HomeMy WebLinkAbout87-071 Raether Fence Variance - Appeal
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
GENERAL INFORMATION:
CITY OF DUBLIN
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: July 6, 1987
Planning Commission
Planning Staff~ ~
Appeal of the Zon1ng Administrator's action approving
PA 87-071 Raether Fence Variance, 7634 Turquoise
Street.
PROJECT:
APPLICANTS/OWNERS:
PROPERTY AND
ZONING:
SURROUNDING LAND
USE & ZONING:
Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's June 16, 1987,
action approving PA 87-071 - Raether Fence Height
Variance application, a request for approval to
construct a fence/elevated deck structure which varies
from the allowed maximum fence height (Section 8-60.55
of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance). The Applicants are
requesting approval to establish two 9'~ length
sections of solid wooden fencing with a maximum height
of 5' - 4" atop an elevated deck with a maximum height
of 4' - 8" elevated deck, creating a structure with a
combined height of 10'. Approval is also requested
for a 4' - 0" wooden picket fence atop the rear
portion of the proposed deck, creating a structure
with a combined height of 8' - 8".
Cameron & Jacqu1ine Raether
7634 Turquoise Street
Dublin, CA 94568
7634 Turquoise Street
PD, Planned Development District
(APN 941-2769-02)
North & East: PD, Planned Development District -
Existing Single Family Residential Uses
South: PD, Planned Development District -
Neighborhood Mini-Park (under
construction)
West: U, Unzoned - Southern Pacific Railroad
Right-of-Way (Vacant) and Alameda
County Flood Control & Water
Conservation District Zone 7 Flood
Control Channel
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - ----
ITEM NO. ~
COPIES TO: Applicants/Owners
Appellant
File PA 87-071
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS:
Section 8-60.55 (Fence Height Limitations) of the City Zoning Ordinance
establishes 6 feet as the maximum permitted height for fences, walls and
hedges along the side and rear property lines in a residential district.
Section 8-60.57 (Measurement of Height) establishes that the height of a
fence, wall or hedge shall be measured upward from the ground level beneath
it; provided that where any fence, hedge, or wall in a required yard or along
a Lot Line rises directly above or is parallel to and within six (6) feet of
the supporting portion of a retaining wall, one-half the supporting height of
the retaining wall shall be deducted from the permitted height and the
remainder measured upward from the level of the ground fill on the higher
side.
Section 8-93.0 (Variance) indicates that the strict terms of the Zoning
Ordinance may be varied in specific cases upon affirmative findings of fact
upon each of these three requirements:
a) That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topo-
graphy, location or surroundings, applicable to the property in
the vicinity under the identical zoning classification.
b) That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and zone.
c) That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare.
Section 8-93.1 - .4 establishes the procedures, required action and
effective date for granting or denying a Variance, and indicates the granting
of a Variance shall be subject to conditions, limitations and guarantees.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Categorically Exempt
NOTIFICATION:
Public Notice of the July 6, 1987, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property
owners and posted in public buildings.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
The Applicants propose the construction of an elevated deck structure
with the two end sections (each 9'~ depth) enclosed with solid wooden fencing
with a maximum height of 5' - 4". This fencing is proposed to be established
atop a decking with a maximum height of 4' - 8", creating a structure with a
combined height of 10' - 0". The Applicants also propose to create a 4' - 0"
wooden picket fence atop the rear of the elevated deck, creating a 57'~ length
section of decking/fencing structure with a combined height of 8' - 8".
The Applicants' Written Statement indicates that the structure's
proposed height is desired at the corners of the deck to provide privacy to
the residential property to the north.
In order for the Applicants to complete the structure as planned, a
Fence Height Variance must be granted.
Prior to granting the Variance, three mandatory findings of fact must be
made. These findings state: 1) that there are special circumstances relating
to physical characteristics (such as lot size, shape, and topography) which
would deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by others in the
identical zoning district, 2) that the granting of the Variance does not
constitute a grant of special privileges, and 3) that the Variance will not be
detrimental to the neighborhood.
Staff's review of the Variance request revealed special circumstances
related to the physical features of the site (backs up to the Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way and has a 4-foot ~ slope drop-off at the rear property
line) which would appear to warrant granting some form of a Fence Height
Variance.
-2-
If the proposed fence was constructed atop a deck established above a
retaining wall (rather than above an elevated deck) the Zoning Ordinance would
allow the combined height of that structure to be approximately 8' - 4"
(assessing only one half of the retaining wall's height against the overall
height of the structure). Following that lead, Staff recommended conceptual
approval of the Applicant's request, but recommended the design be modified as
generally shown in the Staff Study of June, 1987 (see Attachment 4). The
Staff Study recommended that the maximum of the combined structure be limited
to 8' - 8", and that the fencing established atop the deck not exceed a
maximum height of 4' - 0". This approach was recommended as it was felt it
would be generally consistent with the intent of Section 8-60.57 (Measurement
of Height) while also yielding a more sensitive architectural "closure" at the
corners of the proposed structure. Staff also recommended a redwood lattice
finish be required to allow partial screening of the bottom of the structure.
In as much as there are special circumstances related to this property
which would appear to deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other
property in the vicinity, Staff recommended the Zoning Administrator
conditionally approve the Fence Height Variance request, modified to
substantially conform with the June, 1987, Staff Study.
On June 16, 1987, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing to
consider the Fence Height Variance application. After receiving testimony
from Staff and the Applicants, the Zoning Administrator conditionally approved
the Applicants' Variance request, restricting the height of the fence above
the deck at the northwest corner of the property to a maximum height of
4' - 0", with a total combined deck/fence height not to exceed 8' - 8".
The Applicant's neighbors subsequently filed an appeal of the Zoning
Administrator's action (see Attachment #9). Within the appeal letter, the
neighbors indicated their desire to have a 6' high fence carried out along the
side property boundary to the edge of the deck to provide more privacy.
The Applicant also filed an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's action
(see Attachment #10), citing his desire for architectural continuity and the
ability to block the view of the Southern Pacific Railroad trestle as the
additional reasons for the requested extra fence height for the one portion of
the deck/fence structure.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission reaffirm the Zoning Admini-
strator's action on the request, conditionally approving the application, but
limiting the height of the fence at the edge of the deck to a maximum height
of 4'. Approving the appeal (i.e., allowing a deck/fence structure with a
combined height of 10') will set an inappropriate precedent which may impact
future similar requests.
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing.
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicants and public presentations.
Close public hearing.
Adopt Resolution approving Variance request.
ACTION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached
Draft Resolution approving PA 87-071 Raether Fence Height
Variance.
