Text · page 6 of 29
This document was a scan. Its text was produced by character recognition and may contain errors; check the original for exact wording.
4. We have received an overwhelming positive confidential vote response from PGC residents, in support of our petition for a variance. Per the attached, we had only (1) household that was -_ ue in opposition to our variance request. It should be noted that when the residents in dispute purchased their unit last October, it was supplied with custom installed drapes and blinds. See the attached information from the previous owner. They have = 9&* a stated in writing “we should not have to deploy drapes and blinds to block intense blue-light bulbs”. However, their lamppost fixture never had a 5000K 75w bulb installed in the lamppost that serves their unit. Their correspondence suggests they were speaking on behalf of other PGC residents. The recent community vote does not align with their thinking. 5. However, we will agree to revise our Condo “rules & regs” and maintenance practices, to prohibit 5000K or “daylight” light bulbs in these lampposts. We were slowly installing the “daylight” or 5000K bulbs over the other “soft” or 2700K bulbs due to the ability of the 5000K to offer better color contrast (encouraged by insurance and law enforcement for security). Since illumination levels between daylight and soft is insignificant, we feel the change will not be a detriment to our community. 6. Our variance request is not “substantial”, just allowing us to maintain past practice, with the revision cited above in #5. 7. In our view the human safety/property security factor heavily outweighs the intent of the code revision. Additionally, recent