My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
14
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
101811
>
14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/13/2011 3:24:58 PM
Creation date
10/13/2011 3:24:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/18/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
14
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BACKGROUND <br /> Both advocates of historic preservation in the Downtown, and property owners wishing <br /> to pursue development in the Downtown area have been unhappy with the process of <br /> reviewing development proposals in Pleasanton's Historic Downtown. Current policies <br /> in the Downtown Specific Plan (adopted in March 2002) have been interpreted in <br /> different ways by different people, and the process for review has been questioned by <br /> both applicants and opponents of various projects. Establishment of the two Downtown <br /> interest groups, the Pleasanton Heritage Association and the Pleasanton Improvement <br /> Association, has intensified this dialogue. On March 9, 2011, the Planning Commission <br /> voted to recommend that the City Council include a re-evaluation of the Downtown <br /> Historic Preservation policies, guidelines, and processes. On May 3, 2011, the Council <br /> adopted this recommendation as a Council Priority. While most of the controversy has <br /> surrounded residential proposals, the same issues are likely to occur in the commercial <br /> portion of Downtown. <br /> PUBLIC PROCESS <br /> In recent years, the City Council has developed a model for using ad hoc committees to <br /> achieve desired outcomes; most recent examples are the Housing Element Update <br /> Task Force and the Hacienda Design Guidelines Task Force. This model of City and <br /> public collaboration has served well to address the issue in a timely manner while <br /> allowing for a participatory community process. <br /> Task Force Composition <br /> Staff is recommending that the City Council approve the formation of a seven-member <br /> ad hoc Task Force comprised of two members from the Planning Commission and five <br /> Pleasanton residents to carry out the task as set forth in this report. The Planning <br /> Commission representatives will be selected from its membership. The Pleasanton <br /> residents will be selected through the City's normal application and selection process, <br /> whereby the mayor and each City Council member make one selection to the Task <br /> Force. It is important to note the inclusion of residents on this Task Force; staff suggests <br /> that these five appointees represent a mix of Downtown residents, development <br /> community members, the Pleasanton Heritage Association, the Downtown Improvement <br /> Association, and the Pleasanton Downtown Association. <br /> Coordination of the Task Force will be directed by Community Development Department <br /> Director, Brian Dolan, with assistance from Planning staff as necessary. <br /> Task Force Focus <br /> The Task Force's discussions will be focused on a few key topics: clarification of <br /> potentially conflicting policies and programs in the current Downtown Specific Plan; <br /> exploration of urban design polices versus historic-preservation-based policies; <br /> revisiting the need for a program to establish a National Register Historic District in the <br /> Downtown; consistency of policies and process with the requirements of the California <br /> Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), agreement on key definitions such as "demolition;" <br /> appropriate use of the State of California criteria for the California Register of Historic <br /> Resources; and adoption of a clear process for project review. <br /> Page 2 of 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.