PC 042716 - Laserfiche WebLink

Chair Ritter: Great —I'll just keep going. I agree with Commissioner Brown here. I think if you made the houses smaller there'd be more green space and you know, when you buy a house in California, you want to live outside and I think that if you don't give any outside space on your property, I think it's a disservice to the buyer because we're outside. We get 300+ days of sunshine a year so that's just my idea on the density proposal, but I know this isn't the most dense proposal and it's not the least dense, it's kind of in the middle for that area based on the Google images of that area. Commissioner O'Connor: I agree with what you said and I know we should've talked about design earlier, but this is a different community because the front yards don't even face the other front yards so it doesn't look like neighbors are going to meet neighbors very easily here. But, yes, I do think if we make the homes a little bit smaller and the larger ones a little bit smaller, we will get green space and possibly space between homes, and I think that's a good point. Commissioner Allen: And I agree with the comments made as well. Chair Ritter: All right, number 6: Does the Planning Commission support the applicant's proposal to demolish all of the homes or should one or more of the homes be retained? If one or more of the homes should be retained does the Commission have a preference where on -site they should be retained and how they should be used? Commissioner O'Connor: I support retaining at least the Irby home which is historic. I think it would be great to see it from Stanley, but the downside is, is that's where we create more green space? And I'm not sure that's the best place to hang out because it's going to be noisy and more pollution and all the rest of it. I was looking at where they had the historic park community garden and how that occurred and maybe it is less usable for home sites. I'm okay with using that area but again, I'll leave that up to the designers. Chair Ritter: I agree with Commissioner O'Connor. I know this is kind of the entrance into Pleasanton which is bringing up First Street. I wish we could see the historic -ness from First Street or Stanley but I know it's hard to find that location there. And I do think that trying to preserve the Irby home is important and I know relocating that is not easy and it's important for the community. Commissioner Brown: So I walk past the three properties today and I personally don't have an issue with the other two properties. I did have a question on the Irby home specifically. I don't know if it shows well in the picture, but I presume every home can be saved. I guess I had a question of is it structurally sound today and is it a worthwhile investment. If re- conditioning it to standards results in basically redoing the whole home, is it worth it. Hagen: It is questionable whether it is structurally sound at this time. We haven't had our Building Official go out there but you know we have been out there. We know that they have sloping floors, rotting issues, electrical issues and things like that. So any relocation of this is really almost going to be a recreation of this. We can keep the architectural integrity and the historic presence of the home, but I'm not sure until we get a professional inspector out there and the Building Official to take a look and see actually how structurally sound this structure currently is in its existing state. Commissioner Brown: Yeah, that was my hesitation and the way I described it, it looked fragile. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, April 27, 2016 Page 33 of 43