-3-
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: Draft Resolution Approving Fence Height Variance Request
PA 87-071
Exhibit B: Fence Height Variance Submittals
Background Attachment: 1. Zoning Map
2. Applicants' Written Statement
3. Site Photos and Photo Key Map
4. Staff Study - June, 1987
5. June 16, 1987, Zoning Administrator Staff
Report (without attachments)
6. Minutes from June 16, 1987, Zoning
Administrator Meeting
7. Zoning Administrator Resolution No.4 - 87
8. Letter of June 17, 1987, from Applicant
indicating Proposed Trellis/Fence Details
9. Appeal Letter of June 17, 1987, from Gary J.
and Steven A. Gessler
10. Appeal Letter of June 18, 1987, from Cameron
A. and Jacqu1ine Raether
11. Notice of Appeal
-4-
RESOLUTION NO. 87 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN PLANNING COMMISSION
UPHOLDING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S ACTION APPROVING PA 87-071
RAETHER FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW A REARYARD/SIDEYARD FENCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FENCE
HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AT 7634 TURQUOISE STREET
WHEREAS, Cameron and Jacqu1ine Raether have filed a Fence Height
Variance application requesting approval to vary from Section 8-60.55 of the
City's Zoning Ordinance to allow use of a 8' - 4" to 10' - 0" fence height
along portions of the sideyard and rearyard property lines at 7634 Turquoise
Street; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to
be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said
application on June 16, 1987; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending conditional
approval of the Fence Height Variance application, modifying the design of the
proposed structure as generally depicted in the Staff Study of June, 1987; and
WHEREAS, after hearing and considering all said reports, recommenda-
tions and testimony, the Zoning Administrator conditionally approved the Fence
Height Variance request; and
WHEREAS, on June 17, 1987, Gary J. and Steven A. Gessler, neighbor-
ing property owners to the subject property, filed an appeal of the Zoning
Administrator's action; and
WHEREAS, on June 18, 1987, the Applicants also filed an appeal of
the Zoning Administrator's action; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said
appeal on July 6, 1987, and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending that the Planning
Commission uphold the Zoning Administrator's action and conditionally approve
the Fence Height Variance application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission
does hereby find that:
A) There are special circumstances, including topography and location,
applicable to the property which would deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning
classification, in that the the lot at 7634 Turquoise Street backs up to
the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and has a 4-foot ~ drop along
the length of the rear property line, making the lot non-commensurate
with other lots in the immediate vicinity and same zoning district.
-1-
B) The granting of the Fence Height Variance application will not constitute
a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon
other properties in the vicinity and zone, in that special circumstances
exist which warrant granting the Fence Height Variance. The granting of
this Variance request will not constitute a special privilege in that the
approval will establish parity between the subject property and similar
properties in terms of the privacy yielded by side- and rearyard fencing.
C) The granting of this Fence Height Variance application will not be
detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public
welfare.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Planning Commission does hereby
uphold the Zoning Administrator's action to conditionally approve PA 87-071
Raether Fence Height Variance application as generally depicted by materials
from the July 6, 1987, Planning Commission Report, labeled Exhibit Band
Attachments #2 and #8, as modified to substantially conform with the Staff
Study of June, 1987 (Attachment 4 of the referenced Report), on file with the
Dublin Planning Department and subject to the following Conditions:
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with
prior to issuance of a building permit or establishment of proposed land use
activity, and shall be sub;ect to Planning Department review and approval.
1. This approval is for construction of a fence/deck structure with a
combined height not to exceed 8' - 8", and with the height of the proposed
fencing (measured above the deck surface) not to exceed 4' - 0". The
design of the fence/deck structure shall be substantially consistent with
the Staff Study of June, 1987. The design and materials used to enclose
the bottom of the elevated deck along the north and west portions of the
deck may be altered from the Staff Study if approved by the Planning
Director.
2. Building permits for the fence/deck structure shall be secured and
construction commenced within six months after approval of this permit or
said approval shall be void.
3. This permit shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8-90.3
of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of July, 1987.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-2-
~
"'I/W
~~,;~t
iI.
,r.
"'.i'
.
"
"-
. 1
I
I
I
I
IO~~~I ..
I t
...
~
.1
I
1
1 ..
..
I
I
I" ,
'-
,.
,
.
:) .
.'\-~ 10",,-
. ,
~~ \c.~o~...
,
)
"
i'
~
Q
"
-:.,. S,' ~"w.
w?
"
./
.'
.~~ ~"'-W4 ~
\-C~~.()tI.)'-'~;
~~~~~'- .
I .~I
~ I f
\1
\
/19
cs::r t"t-<.
.
,
.
I
.1
I
J
:I
. '"
,p
TURQlIOISE
$):
--. ---.--........---..---
--~
. ~.
JOB NO. 1"02!!
....
, LOT 119
TRACT' 4719
DUBLIN HILLS
DUBLIN. CALIFORNIA
.
.
BISSELL a KARN,INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS
1t!!!!1 M.rc.d SI. Son Leonch,CA.
(4IS) 483-2170
FOR: IECK DEVELOPMENT
SCALE: '-.20'
. ....
. -,...- ..~- -"~ .-. ...-.-...----:-- ------
----.----.. -.----..-:-.~.7~-.... ~~ -~.---.._:- .~.. ..,.~. ...
~.
.. .. . HIBIT B-'
'. "!IJ ..; : ,'.: <." :' ,.... ,"; ......... . '."".' .
.~ .
. , . . .
4,~o/:~~;J.~tf!~{ m!.~~~rrrAt5
.iMf~~;;U:J:-.~~~~:~i~:'~f.,~~3"_~~~~:~~tf:~~~\t,~~~~\~~~:~~~;d,'?tJtJ~1~0.~");.f~:<~~~t.:~:J ~-';":t~-):~..;:..
. ..... ~'. ,'''-' ,r:'S;';':~a.l_..'" .>-_\~.>~tr.''"'-A",_,t'_:''~. 't!'.':-..":\.-,:,'..;,-';\.;'~..; ;.:~:.' ,.:.<:::
z
~
~~
ot
,J
, .
-,
(,
1
'4
'--
!'
.
.
i
i
'-
""
.,
j
~
f
~
~
CI}
a:
::c
Cb
. - ':-,:~,!,~~\jii;~~~;~:};;'b~~~jt:f>;:,:",
" , -','" -, ,~l(,!,~.>\j;:...~b...,,<,jtoili'"t'i f>_t~{"
Lt., ';4';'" -:""')'.1 ...;.'t"'~~;~{,'~.{..../tfJ l~\,. ~ .~
. .;, :r-;' ::;;:';:V,.}u." ':-;- '::f:..;.,."4:~,,~:,%:'n }<7. ..:
P:'.!~I,,:'i'r-{~.y;~.,~~..., .t~ ~r:~. 2' j
,~..... .">::>;;;"\ .: (~, r,"'...,.v;-....,. ",.;1';. M' .'\>.
-,.".. "'JI.~.Ii'1)'''' <II t. '':(l-:''~'''' . ~. .I" .
. ':/~:~:~\;~j;~i:~1~ 'S:~'i.~~"i{?r~," "(.,
: "1 ,,,,,,,'~l~~i?;'1k.H,.. ';1'{1(.1::i.{ . ,'" :
1" -" :!.;..~.. :Jp~rf~ . ..~,vr:","~!~:/", '\
',,'~' ~,.. r . '~1'::~~...:6~~~.'>'~I~"'!~'
. -'~~~::1'::"~~:~/~:,".~:'7 _'-::.;r.... t:. ..~
..-.--.... '''--. .
_=_-==::C~_y:~-_ ________
~ l $;
~ l. d ~
~ '~~ ~ ~
:3 JJ,t
1t,tj-;
((
o
w
>
~
;'
w
U
w
0:::
4-
-"
l.i
i
f
cI) Cl1
.J
.i ~
~
~W
~
~
(1
r-...
co
OJ
-
o
z
Z
z
S
a.
Z
::;
lX1
::J
Q
.....
.....
~
::2:
..
~.
.
to ..
:: :
~
.., ..
~
..
...
':c ~
o ~
~
a
:t:
,. ..
t- .
t:
"
'"
..
..
