PC 072804 - Laserfiche WebLink

_. Stacey Shurson, 403 Neal Street, indicated that she would like to see the retention of the second unit. She added that low-income housing contributes positively to the eclectic character of the Downtown. Gena Mariscal read a letter on behalf of her parents, Betty and Joe Wolfenberger, residents at 4408 First Street, stating that legalizing the second unit would send a message to the community that it is all right to build any structure anywhere without any consideration for safety issues. Paul Uster, 573 East Angela Street, stated that the existing structure is not a historical building and that approving the variance would create a precedent. He urged the Commission to be fair and keep the process equitable for all. He expressed concern about the numerous buildings and five code violations. Mike Carey, 4453 Second Street, commented that the Downtown needs variances to improve the area where space is limited and creativity is encouraged. He indicated that he supports the retention of the second unit with the required safety upgrades. Peter Graham, 4443 Second Street, stated that the structure is an asset to the Downtown and fits the Victorian style and encouraged its retention with upgrades to meet code requirements. _ Debra Donald, 4420 First Street, expressed her appreciation for Mr. Iserson's correction that her primary concern regarding this application is safety. Referring to several photographs of the property she handed to the Commission, she gave a brief history of her complaint and pointed out her health and safety as well as privacy concerns regazding the property. She stated that although the property owners were made aware by City officials of the need to bring the structure up to code at the time they purchased the house, they have not done anything to upgrade the structure. She indicated that she wanted safe and legal housing in the neighborhood and that the Commission would be setting a precedent if it granted the variance. She felt there is no room for trees and that a trellis would not help. She stated that this is not a historic structure. Dustin Boyce, 4546 Second Street, stated that he was a general contractor in Pleasanton and noted that the existing structure was built without a permit. He commented that it would be in the best interest of the community that the Commission does not set a precedent in this regard and require the structure to be either code compliant or replaced by the proposed single-story structure. He had mixed feelings on the second unit. Peter MacDonald noted that the Chatelains did not receive a letter from the City of Pleasanton indicating that the house they purchased was illegal. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 28, 2004 Page 16 of 19