My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
20 ATTACHMENT 06
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2008
>
061708
>
20 ATTACHMENT 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2008 8:26:30 AM
Creation date
6/13/2008 8:26:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
6/17/2008
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
20 ATTACHMENT 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Roacha stated some facts in the Commission meeting, which were false. I <br />have supportive documentation showing that Terry's Tree Service removed <br />the existing trees in my front yard at the end of Apri12007. Also, the fencing <br />at Diamond Court that was recently replaced was brought up. The city never <br />placed fencing at the end of that court, years ago when the homes were built. <br />The prior owners of my residence placed -that fence halfway across the court <br />without a permit required. It was broken down, and dilapidated. The <br />Diamond Court residence owners approached us as soon as we bought and <br />asked if we would consider taking the fence down. They had always looked at <br />the land before. They were aware of the old existing barns, and tank, but <br />again it fit with the look of the area. It was not an eyesore. <br />In closing, we feel that the City of Pleasanton should not be rewarding Ms. <br />Roacha for doing unpermitted activities; she should have to consider the <br />concerns of her neighbors that the tank affects. I should not have to mitigate <br />for landscaping to cover a tank that should have never been moved in the first <br />place without consideration. Ms. Roacha is knowledgeable and trained in real <br />estate and knew what she was doing. She has increased the value and overall <br />appearance of her surroundings and devalued our home. Her motivation for <br />this we feel is malice, considering we have been one of the neighbors who <br />have complained about her manure not being cleaned up and her dog <br />barking. Our concerns were warranted, as she was citationed for both. Also, <br />the survey, which was performed in early April, and deliberate placement of <br />fence line on disputed property, had left our neighborly relationship obsolete. <br />She recently in the last week was doing construction on her existing garage <br />without a permit. She knowingly was converting her garage into an office, as <br />stated by Les Lyons, and Bruce from the City. She was issued a stop work <br />and told to obtain a permit. Because there are no consequences to her <br />actions she just keeps ignoring the required method of permitting. If Ms. <br />Roacha had followed the proper legal method from the beginning my <br />concerns about location and what type of replacement would have been what <br />the City of Pleasanton and the Planning Commission wanted to discuss. <br />Instead all I have heard is "mitigation" regarding shrubs and landscaping, <br />which is short of rewarding a person for performing unpermitted work! <br />Sincerely, <br />Phillip and Joanna Segundo <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.