Laserfiche WebLink
Verbal Public Comments <br />1. April 1, 2008: Richard Gale (317 Diamond Court) <br />Comments: Mr. Gale stated that there is no doubt that the applicant is <br />nice and that they have done significant work to improve the property; <br />however feels that the tank should be relocated farther to the east and <br />north to offer more screening to those on Diamond Court and the rear yard <br />neighbor. He felt that relocating the tank would be reasonable for both <br />parties. Mr. Gale feels that it is too close to the rear yard neighbor's front <br />yard and the planted redwoods would take to long to provide screening <br />and the tank is too much of an "eyesore" for those living on Diamond <br />Court and the rear neighbor of the subject property. <br />2. April 2, 2008: Jill and Joe Ortisi (322 Diamond Court) <br />Comments: The Ortisi's would like to see the water tank relocated to the <br />southeast or northeast portion of the subject property; closer to the subject <br />sites house. They feel that more consideration for the rear neighbor <br />should have been given prior to relocating the tank. They stated that it is <br />in the back of the subject property, but located very close to the rear <br />neighbors front yard area; which, in their opinion, is inconsiderate to the <br />rear neighbor. The Ortisi's think that the current tank is an "eyesore" and <br />they were not aware that there used to be a tank on site because it was <br />well screened. They felt that that redwood's would take to long to screen <br />the tank. <br />3. April 3, 2008: Steve and Kim Michell (321 Diamond Court) <br />Comments: The Micheff s feel the tank is an "eyesore" and that there is <br />likely a better location for the tank that would be screened for those on <br />Diamond Court and the rear neighbor (455 Sycamore Road). They feel <br />that it may be better suited located near the subject house so that the line <br />of site is less. They continued by saying that the rear neighbors of the <br />subject site have done a great job of clearing out the landscaping that was <br />on their property (455 Sycamore) to open up the area; which was a benefit <br />for those on Diamond Court because it also gave more of an openness for <br />them. He also feels that the redwood's that are currently there would take <br />to long to screen what is already in place. <br />