CCMIN101805 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Brozosky asked if a variance was required for a seven-foot tall side property line fence? Mr. lserson said there is a design review process for the seven-foot tall fence and Council in approving this could approve the height as a part of the design review approval. Mr. Brozosky asked if the variance would still be in effect if the Diazs decided not to proceed with their project? Mr. lserson clarified that this is technically not a variance and an over-height fence approval. Council could take two separate actions on this project because if the requirement of a seven-foot tall fence is a condition, and the Diazs could replace the fence without the addition. Ms. McGovern inquired about the distance in height between a 15-gallon Evergreen tree and a 24-inch box tree. Mr. lserson said it depended upon the species of the trees and typically, there is a four to five foot difference between the two. Ms. McGovern asked staff what height would a tree need to be to block and increase the Croftons' privacy? Mr. lserson believed a tree would need to be at least a minimum of 15 feet to screen the views from the deck. He noted smaller trees tend to grow faster and a 15-foot gallon tree would grow faster than a 24-inch box; however, the 24-inch box tree would be initially taller. Mayor Hosterman declared the Public Hearing open. Joyce Diaz, appellant and applicant, outlined the history behind the sequence of events. She noted that the Croftons had applied for approval to build a room addition and the Diazs objected because of the size of the addition. She did not believe this was a contentious issue between neighbors and she is here to appeal what she believed is a unfair and unwarranted action by the Planning Commission to require a seven-foot tall fence that does nothing to increase the Croftons' privacy. She was unhappy with the Planning Commission's decision to require the Diazs to pay for the seven-foot tall fence when Mr. Crofton asked if he could install the fence because the Croftons were required to plant a row of trees as a condition of its approval. She did not ask for the trees and only asked that consideration be given to the scale of the Croftons' project. She did not believe adding another foot to the fence would do anything except to put her in a larger hole and the entire objection of the massiveness of the Croftons' project was the reduction of light and air from their home, and she believed installing a seven- foot fence would do more of the same. She encouraged Council to think about this project not in terms of a contentious issue between neighbors but in terms of what the project is now and the reasonableness of the condition that has been imposed by the Planning Commission, which she believed was unfair. Benjamin Diaz, appellant and applicant, encouraged Council to keep an open mind. Kevin Lally, representing Joyce and Benjamin Diaz, acknowledged the courtesy and professionalism of City staff. He referenced a letter he submitted to Council, which addressed the history and some of the issues of this project. The most telling feature is the comparison Pleasanton City Council 6 10/18/05 Minutes