My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 101415
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2015
>
PC 101415
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 4:56:21 PM
Creation date
8/10/2017 4:47:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
10/14/2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Commissioner Nagler presented a scenario where a house in town has been completely <br />gutted on the inside such that nothing on the inside is the same when the house was <br />built, but the exterior is perfectly well maintained to its original character and construct, <br />and the windows are maintained. He inquired it the fact that the interior was gutted <br />does not impact whether it has historical significance. <br />Ms. Petrin replied that was correct and added that most municipalities do not consider <br />interiors. She noted that the City of San Francisco considers interiors for some publicly <br />accessible buildings, but not for residences. <br />Chair Allen inquired if there is an example of a home that has historical integrity but did <br />not meet the criteria because it did not have historical significance. <br />Ms. Petrin replied that Pleasanton has a lot. She stated that there are two houses <br />across the street from each other; one is within the boundary of the (DTSP) area, and <br />the other is outside of it. She noted that the house that is outside of the boundary has a <br />perfect exterior and perfectly conveys an original early 20th century structure; it has all <br />original materials in perfect condition, a high level of integrity, and obviously built before <br />1941 -1942. She pointed out, however, that it is outside the boundary and ,therefore, <br />outside of their purview. <br />Chair Allen inquired if there are similar homes within the boundary that has historical <br />integrity but did not meet the Register because it did not meet the second criteria of <br />historical significance. <br />Ms. Petrin replied that there is a large quantity of buildings that were built after 1942 that <br />have a high level of historic integrity, but they are not part of this survey. <br />Chair Allen inquired if all of the 200 or so houses that were reviewed were built before <br />1941 -1942, with the exception of about eight or nine. <br />Ms. Petrin replied that they were all supposed to be, but there were a few that fell <br />through the cracks either because City records had an incorrect date or they were <br />unable to sort out the correct dates. <br />Mr. Otto then continued his presentation and talked about the survey and its results <br />1. The survey included all homes in residential zoning districts in the DTSP area <br />that were built before 1942, and based on these parameters, staff found <br />201 structures that were provided to Ms. Petrin and Styles to survey. The <br />structures were analyzed to determine whether they were historic or not based <br />on the Council- adopted definition, and 88 homes qualified as historic resources. <br />Some homes were found to have been built later than 1942, and more than half <br />did not qualify because they had had significant changes done over time to the <br />point where they lost their integrity and didn't qualify as a historic resource. <br />2. The survey will have several beneficial qualities. It will save property owners <br />some time, about one to one - and -a -half months, since they will not have to hire <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2015 Page 6 of 35 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.