SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

• Instead our current zoning for nearby buildings of 20' seemed most appropriate and most compatible • Commission strongly requested story poles so you could validate the limited setbacks of the 3 story building from the sidewalk (as we could not). • City code (18.20.40E) requires developer to install story poles if needed by Planning Commission "depicting the height and of the proposed structure" and" these should be installed prior to noticing." • The 2 boards nailed to the side of the small existing home, with a cord, last week do not meet spirit or language of our muni code requirements. • I know transparency is important to you. I hope you would agree these poles could mislead the public and the public has a right for a fair representation of a project. • FYI: Staff instructed Commission exactly how to request story poles advising us not to include them in the motion since procedural in nature and just to strongly request them,which is exactly what was done Staff also validated that a month should be plenty of time to install story poles(actually had'7 weeks). Requests for your consideration: 1) Delay vote until the story poles the Planning Commission requested are properly installed per our request and per code. a. Why have regulations, especially ones you recently adopted, if we do not hold others accountable to follow them? 2) If you go forward with discussion on Tuesday please: a. Have project returned to staff so alternative site layouts can be explored that protect all 3 healthy heritage oaks and insure the 3 story multi-use building front street setback is compatible to neighboring homes/buildings i. Change site design to save the one heritage oak planned for removal ii. Insure a very high chance of survival of the remaining 2 oaks by redesigning layout of parking/drive so there is more than a 2-3' gap before pavers or driveways starts iii. Potentially increase street facing setback of the 3 story multi-use building so it is more compatible and consistent with neighboring building setbacks based on your assessment b. If you vote to cut down one heritage oak and approve with existing layout, please protect the remaining two heritage oaks so they have a very high chance of survival. i. Staff has been working hard to mitigate risks and you will determine if plans are good enough. Some of you sat on the Heritage Tree Board and know the hoops we put residents through who want to remove a tree. Please insist we take the same care with discretionary PUDs to protect our limited healthy heritage oaks that help make downtown Pleasanton special. I think this project is close but can be much better and hope you agree. I believe we can and should demand the highest standards on our remaining downtown infill discretionary rezone requests to protect our historic downtown resources and character. That includes protecting our few remaining healthy downtown heritage oak trees at almost all costs and being able to validate (and let the community validate) that our projects are compatible with the neighborhood. Thank you for listening. Nancy p.s. Muni code 18.20.40 E on story poles If determined to be necessary by the zoning administrator or planning commission, an applicant for a new house within the Downtown Specific Plan Area or a two-story addition to an existing house within the Downtown Specific Plan Area shah install story poles depicting the height and mass of the proposed house or addition subject to the satisfaction of the 2