My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENT 04
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
090611
>
11 ATTACHMENT 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/26/2011 4:25:48 PM
Creation date
8/26/2011 2:55:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/6/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11 ATTACHMENT 04
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
205
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).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Camp stated that they agree that some of the Deodar cedar trees (#61 through #64) <br /> are healthy, but they have split trunks and some are very tall and very large. He noted <br /> that they have adopted an aggressive mitigation program that would replace the cedar <br /> trees with California native species throughout the project and in the backyards. He <br /> indicated that one of the most important issues is the public health and safety issues of <br /> the trees. He pointed out that the Deodar cedar trees produce small round cones in <br /> abundance that land on streets and sidewalks and present great danger to anyone <br /> walking by the trees. He added that this specie also has a history of limb breakage, <br /> even with maintenance, which may cause damage to the homes. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Commissioner Pearce requested that Mike Fulford, City Landscape Architect, be <br /> present at the meeting when the actual application is presented. She indicated that she <br /> appreciates the Council's direction to return the item to the Commission. She stated <br /> that she has learned more about historic homes after she and Chair Narum attended a <br /> California Preservation Foundation workshop on historic preservation and that she does <br /> not support the demolition of the house. <br /> Commissioner Pearce stated that the Commission does not look at whether this is a <br /> great house, but rather, it tries to evaluate if the house has any historical significance in <br /> conformity with Federal and State guidelines, with respect to whether or not the house <br /> is associated with an important period or important people in Pleasanton history. She <br /> noted that the report concludes that the house does not have these associations; <br /> however, the report also states that the footprint, form, and structure of the house has <br /> been unchanged, it has good integrity and design, and that if minor modifications were <br /> undertaken, primarily the removal of the stucco cladding, the house would be in great <br /> shape. <br /> Commissioner Pearce stated that her entire belief regarding preservation of the house <br /> has nothing to do with whether or not anyone important ever lived there or whether this <br /> particular part of the street was important in Pleasanton history, but rather, with whether <br /> or not this is a structure worth saving. She noted that based on the expert report, she <br /> believes that it is. She indicated that she thinks a lot can be done with houses like this, <br /> especially in looking at what has been presented of the San Diego house. She <br /> continued that she believes a lot should be done with houses in Pleasanton based not <br /> on whether or not they meet Federal or State guidelines for historic importance, but on <br /> whether or not they are good examples of older homes and can help the City retain the <br /> integrity of the older districts in town. She stated that she appreciates the applicant's <br /> suggestion that the house be relocated to another place, but clearly this is where the <br /> house belongs. <br /> As a final note, Commissioner Pearce noted that the applicant talks about the current <br /> state of the structure. She stated that, as she understands it, the structure has been <br /> owned by the applicant for 30 years, and she is not in favor of rewarding someone for <br /> allowing the house to fall into disrepair and then approving it for demolition. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 9, 2011 Page 8 of 18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.