My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN041712
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2012
>
CCMIN041712
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2012 12:51:26 PM
Creation date
6/14/2012 12:51:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
4/17/2012
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
DOCUMENT NO
CCMIN041712
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
Glen Bunting said he knows the Lopez family personally and while there is a tremendous amount of <br /> bickering surrounding the project, it is clear that they are not the only instigators. He stated that the <br /> entire purpose of the condition in question was to provide $2,500 for the purchase and installation of a <br /> skylight. If, for whatever reason, the Perry's choose not to use the funds for that purpose than it would <br /> seem there was not a significant issue to begin with. <br /> Helen Sullivant said she originally supported the project because there are several existing two-story <br /> homes in the Valdez neighborhood. The City Council made an appropriate decision in supporting <br /> mitigation in the form of requiring the applicant to pay $2,500 for the purchase and installation of a <br /> skylight. She said she is now baffled that the Perry family is attempting to alter the intent of the <br /> condition and troubled that the Lopez family may be the victims of discrimination. <br /> Martha DeJesus stated that the condition, as presented today, does in fact differ from what was agreed <br /> upon at the last Council meeting. She hoped the Council would recognize the discrepancy and correct <br /> the language to provide for payment of a skylight and installation only. She recommended further <br /> modification to ensure that the installation is completed before the Lopez family releases any funds. <br /> Marthel Green said this is clearly more than a neighborhood squabble and, in looking at the <br /> information, it appears that this could be a matter of racial discrimination. He said he attended previous <br /> meetings on the matter, knows what was agreed to and was very concerned to see that things may <br /> have changed. <br /> James Veet said he has known the Lopez family for eight years and that the claims of bullying are out <br /> of character for whom he knows them to be. <br /> Mayor Hosterman closed the public hearing. <br /> Councilmember Cook-Kallio said she was disappointed to see such animosity and predicted this was <br /> costing everyone involved much more than money. Staff is clear in that it was their intent that $2,500 <br /> would cover the cost of the skylight. It is unfortunate that bids were not procured ahead of time and that <br /> likely highlights the need for effective language. She felt the intent was for the Perry's to get a skylight <br /> and said she could support staff's Option 1. In lieu of that, she would support Option 3. <br /> Councilmember McGovern referred to the photo provided by Mr. Person and said that if accurate, it <br /> clearly demonstrates why she did not vote in support of the project. She felt that the lone tree looked <br /> like little more than a shrub against the massive backdrop of the Lopez home. She said there has been <br /> a clear impact to the Perry's home and that she would support asking the Lopez family to pay the full <br /> price of the skylight or allowing the Perry's to use the funds for additional landscaping. <br /> Mayor Hosterman cautioned that one of the hazards of coming back before the Council is that the <br /> outcome can change significantly. She said she would be in favor of requiring the Lopez family to pay <br /> the full cost of the skylight plus an additional $1,000 for landscaping. <br /> Councilmember Thorne said this is one of the most difficult types of issues for the Council to deal with, <br /> primarily because legislative bodies of this nature are not prepared to resolve the kind of allegations <br /> being tossed around. He felt that because the issue was so contentious the Council should stick to the <br /> original language of the condition, which to him says that the $2,500 is not earmarked for anything <br /> specific. He said he could not support any of the recommended amendments and would vote to deny <br /> the appeal. <br /> Councilmember Sullivan read the condition, as presented on page 2 of the staff report, and interpreted <br /> it to mean that the payment is contingent upon the installation of the skylight. He agreed that the Perry's <br /> have suffered but said the Council needs to take some responsibility for approving the project. He felt it <br /> would be going too far to extract more money from the Lopez family to provide additional mitigations for <br /> City Council Minutes Page 12 of 13 April 17, 2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.