My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
01
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
010615
>
01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/18/2015 1:48:49 PM
Creation date
12/19/2014 9:46:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/6/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
1
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
survey for the older residential structures downtown, possibly expanding the city's Design Review <br /> authority to include the first floor of single-family homes in residential districts in the Downtown Specific <br /> Plan, and possibly installing signage to recognize the 5 historic downtown neighborhoods. <br /> Staff has worked with consultants Architectural Resources Group (ARG) to prepare a contract for the <br /> preparation of the requested survey for an approximate cost of $70,000. The survey would include all <br /> residential structures in residential zoning districts in the Downtown Specific Plan area constructed <br /> before 1942, of which it is assumed there are 189, to determine which of those structures are <br /> considered historic resources based on the definition approved by the Council. Once the survey is <br /> complete, a public meeting will be held to allow property owners, realtors and other interested parties to <br /> review and comment on the document before coming to the City Council for review. <br /> Currently, the city's Municipal Code requires an administrative Design Review process by the Zoning <br /> Administrator for additions to single-family residences that exceed 10 feet in height. With historic <br /> structures, changes that are 10 feet or less in height generally occur on the first floor and could <br /> significantly affect certain character defining features of the home such as windows, doors and exterior <br /> wall materials. The city does not currently have the authority to review those changes, which could <br /> result in the removal and/or permanent alteration of those features. Expanding this authority would <br /> require a code amendment, which could be limited to single-family residences in residential districts in <br /> the Downtown Specific Plan area and those structures that are considered historic resources as <br /> determined by the survey. If the Council wishes to pursue the amendment, it would go to the Planning <br /> Commission for review and comment before returning to the Council for final action. Staff has provided <br /> some sample language which can be modified to suit the Council's intent. <br /> Lastly, Councilmember Brown had inquired about installing signage to recognize the city's 5 historic <br /> downtown neighborhoods. Due to irregularities with the shape and application of these neighborhoods, <br /> staff struggled with identifying a method to place signage that would identify each neighborhood <br /> individually. One possible solution would be to install a series of generic signs indicating something <br /> such as a "Pleasanton Heritage Neighborhood" at key entry points to the downtown. Staff has identified <br /> several possible locations and design options, most of which are pole mounted to allow for their <br /> installation on existing poles to minimize costs. <br /> Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute the professional services <br /> agreement to complete the resource survey, provide direction regarding the code amendment, and <br /> provide direction on whether to move forward with implementation of signage for the historic <br /> neighborhoods. <br /> Councilmember Narum requested clarification on whether the 189 structures mentioned reference the <br /> total number surveyed or the total number anticipated to be designated as significant. <br /> Mr. Otto said that is staffs estimate of the total number to be surveyed. <br /> Councilmember Narum said she was expecting that the Planning Commission would be able to explore <br /> several options regarding Design Review and the code amendment. <br /> Mr. Otto confirmed that anything could be discussed through the public hearing process and, if Council <br /> directs the matter forward, a variety of options will be presented for the Commission's consideration. <br /> Councilmember Cook-Kallio asked how many of the homes being surveyed are single story, noting that <br /> Design Review already applies to the second story and explaining that she was particularly concerned <br /> with rooflines. <br /> Mr. Otto did not have an estimate but pointed out that the amendment would also apply to the first story <br /> of two-story homes. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 20 of 22 November 18,2014 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.