Laserfiche WebLink
DRAFT <br /> Lastly, Mr. Peel presented a scenario where if he were buying a house on Second Street <br /> and took into consideration the 25 percent of the surrounding neighbors, and it was <br /> determined that he could add 400 square feet to his house. He continued that then a friend <br /> of his moves three blocks down the street where the homes are larger, and he can add <br /> 800 square feet to his house. He indicated that this is extremely inappropriate and not <br /> consistent with each homeowner who wants to move Downtown. <br /> Mr. Peel stated that he agrees with everything Mr. MacDonald said. In summary, he stated <br /> that he believes the historic date should be 1900 and older and that all new homes and <br /> remodeled homes in this district have the same FAR as all the other homes in Pleasanton. <br /> Jan Batcheller stated that she lives right in the heart of this District that is being talked <br /> about tonight and sees this as creeping regulation that makes things harder and more <br /> expensive. She indicated that some of the most affordable housing is located in part of this <br /> Downtown area, such as on Augustine Street. She noted that with these big regulations <br /> such as replacing wood with wood, people will not be able to do what they might want to do <br /> with their homes because this is expensive and eliminates some of the people who might <br /> want to make some modest changes to their modest homes. She indicated that one of the <br /> things she likes about living Downtown is that it is very eclectic, and there are so many <br /> modest homes around there. She noted that her home could never be built today if these <br /> regulations were in existence. She stated that she lives in a mainly Victorian neighborhood <br /> but her house is not Victorian and the setbacks are all different. She further stated that this <br /> makes our neighborhood very eclectic and very unique and desirable. She indicated that <br /> they do not have any Covenants, Conditions, & Restrictions (CC&Rs) and that they are one <br /> of the most desirable neighborhoods in the Downtown. She added that she sees this as <br /> putting a whole bunch of CC&Rs on her neighborhood and they are not by the <br /> homeowners. She noted that it is the government putting the CC&Rs upon them, and they <br /> do not get to decide those for themselves. She recommended that rather than having <br /> prohibitions, there should be incentives, such that their fees for this or that are reduced if <br /> the regulations are followed. She stated that it should encourage remodeling and <br /> restoration, not discourage it. <br /> Ms. Batcheller stated that she is in full agreement with Policy 8. She noted that the <br /> compatibility FAR just sounds terribly complicated and questioned how she is supposed to <br /> know of the neighbors' FARs before starting to make any plans. She stated that the FAR <br /> has nothing to do with historic preservation and requested that the Commission consider <br /> adjusting it. In conclusion, she stated that she seconds Mr. MacDonald's comments. <br /> Linda Garbarino stated that she attended the Chamber meeting this morning, which is <br /> always interesting and a really educational experience. She noted that at that meeting <br /> today, the proposal that is being considering this evening was described by the presenter <br /> as decrepit and fossilized. She stated that she was not really sure if those adjectives were <br /> referring to the Task Force members over the age of 60 years or the view that some folks <br /> have of taking Pleasanton's history. She indicated that she was a little confused by that but <br /> that she will take the high road. <br /> DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 11/13/2013 Page 13 of 28 <br />