PC 022807 - Laserfiche WebLink

6.PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS a. PAP-103 (PV-140), Peter and Garrett Nowak Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s approval of a variance from the Pleasanton Municipal Code for a reduced side yard setback to retain an existing trellis/carport on the south side of the existing residence located at 3590 Glacier Court South. Zoning for the property is R-1-6,500 (Single-Family Residential) Chairperson Fox called the Commission’s attention to materials on the project that were distributed before the start of the meeting. Ms. Decker advised that under normal circumstances, the Zoning Administrator would not be presenting the staff report for an appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision. She explained that while she is the Zoning Administrator, Ms. Janice Stern, Principal Planner, was the Acting Zoning Administrator for this case. She then expressed her apology to a neighbor who inquired how the application description has changed from a trellis to a trellis/carport to a trellis/patio cover. She stated for the record that she would like to ensure that there was no intent to confuse the issue as the project has moved from a Code Enforcement process and staff level review, through Zoning Administrator review, and to the Commission. She explained that staff looked at what the uses actually were and noted that the existing structure was being used as storage place and a parking area for jet ski trailers and was wide enough for parking a car; all these uses were combined in the description. Ms. Decker then summarized the staff report and described the background, layout, and scope of this project. Commissioner O’Connor noted that structures under 120 square feet area or ten feet or less in height are not subject to the Code. He inquired if they are also exempt from setbacks from the property line. Ms. Decker replied that was correct and that this is true with various small structures or portable units that are placed within the setbacks. She added that accessory structures over ten feet in height go through an administrative design review process and are also subject to setbacks. She pointed out, however, that PUDs may have different setback requirements than straight-zoned properties, which is what the subject site is zoned, that staff looks into with respect to accessory structures placed within the property. In response to Commissioner Pearce’s inquiry regarding whether the fire-resistant paint mentioned in the report was intended only for solid surfaces as opposed to timbers with spaces between them, Ms. Decker replied that it was the preferable use of that particular paint. She explained that for other post and beam assemblies similar to this structure, fire rating can be achieved by using heavier timber, such as six-by-six or eight-by-eight posts, which are resistant to burning because of their mass. She noted that this has been used in the past in conjunction with fire-resistant paint, but that this paint performs best on solid surfaces. She stated that this PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 28, 2007 Page 5 of 13