~
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
J::
~
..
..
..
~
..
...
...
~
..
-
..
!'
"
JItOf(
tllt
Q,
, ,
~
~
....
L.
-e
~~ ,..
... 1S ~
2Cl
~~f'
... 0 ..
:z. ,..
"'~ ~
~.~ .;
~
...
:
..
...
to\
~
~
..
~
...
~
~
..
..'
...
~
...
~
!
~
Q
..
..
....
...
st.
"
':10
~
..
--
'0
..
"
,..
,..
"
......
....'~ ~ ....,-
I
'"
f~
IV ~
I j
J
~
$
4
II> tJ.
JIg "
11-1'
0,. I)
~~ 4
'~7 0
L( ~
~ ~
.-:t
fJ,
.
VJ
()
.J
o
J
~
J
z
" ,-,', (.'~"--,. --, -P~"''C;~''-.lV'-J;''
'.:4)"')~';"7-t. r:~''''~~J>!) I .l;~;: . ~!~~'1 :' '11~:r~ J;;ry,4;1~
, "^~',, 'io~"'~f.t;r!:,,~,;; , ,;kl1.1".~,,, ' ,_~;'f,. " C'I',"
, ... ., "... ~ ~I -~'~ 11~,j. ,'-,.' ~. ~, 'r, i~.!1e .
",~.,1~.''''.1\1r~'Jib''' ;J..~~l ~~, l~I~1\I"~'f"":' ~.'k4"}~~:'1!,,,
".l)t.-~....,. .~'.if.:V"~J.'; L,~.'" t~ ,.~. '.." " ,,',:,,"t,!.
. 'tr ~~',:;:,,:;:':.;'~,:;~:,:, ::';",,> '.:~:.~~2~f~;i~:'::<-~
,. , . -' .. ~ I ...,}. . .. -, ".. . l,.' ,
"',;". '. ;,";-.
.....,
,.
~I
'Y-
'''I
~
{J
.....,.
",.. .'.._ ~"",___~_,"-:'._~&'.'*':".._...__r-r:~~'~. ;I":'-;".-'.r-~:-:~',~~' :.:~.:..'~':'~- .....
.....---......
4-
..
f)
"'0
:~~l
o ~ -; o;-~;1
....I)QCJ...~OQ. Q')...I
,U v.~ .
~ 01) 0 0 O~ :), ~
---- T
. i~
z~z
i"'O
:)~.... "'1
cfbe -0-
o c::( ~ go-:
)ooOc .!.~
...Z&:.I U
-- > c
U Z 0 ~ 0
Z ~ u
~~ 0
,
'S
f (J 'I
7 ?' ~
! tl9 ~"J ~-!
~te ~~ ...
1. ~rrJ Jl
.. ~J~ do
~jJ$JJ\ ~
I~ 1+
I
i"
/)r~
~j
J J
..r
~
~
? ~,
H
.,.~
Of
I-
s~
.0
.
~
rj .,
li
~"
~~
if)
J
~i
~ 1
; ~ J
,~ .. 1
.,..'
" oJ
.; ~~
DW
~
VI
~
III .
,n-
-
o
~
U
~ cl
~J3
7<(
IIJ cl'
e ...JJ
cPr
" ~
. 1-
;J
~1
~ If
1;
,
2 ~
~,J
~
,
'''~
~~
,,I ~
r
1""4 (
t:-e
O.
.
[Xi
...%~
. .. ~
l'o t II
o ... "
....w}
')';) .1' I f~;-':)?l
O~C;>\ \-;)<;):>~~J
t) 0.2..\ ~__
"l--1
"ll) ~
"
c
0)
en
''>,
, .. '. .
'", c"~~;;,!1t:::.c"
,
. '
1"'._ ;:. ".'
'61,,;, fr,',.", 1', '
:'. V','... ',>' , .,...
'"...4 ;'.' '
~~. .
~;$'
,,' ..:>'-
::':':.'~;
...... .. ..-.. ;.-'~. . ...............:.. :~~,-:."'; .. .~~.:-.._-.;:..;:::._.._:::.:;:;;;.-.-::.::;;.;..- ... ..-..--- --- ---- '_.~ ...__._.'...._.=-.-:~.~_..:. :....;;;.'7.;.~::.:..:
.J
1
j
~
..,~
~J
~
~~
~~
~-
"r
~
~-o"
.0
,
Ol
-D
..'
r-
ID
Q
w
>
o
~
a.
~a.
Ie(
I
.
,.....
'=0
~ i g
~ t i G
'7 ~ S
-r. D r It'
ot/J
.. -t'
=0 ~ ~ ..
, J"
-.,. ~ v ...
;; IJ 'f
~ ~ % .r
11"~-
(l: rn
--
i
,
.
III J
1 D
P ~f
p~
r-; ='~ ~
t ~!C
~ J i
cO ~ f'-
,.J j. ~
;,
;
III
~
~
7 1
II! ~
-yo
/.,..
~ ~
rr
!
.
"
.
',," ...
-=0
I
...
z
w
:e
...
a:
-<
Z ~
::; 0
~ z
o 0
011.. .u
c.:J
~ on;
_ Z
U -
,
....
.,.- ._-....
% ... ...
~ ~ ~
o )0 0
J:.j - :fell
'" < II.
'" - III <:!!:
;:Q~ 9
<:l:ac ~5
J:o~ ..._
~elIlII -%
::I%~ 0:;
oe... ...~
~~elIaloo w
:;) % ... ... ... ...
:a:::-!:iliio <
elIJ:9<:f~uJ c
%~5"''''_0
<>-_o~o~
X-w:lllt::iitW
OOJ:"'-J:
~i:!::~~:;:~~
~"'<~~oo
00 00",
%~Bi%%%elI
::l:;) ~ 0 ::l g ~
.... -< < ... 0 -< :;:
~ J:~-...J:ON
Z '" ~ ::l 0 "'...
9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ is,,.
~ g~=!i~~...f'
...... ~ ell'" 3~ ~
~~:;9~~oi
o ~:;: -:;:
Ozi=5i!:0 ~
o ..,.. ...
.....",. ,
r'll
(
c:. ~ 8;..C' ;:J
~....l,.n I
-<:::~E....l.
-'-e I
=e ,. c:l
~,
'>m
~Sg
-C.
cc~
~ii
'z~
;;;~
.
~ ;> :;: '"CI
.:." g; 0
t..lC ~
~!=
'Z
"
~
,."
~
""
n
\,1)
<' ,,' .
.... '--.
~0 '"CI
0;00
"0
Cc.
~.
-z
. 0
~tn
",.
co
.,..
J~'.........."::":.--r'~""';.:':'w....,.i.."",,,,.,,
(
~
,,~i~'
~'
"
t
~
.
:
..
.
c
~
!
i
r:.tU,OOO
.,...~
.
l
----
------
..-----------
~ tj: !l'~;ii I ~
... . : :,'~ : I ~! :i
~ ;!.:l , !i
"1t1....IlID 'Ollll
'~,
DUBLIN
~"".l..... ~","l')."~'\""'\ I..,.
" .........J..C.' ~'Ntr ftMfj~~!<<'~~'-
;{:~~j;~Y't~~".li;i2,;\:M~~~i;i8;~~W)~;~~~#:;~;f:~t\~\i,:';\~tI}~:ii:D1i~;f{~tSX:.~!,:~"!~ik"i,m~l'.', , ',.',' '. " -" ''',' \,' ~ ~t&/" :"l
~
"'1
;..
