Town Square

Preserving our past

Original post made on Mar 15, 2013

When Gerald Hodnefield wanted to renovate the 1865 home he purchased on Second Street, he knew he would have to go through the city's planning process. The home was first occupied by the first train station master when the railroad came to town, Hodnefield said.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, March 15, 2013, 12:00 AM


Like this comment
Posted by Craftsman
a resident of Downtown
on Mar 15, 2013 at 9:12 am

Hodnefield "suggested homes that homes built before 1900 are historic, and those after 1940 are not"

This is a very narrow-minded and ignorant approach to historic preservation. Mr. Hodnefield certainly isn’t familiar with the National Register of Historic Places or California Register criteria for evaluating a property for historic significance. What if a home built after 1940 is an architectural masterpiece or played an important role in the history of Pleasanton? Age certainly isn’t the only determining factor. If you follow National Register guidelines, it takes away the arbitrary nature of evaluating a property: Web Link

It troubles me that a man with such a myopic view is guiding a taskforce on historic preservation. Save me the property rights whining. What a person does with their property impacts the ENTIRE neighborhood, whether it is resell value or the historic integrity of the street. If people on 2nd Street started installing cheap, Chinese-made, vinyl sash windows on various houses, it would drag down the history integrity and charm of the entire street. Like it or not, your house does not exist in a vacuum, it has an impact on those that surround you.

Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Downtown
on Mar 15, 2013 at 5:11 pm

Agreed Craftsman.
What about if someone on First St built an illegal garage with a second story structure, none of which was permitted or up to code? They did it without permits (which could not have been given as none of it was up to code), they did it without a variance (which could not have been given as it is 11 feet too close to the lot line and 22 feet too high), they were challenged on it all the way up to the city council -- and hosterman ruled that it should be allowed to remain in place WITHOUT meeting any current or past building safety codes! Fortunately the building dept told her that she could not overrule California safety codes -- but she wanted to "grandfather" in the whole thing.
How fair would that be? Well it happened right here, under the nose of the so-called planning commission.
Before Gina or Jeb deletes this post as "containing untrue statements" read your own past articles as there were many outlining this very issue. Read the council minutes and you will see that everything in this post is true and on the record.
If this town is going to have rules then ENFORCE THEM on everyone, don't let the mayor's friends buy their way out of compliance. Or, if you want to build any old thing, just do it fast and ask permission after the fact. It works.

Like this comment
Posted by anon
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 18, 2013 at 4:53 pm

I am so tired of Ptwns Planning dept. We summitted application and all the required documentation as per their application checklist to open a business here in Ptwn. The Planner was so inept. She kept asking us questions for answers she had in front of her on the application and in the supporting documents. I have to assume she never read it or looked at our plans.I can't believe the money they pay these Planning Associates. I coulod do their job better. We steered clear of Ptwn and opened our successful business in a business friendly city nearby.