01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Dolan briefly reviewed proposed changes to the Downtown Design Guidelines, noting they largely reflect the recommended changes to the Specific Plan policies. One issue raised solely in relation to the guidelines was consideration of the use of metal roofs. The task force has proposed that the guidelines continue to discourage the use of metal roofs but also acknowledge that metal shingles with a dull finish resembling shake or tile could be approved. Another issue of some controversy is whether or not wooden windows must be replaced with wooden windows of similar construction. The task force would like to continue to discourage replacement with other materials while also acknowledging that the window industry has progressed to such a point that modern materials can be used to create windows which look like old fashioned wooden windows and are more desirable to the property owner. These kinds of replacement windows, if in keeping with the original windows in profile, dimensions, operation and glazing pattern, would be acceptable. The sole proposed amendment to the General Plan is minor and would eliminate reference to the adoption of a historic preservation ordinance, which has not been the theme of the task force's discussion or the Council's direction. Mr. Dolan discussed the proposed Municipal Code amendments related to story poles and demolition by neglect. While story poles are commonly desired when considering an application in the Specific Plan area, the City currently does not have the authority to require them. The proposed amendment would give staff the latitude to require them when determined to be necessary by the Community Development Director or Planning Commission. With respect to demolition by neglect, the code currently addresses property maintenance but not with regard to single family homes and only in a limited geographic application. Given that the issue is of significant importance to historic preservation, the task force is proposing an amendment to expand the applicability of that code to residential structures and the eni.ire Downtown Specific Plan area. The Planning Commission reviewed and supported the task force recommendations with one real exception. The Commission did not like the mathematical nature of Policy No. 8 regarding bulk and mass and preferred to rely on the current language and practice of determining compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood on a case by case basis. Mayor Thorne asked how the proposed changes would affect a residential home in a commercially zoned area wishing to convert to a business use or vice versa. Mr. Dolan said it is entirely dependent on zoning; none of these changes apply to a commercially zoned property. Mayor Thorne asked how the task force settled on the year 1942. Mr. Dolan said they used the Context Statement to inform their discussion. Based on the information provided, it seemed that building largely stopped during the war and once resumed following the war, the style changed considerably. The task force felt that the architecture which presented itself before the war was more in keeping with what the community valued preserving. Mayor Thorne questioned the nexus between bulk and mass and historic preservation, which he did not necessarily feel were related. Mr. Dolan acknowledged the point and agreed that the issue is much broader than historic preservation. It does, however, arise pretty consistently on anything proposed in the downtown. One important feature of historic preservation is the setting that the structure appears in and this setting can be significantly affected by structures with a dramatically different bulk and mass than was historically there. City Council Minutes Page 9 of 20 December 17, 2013