CCMIN071503 - Laserfiche WebLink

compromised to 24.6 feet, but the neighbors still fought that. Although his addition was approved, the process so damaged the relationship with the neighbors, the he and his wife have put their home up for sale and will be moving. The process was extremely stressful and he asked Council to review the process, so other don't have to experience this to improve the quality of life for their families. He supported the Siners and Croftons and asked for approval of their applications. Daniella Karo, 6578 Stanton Court, adamantly opposed the Siner addition. She said Rosepointe was originally 53 units, not 62 as claimed. Only five of the original 53 have been expanded to two stories. So the ratio is actually one in ten. She related how she moved to Pleasanton and built her house. She was assured there would be no two story houses in the neighborhood. She said the houses are close together because of that. She felt that a two-story addition next to her house would severely limit the sunlight to her home. This would affect her quality of life and impact the landscaping on her property. She also felt there would be a loss of privacy. She believed her property value would decrease by approximately $30,000 to $80,000. She believed the second story addition would have a major impact on the character of Rosepointe, which was a subdivision built to have single story houses on large lots. She preferred that homes be extended outward, not upward. She urged Council to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission and not allow alterations to the original architectural intent of the neighborhood. She presented statements fi:om other residents of Rosepointe objecting to second story additions. Mr. Brozosky asked if she would agree to a second story if it were not so close to her house. Ms. Karo said no. Any addition to the height of the building would block her view of the sky and sunlight. Karl Hagmaier, 6577 Stanton Court, said he is one of the original residents of Rosepointe and reiterated his belief that there would be no two-story homes. He objected to the Siner addition because it would change the appearance of Stanton Court, would open the doors for future second story additions and would destroy the neighborhood's charm and character. It would create a negative impact on the value of surrounding homes. Allowing second story additions would reduce the availability of single story homes for handicapped or sen/or residents. He urged Council to uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny this request for a second story addition and to rezone Rosepointe to a single story neighborhood. Wayne Couto, 302 Kottinger Drive, commended the Planning Commission for denying this massive increase to an already large home. He was concerned that when second-story homes creep into single-story neighborhoods, it changes the character of the neighborhoods and creates disagreements among the residents. He felt this wonderful community would be ripped apart by sandwiching bigger homes among smaller homes and forcing the smaller homeowners to increase their homes to compete for light, air and privacy. He asked what does that do to the town and the neighborhoods? Pleasanton City Council 12 Minutes 07/15/03