PC 062415 - Laserfiche WebLink

out the Shoemakes wanted to construct a very large entertainment structure that will look directly into her bedroom window. She noted that the plan included a television, so amplified sound was added to her concern, and she felt as though this project overly imposed on the privacy and tranquility of her home and the sanctuary of her backyard. Ms. Brillhart stated that on May 26`h, City staff came to her home and saw from her bedroom the slanted, two -inch piece of PVC pipe that Mr. Shoemake had put up. She indicated that it was not overstated, but it is important to keep in mind that this project is not a two -inch piece of PVC pipe, but an 18 -foot wide and 14 -foot tall structure. She stated that to give the Commission a better understanding of the height of the structure, the height of the peak of her own home is around 14 feet high. She noted that she brought a picture of the view from her bedroom window and that the height of the shed in the picture is 91/2 feet at its peak; the location of the proposed structure would be just beyond that and would be 50 percent taller. She indicated that right now, the foliage of the tree is green, which would currently provide minimal coverage, but everything in that direction is deciduous, and during a good portion of the year, she would be subjected to the view of the back end of this project. Ms. Brillhart stated that on May 29`h, she sent an email to the Planning Division and requested a copy of the electrical lighting and sound plans, and she was told that there was none. She responded that she felt this hearing would not be effective without these details because she would not understand the scope of the project. She stated that Natalie Amos, project planner, then called her saying that the Shoemakes would be willing to drop the height to 121/2 feet, just a foot and one -half lower than the peak of her home. She added that the Shoemakes wanted to have four low- voltage lights installed under the roof of the structure. She stated that low voltage does not mean anything as it is a matter of wattage and intensity. She added that when she called Code Enforcement, one of the specific issues brought up was the fact that LED lights, which have very low voltage, have very high intensity and a lot of problems with spill -over. She indicated that there may be no intention of installing speakers, but flat- screen televisions have sound bars, and that is amplified sound. She further indicated that she was relieved to find out that the hours for the sound of 70 dBA are from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, and from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays. She indicated that 70 dBA is the sound of an average radio, and 60 dBA is the sound of an average conversation. She stated that she was also informed that they were willing to plant an orange tree for screening, but Jacki Martin, another neighbor, stated that the orange tree they put in does not provide any screening of the proposed structure and is nowhere near blocking her view. Ms. Brillhart stated that because of all these aforementioned reasons, she did not feel that an adequate compromise had been proposed, and without specific information on the items requested, she did not feel that this is a project she is willing to risk being subjected to. She indicated that she is familiar with certain projects that have happened in the area, such as a bedroom window at 5252 Meadowood Court that a neighbor objected to, stating privacy concerns, and the applicant planted Italian Cypress to completely obstruct the view for the concerned neighbor. She added that another good example is Pleasanton Valley Club, which constructed a large shed for storage, but because of its location, was not authorized to install an outside light for it. She indicated that the Shoemakes' lighting height is a maximum of eight feet, angled away from any PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, June 24, 2015 Page 50 of 54