-,.,.~
.,.,,~
__L__,_ --7-'-1--i - -~,,_._...-,:--... .._.._...~. ,. ';.. ,+...j.- ~".'1" ' ...-f....
, . ' : ' : !: J! J' i i ill
-~._-., u;. "[ ,-, -~, ..." -;- ---" T"" .. I ,. j' --I ",'''.'':''-' "l'"
, .i ~?-.\~~ ..~~'"';'.~_ L...;...+_..
-rH-"'''~-''''I'''' , ' " 'i'::' : I
...........;-' i"'! : ~...:_.,~~.. (_..!.~.-! .;..L'-+'-':::i !~
.,.,._..,____.....:......: ,_, ...~I:- ~:~;, ,~",~I.o ~~~~ ~ ~ ~,~'\;)~
I' , "I ' " "
.~ ,--_.-~.--l ..:<....~p,.c..~ _Or::... ._~'->~~"\ :..., p~ ;..--i...",b~A,~~~~-\30\~~'=:.~~..
, , . I ' 'I ' I : .... i " '\ '
l " I 0 :. . ' '~ . I . "tJ_, t)" -
;""...c__..:. _:__~ ~ ,:.u.)~"",,,j~.; 'l:)~Nv~; ~ - i~~~ .:~~
, , ' : ' , ~ I '<-' '-:i.- : ..:.::~ ·
_.._,...__..........~: ,\:)~...~~~~ __.___ roo' -:- l,')~~ . ~ ~~'f,.. , " \'\\~ \)')O\h.:~
, , ' : : "':"":'l_-=. '~ '-': '~.:>\ I _\, ' : '_' '0" \='-,
.-.-;'-. "'-j'"'''' ,'"'<>;;;..,."....,.. ...'\ ~ ~ 1.' ~u:. 'j , ~"""'~~.: to -, .; ,-.......~..... ..
_..__,_...:..-.J.__.;.. ~9..~-.)~v... .~~e.~..._~ ..,X... ~~~; ~~ :~~ \ i. ,,~ ~~,-,
, I, , c..'~.."" (',' b ' . , . , , " ~
...:.__.____..._.J._~...~'->~ _.__~y_....,~,,~.._..I\~ _,~~~T\.'~' ~_ \~...: ~~~ -..D.. .,,~,.
I' --' r ; . I'.;:
._.._..__._...:.._~ .~\>>~_...'_~~~.\ ~c~ ~~ QT-:~~~l.:.......... '
I ;'.!.
';
,,"
.--------.-..---.. -.-, ..-.":"-
_.~-.._+.._..~.
"
'''_''h____'''.''': ,~~~~~,~~ .~,~
-~ __..~o'-~o.....,\~~ ~-i - ~.
.. . ~!!!
.:\.)~~~~(..~
. \~ .~l::l\)\~~
. :.....! - i" .; --~ _.
.
~'~~=~._.~~:~.._._~.~~..._..\o .~-\'~~~~'."~-'~C: ~t.'~~~Oit-~, ~l::l~~ .~~,
.:.._:_\....c~..:.\,~:,_..:,__ -,-.. ....'
:~~..~__...:__..:....."_..___;20 .~~~ ~~,,_' .~'- ~\;U<-! .~~~ ~ ~~
._____~_:,__;.._____.,__:,__._.~ _..\-~~..~'::O"'._;~~O\)C :~~c...~. " ~\,,\,(..'c\. '
, ' , , ~, '~' -::::::..' ., \ \\ ':::)
_..:.._____..:__.;__~..._..______._. .-., U,:)c~~~ h_''''~'_''_' ' ~.; n,Po'.... _ ~~ :~,:-. 0 : '" \..\J~
_..__._._~_ ._._~-- .;_...~-.-:-..-.;. C. \\-O\~..:+,~ "~tl\J c.~._ b \~ 0'\ ..\...\''I\~"T" 1- ....
..:____._~,~.~_..:_.:_ .:~. ..~~~ .~.~~~,~~: ...,\\0 \.:)-b~' , .,~ \....cc..~ . '\.
~~~__.:______~~._._o~~~~~~\.~..~~~\~O~ "_'-C:)\_~ _~~ \..,~1S .)
. .'"
---.---.-. ---~-------.-._---_._~
, ,
""'-
~ . .
___.____~--__---_-._.- _.._.___ ........---: ________-:..___._.__._._.____:_ ___.n,.
, '
, ,
------------. -.-.----- -.--'--
. ".'
- _ ___ -_.- --.-.-.--------------T-'-..
. . ' .
n... ___.. __4 _ _ ._.__ ._._..._..__..'-:'____ _...___.....___ _ --:... ....
.~..-.._-~.~--- ,--:- _._~---. -~-_":.-f-+--.~.--" --~.._- ~.- r
__.___ _._ __... _ ._ ___; ____ _._.:.....__ _.. ._ ... ..,._ _ _.__ ~_. __l___.~. ____.. _____. _-:_._...._.'_ ~.
.__ - - ..H
,
... __.l _._
,
_! _"_': .m~._...~.
I ,
-:"" -...... - -.- ---t --.-..-....r. ._--- -. --- ~- .
;
"j
....._- --:--.f~-..---.-..-.. 7' ....... ... --.. .---....
I , , , ; I ,
..:~=.~-~_~_. i-=r~~= T~~:-~.~:'~':.~ ~ '~.~_....:~--.. ~~...~-. .' ;"~.T-:":;'.' . :
,
,
~
i
":"'R-ic E 1 V ED
,... .l _ . ~ . ... ..' , . .
, t~I\'( 11 i~87.,
!. ,
: DUBUN FLANNING
"
, !
I, .: ....:
i I I
,.; ._.L._i
_.: ... .._._....._._.;._ .~_. _ _._....:.__....l__..___.._,._.. _ ..~.._
- ~ .
'r
: '
--7- . -...' ... -- - - ~ .. - ~
.,,,..L........ .
,
.....-.-.. ....
I
,... .
..i.._._ ..._'__ .~
..,
p.- -.. ... _. - .....-.. ...-. ..." . - ... .. . .. -
; i ,
..~"!.. .;
, i
,
i
!
:'81 -: 0'7 i
. ..., "
, , '
.'
,
.., .~..-...-..._--_..-...._-----
ATTACHMENT
~i;"l,.,,,
'-:. .~~. l.~
" "...,'.'iF', , ......
.:. .,
, . 11M "I \ D ~~;";~r: : .':' '.. ---~-;...
.::;;.: :.,~'; ';,,; \. ';, ;'. ,"f";\~~,::', ' '/J (JfI{1 ~,.JP r- t I(r:r:~, "~fi~l~r' ~, "~"'
~..:! ..' ...;.,;.'" . ~ ,,<, ~1;"\,,~. . ^ ,;"".1 ~ ~~.l",....... 1.. ib ~ ~J.I . ',. H" ',,' )". -.J~"
. . '.' '. ... .~.) . ',", ,... 1j' ~.'" ~ , ;a;.. .~ .. .. " "'., . <"".. t .
~%~"V;;W: ,~~ '.i ';,.-, i:"%J.~i;.~;r ;~.~i#~" l; ~~1i1~!'{J' '~" ~~~~l''';'~if ;"\~ 11~'-~ :},~~;"'1;e; ,~ .
