Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page I of2 <br /> <br />Natalie Amos <br /> <br />From: <br /> <br /> <br />Sent: <br /> <br />To: <br /> <br />Cc: <br /> <br />Subject: stacy knight <br /> <br />Thursday, February 23, 2006 8:06 PM <br />Natalie Amos <br /> <br /> <br />Natalie: <br /> <br />The poles are up, and what a disappointment! The plans shown by the Shutts Corp where very much under <br />estimated. I will restate a few items that came out at the hearing, and then say that the Imperiale family will appeal <br />this proposed addition to the fullest extent. <br /> <br />I would also like to state as a matter of record that the proposal by the Knights would set a precident in the <br />neighborhood that was never planned or designed to be by our city fore fathers and design commission. We have <br />researched the proposal and found many loopholes. I am very surprised that the city workers have not <br />investigated this request and found the information, we as neighbors have found. Could it be possible that the city <br />new these things but have just ignored them? <br /> <br />The City of Pleasanton has taken pride in the fact that they have retained their past heritage and convictions, why <br />should this change now? I am going to site a few paragraphs from the Administrative Design Review. <br /> <br />. The Design review process is intended to preseserve and enhance the City's aesthetic values. <br /> <br />. In designing any new construction, you should consider the compatiability of the project with the existing <br />residence and surrounding vicinity, as well as the effects on adjacent properties. <br /> <br />. Section 18.04.010 Objectives <br />B. This does not foster a harmonios, convenient, working relation among neighbors. <br />C. This ndoes not promote the stability of existing Isnd uses that coform with the general plan ( this neighborhood <br />was designed and approved by the city to be what it is. Yes additons are necessary but not to the extent of <br />breaking city regulations.) Yes the Knights are within their guidelines in one area but completely off in many <br />others! <br /> <br />J. This does not protect nor does it enhance real property values. It reduces them. <br /> <br />K. It does not enhance the the appearancce of the city. It simply allows a family to dodge a bigger tax base and <br />change the complexion of a neighborhood that are family father approved over 35 years ago. <br /> <br />18.32.010 Purpose <br /> <br />B. This not ensure adequate light, air, privacy for each affected dwelling. <br />C. This does not protect family dwellings from privacy. <br />F. This does not preserve the natural beauty of hillsides. <br />1. This does not protect residential properties from unsightliness and other objectionable influences. <br /> <br />18.20.030 <br />A. Clearly this paragraph has not been review properly. <br />I. This does not conform to our neighborhoods original design plan. <br />2.This does not consider public views and scale of buildings within its site and adjoining buildings. <br />3. This does not conform within the aspect of adjoning buidings and consistency with neighborhood <br />character. <br /> <br />6/9/2006 <br />