Fence Exception-Withdrawn-2003
";---
o'f. . CA-1t
. ~<S>
~ «'
- t""
U r
-...
CAMPBELL
.--
c:
0
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Community Development Department
September 9, 2003
Jill A. Zahner
1252 Ridgeley Drive
Campbell, CA 95008
Re:
File No.: PLN2003-105
1252 Ridgeley Drive
Fence Exception Application
Dear Ms. Zahner,
Thank you for meeting with me on Monday, September 8, 2003 to discuss your Fence
Exception application for seven-foot high fencing along the eastern and southern property
lines. The proposed seven-foot high fence on the east property line encroaches into the
required setback by fifteen-feet. Staff cannot support your application, as the proposed
fence will impair vehicular or pedestrian safety along Midway Avenue.
As per our discussion, your existing six-foot high fences along the eastern and southern
property lines are legal non-conforming structures and may be repaired or maintained
under section 21.64 (Non-Conforming Buildings) of the Campbell Municipal Code.
Based on this determination, you will be refunded the fees that you paid on August 12,
2003 in the amount of $258.00. The refund check is currently being processed and will be
mailed to you separate from this letter.
I realize that you have spent a great deal of time and effort preparing the application
submittal. I apologize for any inconvenience that this has caused you. Please feel free to
contact me if you have any additional questions at (408) 866-2142 or via email at
melindad@cityofcampbell.com.
Sincerely,
fIittud¿'? ~- .
'. ~ '/ - /7/
, - t..<./r
Melinda Denis
Planner I
Cc:
Geoff Bradley, Senior Planner
70 North First Street. Campbell, California 95008-1436 . TEL 408.866.2140 . FAX 408.871.5140 . TDD 408.866.2790
Jill A. Zahner
1252 Ridgeley Drive
Campbell, CA 95008
TL: 408/371-1432 (h) TL:650/496-1262 (w)
EM: iil1.zahner(å)dnax.org
12 August 2003
Planning Commission
City of Campbell
RE: Fence Exception Application - 1252 Ridgeley Drive
Dear Commissioners,
Enclosed is my application and required documentation for a Fence
Exception Application on my property at the corner of Ridgeley Drive & N.
Midway Street in Campbell. There are additional drawings:
Drawing B: Section of current driveway fence
Drawing C: Section of proposed driveway fence
I am applying to replace myoid, storm-damaged, 6-foot fence with a new
7 -foot, louvered fence along the rear of my property and along a portion of the N.
Midway Street-side of my property. I do not at this time intend to replace the
fence between myself and my adjoining neighbor at1236 Ridgeley Drive. This
petition for a taller fence is being submitted because I wish greater privacy for
my corner lot property. .
I apologize to the Commission for the rudimentary appearance of these
drawings. Clearly, I am not a draftsperson, but I cannot afford to hire someone
to do the drawings for me. I am happy to clarify any points of confusion that
may arise because of the 'layman' quality of these drawings.
. I would like to draw your attention to two points that will be germane to
your assessment of my application:
1. Along with the required Application drawings, I have submitted two specific
drawings of the driveway section of my property. I am not requesting an
exception of additional height for this portion of my fence; however, I would
like to change slightly the configuration of fence panels. See Drawings B
(current section) and C (proposed replacement section).
2. I was instructed by Tim Haley at the Campbell City Planning Department that
I needed to solicit the input of my neighbor, Ms. Patricia Lauderdale (1276
Ridgeley Drive), even though we do not literally share a fence line-we are
separated by N. Midway Street.
Ms. Lauderdale has declined to endorse my plan for the portion of the 7 -foot
fence exception along N. Midway Street for aesthetic reasons that she
discusses in her attached letter. I have elected to submit this Fence
----
Exception Application without her endorsement, so that during the course of
the Commission's assessment of the Application, it might enlighten us as to
our mutual rights and responsibilities regarding her concerns. For instance, I
am not certain if the "good neighbor" policy of sharing the fence expense now
applies in her case because the City required me to soliCit her opinionnand I
certainly wouldn't want to surprise her with such a situation, should it exist!