. ~i{.'1\.:;..)\~~' ~ \'~""~J;~ '. . ).';:-l;,~,:;", '}i\-1\'f'~:.;:{ .'.~.",; ~~~t"', J .t\.~. i'l;!:!~~~~~~~ A"" '-'f~'......;....ts ,\ "t\:f~..... . .
..t
,',',t,
...' "
"
"
:I
,
./
...
.'
~~ ~'("-W4c-
\-C~~.()tI.) ...,~.;
...-" "
.'
~~ "" ~~'- '
;.=
CS:f' ~"t-<... f.
...
I
~'
l
-oef;
,
"
~
1
I
I
I
I
IO~~~ I ..
I ..
1:1
...
~
..
.1
I
1
I ..
..
I
I
,I
t, "
-
: )
, ,
-'\-~ 10",,- ~~ \o,~o~... ~
,
"
.
T~..c.. "T
,.. .tt,
...... .;
Q
"
-:.,.s,' ~"w.
w?
~
/19
:1
:I
TURQlIOISe
$):
-.... ----.--.....----.---
, i
JOB NO. 161025
. LOT 119
TRACT 4719
DUBLIN HILLS
DUBLIN, CALIFORNIA
BISSE LL a KARN,INC.
CIVIL ENGINEERS
2551 M.rc.d SI. Son Leonclro,CA.
FOR: IECK DEVELOPMENT
(415) 483-2170
SCALE: '-.20'
-: ......... ._,'_ ____...'... -.......- - 7"---.-;-..-.....
..--------. _.~- ....... .... -- -. . ....
. .' .
... ATTAtHMENT~
,'. :.;,:,..<'..~,..:,.;~nypf{o-m~,S,$.ft!~ ~M~
~~ij:~:~vlJiiy"i:,i ;,.:p ";~~~.~~j~1~~~;;'",.i~~~;:Ri~~~:(..f~;~~\Kr~~f:?i;}:DJ.~}~!.~~~~,~~:~i~~tlj~;~~\t\~iif~};j~;Z:.(:.:';::.:. .' ',." " '
'-.'
"'fI
'^
;/J
.,.l; ~
~.. -, ~ - "\':.
V'~-'''~'''..-.::i.
~
-"-/1
---v- ~~
HIMl t 1. ....H..;J
~3
~4
.r
r
'81
- 071
"
"
~.,.
tp
"t.
~~~f
.,., ....
. ..,.-..,...., .
.. .--...
,~......._;...- ..._.,.~-
~.."...... -....,.--.. '..-."~ .
.-_~'.....'.:.l_....';'":-...
........ ..
,
I ','
\ ,i
~ J ~
. 1-
" J
~ ~ ~J .... I
)~
;J rl. ..." l:w
1; o~ 0
:t ~ " ~ I
'( ~'" r ,....
I- ~ ~
#11
.z'"
. _ PI
(Io~~
~.i"
~
-
IJ
~o .0
_ ~~ 4': ...
~ ,. 0'-- ';"
~~';)~O'i).'\ ;I--~
n · Q')..,\ .-;;.
-2.~~1~~.gl ~
~1 T ~~.
j ~ iJB":t
iJ nl !"- " " ",'
~ (J , ~2;:' ~.:
~'g ~.' €.~),
~- ~.
~ ! ~ ~.
~J3 l~
7<( ~
III cO
e ..;D
cfJr
..
.
i,
...
. L...~r: r. All' A..--.C-'--H-c-'M.::-:::=E:::'-N~' T--'. '~~'U', .....
i;';',\,?~~~,~~ .<~<," ..' .'..... .. .'..
.
~
~"JI
.JJ
0,
~.- '.
.. '.--'
,.
"
~1fr1=f ~ y
(JVNe ll967
5h,.,1 to t t
11.' "
Tift kt.
lJtT{Jce' +'8'
rf~g- trt.
~~7H;
~r~..e
Ol= ~r;
~seD
flGf'er'
'fi'HUrl tr /tnJP
~tJF ~
roe- ~F
,2~er
76p~ p ,
dUPe!'
6 'I,oe-y~
FeUctr
p~.,~ '
e!4v",""~.lJ
~~
":._'Eklm~ ~I /iWt14
..,
'.' ..
::, , ;,o,;,:;,:ti.I:" 't,Gi,~,'s;;/~::"~":'~";';~~;;'~I~:;~"
>,~.. :-t,,', ( i\f!/l~~\t'~:a,'::~;~>1'\j.~':).t~:u,\~,.~t1fj~l~m;,',~'
. \::":'.~~.\~'~~S':0:;'&!~:;:4'f\;)~~\l~i.~~~~~t~t~~\
. .:%~.~~,~~W(':> · .'
".("-&~~~t\.~;-: ''.t-;::r'"
~'ii~_'.4.~l: '.~'-:':~:'~ ".;:
Y~A' C..~~ ENT
., "..' j
'I -\VI' ~c~ '.{
$fI.1F . ~n 6-/"-87
<<
.~~
(,
" ,
.
Section 8-93.0 (Variance) indicates that the strict terms of the Zoning
Ordinance may be varied in specific cases upon af~irmative findings of fact
upon each of these three requir~ments:
a) That there are special circumstances including size, shape, topo-
graphy, location or surroundings, applicable to the property in
the vicinity under the identical zoning classification.
b) That the granting of the application will not constitute a grant
of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other
properties in the vicinity and ,zone,
c) That the granting of the application will not be detrimental to
persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public welfare,
Section 8-93.1 - .4 establishes the procedures, required action and
effective date for granting or denying a Variance, and indicates the granting
of a Variance shall be subject to conditions, limitations and guarantees,
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Categorically Exempt
NOTIFICATION:
Public Notice of the June 16, 1987, hearing was
published in The Herald, mailed to adjacent property
owners and posted in public buildings,
ANALYSIS:
The Applicants propose the construction of an elevated deck structure
with the two end sections (each 9'~ depth) enclosed with solid wooden fencing
with a maximum height of 5' - 4". This fencing is proposed to be established
atop a decking with a maximum height of 4' - 8", creating a structure with a
combined height of 10' - 0", The Applicants also propose to create a 4' - 0"
wooden picket fence atop the rear of the elevated deck, creating a 57'~ length
section of decking/fencing structure with a combined height of 8' - 8".
The Applicants' Written Statement indicates that the structure's
proposed height is desired at the corners of the deck to provide privacy to
the residential property to the north,
In order for the Applicants to complete the structure as planned, a
Fence Height Variance must be granted.
Prior to granting the Variance, three mandatory findings of fact must be
made, These findings state: 1) that there are special circumstances relating
to physical characteristics (such as lot size, shape, and topography) which
would deprive the property owner of privileges enjoyed by others in the
identical zoning district, 2) that the granting of the Variance does not
constitute a grant of special privileges, and 3) that the Variance will not be
detrimental to the neighborhood.
A review of the Variance request reveals there are special circumstances
related to the physical features of the site (backs up to the Southern Pacific
Railroad right-of-way and has a 4-foot ~ slope drop-off at the rear property
line) which would warrant granting some form of a Fence Height Variance.
