My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 022807
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2000-2009
>
2007
>
PC 022807
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/5/2017 3:29:13 PM
Creation date
8/17/2007 10:02:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/28/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Commissioner Pearce requested Mr. Judd to confirm that the fence was built in response to the <br />trellis. Mr. Judd stated that there was initially an existing six-foot tall fence and that after the <br />applicants built the trellis, the neighbors built the overheight fence. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Pearce’s inquiry regarding whether the two-inch setback <br />referenced by Mr. Judd referred to the variance granted by the Board of Adjustment in 1972, <br />Mr. Judd said yes. <br /> <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED <br />. <br /> <br />Ms. Decker made a clarification in relation to the setback required without a variance. She <br />referred to the Pleasanton Municipal Code that for properties zoned R-1-6,500, the requirement <br />is a five-foot side yard setback with a combined 12-foot side yard setback. She noted that the <br />three-foot setback from the property line is a Building Code question, and the closest distance the <br />structure with openings can get to the property line is three feet. She noted that the variance <br />requested is to reduce the side yard setback from five feet to zero, and the Zoning Administrator <br />made the determination to vary the setback from five feet to three feet for the location of the <br />posts. <br /> <br />In response to Commissioner Blank’s inquiry regarding whether this product was used elsewhere <br />in the City as indicated in the staff report, Ms. Decker replied that she was not sure if it was this <br />particular product or a similar one, but it was a one-hour/two-hour rated material, depending on <br />the thickness of the coating that is painted on. <br /> <br />Referring to the aerial photo of the site, Chairperson Fox inquired if there was any way this <br />structure could be moved somewhere else on the property. Ms. Decker replied that staff did not <br />try to redesign or re-evaluate the structure. She noted, however, that from the site plan, it <br />appears that the same size and shape could fit between the home and the pool, but there seems to <br />be a shade structure in that area, probably for the benefit of outdoor and pool use. <br /> <br />In response to Chairperson Fox’s request that staff clarify once more what an approval or denial <br />of the appeal would mean and would require of the applicant, Ms. Decker clarified that the <br />Zoning Administrator’s decision is to set back the structure three feet from the property line, <br />with a two-foot setback for the eaves overhang; the applicant’s appeal is to reduce the setback <br />from five feet to zero, and staff’s recommendation is to deny the appeal. She added that the <br />Commission could uphold the appeal and change the Zoning Administrator’s action; it could also <br />uphold the Zoning Administrator’s decision with modified conditions. <br /> <br />Commissioner O’Connor noted that if the appeal were denied and the eaves overhang were <br />moved two feet from the property line, the gutters would no longer be necessary. <br /> <br />Commissioner Blank indicated that he is inclined to uphold the Zoning Administrator’s decision. <br />He expressed concern that the structure was built without a building permit. He noted that <br />variances should be granted only in extreme circumstances and that he did not see this as one. <br /> <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES February 28, 2007 Page 9 of 13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.