12 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT Chair Allen replied that that is something the Commission would have to discuss, but not tonight. She added that the Commission would like to know from the public whether they think it is a good idea for the Commission to explore this further, and if the Commission does explore it further, there would be an opportunity again for the public to provide input. Karla Brown stated that she was speaking tonight as a citizen who also loves the Downtown. She indicated that one of the reasons the Task Force was originally formed was to stop the possibility in the DTSP area to have a house that looks like it belongs in Arizona or Tahoe next to a house that looks like it is a historic resource in the City of Pleasanton. She noted that the variability within the DTSP area is one of the reasons the Historic Context Statement was developed where it isolates and points out there are nine styles of homes in the DTSP area. She added that with regard to the houses that did not qualify as a potential California Historic Resources, as well as those that were built after 1942, there have been discussions that they adhere to the nine styles that were identified in the Historic Context Statement. Dan McCarthy stated that he lives in one of the 88 houses that qualified as a historic resource. He indicated that he downloaded and looked at the 778-page Historic Resource Survey report; he found it to be very well done and appreciated the energy that was put into creating that document. He stated that he is a big believer of retaining the historical significance of the historic homes in Downtown and appreciates Option 2 versus the Option 1 because "all" could include anything in any legal document which would mean they may not even be able to mow their lawn because that could be an alteration to the front. Mr. McCarthy stated that they purchased their home, which is located right across the street from the bandstand park where the Concerts at the Park are held, less than a year ago. He requested that, if the Commission is possibly taking away or asking for additional review of any modifications made to the front of the house in that first ten feet, there be consideration to waive the design review fee associated with any modification they wish to make. He noted that some of the things they have done since they have been in the house, such as change the numbers, repair part of the banisters, and things like painting is part of their job as owners to help preserve one of these 88 historic homes. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Nagler inquired what the implications are, other than more design review scrutiny, of being considered a historic resource both from a permitting perspective and beyond, and if there are benefits that come to the homeowner for being listed as an historic resource. Mr. Otto replied that there is no direct benefit and that being the historic resource basically subjects the house to additional regulations that the City has already adopted. He added that the Council and the Task Force discussed other potential programs that DRAFT EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 10/14/2015 Page 12 of 18