If the proposed fence was constructed atop a deck established above a
retaining wall (rather than above an elevated deck) the Zoning Ordinance would
allow the combined height of that structure to be approximately 8' - 4"
(assessing only one half of the retaining wall's height against the overall
height of the structure). Following that lead, Staff recommends conceptual
approval of the Applicant's request, but recommends the design be modified as
generally shown in the Staff Study of June, 1987 (see Attachment 4). The
Staff Study recommended that the maximum of the combined structure be limited
to 8' - 8", and that the fencing established atop the deck not exceedta
maximum height of 4' - 0". This approach would be generally consistent with
the intent of Section 8-60,57 (Measurement of Height) while also yielding a
more sensitive architectural "closure" at the corners of the proposed
structure. Staff recommends a redwood lattice finish be required to allow
partial screening of the bottom of the structure.
-2--
G[
co.
.._...:~.
In as much as there are special circumstances related to this property
which would deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other property in
the vicinity, Staff recommends conditional approval of the Fence Height
Variance request, modified to substantially conform with the June, 1987, Staff
Study.
~',
RECOMMENDATION:
FORMAT:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Open public hearing,
Hear Staff presentation.
Hear Applicants and public presentations.
Close public hearing,
Adopt Resolution approving Variance request.
ACTION:
Staff recommends the Zoning Administrator adopt the attached
Draft Resolution approving PA 87-071 Raether Fence Height
Variance.
ATTACHMENT:
Exhibit A: Draft Resolution Approving Fence Height Variance Request
PA 87 -071
Exhibit B: Fence Height Variance Submittals
Background Attachment: 1. Zoning Map
2. Applicants' Written Statement
3. Site Photos and Photo Key Map
4. Staff Study - June, 1987
,
-3-' ,
,/
(
(
the City Council's previously established position regarding private structures in
the City right-of-way, it would appear unlikely that an encroachment permit would
be granted for this request,
~
Mr, Tong closed t~~Ub1iC hearing,
Mr, Tong stated that ~,three findings"~hich must be
Variance request could be"inade as follows: ,1Iil)J1.>."
~.!T~to.._ -.df:~.f~'
.i:"^-'"'\.. -,.wi~"
that there are special circ~stances re1ated'to physical features of the lot,
(the lot configuration of the subject lot'~fr~ates a unique angle as it
relates to the adj oining key tot) , ,.t.iJ7
,... ~'-"~
, '^'l, <<Jl~9
~~~~n~~;,v:~~ance would serv,:(;~~~~parity with properties in the
that the Variance would not be detrimental to the neighborhood.
,/:":\\...
Mr, Tong stated that since ".th~j required findi~is, could be made to warrant granting
this Variance application, he was therefore Conditionally approving the Variance
with the adjustment noted to Condition #3.
;'./
,,,(,~,,,
order to grant the
1)
2)
3)
" /'
1,'\',.,."
APPROVING PA,87-057
EXCEED THE
J,
<~i;y
," .;1'
-,:;;'~"
RESOLUTION NO, 3 - 87
SWENSON FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST TO ALLOW A FENCE TO
FENCE HEIGHT LIMITATION AT 7673 TURQUOISE STREET
* * * *
SUBJECT:,::-:"., ., PA 87-071 Raeth'er Fence Variance, 7634 Turquoise Street,
'---'.4.....c-~-......._...<i!l:::;n{~ '\
Mr, Tong opened the public hearing and called for the Staff Report.
Mr, Gailey advised that the Applicants propose the construction of an elevated
deck structure with the two end sections (each 9'~ depth) enclosed with solid
wooden fencing with a maximum height of 5' - 4", He indicated that the 'fencing
was proposed to be established atop a decking with a maximum height of 4' - 8",
creating a structure with a combined height of 10' - 0". He advised that the
Applicants also propose to create a 4' - 0" wooden picket fence atop the rear of
the elevated deck, creating a 57'~ length section of decking/fencing structure
with a combined height of 8' - 8".
Mr, Gailey advised that a review of the Variance request revealed that there are
special circumstances related to the physical features of the site (backs up to
the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and has a 4-foot ~ slope drop-off at
the rear property line) which would warrant granting some form of a Fence Height
Variance,
Mr, Gailey advised tha~ Staff was recommending conceptual approval of the
Applicant's request, but recommended the design be modified as generally shown in
the Staff Study of June, 1987, That Staff Study recommended that the maximum
height of the combined structure be limited to 8' - 8", and that the fencing
established atop the deck not exceed a maximum height of 4' - 0". Mr. Gailey also
recommended a redwood lattice finish be required to allow partial screening of the
bottom of the structure.
Regular Meeting
ZAM-2
June 16, 1987
~
A TT ACHMENI. ....~...
,A/Allo/tf , prA ~tt:.?t'e;,
. . ~ ,,. -'_,\:I,'C}:.w. --;-;~.",i(''1l,''.~-.'.i>ll,. ",'
,"'ic' -'_'~'-" \'.. ,.'..'__'.;~...;oa... ........__.<4.
~J 'rJ"""'~'''''''''-~-~~'''--'' '''''''",,", ~,.,.. -,,'. ~~.~----,---
,~
_ '. ,;c/
, : (\ 'r
Mr, Raether, Applicant, indicated that the structure's proposed height was desired
at the corners of the deck to provide privacy to the residential property to the
north,
Various design changes were discussed to address the differences between the
Applicant's submittal and the Staff recommendation. The discussion concluded with
an agreement to allow an alternate choice of materials at the bottom of the
elevated deck and to conform to the height limitations recommended by Staff,
Mr. Tong closed the public hearing,
Mr, Tong stated that the three findings which must be met in order to grant the
Variance request could be made as follows:
1) that there are the special circumstances related to physical features of the
lot (in that the lot backs up to the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way
and has a 4-foot ~ drop along the length of the rear property line),
2) that the Variance would serve to grant parity with properties in the
vicinity, and
3) that the Variance would not be detrimental to the neighborhood.
Mr. Tong stated that since the required findings could be made to warrant granting
this Variance application, he was therefore conditionally approving the Variance
with the adjustment to Condition #1 to allow an alternate design/material for the
area below the deck.
RESOLUTION NO. 4 - 87
APPROVING PA 87-071 RAETHER FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW A REARYARD/SIDEYARD FENCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FENCE
HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AT 7634 TURQUOISE STREET
* * * *
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a,m,
:.i:/P-
Regular Meeting
ZAM-3
June 16, 1987
." -,-, .... .""--~ ....--,..... "', --."..~.-...
f ,
"-,: - ~;., ct, .
, ,
c'
. ',~,; ~
y '..'" '-L,.: :\) :f-", .I '.~ >1
_iJ.:it.,~~:~~,'~i ~&~~li.titB.:~::';':~'";'~~;.:fl~i:S1.~;'~."-\:, ,_;;.~i.'~/f ,'~.~,' ",; ,':v. ;, 'I: ~
cD
Ci
RESOLUTION NO. 4 - 87
A RESOLUTION OF THE DUBLIN ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
APPROVING PA 87-071 RAETHER FENCE HEIGHT VARIANCE REQUEST
TO ALLOW A REARYARD/SIDEYARD FENCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FENCE
HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AT 7634 TURQUOISE STREET
WHEREAS, Cameron and Jacqu1ine Raether have filed a Fence Height
Variance application requesting approval to vary from Section 8-60.55 of the
City's Zoning Ordinance to allow use of a 8' - 4" to 10' - 0" fence height
along portions of the sideyard and rearyard property lines at 7634 Turquoise
Street; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the
"provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and has been found to
be categorically exempt; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on said
application on June 16, 1987; and
WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all
respects as required by law; and
WHEREAS, a Staff Report was submitted recommending conditional
approval of the Fence Height Variance application, modifying the design of the
proposed structure as generally depicted in the Staff Study of June, 1987; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Administrator heard and considered all said
reports, recommendations and testimony as hereinabove set forth; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Zoning Administrator
does hereby find that:
A) There are special circumstances, including topography and location,
applicable to the property which would deprive the property of privileges
enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the identical zoning
classification, in that the the lot at 7634 Turquoise Street backs up to
the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way and has a 4-foot ~ drop along
the length of the rear property line, making the lot non-commensurate
with other lots in the immediate vicinity and same zoning district,
B) The granting of the Fence Height Variance application will not constitute
a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon
other properties in the vicinity and zone, in that special circumstances
exist which warrant granting the Fence Height Variance. The granting of
this Variance request will not constitute a special privilege in that the
approval will establish parity between the subject property and similar
properties in terms of the privacy yielded by side- and rearyard fencing.
