PC 111313 - Laserfiche WebLink

Lastly, Mr. Peel presented a scenario where if he were buying a house on Second Street and took into consideration the 25 percent of the surrounding neighbors, and it was determined that he could add 400 square feet to his house. He continued that then a friend of his moves three blocks down the street where the homes are larger, and he can add 800 square feet to his house. He indicated that this is extremely inappropriate and not consistent with each homeowner who wants to move Downtown. Mr. Peel stated that he agrees with everything Mr. MacDonald said. In summary, he stated that he believes the historic date should be 1900 and older and that all new homes and remodeled homes in this district have the same FAR as all the other homes in Pleasanton. Jan Batcheller stated that she lives right in the heart of this District that is being talked about tonight and sees this as creeping regulation that makes things harder and more expensive. She indicated that some of the most affordable housing is located in part of this Downtown area, such as on Augustine Street. She noted that with these big regulations such as replacing wood with wood, people will not be able to do what they might want to do with their homes because this is expensive and eliminates some of the people who might want to make some modest changes to their modest homes. She indicated that one of the things she likes about living Downtown is that it is very eclectic, and there are so many modest homes around there. She noted that her home could never be built today if these regulations were in existence. She stated that she lives in a mainly Victorian neighborhood but her house is not Victorian and the setbacks are all different. She further stated that this makes our neighborhood very eclectic and very unique and desirable. She indicated that they do not have any Covenants, Conditions, & Restrictions (CC &Rs) and that they are one of the most desirable neighborhoods in the Downtown. She added that she sees this as putting a whole bunch of CC &Rs on her neighborhood and they are not by the homeowners. She noted that it is the government putting the CC &Rs upon them, and they do not get to decide those for themselves. She recommended that rather than having prohibitions, there should be incentives, such that their fees for this or that are reduced if the regulations are followed. She stated that it should encourage remodeling and restoration, not discourage it. Ms. Batcheller stated that she is in full agreement with Policy 8. She noted that the compatibility FAR just sounds terribly complicated and questioned how she is supposed to know of the neighbors' FARs before starting to make any plans. She stated that the FAR has nothing to do with historic preservation and requested that the Commission consider adjusting it. In conclusion, she stated that she seconds Mr. MacDonald's comments. Linda Garbarino stated that she attended the Chamber meeting this morning, which is always interesting and a really educational experience. She noted that at that meeting today, the proposal that is being considering this evening was described by the presenter as decrepit and fossilized. She stated that she was not really sure if those adjectives were referring to the Task Force members over the age of 60 years or the view that some folks have of taking Pleasanton's history. She indicated that she was a little confused by that but that she will take the high road. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 13, 2013 Page 27 of 50