HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 5, 1982 (19)RSC E11
'tjZo May 30* 1982
Mrse Alke M e. Re imche "I' Ilk 33 SS
city Hall ALICE M
221 Imst'Pine Ste CITY CLIAX
Lodi,California
95240 CITY OF LCD!
Res Appeal - Solar Collector Rack 9 Mulberry Ct.
Deaz Mrs* Reimches
I wish to appeal the Planning C07-.7-Issions determination that
the Solar Panel. Support partially constructed in my rear yard at
9 Mulberry- Ct. constitutes. a structure.
In.Feb, '82--. 1 contacted the City Building / Planning Dept.
and' was refered to Mr. blorimotO * I explained to him that because
my residence' doesn't have
ve either a South face for solar or adequate
roof � spai6eF. - to -contain the Solar System I planned to purchase * I ,
wouldhaire.Aq build a Solar Rack in my rear yard ten feet wide and
fort$-fiv"eet long I Inquired of,mr, Morimoto If a solar rack
built a4.:: -specified nd against my rear fence' (which separates -9
Mmulberry.- ' Ct. ' from 132 Mulberry Circle) could be built and what
perzIts`.'%4.ad- be needed*, I explained that the solar Rack would
have to,.be'-built against the rear fence because It was the sole
locatioxv.,which would offer adequate space for the rack even though
the rack would extend over five feet into my pool areae Thlisly,
the rackwould have to be built at least ten feet above the ground
In order'.; to_ clear the swimming pool and surrounding three foot
deck, I 'alsa explained that the portion of the rack against MY
rear fence would be approx. twelve feet above the ground to hide
the solar system from view for my neighbors.
'Mr., Morlmoto Informed me that as, long as the sole purpose of
Solar Collector Rack was to place solar collectors upon it. It was
not considered a Structure and did not need permits or variances
from existing City Codes. I made It clear to Vx, Morlmoto that
the Reck was going against the rear fence and would be forty -:rive
feet longe. Mr. Morimoto was definate In stating that the rack was
not a structure and could be built against the rear fence.
I began building the Solar Rack by placing siXteen foot. 4x4
Redwood posts three feet In -to the ground. However* My neighbor at
132 Mulberry Circle complained to the City Planning Dept. and I
was Instructed by a letter signed by D'--. Morimoto to cease
construction until the Planning Commission could Interpret existing
codes and ordinances to determine iftbe Solar. Rack was a structure*
The Planning Commision voted on 042682 to classify my Solar Rack as
2 Structure. I feel It is not a scnucuure as its sole purpose is
to support a solar system lor my swimming pool and spa.
The Rack& when built, would be twelve feet nigh along the
rear fence end slanting towards my pool to ten feet above the pool.
This would hide the solar collectors from view from my neighbors
yard nd ge
oulllpsenthe hanpeq of water flooding Into their
yards oul a a occur. Re heighth would allow me to utalize
777777777775F
I
M
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, May 19, 1982
at the hour of 8:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, the Lodi City Council will conduct a public
hearing in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 221 West Pine
Street, Lodi, California, to consider the appeal of Dennis
Lewis, 9 Mulberry Court of the. Planning Commission's denial of
his request to construct a solar collection rack in a required
rear yard setback at 9 Mulberry Court (Assessor's Parcel No.
05'7-3:60-4-9t.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the
office of the Community Development Director at 221 West Pine
Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited
to present their views.eitber for or against the above
proposal. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk
at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein and oral
statements may be made at said hearing.
Dated:: May 5, 198-2
By Order of the City Council
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk