Re: Oct. 3 Council meeting
Dear Editor,
I recently watched the Oct. 3 Martinez City Council meeting, which
aired on Oct. 5. I was especially interested in the Council's decision
regarding the "permanent private open space" on
As I have no vested interest in the property and do not live near the
area, I listened with an open mind.
What struck me most was that Mr. Freitas bought this property knowing
that development would not be possible on a "permanent" basis. The Planning
Commission voted against the request and an appeal was therefore placed on the
City Council's agenda.
Most of the neighbors who spoke were anti-development as they had purchased
their properties with the guarantee that the space would not be developed and
would remain open space permanently. As the Council listened I truly thought
they were going to base their decisions on the information presented that
evening. However, as each Council member spoke, it became apparent that his or
her mind had already been made up.
One of my friends asked the Council to reconsider a denial from the
Planning Commission to add a story to her one story home. Her request was
denied, citing two neighbor's objections and the fact that when she bought her
home it was stipulated that she would never be able to' add second story. At
that time, it appeared that "never" really meant never.
As Mayor
Schroder stated, "zoning is not permanent." I would like to add,
"this Council is not permanent."
Merrilee Willer