02 - Laserfiche WebLink

followed by Police presence on the street, when reported. He added personally calling the Police when he observed drug use in the property and in cars on the street. As captain of the group, he was involved in what other neighbors observed and Police presence seemed to focus on the subject property. He reported a lot of nighttime activity and noticing different people going in and coming out during all hours of the day. He reported the property owners attended a Neighborhood Watch meeting and indicated they wanted to be left alone and were not responsible for what other adults did on their property. He added the disclosure of Police activity in the neighborhood made his house difficult to sell. Mr. Farmer concluded the project would bring more undesirables into the neighborhood. Eric Wedeking spoke in opposition to the project noting his neighbors feel the same; they are not opposed to home improvements, in general, but are opposed to worsening problems. The property is a problem to the street and the community, because of the resources used to enforce laws. He reported the Police are a constant presence in the neighborhood as illegal activity pours out of the house and it meets the definition of a "nuisance neighbor." He reported they were using their attic as an illegal living space and have no regard for the law. Mr. Wedeking reported there is a constant stream of young people speeding on the street and the residents and their visitors have no regard for the peacefulness and safety of the streets and have been observed dealing drugs. He reported one-third of the houses in the neighborhood have been sold, in the last two years. He urged Council to deny the appeal to keep current problems from getting worse. Glen Johnson noted his main concern is the privacy of his family and reported there is a transient population going in and coming out of the subject residence. He expressed concerns regarding the maintenance of the subject residence, and said if they expand the size of the home, there will be a larger nuisance and reported it has been the worse property in the neighborhood for many years. He questioned the capability and sophistication of the contractor, commented on the permits he has pulled in the last six years and spoke of the possibility of the contractor abandoning the project. Shoni Johnson shared her and her husband's experience in moving to Pleasanton and noted challenges living in the neighborhood. Residents have had the responsibility to report activities related to the subject site and the property owners seem to have a total disregard for what is occurring. She complained of people urinating on her lawn and selling and doing drugs. She reported Mrs. Robles had claimed, at a previous Planning Commission meeting, they do not rent rooms but rather, they "help people," but they are not trained and are only providing a haven for criminals and drug addicts. She expressed frustration noting the project will increase existing problems. Ed Broome commented on the project being "unremarkable" in its design and mass and said it will contribute to the overall improvement of the neighborhood. He commented on the history of the property noting Council cannot take that into consideration, but addressed the issue of parking. During a previous Planning Commission, the use of the garage, for parking, was addressed. The applicant had no intention of using the garage for parking. He said approval of the project will continue the condition of deferred maintenance and urged Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision. Mr. Broome added the applicant has not followed the Planning Commission's recommendations and opposed the project. David Robles reported living in the house for 38 years and accumulating a lot of stuff, as they are a big family. He explained the need for more space and reported meeting all the requirements of City staff. Mr. Robles reported they are foster parents and some of the kids have had problems, but have addressed them. City Council Minutes Page 6 of 9 October 3, 2017