C) The granting of this Fence Height Variance application will not be
detrimental to persons or property in the neighborhood or to the public
welfare.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Zoning Administrator does hereby
conditionally approve PA 87-071 Raether Fence Height Variance application as
generally depicted by materials from the June 16, 1987, Zoning Administrator
Report, labeled Exhibit B and Attachment 2, as modified to substantially
conform with the Staff Study of June, 1987 (Attachment 4 of the referenced
Report), on 'file with the Dublin Planning Department and subject to the
following Conditions:
ATTACHME T 1
_ (;-1-.. ~l ft aT
. .' .'..
. '.' \. : ~,' .' ,.. ,l~ ~.-' ,
"".';~'~';":~ ,'\'i'~1';" t~:,"~..~:,A@.,..~.; ;,:,1()10:~:'1 " ""t~>;~.~~>if~~;:' ':~., '
. .... ~\" ...:,~,,_..!.#.i1.,,~o ."::: ~...__~;.~..~t."'.~J~::.Ji..'....."'4"~~h.>..'"...>_:<tr>'~.~,.. '. ':.,'''~" 1."...~<l.U,;.a.t;..>,_\:,,,....:.,,..,,,,
'I,:'
"f'
co
C;'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
Unless stated otherwise, all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with
prior to issuance of a buildin~ permit or~stablishment of proposed land use
activity, and shall be sub1ect to P1annin~ Department review and approval.
1, This approval is for construction of a fence/deck structure with a
combined height not to exceed 8' - 8", and with the height of the proposed
fencing (measured above the deck surface) not to exceed 4' - 0". The
design of the fence/deck structure shall be substantially consistent with
the Staff Study of June, 1987. The design and materials used to enclose
the bottom of the elevated deck along the north and west portions of the
deck may be altered from the Staff Study if approved by the Planning
Director,
2, Building permits for the fence/deck structure shall be secured and
construction commenced within six months after approval of this permit or
said approval shall be void~
3, This permit shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8-90,3
of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of June, 1987,
~~or
'\
.', \.
;.. ~ '-,
G',;~0g';{:t:,!:~>c'"
f""...,w;a:NJiJ
l":', "
~
I'
i
"'i.-
JJA':.;!'''',';:: :" ,.::;:;
.... ':f':,:"f'~::::':
'.~, 0.,' .'
,::.,'~,
".'.~
. . ~ .
,. :-. \'.',',
,.....----
-.-
.......- -:..,.~~ ,,~-~.._;
. ,-J':,......~.,..u.:..r...
_.1..;.0...
.1....-.
~ ' " ~
. 1-
;J. :.I
~r ~J r-f ,
~
v. ' 1; \J. lit t--
.~f o~ 0
:t ~ III ~ .
. 1 . r
-J. rI-J .......
$1'1 ~ s:o
.t.
-
fJ
'0 *0
'to ~ -
~ ,. '0"'--: - .,"
~ ~ ':) ~ 0'0 . ~ ;--,-- ~
oooo~~::IQ")"J '0--
__:-1~":l'gl ~
~r,. ~-~ ,
-tS~.,
p ." 0:
-.l' 'ft..,
~ ~:: ~~~". ':.
-- ~.
_~..Ia.... r.
, '~~~.~l~;-
.t.: L:.
(.. .'
~~_.
, ,
,-. ......,-,
., ....... ...... ,.
,
I -,'
~'
l
, .
:
- --
, i
I.
~
.-.- ..
tj ,
"5~
It
3
~t)
d.
/fJ~
!4
"
po % 'oJ
. - ~
~ ~ ~
~~"
to -
"'-
..-
'0
~
~ ~
~p
7<(
aJ rfJ
~ ~
ifJ r.
, .'
-.;
...
..
,...
. ,
. . . .
.,' ;-\;fk/> ......
. ~ i
.-..-........;-.
-_::...~:.._~~~-~
. .' ',,)
'-' ...--
,--'
~22~l~~~8t;j;~f~;;:;2!'I~ii~~/;L,:..,;;;:.~:,;:.::.,.', ,,"\:C:~..:;' .' '" ",.; :"'':/'i;~~"::?~,;'1-~f.'f~~l~}':Y);';t;~:~,~;\5;:;;.:: ;.s.;~;"t ;..', . ;:
r', ,I i.- ,"1'....." /..~:":t/:~:.};~ J~;..;~.l!/~,..}~:..,!,td"1-~.J1~,,,.r.'~'JI/~t""J:(:rr'l"',t(~. "1' '~"":;:f.~~ :,..,.;..~,~; ',,,j't...~'./. .~:~ I
',',;,:: ',' . ......, ':~;:~'''~''-i'':'''~''''-;f,'~}!t_~ ' , 1.!1'\"~I~;"fl,'l')';'~.i~'/:-;~'~'/':'~~:i.",'1,~,'.ifd}I...~1ir-'''1:;1~:~;Jf I" 'f ,,;~~';~'I.,t ~;'~~~~':~'~"l'ft'-:"j.r.:;'.'..... '1' ;.,
..' . " , 'I", k:' .- 'f .. J.... h-'u~ ...~...Jtf,'+A.:"~.J'...l~tI..Jr!. .1....~ "l{'" .lWw...l..'II...... . 1_:"
. .:. ,1 '.' V".."" <J ..~~..1.t't~..'..:../I";:y,.'j.,~.,;J.y..,,,.....~.~..'t.,,,/....;.. --_.~.:,;--:.~';;.II."{',(" ,,;,/,:..'''' ,'"
, .' ,. . .. \; ,'.'-;<.:"\';" ''!'i~{~~~;:,:'~' ?'~fW::i;if1J:~~r,:i2iYf <.
,. '~~mfs~y
"%'1:Pt!- ~'DvNe;/'18!
5h~1 ~,'::tot t
,
~
L1' II
T J.x kt.
6 'I/~'1Mjj
~C6="
IrT{iC~ J1!a /
~l[ tTt.
J6~7H ~
~r CO~
Oy;~
flefcseD
Fitw'
~(JN tr' ItrDP
~eF~
Pt&P~seD
eze-v~
~i::.
~~F
~2~e:-
,
...
" :'~/J7l~. G1 i?l!tfit~
"
" .~ I
, .
..,
or,
-'.
"
:.... "
'..::,:. .. ":: ~'~'.
