Laserfiche WebLink
done. He indicated that if the Commission is not going to change any of this, he does not <br />think it is going to help matters much and that he is not going to vote "yes" for this the way it <br />is. He reiterated that he is a "no" vote. <br />Commissioner Allen stated that she has not followed this closely in the past but believes <br />the Task Force really did a thorough job here. She noted that the Task Force was a <br />diverse team with members of the business community, homeowners, and staff, and they <br />made a lot of compromises early on, which resulted in the proposal before the Commission <br />tonight. She indicated that when she learned it was a unanimous vote of the Task Force <br />from all members of the business community, residents and staff, it said a lot to her, <br />knowing the kind of contention there could have been. <br />Commissioner Allen indicated that she supports this proposal and just wanted to mention a <br />couple things. She stated that she looked at three questions as she made her decision on <br />this: (1) Does this adequately protect our historic resources? (2) Does this provide a <br />simpler process for all homeowners, for builders, and minimize some of the frustrations due <br />to the lack of clarity that exists today? (3) Does it provide enough flexibility to homeowners <br />to help them make solid decisions? She stated that she really looked at the rights of <br />property owners versus protecting historic resources, and she looked at both of those <br />areas. She stated that she felt the process did the best job it could in balancing those and <br />provided protection for really an important part of Pleasanton that is not well protected <br />today in terms of our residences in historic areas. She indicated that she thinks the <br />process provides more clarity. <br />Commissioner Allen stated that she struggled with the FAR issue in the discussion the <br />Commission had tonight, and where she lands on the FAR and why she can support it is <br />twofold: (1) It is a standard today for the Downtown district, which says things need to be <br />scaled in a similar way, and that exists today in the Downtown district even though it does <br />not exist in the rest of the City. She noted that the principle is not being changed; all it does <br />is add some clarity to make it easier for people to make decisions and have that <br />information. (2) She does recognize that the historic district does have a big variance in lot <br />size, and she is guessing that is probably why this principle was put in place a long time <br />ago. She questioned if, frankly, the City should do this for the rest of the City. She noted <br />that if it needs to be done here, then let it start there. She noted that she thinks this goes a <br />long way in protecting this great resource that is the Downtown. She expressed her <br />appreciation for the work of the Task Force to provide clarity that will hopefully make it <br />easier for everyone over time to know what they are getting themselves into as they look <br />into buying a house or enhancing the house they have today. <br />Chair Pearce stated that she wanted to circle back around to Commissioner Olson one <br />more time. She indicated that she would obviously love to have his support on this. She <br />asked Commissioner Olson if it is simply the FAR that would allow him to have a "yes" or if <br />he wanted all of Mr. MacDonald's suggestions incorporated in the motion as the only way <br />to get his to a "yes" vote. <br />Commissioner Olson replied that that is the only way to get him to a "yes" vote. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, November 13, 2013 Page 38 of 50 <br />