My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
16
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2009
>
012009
>
16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2009 2:35:16 PM
Creation date
1/14/2009 9:40:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
STAFF REPORTS
DOCUMENT DATE
1/20/2009
DESTRUCT DATE
15 Y
DOCUMENT NO
16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
82
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
been re-marked in a current survey done Apri12007. She was aware that we <br />were disputing the new survey and that we were looking into the legalities of <br />claiming that land as ours since it had been that way for the past 44 years. <br />The old fencing that was 5 foot from the wellhead was replaced in April <br />despite this dispute, done in malice. <br />Ms. Roacha is a licensed realtor. She is trained and aware that moving that <br />tank 35 feet away from her backyard area and placing it in my frontage area <br />increased the value of her home, and devalued my home. Ms. Roacha has <br />about 1-lei acres of land. She chose to take an existing water storage tank that <br />was functioning and plumbed to the existing wellhead, appeared as more of an <br />urban, agricultural antiquity, and replaced and relocate it without a permit. <br />After speaking with Dan's Water Well who did the work for Ms. Roacha, the <br />existing tank was leaking, but a little maintenance would have solved that issue. <br />It was in fact Ms. Roacha who chose to replace that tank, and relocate it to its <br />current location. He did not suggest that it would function better if it were <br />located closer to the wellhead as Ms. Roacha suggested in her original <br />application. It is a simple water line that can extend to whatever location she <br />would have placed it. Also Ms. Roacha was well aware of the rules and <br />regulations of the City of Pleasanton. She had done whole house construction <br />the year prior, so she knew to check with the city on what might be required <br />with permitting. Which again directs us to the fact that all the existing <br />neighbors never got to voice their concerns on the placement of the tank. It <br />would not have been a question of mitigating whether ivy, or bushes can <br />disguise this enormous tank in my frontage. We would have suggested a <br />lower profile tank, either left in its original location or somewhere out of view <br />from my kitchen, backyard, TV. Room, eating area and front driveway/ play <br />area. There are low profile tanks attainable that Ms. Roach could have <br />installed and easily landscaped with shrubbery. The size, of the tank that she <br />got is massive in height. There are tanks available that have much lower <br />heights, yet can still pump the same amount. Ms. Roacha acquired a 10,000- <br />gallon tank, yet her home is on city water, and the only landscaping she <br />supplies is her front yard and rear landscaping, and a little water for the horses <br />to drink. The question I would like answered is, why such a large capacity of <br />tankP A smaller, low profile tank could have sufficed. This tank is overkill. <br />We also would have suggested leaving it where it is. It was a functioning tank <br />with a leak. The exterior of the tank fit with the whole agricultural feel of <br />where we live. It could have been cleaned up and viewed as an antiquity. Just <br />because we live in an area that is ran by City, but zoned Agricultural, does not <br />mean people can place anything anywhere. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.