PC 052715 - Laserfiche WebLink

Acting Chair Ritter stated that the Commission's job it to ensure that the Zoning Code and other codes and laws are followed and that the proposal fits into the neighborhoods properly. He indicated that he has been on the Commission longer than most of the other Commissioners and noted that neighborhood issues are the most difficult cases that the Commission has to deal with, and the Commission wants to do what is best for Pleasanton and the neighborhoods. Commissioner Nagler stated that what is tough about this is that it is all about everybody's children, and every family is in the conversation because of the concern over children's health and privacy. He noted that what causes neighbors and groups of people to get along to the extent possible is compromise, and there has been no ability to compromise in any way on this project, given that everyone's concern is exactly the same heartfelt concern for their children, and the Commission will have to make a decision and choose the concern of one child over that of another. He added that it is a complete shame because the Commission is just not in a position to decide whether the totally legitimate concern of a family that their teenage daughter's privacy be properly maintained is more or less important than where the cool air is acquired for a child in the middle of an asthma attack. He stated that it is not a pleasant task and that does not think that it should be an appropriate task for the Commission when the people who are directly impacted should themselves be able to come up with a compromise. Commissioner Piper agreed that this is a difficult decision to make. She indicated that these are the Planning Commission meetings that she does not like to come to and prefers making decisions on what is being built Downtown on Main Street. She stated that she knows the Birdland area well and is quite intimately familiar with it because she grew up there. She indicated that they had a pool and all the children were in the pool, and privacy was not an issue for them back then. She added that they had second stories and people looked down, and all the children were friends and knew one another. She stated that she cannot resonate with the issues at hand relating to the children, because if the child has asthma and the proper solution is to go outside, there are many different ways to go outside other than through a balcony. She added that she will need to put the matter of children aside and lean toward consistency in the neighborhood. She stated that she believes there has been a compromise since the neighbors are accepting all the different aspects of the additions with the exception of this balcony that happens to be not consistent with the other homes in the neighborhood. She indicated that at this point, she is a little bit more in favor of the appellant. Commissioner Balch agreed with respect to the children and their specific concerns. He stated that he has a child and they have a pool, and they we have a neighbor who has a balcony into their backyard, although he was not a homeowner there at the time the balcony was added and does not know in hindsight what he would have done in this regard. Commissioner Balch stated that one of his elements is that people should not be making rules that are not known at the forefront, so they should not be putting in PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, May 27, 2015 Page 11 of 18