SR 06:245 - Laserfiche WebLink

Knight said that they would like to thank and acknowledge City staff for their professionalism and thoroughness in executing this process. Joe Rose, 768 East Angela Street, spoke in opposition to this project and expressed concern that the neighborhood was becoming more built up. He would like to preserve the view from his house as well as their privacy. Tim Bennett, 784 East Angela Street, spoke in opposition to this project and expressed concern about their privacy and the impact of the addition on their property value. He thanked the Commissioners who came to their house to get a sense of the possible impacts on them. He stated that the Knights canvassed their neighbors on Mirador Court but never approached them during the process. He noted that none of the residents on Mirador Court, except the immediate neighbor, Martha Wensel, will be negatively affected by the proposed project and stand to gain by their increased property values. He stated that most ofthe comments from the neighbors are biased and that none ofthem have been in his back yard to gauge the effect of the project on his property. Mr. Bennett stated that the Knights propose to double the size of their house and in a neighborhood of predominantly 1,600-square-foot single-story homes; the Knights' home would be over 3,000 square- feet. He continued by saying that because ofthe stepped nature of the hillside, his backyard offers views to Mount Diablo and the Livermore hills when the trees are bare and provides a wonderful airy, forest-like, private feel. He said that he now looks over the roofs of the houses on Mirador Court and feels that the Knights' proposed second-story addition will place the view of a structure from his backyard view and felt that trees could conceal some of that structure. Mr. Bennett stated that after reviewing the Knights' plans, he believed there are definite opportunities to scale down their project by eliminating the second floor or moving it forward on the property. He continued that they should be a little more modest in their expectations as this proposal would get all the upside and their neighbors on East Angela Street would get all the downside. He added that with Pleasanton reaching buildout and property taxes based on sale value, this kind of inappropriately huge expansion is becoming too common as owners ride roughshod over their neighbors for their own self-interest and speculation. He stated that it is time for the Planning Commission and City Council to draw the line and exercise control before it is too late and the character of our neighborhoods is lost. Mr. Bennett concluded that he is a Pleasanton businessman, a member of the Chamber of Commerce and Pleasanton Downtown Association. He said he was aware of how hard the City tries to maintain and improve its neighborhoods and amenities and sometimes decisions have to be made that are difficult at the time but are for the greater good; and this is one of those times. Louis Bertolini, 776 East Angela Street, expressed his opposition to the project. He noted that he lived two doors down from the appellants and has a modest view of the proposed addition. He indicated that he had also previously proposed a second story to his home to increase the square footage for a growing family. He stated that after working with the Planning staff on the design and when he found out that it would have an adverse effect on the neighbors, he chose to compromise and not build the second store, thereby reducing the size of his addition, in order to maintain the good will of the neighbors. He encouraged the Commission to provide leadership on this issue and to deny the project. EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, June 14,2006 Page 6 of9