My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
13
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
121713
>
13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/11/2013 1:21:52 PM
Creation date
12/9/2013 12:47:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
12/17/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
124
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
DRAFT <br /> Mr. Dolan said yes and added that most of the comments were very positive. <br /> Commissioner Olson requested verification that none of this applies to commercially-zoned <br /> buildings in the area. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that none of the proposed changes apply to the commercial. He <br /> continued that the Task Force did not roll back what already applies to the commercial and <br /> that if the Council adopts this package, what applies to commercial today will be exactly the <br /> same down the road. He confirmed that these new policies apply only to residential. <br /> Commissioner Allen inquired how this proposal compares to other cities that have a lot of <br /> old homes, such as Livermore, Danville, and others. She inquired if Pleasanton is being <br /> more lenient or stricter compared to the others. <br /> Mr. Dolan replied that there is no standard approach, and they are all over the map. He <br /> stated that there are some communities that have National Registers for Historic Districts, <br /> and the process for protecting them is pretty regulated. He indicated that a certain quality <br /> of resources is necessary before that approval is granted and that it is not the locality that <br /> makes the determination that the district is eligible. He added that once a district is <br /> deemed eligible, the rules are pretty strict, and it requires the creation of a commission, <br /> whose membership must have a certain amount of expertise, to consider all changes other <br /> than minor ones that can be designated to staff. He stated that it gets pretty involved and <br /> that there are some communities that ignore this issue entirely and only do it when <br /> somebody uses CEQA to challenge something that they have done. He indicated that <br /> Livermore has probably a more aggressive and involved approach than what Pleasanton <br /> has; it has a fairly complex ranking or rating system of its resources, Levels 1 through 6, <br /> based on the national model of rating. He added that Livermore also has a commission, but <br /> in most cases, smaller items are eligible to be determined by staff. He added that it has a <br /> very similar set of policies to Pleasanton's and a similar set of guidelines, but the decisions <br /> are made at either the staff level or through this commission that it has established with a <br /> certain kind of expertise. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. <br /> Peter MacDonald stated that at the Chamber of Commerce meeting this morning, a <br /> member of the Task Force, who is also a Downtown homeowner, expressed concern that <br /> Downtown is the only neighborhood in Pleasanton that is not protected by architectural <br /> restrictions. He indicated that he agreed and that it shows in the highly diverse architecture <br /> that makes Downtown Pleasanton so interesting. He noted that Downtown is the most <br /> spectacular neighborhood in the City; the quality homes and eclectic architecture of <br /> Downtown is the product of individual property owners, each improving their own property <br /> in their own way. He pointed out that there are already substantial controls on Downtown <br /> property improvements; every project has to go through design review. He added that the <br /> Historic Preservation chapter of the Downtown Specific Plan spells out policies for <br /> preservation of historic resources, and there are design guidelines as well. He stated that <br /> the Task Force recommendation addresses the right issues but has some flaws that should <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 11/13/2013 Page 10 of 28 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.