4 - Laserfiche WebLink

THE CITY OF Planning Commission ,�. IAgenda Report •" .. flaw. ptn November 13, 2019 LEASANTON Item 4 SUBJECT: P19-0342 APPLICANT: City of Pleasanton PURPOSE: Consider adding a new Section 18.140.030 Fines and Restrictions on Future Development for Illegal Historic Building Demolition to the Municipal Code to strengthen preservation of historic buildings and penalize unpermitted demolitions and alterations LOCATION: Citywide GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN Various ZONING: EXHIBITS: A. Draft resolution recommending new Municipal Code Section 18.140.030 Fines and Restrictions on Future Development for Illegal Historic Building Demolition as Attachment 1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1. Find that the proposed addition to the Pleasanton Municipal Code is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 2. Adopt a resolution recommending approval of Case P19-0342, addition to the Pleasanton Municipal Code of new Section 18.140.030 Fines and Restrictions on Future Development for Illegal Historic Building Demolition as shown in Exhibit A, Attachment 1, and forward the proposal to the City Council for consideration. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Historic buildings are a community resource, and the City lists historic resources in the General Plan, has an inventory of historic residential structures in the Downtown Specific Plan area, and has determined other structures to be historic resources in other City documents. The current Municipal Code allows property owners to process new development applications that may simultaneously consider alteration and demolition of historic buildings. The Building Code also allows the Chief Building and Safety Official to make a determination if a building is so unsafe or dangerous that it should be demolished. A new section is proposed which would further the policy of preservation of historic buildings by imposing monetary fines and ourned the meeting at 10:33 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Jenny Soo Associate Planner P19-0130, Malik, 7218 Moss Tree Way Page 2 of 2 less than 10 feet from our house!We had bought the house and paid the premium price in Pheasant Ridge community because among other reasons, we didn't want houses closely packed, this proposed construction is going to take that away from us. That is going to drastically affect our quality of life as well as property value. An updated design was submitted by the applicant to address some of the privacy issues we had raised. It seems in this design the width of the siding also encroaches a bit more into the setbacks on the side of the house. None of the other homes in our neighborhood have had large siding walls or overhangs like that put up and we are worried it would look out of place. During the design review hearing process it became very clear that no matter what we said or how it affected us, this was going to get approved. During the hearing we suggested an II at its closest point,a larger setback than the standards would require. The proposed addition would be built directly above the existing garage and would maintain the existing building setback. P19-0130 Planning Commission 11 of 15