01 - Laserfiche WebLink

order to encourage a more robust historic area going forward, he suggested the City take the following steps: 1) designate a local historic district, 2) accept the historical context statement, 3) prepare a comprehensive historic resource, 4) encourage the task force to increase clarity in design guidelines to educate owners on possible and preferred features when remodeling, 5) encourage the task force and staff to develop a more useful discussion relative to major remodels and demolition, and 6) encourage the task force and staff to identify an expedited process for proposed projects that comply with all appropriate guidelines. Linda Garbarino, task force member, said the task force has sought and received a tremendous amount of input over the last 15 months. She agreed that some properties have more significance than others in the context of state standards but noted that Pleasanton's unique charm and character might also make some structures locally important even if they were not to meet the state's rigorous standards. Establishing a date of historical significance would cast a wide net and allow the City to create its own local protections. She shared some of the comments received by the task force from the public. The questions ranged from how a neighbor's poor remodeling decisions affected the value of their own property to why "no one is paying attention." She acknowledged that some residents fear the task force may be stepping on their property rights, but noted that others argue for their right to have the City monitor and protect their historic neighborhoods from design errors and benign neglect. With input and direction from Council, the task force can move forward with simplifying, not adding to, existing documents and making a narrative like a specific plan document relevant to an individual project. Bonnie Krichbaum, task force member, said the creation of a historic district is a simple but meaningful designation that will emphasize the identity of subject site. As an identifying name, it has great power and creates pride, respect and interest. She noted the value of designated districts evidenced in other jurisdictions, including Livermore. She quoted from the City of San Diego's Historical Resources Report, stating that "property owners often perceive that the value of their asset is confined within their property line boundaries. However, the value of real estate is interrelated with is beyond the property boundaries." She said the benefits of a well-preserved or rehabilitated historic structure accrue to adjacent property owners, businesses and local government. She asked the Council to direct the task force to create a local historic district within the current Downtown Specific Plan boundaries. Dorothy Nesbitt said the specific guidelines of the Downtown Specific Plan were initiated to preserve and revitalize the numerous historic buildings downtown. She stressed that the goal is not to prevent property owners from altering their existing structures but rather to provide some guidance on how to do just that within the structure's historical context. Mike Cheney said he felt it was appropriate to streamline and properly implement existing guidelines but not to create any additional regulations. Charles Huff identified himself as both an architect and historian. He took issue with the idea of regulating what can and cannot be done with private property beyond the protections already in place. He agreed that other cities have successful examples of historic districts but noted that those places are not Pleasanton. He also noted that those sharing support for creating such a district seem to be limited to those who own historic homes and said he did not share their support. John Harvey identified his home as the "modern craftsman" depicted in Mr. Dolan's presentation. He said the Historical Context Statement was an interesting read but seemed to accomplish nothing that isn't already addressed by the City's numerous other zoning regulations, design guidelines and general requirements. He felt this existing guidance was sufficient with some clarification. He stated support for a more specific definition of "demolition" but expressed concern with the idea that moving a door or window on the front facade, which could substantially diminish the historic significance of a structure, could then be declared a demolition. He felt that compatibility standards and expansion of design review to the first floor could be addressed through revision of existing standards and a closer look by City Council Minutes Page 8 of 16 June 4, 2013