PC 111319 - Laserfiche WebLink

appropriate to review increasing the penalty such that they will not purposely violate the code. In essence, he thinks they should ensure the policy deters the behavior seen thus far and what might be seen in the future. Chair Allen summarized there were three items to discuss: (1) How they value the home appraisal versus replacement value and the upper limit; (2) Ms. Garbarino's letter and the question of whether they should add something that references replacing the home with a comparable historic style and/or a comparable one; and (3) whether the Commission needs to require the Director of Community Development to be able to set a minimum dollar amount. Commissioner Balch referenced the proposed fine of $600,000 as a quite notable fine, especially given residing in the Bay Area and the need for a stringent fine. He would support the Director of Community Development being able to set the fine amount. Mr. Dolan said he would prefer the Commission decide on a particular methodology for the fine. He also noted that he has only seen this type of illegal demolition occur once in the 12 years he has been with the City. Commissioner Balch said he agrees with using the greater of either the replacement value or the appraised value, and also agrees with the position made by Linda Garbarino's letter. He likes the character of the historic homes in Pleasanton and thinks that if something is proposed to be demolished or remodeled it should be similar in design in its reconstruction. Commissioner O'Connor voiced his support for using the greater of either the replacement value or the appraised value because some homes are in poor shape, but they might want to allow a larger home to be constructed. Commissioner Ritter asked and confirmed that insurance companies provide replacement values as well as appraisers and construction cost estimators. Commissioner O'Connor referred to the rebuild and expressed he would definitely want the same type of home to be reconstructed as that of what was taken down, or at least those on the historic context. Commissioner Balch said if included it helps staff continue that goal, but if someone wanted to develop a contemporary home and it went through the Design Review process, he assumed it could be overridden by future bodies. If the design is appealed, it could come back to Design Review in order for them to choose a different one of the historical styles. Chair Allen said she thinks it should meet one of those historical styles. She was open that if there was a lower quality home that happened to be on the list, she would rather see that upgraded to Craftsmen or Victorian style that would be on the list. Commissioner O'Connor restated his desire for the design to meet one of the context statements. Planning Commission Minutes Page 10 of 12 November 13, 2019 mber 13, 2019 er than six feet but not over eight feet in height may occupy a required site or rear yard" and he stated the screen wall is 20 feet high; (2) "All additions to main structure which exceed 10 feet in height shall be Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 12 November 13, 2019