My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
19
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
060413
>
19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/30/2013 4:17:55 PM
Creation date
5/29/2013 1:21:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
6/4/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Design and Beautification Policy 21. Prevent the use of industrial or commercial <br /> building elements and materials in residential areas. <br /> Some residents felt that the use of metal roofs and large windows made this new home <br /> on Neal Street have a commercial character. <br /> Downtown Design Guidelines <br /> Floor area of new homes and additions to existing homes are to be compatible with <br /> surrounding houses. <br /> Oftentimes, surrounding homes have FARs less than allowed by zoning regulations. <br /> This begs the question as to whether the zoning regulations apply, or if there is a <br /> different metric that should be used when adjacent or nearby homes are smaller. <br /> Windows <br /> There are several Downtown Design Guidelines that suggest that wooden windows <br /> should be required in the remodeling of historic homes and in the construction of new <br /> homes in historic neighborhoods. This can create added expense and increased <br /> maintenance requirements. Some residents believe that policies on windows may need <br /> to be more specific as to when or if wooden windows are required. <br /> 5. Clarity of Process. The current process to get a project approved when historic <br /> preservation is an issue involves the intermingling of Local, Slate and Federal <br /> regulations, standards, and processes. The intermingling of these standards and <br /> processes can make the application process confusing and time-consuming for <br /> project applicants, leaving them with the impression that there is no fixed process <br /> and that outcomes are uncertain. While the end result of discretionary review <br /> can never be entirely predictable, the Task Force believes that the overall <br /> process can be improved through addressing some of the problems described <br /> above to provide more clarity within the local Pleasanton part of the equation, but <br /> also through provision of a comprehensive flow chart of the overall process to <br /> help inform applicants what various steps and decision points will be involved. <br /> No such documentation of the process currently exists. <br /> Page 7 of 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.