My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
100317
>
11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/27/2017 4:35:21 PM
Creation date
9/27/2017 3:37:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/3/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
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
18.20.030 of the Municipal Code establishes the following criteria that are to be considered <br /> in evaluating a Design Review application: <br /> 1. Preservation of the natural beauty of the city and the project site's relationship to it; <br /> 2. Appropriate relationship of the proposed building to its site, including transition with <br /> streetscape, public views of the buildings, and scale of buildings within its site and <br /> adjoining buildings; <br /> 3. Appropriate relationship of the proposed building and its site to adjoining areas, <br /> including compatibility of architectural styles, harmony in adjoining buildings, attractive <br /> landscape transitions, and consistency with neighborhood character; <br /> 4. Preservation of views enjoyed by residents, workers within the city, and passersby <br /> through the community; <br /> 5. Landscaping designed to enhance architectural features, strengthen vistas, provide <br /> shade, and conform to established streetscape; <br /> 6. Relationship of exterior lighting to its surroundings and to the building and adjoining <br /> landscape; <br /> 7. Architectural style, as a function of its quality of design and relationship to its <br /> surroundings; the relationship of building components to one another/the building's <br /> colors and materials; and the design attention given to mechanical equipment or other <br /> utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings; <br /> 8. Integration of signs as part of the architectural concept; and <br /> 9. Architectural concept of miscellaneous structures, street furniture, public art in <br /> relationship to the site and landscape. (Ord. 1612 § 2, 1993; Ord. 1591 § 2, 1993) <br /> If the Planning Commission chooses to deny or modify the project, the decision to do so <br /> should be based on the criteria listed above and the Planning Commission must make <br /> findings supporting its decision. With a Design Review application, the Planning <br /> Commission should not deliberate on concerns regarding the occupants of the home or <br /> how the home will be used. This differs from the required findings for Conditional Use <br /> Permits, for instance, where a primary concern is the operation of the proposed use (see <br /> Section 18.124.070 of the Municipal Code). If there are issues that arise at a later date <br /> regarding the use of the home, those issues will be addressed by the City's Code <br /> Enforcement Officer (discussed in greater detail below.) <br /> • This property is zoned for single-family residences; what is the definition of a family? <br /> State law prohibits cities from defining a family in terms of blood or marriage and also <br /> prohibits cities from limiting the number of unrelated people who live can live together.' <br /> 1 In City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson, 27 Cal. 3d 123 (1980) the court struck down a <br /> municipal ordinance that permitted any number of related people to live in a house in a R- <br /> 1 zone but limited the number of unrelated people who were allowed to do so to five. There, <br /> the City had sought to exclude a group of 12 unrelated people living in a single-family <br /> dwelling in an R-1 zone because they were unrelated and thus did not meet the City's <br /> definition of a family. The Court held that the residents of the Adamson household <br /> constituted a "family" because they were a close group with social, economic, and <br /> psychological commitments to each other, and who shared expenses, rotated chores, ate <br /> evening meals together, and participated in recreational activities together. <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.