17 - Laserfiche WebLink

7 a our main patio is. The planned window addition is overlooking right into the center of our main patio. Applicants have shown many photos taken from various sides of their homes. Photos are sometimes not very precise on the size and clarity; some can just hide the true picture that the human eyes can actually see. In fact some of the photos that applicants presented during the previous public hearing, like a view showing only the roof of our house or one that showed from the other area of the wall when it was opened for repair, are totally misleading. A realistic visualization of how grossly privacy is impacted in this case is to ask somebody to stand 10 to 20 feet away. We believed you would agree that the planned window, that will allow applicants or future residence to casually observe us in the patio area from 10 to 20 feet away, clearly and grossly, violated the pre- existing privacy that we currently have. Another troubling fact is that the proposed window has direct sight -line towards the sliding door of our family room, approx. 25 feet away from the planned window. Near the sliding door is where we place a table for our daily dining and also serve as a work table for my wife when she is home doing the paperwork or working with the laptop. She is a stay -at -home mom who dedicated her time volunteering for a church, helping seniors at senior housing In Pleasanton, and our children's schools. Applicant also mentioned a couple of items that I am not sure about the relevance towards the impact towards the previous decision. Since we were not informed about the reasons for the decision, let us put some major information that the applications provided. 1. "Medical condition of her daughter's eyes requires a window addition for direct sunlight to the bedroom, and planning to place a desk right next to the window". There are a lot of other options to improve the lighting of a room that are safer than having to let people read under direct sunlight. In fact there are a lot of articles that recommend against it. So this reason that applicant brought up did not seem logical. Their need for extra lighting in the bedroom (which main purpose is supposed for sleeping) will be gained at the cost of our lighting when we were suggested to install blind at our patio door to protect our privacy in the family room (which hold our main activity in the house, and is the only room in the house that has enough light). Where is the fairness? 2. "Rights of use ". If privacy is not of our concern, nobody is going to bother the applicant about the right of use. However, the right of use the applicant is mentioning is taking away the right of basic privacy from us. There are codes and regulations for safe architecture, and there are ordinance and guidelines to cover those that cannot be covered by the codes. Many cities acknowledge that second story window may be very intrusive towards adjacent property if the orientation, location, and /or size are not right. The right of use should not be viewed as absolute, but should also consider the impact to neighborhood. The location, the size, and the orientation of the planned second story window is exactly over viewing the center of our main patio, in a distance between 10 -20 feet. It also has a direct sight line to the 8' sliding door to our family room. This is exactly what other city planners are worried about when they mentioned "second story window may be very intrusive towards the adjacent neighbor property. 2