PC 112812 - Laserfiche WebLink

Acting Chair Blank expressed concern about the 14 homes. He stated that it feels like a lot to him but that he did not go inside the other home. He suggested that before this proposal comes back to the Commission, a tour be arranged for all the Commissioners to go inside the older home. He indicated that in his opinion, the walkway, as it is currently constructed, looks like a blocked -off private amenity and does not appear to be a public amenity at all. He stated that he lived on a cul -de -sac with a homeowners association and did not have problems with the common lands; he was on the Board of Directors and it was very rare that they got damage. He agreed with Commissioner Pearce that if there will not be a public amenity, then he does not understand why it wants to be above mid - point. He stated that considering making the two front homes historic - looking as a public amenity is a whole different discussion. He noted that for him, density is all about the public amenity; the walkway can be included if they wish, but it does not fulfill the requirement for a public amenity. Discussion Points No. 3 and No. 4 were considered together. 3. Should the structure be demolished to accommodate the proposed development or should the applicant restore and relocate the structure to one of the proposed lots fronting Stanley Boulevard? 4. Given the age of the structure, should the historic evaluation be revised to reflect information in the Pleasanton Downtown Historic Context Statement? Commissioner Narum stated that she is torn: she hears what the applicant is saying that the house needs work, but at the same time, every house that is torn down cannot be taken back. She added that it is unfortunate that the Commission is being asked to make a decision while the Task Force is going on because it was this Commission that went to the City Council and asked to redo that portion of the Specific Plan as the Commission is so conflicted when it has to make decisions like this. She indicated that she would like to see the house for herself as it is hard to get a good feel from pictures where it looks fairly intact; however, if the wiring does not work and the heating does not work, then it is not livable. She agreed with Acting Chair Blank that she would like to have a tour and get a little more information before she makes a hard and fast decision. With respect to No. 4, Commissioner Narum stated that is part of the problem. She indicated that they can talk about where the Task Force is today, but her understanding of what is going on is a lot like the Downtown Hospitality Guidelines Task Force where there is a lot of different opinions and difficulty finding consensus. She stated that just to step in the middle of the Task Force process and use whatever it has at this point to make a decision is kind of problematic. She added that she does not have enough information on this Context Statement in the picture of the Task Force, particularly since she has not attended its meetings. Acting Chair Blank agreed and disclosed that both he and Commissioner Pearce are members of the Task Force. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 28, 2012 Page 16 of 38