My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
24
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
041911
>
24
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/13/2011 11:55:20 AM
Creation date
4/13/2011 11:48:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/15/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
24
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Spangler asked about the opaque glass being changed to clear glass. <br />Ms. Leroudier mentioned that there is a state law that homeowners have the right to use and <br />enjoy their property with the exclusion of others. She stated that if they cannot install this <br />window then their rights are not being protected. <br />Ms. Leroudier stated that other cities all around Pleasanton do not have this law that you must <br />get the neighbor's permission to install a second -story window. She mentioned that this was a <br />waste of time and taxpayers money and does not agree with Pleasanton's law. She also <br />mentioned that this process damages relationships with the neighbors. <br />The Public Hearing was closed. <br />Ms. Stern explained that a lot of information was brought up yesterday about the area and the <br />conditions on the site, but noted that the discussion today had revolved around the privacy issue <br />and what people's expectation of what privacy is. She stated that she went to visit the site to <br />evaluate some of that information and to figure out what would be the reasonable expectation for <br />privacy in that neighborhood, given the conditions, and the houses and changes that people have <br />made to their houses and to the'.r sites, including the applicant, the neighbor and the other houses <br />around there. <br />Ms. Stern noted that after visiting the area she noticed that people have made additions to their <br />houses and that many balconies do look into neighboring yards. She stated that she understands <br />the concern about viewing into the living area, but there are ways to prevent that by using blinds. <br />She noted her concern regarding the exterior area because there is not an opportunity to put a tree <br />there or increase the fence height to maintain the privacy. She noted the raised deck in the <br />neighboring yard that gives them the opportunity to look into the applicant's yard pretty clearly. <br />She also noted the neighbor's window additions that look over onto the applicant's home and the <br />other neighbor. <br />Ms. Stern mentioned her concern with opaque glass because that could cause more issues. She <br />noted the window will be opened at certain times and they could also replace the glass without <br />going through a review by the City. She stated that it would be hard to enforce that condition of <br />only installing opaque glass. <br />Ms. Stern noted that she will make a decision today that will end this process, but she hopes the <br />neighbors will adapt to this anc. keep a neighbor relationship as that is more important than a <br />window. <br />The Zoning Administrator granted approval of PADR -2138, subject to the conditions of approval <br />as shown on the attached Exhibit B. <br />Respectfully submitted, <br />Natalie Amos <br />PADR -2138, Leroudier December 22, 2010 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.