My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
111715
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/13/2015 11:15:56 AM
Creation date
11/10/2015 4:02:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/17/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
54
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
and staff for their thorough work. He supported Option 2 and supported also including the other homes <br /> that did not make the list, given that they will be improved at some point. He restored 5 houses and has <br /> written articles for American Bungalow and wrote one on old house windows. Cities that have <br /> ordinances protecting siding, windows and doors have great home values and people who want <br /> changes will be given guidance by City staff and/or commissioners. He feels a spirit of the need to save <br /> the old houses and thanked the Council. <br /> Eric Pestana said he and his wife moved to Pleasanton a few years ago and are in the midst of a <br /> renovation at 403 St. Mary's Street on the corner of Peters. He said he was the president of an HOA in <br /> Fremont for over 5 years and during that time they had little community interest. Since they have <br /> brought their home back to its original form, they have become more of a community with neighbors <br /> and close friends with many people. He thinks that being able to keep the ability to change homes for <br /> the better and making the process easier will help people become part of their community. Also <br /> significant is that even their home is 100 years old a Portuguese family is living in a home that a <br /> Portuguese family once started. <br /> Mike Carey said his family has a 1958 mid-century modern home they are planning to remodel and <br /> preserve its character. He said it is not one of the 12 identified styles and asked where they would be <br /> placed if the amendment was approved. <br /> Mr. Otto replied that staff is not at the 1958 era of homes but pre-1942 homes and rolling those into a <br /> similar process of what is being considered for the 88 homes. When getting beyond 1942 and beyond, <br /> staff would need to determine criteria and how they would evaluate the homes relative to their historic <br /> era. <br /> Mr. Carey thanked everybody involved in the historic preservation process but strongly disagrees with <br /> any heightened restrictions being placed on all Downtown houses including all old homes deemed non- <br /> historic by the City paid study and even those built after 1942. This was never recommended by the <br /> task force and he thinks the discussion and change was done with little notification to owners. He said <br /> one week ago he received a notice and even though he followed the process, he had to read it three <br /> times on what would be included in tonight's discussion. Putting in place an additional layer of <br /> government for non-historic homes and/or all homes in the Downtown built before or after 1942 <br /> suggests that Pleasanton's property owners need protection from themselves and their neighbors. They <br /> hire architects and design professionals to remodel their homes and Pleasanton residents have pride, <br /> integrity and good judgment and he recommended the Council only pursue the original <br /> recommendations of the committee and not add more to Downtown property owners. He reminded the <br /> Council that Downtown commercial owners lobbied against over-regulation of their properties and they <br /> are exempt from the study. He is confident that those involved in the City review process do not support <br /> any more regulation on their properties except the original recommendation. <br /> Charles Huff said one comment about the house on First Street is true and the windows are <br /> inappropriate, but this was done in the 1950's or 1960's and they can see examples of these things in <br /> the Downtown Historic District. He thought the historic home issue was addressed by the previous task <br /> force's recommendations and questioned why the Council was discussing it tonight. <br /> He voiced concern with real estate agents who are trying to market properties within the historic zone to <br /> people who will spend a lot to be able to purchase these homes. Given the amount to remodel, he <br /> thinks the Council should have faith in staff that they would not allow certain things and was unsure why <br /> the added item to evaluate all of the homes was brought up. He also referred to a letter regarding the <br /> 114 homes unprotected from previous mismanaged remodels and said they will remain if this new <br /> consideration is allowed to happen. He said homes will be purchased by people who will enhance the <br /> residence and who will blend it into the other historic residences. If new regulations are enacted it will <br /> be devastating for many of the historic homes, given that it is another set of regulations homeowners <br /> and the City do not need. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 11 of 16 November 3, 2015 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.