Before providing her letter to me, Ms. Lauderdale and I talked extensively
about the fence in general, traffic issues at our corner, and about her
apprehensions regarding the aesthetics of my proposal-specifically, her
unease about the potential 'stockade' appearance of a high fence. At that
time, I assured her that it was my intention to keep the current trumpet-
flower vines that completely covered the old fence. These lovely flowers would
easily overtake the new fence, particularly if I planted another vine or two.
She seemed most amenable to this as a solution to at least soften the overall
effect of the fence. Although her letter touches on the important issue of
vegetation, I believe it was a simple oversight that she did not recount our
specific discussion about the vine solution.
Additionally, Ms. Lauderdale indicated her preference for a lattice-top fence
on my property, which she felt might meet my need for a higher fence, while
accommodating her hope for a more aesthetic appearance. Unfortunately I
don't have the funds to support that option, as 12" lattice-top is more
expensive to replace than plain board. A single-lattice component would not
afford me the privacy I am seeking, and double lattice is, as I alluded, a
goodly expense; it actually amounts to an extra $4 per foot. However, if the
vines I already have in place continue to grow with their customary gusto, the
lattice would be covered in any case, and solid board would probably provide
a stronger base.
I am happy to answer questions you may have about my Application (I am
more easily reached at my work number, above). Please note that I will be on
vacation and therefore unavailable between 13 and 22 August. In spite of my
absence, I am respectfully requesting that you give my application your
immediate attention, as my long-suffering neighbors have had to stare at my
dilapidated fence--sections of which are completely down--for the last 7 months
while I put the job out for bid and then secured the money for the project. I am
also well-aware of the N. Midway Street Improvement Project, and will of course
postpone any fence replacement until such time as the Project Manager deems I
can begin.
Thank you for your patience and careful consideration of my application.
cc: B. Mendoza, Code Enforcement Officer
P. Stonard & J. Einstein, 181 N. Midway Street
P. Lauderdale, 1276 Ridgeley Drive
L. Peterson, Project Manager, Midway Street Improvement Project
July 31, 2003
Ms. Jill Zahner
1252 Ridgeley Drive
Campbell, CA 95008
Dear Jill,
You certainly have no need to apologize for your drawings.
They are perfectly clear and worthy of a professional draftsman.
I have studied them carefully and they appear to be in every
detail just as you described in our discussion.
While I appreciate your intention to upgrade your fence
with a better quality lumber and the fact that it will be a
more interesting style (louvre) than before, with the exception
of substituting graduated panels for the present slanted one,
it will be essentially the same unbroken form, only higher.
Therein lies my problem in endorsing it.
As I explained, ever since I moved to Ridgeley Drive in
1966, the west side of Midway has had the unattractive look
of a series of haphazard stockades because, when built, they
were in the County and did not have to conform to a code. Many
of them appear to be taller than six feet, are not landscaped,
and will probably need to be replaced in the near future.
It has been my ardent hope that as this is done, the City
of Campbell, which has an interest in neighborhood improvement
and beautification, will rectify this long-standing eyesore
by ensuring that the nonconforming fences, when rebuilt, will
be in compliance with its regulations and perhaps may even
provide plant material to screen the long expanses of wooden
fences that flank that side of Midway.
While I would like very much to accede to your request,
if you are granted an exemption for a seven foot side fence,
it will set a precedent which other homeowners on that street
can then cite to get similar waivers, and the present alley-
like hodge-podge on west Midway would most likely be perpetuated.
However, I have no objection to seven foot fences between your
backyard and your adjacent neighbors'.
Since the extra long backyards of the houses on Ridgeley,
McBain, Fewtrell, and Campbell, the sides of which abut the
west side of Midwa~ do present a unique problem with regard
to both aesthetics and security, perhaps the City planning
department might be willing to engage in some creative problem
solving with you and the other owners there. For instance,
if in recognition of the unusual layout of the houses which
allows little space between them and the sidewalk, they could
modify the code just for that strip to require seven foot fences
---
July 18, 2003
To whom it may concern:
I am aware that my neighbor, Jill AZahner, owner of the property 1252 Ridgeley Drive,
is requesting a Fence Exception, from the city of Campbell, to allow her to build a fence
seven (7) feet high. I have no objection to this plan
Peter Stonaro
Judith Einstein
181 N. Midway St.
Campbell, CA 95008
408-377-7496
.,' . ~~--
/";":"""':'~~......~
l~rÑ: Midway St.
Campbell, CA 95008
408-377- 7496