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
Adjustment to the Task Force's Position on Commercial Properties <br /> The City's existing historic preservation policies do not differentiate between and apply equally <br /> to residential and commercial properties/structures. The Task Force had initially contemplated <br /> changes to the existing historic preservation policies that would apply to both residential and <br /> commercial properties/structures in the Downtown. Based on overwhelming response by the <br /> Downtown commercial property owners to not include their properties in a historic district or be <br /> part of any new regulations, the Task Force reconsidered its position and excluded commercially <br /> zoned properties for consideration as part of the contemplated changes. This Task Force position <br /> was provided to the City Council on June 4, 2013, when it updated the Council on its work to <br /> date (discussed in the following section). <br /> City Council Check-In <br /> On June 4, 2013, the Task Force updated the City Council on the results of their work since <br /> forming and requested direction on specific items the Task Force was considering. The attached <br /> City Council staff report(Exhibit E)provides detailed information on each item. The City <br /> Council provided the following direction at the meeting: <br /> 1. Should a local district be created? <br /> The Council did not support creating a local district. The Task Force's recommendation does <br /> not include the creation of a local district. <br /> 2. Should local standards be created? <br /> The Council was generally not supportive of creating local standards, although some <br /> Councilmembers wanted more information before making a final decision. Cognizant of the <br /> Council's response, the Task Force is not recommending that local standards be created other <br /> than setting a cutoff date (1942) and utilizing the Historic Context Statement to help <br /> determine whether a residential structure is eligible for listing in the California Register and <br /> considered a historic structure. Essentially, if a residential structure built before 1942 <br /> provided sufficient components of one of the property types listed in the Historic Context <br /> Statement (e.g., Craftsman, Queen Anne, etc.) and the structure retained its integrity (i.e., it <br /> had not been altered such that its character-defining features have been removed or <br /> destroyed), then it would be considered a historic resource. <br /> 3. Should a definition of demolition be created? <br /> The Council agreed with the Task Force that a demolition definition was needed and <br /> generally preferred the section definition presented in the Council staff report or a similar <br /> definition which reduces the need for judgment on the part of the City to determine what is <br /> demolition. The Task Force is recommending that the second definition be utilized with <br /> some added clarification. <br /> P13-2446/P13-4447/P13-4448 Page - 3 - November 13, 2013 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.