. .::. ;-:..:.- ,":'
". . '-',
" "
';.,
.-
r
( RECEIVED
JUtJ 1 D ;::27
OURlll\j
--'. PlAJI!['o!JNG
June 17, 1987
ci ty of Dublin
P.O, Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Attn: Mr. L. L. Tong, Planning Director
Subject: PA 87-071 Raether Fence Variance
Gentlemen:
In accordance with Public Hearings on June 16, 1987, please
find the revised plan reflecting a tapered fence on the north and
south wing walls. The plan also includes a redwood lattice cover
over a solid enclosed area under the deck.
The existing Permit' #87 345 was reviewed with MI\, White
(Dublin Building Inspection) and was found acceptable for a 4'0"
high fence in lieu of a 6' 0" high fence on top of the proposed
deck.
If you require any further information, please contact me at
(415) 891-2865,
----
CAM: j g
~
ATTA"~~~~""NT 8
',:, , '-:.' t, y~ ~',~;.!:~_~'1 -~
",Ui ~hit ~
Ap,I;te",."j Le~ ,f 6-1'-'"
. . (
'~
,"to ~
-
}...# it
" -'
':--. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.IJ)
"J a III Jl
","
9.1> .) r "0
0.".,0 .
-~
'<, .,;~ ~ -1-
.P~
i I~ ,
- ~ t '0 ~ I
'"
--
.,.
" ~ ~. . (
,(l. .11.., I
:1~
,~fJ
I
I 0
l'e
I
I
(
II 1
o 1-
.I
~1
'J. It lit
"Jtl ....oq
1; ..
,If ~
~ ~ ~ u
~ oj l
~
~
~ ~
:l ~t
~ ,
(Y
,O:J1'
f.,
s~
g,z
o-~
~J
I J
j~
\
_.~
(>, 10').'1' ~'.:> I
:)<;) - I J :>
oQ..,>\ \";)~ ~'ll
..,0 0..1 ~__
r=~-1
~~
ti~1~
~ii~p:,!
Jf)J "11
J.i ~ ~ s~ , p. l
.... ~ #. )C. 7 JJ J
w! i Its...... .",
~1lJ .
.-
c/I
.0
.
~
4.
-
f)
~o
--
:~ --41,
- - '-:~--;I
o <:)lJ"~O'O" Q')...\
~ i) v ";) ,. ~ ';) ~ ~ .~ I
~ O~ 0 ~-2._
I
I
I ~
.or
.-
:/ t
..,
0
1/ ~
I OJ
! '=0
. '< ,
.. ~
\'..
T !Z~ · ~
IoU % ~ l~
%~ :Do 0
::J to- 0 ~ o~ Q
ISl a:.... '" "0
::>><0 ~.$
C fl:i to- ~
\&.. C '" o' c-.:
o < ~.~
>- CJ C .::..
.....zt:.! u
Oz~ := 0
Z ~ u
::. g: 0
G.<(
~ ~
~D-
1~
~$
d
r.:g
if)
~
10
""
.-
o
='
q
g c/.
~p
7<(
'" rI'
(J ...D
Jjr
, .
;
o
'''0,' Z
t-- .--
'.t.U co 6';
':.~ ~:2 ~
. - c:> Llo
\10 % ~
o _ ~
t III
II- ... .
~llv
,'UJ .-i
.-.
...~
:' () :;:: o:i
:::) i::!.\
..' ...,.
'.Ul -; 0
'.: r! '.
" ""
(-
(
RECEIVED
JU\'\ 1. ~ E2?
DUBl.lN ~LANN:~~O
June 17, 1987
City of
P.O. Box
Dublin,
Dublin
2340
CA 94568
Attn:
Mr. L. L. Tong, Planning Director
Subject: PA 87-071 Raether Fence Variance
Gentlemen:
In accordance with the appeal procedure for variances, we are
filing this appeal to allow the proposed fence (north wing wall)
to remain at 6'-0" off the deck as originally proposed for the
following reasons:
1. As the property owners directly north of the proposed
area, a 4'0" fence does not provide the same privacy a 6'0"
fence would allow.
2. A 6'0" fence on the deck would allow a consistent
extension of the existing wall that seperates our property.
3. The difference of 2'0" in height does not create an un-
desirable obstruction, in fact, it shields the abandoned
railroad trestle south of the project area.
Unfortunately, working days and late night shifts would not
allow us to attend the public hearing. Please consider our
concerns and wishes before the final decision.
veflJl1f2
G~ f ~s'sler
7652 Turquoise St.
Dublin, CA 94568
~!JJAA/~
Steven A. ~:essler
7652 Turquoise St.,
Dublin, CA 94568
CC: Cameron & Jacquline Raether
7634 Turquoise St.,
Dublin, CA 94568
1
/\
ATTACfJ"ENT I'J
. 'i~Hi.i-Z-
6"tsSltr* 6,/1,IlAt-I/dtr
','-.
I
\
\
\
"
]-
i" F
,
RECEIVED
JUt'l f) f) '1~?7
IJ IJ .... ....
)
June 18, 1987
DUBliN HANflJ1NG
City of Dublin
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Atten: Mr, L. L. Tong, Planning Director
Subject: PA 87-071 Raether Fence Variance
Gentlemen:
Having received a copy of Gary and Steven Gressler's appeal
for the north wing wall, we would like to appeal the south wing
wall of the project area for the following reasons:
1. If a north wing wall is approved at 6'-0", it would be
more architecturally consistent to have both wing walls at
the same height.
2. A south wing wall at 6'-0" would also help shield the
eyesore trestle south of the property.
3. The picket fence on the rear of the deck can taper from
a 6'-0" to 4'-0" height allowing for a pleasing design,
4. The addition of lattice under the deck area will provide
a clear distinction that the deck and fence are two separate
structures.
5. For the most part, the south wing wall is contained with
in the back yard, connecting at the rear property line at
the west end of the deck.
6. The deck was not built to take advantage of a view, but
rather better utilization of our hillside property.
We respectfully request you take these points into considera-
tion prior to final approval.
CC: Gary & Steve Gressler
7652 Turquoise St.,
Dublin, CA 94568
If)
A TT ACI'~MENT /0
t.eHtv~ liter '.lIf1
Development Services.
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
CITY OF DUBLIN
( Planning/Zoning 829-4916
Building & Safety 829-0822
Engineering/Public Works 829-4927
r
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Re. Planning Application #:
~ June 22. 1987
PA 87-071 Raether Fence Variance
Finance Control #:
H/A
Project/Site Address:
7634 Turquoise Street
Assessor Parcel Number(s):
941-2769-2
Applicants/Owners:
Cameron & Jacqu1ine Raether
7634 Turquoise Street
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Applicant:
The decision of the Zoning Administrator on June 16, 1987, regarding the above referenced
Planning Application has been appealed.
The appeal of your project will be taken up by the Planning Commission in the near
future. You will be notified in advance of the date and location of the hearing.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact this Office at 829-4916.
:T~
Laurence L. Tong~ ~
Planning Director
LLT/KJG/ao
cc: Appellants
1\
~...~~:tM~:f"ci;:.it~'~~~J.Yl:~~~;7~~~:':';:~:1~~:72:~:7 ',~0:''':''~~:-:''~' ,-- ':-'-~-::-:'--_:.: '~._~-.: ~.:-~:'C~:'~~.;"';~:{':--~~':~~~~-:~:~:'~:~'__'!.z..r.::.-r'.'7':~~ "::::?~~':,~~~"'~~.:~:'S~:'~~~,~a~~T':;~
ATTACHMENT II
,Jilt" 0 f A Pf'.Iwl