMARY: The proposed modification would allow solid wood fencing in some of the side and rear yards of the Westridge subdivision for privacy reasons. Staff and the Planning Coininission feel that the proposed fencing would not be highly visible from public roads and areas east of Foothill Road. Staff believes all outstanding issues have been resolved. Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: BACKGROUND The applicant, Alameda New Communities, proposes to install six foot tall solid wood fencing along several rear and side yard property lines in the Westridge development located on the west side of Foothill Road (former Lemoine Property). The applicant would like to install the solid fencing for privacy reasons. Currently, solid fencing is allowed in this development only when it is not located within the required rear, side, or front yard setback areas. The City Council adopted the West Foothill Road Corridor Overlay District (WFRCOD) guidelines and regulations in 1990 following a study of the area and recommendations made by staff and the Planning Commission. The district generally encompasses developable land located west of Foothill Road, including the project site. The overlay district is a zoning tool which establishes development regulations to a defined area over and above those of the "base" or standard zoning district which regulates the uses of a piece of property. In 1999, the Planning Commission requested a comprehensive review of the WFRCOD regulations and guidelines. The Coininission requested the review due to concerns about the visibility of future development and the loss of the rural environment westerly of Foothill Road as viewed from all of Pleasanton. One of the Commission's main recoininendations was that all fencing on the west side of Foothill Road be open fencing. During this comprehensive review, Delco Builders (the former developer of the Westridge project) proposed the Westridge project. Since the proposed changes to the WFRCOD had not yet been adopted by the City, the Planning Commission and City Council decided that the developer should not be required to comply with the newly proposed changes; however, the developer was encouraged to meet the spirit of the proposed regulations and guidelines. Following this line of thinking, the Coininission recommended to Council that some solid SR 05:132 Page 2 of 6