15 ATTACHMENT 4 - Laserfiche WebLink

Page 1 of 2 Steve Otto From: Greg Reznick I _ _ . Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:00 PM To: Steve Otto Subject: PUD-32 Appeal Dear Steve: I am appealing the approval by the Planning Commission of the proposal by the Sariches to build a very large house on their property at Old Vineyard Rd. This plan is in clear violation of the Vineyard Corridor Specific Plan. The location is clearly not within the bounds specified in the plan. While the "blobs" may appear to be imprecise on paper, there is no ambiguity on the ground. When one is on the property, it is a trivial matter to see what Wayne Rasmussen was referring to when he placed the "blobs" on the map. I can assure you that I had no difficulty matching the locations on my property to the blobs on my map; they were the big flat spots that would be suitable for a reasonably sized house without overly disturbing the topography or the oak forest. It is absolutely clear what area was being referred to on the property that was purchased by the Sariches. This conclusion has been confirmed in writing by the planning department; the space that is to be developed is the shelf area under and adjacent to the existing house. Moving the home location to the top of the knoll clearly violates the specific plan. The fact that moving the building site requires a 40 foot cut only makes the insult that much greater. There has been a claim made that if the specific plan allowed two houses in a particular area, then the property owner is entitled to build two houses of any arbitrary size. If the house they want to build does not fit in the specified area, they should be entitled to move the location and create a space large enough to satisfy their desires. When stated so plainly, this is obviously a spurious claim. The Sariches were familiar with the specific plan when they bought the property; the suitability of the designated building area for their house plans should have been a powerful consideration in their purchase decision. Instead, they bought the property and have been trying to get around the constraints of the Specific Plan ever since. The hills in the southeast corner of Pleasanton anchor our city to the land and provide a sense of open space that is treasured by all. Appropriate development in this irreplaceable geography must respect and honor that space and topography. There is nothing about the proposed residence which is consistent with the local environment or with the vision of the Specific Plan. It is too tall at 35 feet (or even 30 feet). It has too many stories over too much of its size. It is a design which is simply out of place in the proposed location. I'm sure that here are many places in the world where this beautifully designed home would fit in wonderfully. This is not one of them. In summary, I would suggest that this PUD is a transparent effort by the applicants to circumvent the Specific Plan. It proposes a residence which is wholly inappropriate for the location. It proposes a location which is in clear violation of the specific plan and that involves removing an entire hill to the great detriment of the region and the nearby property owners. The Sariches knew all about the Specific Plan when they bought their property and they should have understood that the constraints of the plan are real and would be enforced. Each parcel in the Vineyard Corridor is unique, with its own unique 3/7/2008