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