PC 101415 - Laserfiche WebLink

Emilie Cruzan stated that she was also a member of the Task Force and that some of the big ideas on the Task Force were helping to preserve historic homes because they were being lost and picked off one by one, and to preserve the feel of the neighborhoods in the DTSP so they continue to retain their charm and their interesting and unique vitality. She indicated that she agrees with the adoption of the survey, which is a wonderful document that provides historic information. She noted that she was surprised that 88 of the homes qualify for the California Historic Resources, which is a real tribute to the people who maintain those homes. She added that this survey also gives information about the 100 or so homes that did not qualify for the California Registry but are important to the City locally. She indicated her support for Option 2 and extending the design review into the first ten feet of the home because she noticed that some of those homes that did not qualify were for reasons that changes that were made to the homes did happen within those first ten feet: the porches, the steps, the windows, and some of the cladding. She stated that this is important and supported the Commission's recommending to the Council that there be further discussion about what could happen with the other homes within the historic district with respect to the design review that could be extended to them. Bob Nickeson inquired if the design review that is proposed would apply to the 88 of the 201 houses and then Option 2 would apply to the design review of the other 103 homes. Chair Allen clarified that Option 1 and Option 2 applies to the 88 homes, and the Commission will be voting on recommending one of those two Options. She added that separate from that is another point that staff brought up to the Commission that in addition to the 88 homes, the Commission could potentially pursue to apply the design review beyond the 88 homes if it so desired, but that will not be discussed in any detail tonight except to say whether it is worth exploring. Mr. Nickeson inquired if that would apply only to houses that are near one of the 88 homes. 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. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2015 Page 13 of 35