My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
03 ATTACHMENT 5
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2007
>
091807
>
03 ATTACHMENT 5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/14/2007 11:51:28 AM
Creation date
9/14/2007 11:51:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
9/18/2007
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
03 ATTACHMENT 5
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
~~~~ <br />i~. <br />.~ <br />To read as follows: <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 Exhibit A 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 />DISCUSSION <br />Staff believes all outstanding issues have been adequately addressed. Staff believes that the <br />applicant has done a good job 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 />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />On Apri127, 2005, the Planning Coininission reviewed the proposed project. By a 4 to 1 vote, <br />the Planning Coininission 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 />"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 />SR 05:132 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.