My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2015
>
110315
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/29/2015 12:58:41 PM
Creation date
10/28/2015 3:27:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
11/3/2015
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
Document Relationships
12 ATTACHMENT 5 EXHIBIT B
(Attachment)
Path:
\CITY CLERK\AGENDA PACKETS\2015\110315
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
67
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
and recommended acceptance of the historic resource survey. In addition, the <br /> Commission recommended that the City Council discuss whether to pursue a separate <br /> Municipal Code amendment to expand design review authority to the exterior of <br /> non-historic single-family homes in residential zoning districts in the Downtown Specific <br /> Plan Area. <br /> PUBLIC NOTICE <br /> Notice regarding the proposed project and related City Council public hearing were <br /> mailed to the property owners and tenants within the Downtown Specific Plan Area, the <br /> former Historic Preservation Task Force members, and interested parties who contacted <br /> staff during the Historic Preservation Task Force meetings. It was also published in the <br /> local newspaper. At the time this report was written, staff had received an email from <br /> Linda Garbarino in response to this notice requesting the Council pursue a separate <br /> Code amendment to expand design review authority for the homes in the survey which <br /> were determined not to qualify as historic resources (please see Attachment #3). <br /> Correspondence received in response to the Planning Commission public hearing notice <br /> have been attached to this report (Exhibit F of Attachment 5) or discussed in the Planning <br /> Commission staff report. <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT <br /> This project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) <br /> pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), as it has been determined that the Municipal Code <br /> amendment will not cause a significant negative effect on the environment, and will in fact <br /> protect historic resources by making the City's historic resource regulations more robust. <br /> CONCLUSION <br /> Staff supports the draft Municipal Code amendment, as described in Option 2 above, and <br /> believes that it will help protect historic homes that are valued by the community and <br /> ensure that changes to historic homes are consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan <br /> and Downtown Design Guidelines. The historic resource survey will benefit both property <br /> owners and applicants by saving them the time and expense of hiring a consultant to <br /> conduct an individual survey and by letting them know whether a structure is considered <br /> historic or not, allowing them to plan their additions/modifications accordingly. It will also <br /> aid staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council in their review of applications that <br /> involve changes to residential structures constructed before 1942. Staff is also <br /> requesting Council direction on initiating a separate Municipal Code amendment to <br /> expand design review authority to include the exterior of non-historic single-family homes <br /> in residential zoning districts in the Downtown Specific Plan Area. <br /> Submitted by: Fiscal Rev' w: Approve9 by: <br /> /lin <br /> Beaudin Tina Olson Nelson Fialho <br /> Director of Director of Finance City Manager <br /> Community Development <br /> Page 7 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.