In Porterville Citizens for Responsible Hillside Development v. City of Porterville (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 885, only two speakers raised concerns about the aesthetics of a housing development saying the area was desirable and they wanted less dense development that would preserve its beauty. There was no evidence the development would have any impact on public views, vistas, or scenic highways and there was nothing in the record suggesting the development was near any public gardens, parks, or trails. (Id. at p. 902.) The court observed, "The record contains nothing but 'expressions of concern by one or two people' about a possible impact on the overall aesthetics of the local area resulting from approval of a housing subdivision that has a slightly higher density than the subdivision in which they live. These vague complaints do not rise to the level of substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the housing project may have a significant adverse aesthetic impact." (Id. at p. 903.)