My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12 Attachments
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2012
>
030612
>
12 Attachments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2012 3:12:35 PM
Creation date
3/2/2012 3:12:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/6/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12 Attachments
Document Relationships
18
(Message)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2012\041712
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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
Ms. Lopez stated that in her opinion, there was never the intent to install a skylight. She <br /> noted that the Council approval was given back in February, and the best opportunity <br /> for anybody to see the lighting in the home was during the summer months when there <br /> is most lighting, at which time the Lopezes' home was already erected. She further <br /> noted that they got the bids in November, when typically there is a lot of rain. She <br /> added that this never went beyond what the Council had agreed upon that they —the <br /> Perrys and the Lopezes —were to work it out. <br /> Rodney Lopez stated, in summary, that they are not saying they are not going to pay. <br /> He stated that they will pay the funds as specified in the option, but they want the <br /> skylight to be installed first. He added that they felt that during the process, a lot of the <br /> arguments were being brought up just to put up obstacles, and they wanted to make <br /> sure that if this is a real issue, then the Perrys should take care of the issue and the <br /> Lopezes take care of their portion. <br /> Ms. Lopez stated that they are here to mitigate the Perrys' issue and concern about <br /> shadowing or shading. She added that they are willing to accept that responsibility by <br /> paying up to the $2,500, but they want it for what the intention is, which is to install a <br /> skylight, and not for any other purpose. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated that it is unfortunate that the wording was not a little <br /> sharper from the beginning, but nobody anticipated this. He indicated that as the <br /> Commission has mentioned in the past, disputes between neighbors, especially next <br /> door neighbors, are always difficult. He stated that he believes that in the interest of <br /> putting this matter to bed and quieting things down, the wording of the condition should <br /> remain with no changes made. He noted that it has been more than a year, and this <br /> matter should have come up at the time the condition was written and not this late. He <br /> indicated that he originally thought that he would like to see the skylight installed, but <br /> now that the construction is all done, the skylight may not be the best solution and there <br /> may be other ways to spend the money to make things easier on the neighbors. He <br /> indicated that he would not have a problem with the Perrys using the fund for something <br /> different. He added that he thinks this matter needs to be put to bed so things can start <br /> to heal. <br /> Commissioner Blank stated that he suspects that regardless of whatever decision the <br /> Commission takes here, this will probably go to another body for final resolution. He <br /> agreed with Commissioner O'Connor that this is an unfortunate situation. He noted that <br /> the wording is perhaps not as elegant as it might have been, but he did not think that <br /> the wording should be changed. <br /> Commissioner Pearce stated that she agreed with Commissioner O'Connor. She <br /> indicated that she read the City Council meeting Minutes to see if there was a <br /> discussion about the intent and if there was concern that it might not happen, and she <br /> did not see any of that. She noted that this was a 3-2 vote with the Council approving <br /> Option 3 which included this condition, and she needs to rely on that. She added that if <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 25, 2012 Page 10 of 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.