HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.1 Supplement #10 ITEM 3.1
From: Deborah Padovan SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 10
To: Jaime McAvoy DISTRIBUTED 4/7/16
Subject: Fwd:Tonight"s Planning Commission Meeting
Date: Thursday,April 07,2016 3:18:04 PM
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andy Drexler<andy@drexler.com>
Date: April 7, 2016 at 3:02:43 PM PDT
To: <dpadovan@losaltoshills.ca.gov>
Subject: Tonight's Planning Commission Meeting
Hi Deborah -
I've lived at 12580 La Cresta Dr for 26 years; I can't attend tonight's meeting and I
wanted to make my views known.
There are several unsettling aspects to the proposal to allow increasingly tall ham
radio towers while reducing neighbor input to their construction.
First, one of the roles of our town government is to adjudicate when the legitimate
rights of home owners collide with each other. In the case of these towers, there
are clearly rights in conflict. The tower builder has a right to pursue his hobby(I
discount the role these radios play in public safety as communication technology
has advanced significantly).Neighbors do, however, have several important
rights that these towers can severely impinge upon:
-we have all paid a significant premium for our homes for the fantastic views
they afford;these towers are big, unsightly, and interfere with our views.This
can create a real economic loss, as well as disturbing the visual peace.
-current rules require towers to be built in a way such that if they fall, they will
fall completely on the owner's property.The proposed revisions would allow
people to place towers closer to property lines, creating an unnecessary hazard.
These conflicting rights must be resolved through a public hearing process; giving
tower builders free reign to "build first, deal with conflicts later" is a foolish
policy and flies in the face of the existing policies for dealing with home building
and remodeling.
Second,there is a stench of significant conflict of interest between the people who
are proposing these changes and the people who would be want to take advantage
of the changes.The well-known history of previous attempts to build large
intrusive towers that were basically rebuffed by neighbor objections should make
it obvious that we need a better more inclusive process in determining where and
how these towers can be built.The notion that the people who did not get their
way the last time around can arbitrarily re-write the rules for their own benefit is
counter to common sense and good government.
Andy Drexler
ndyCadrexler.com