PC 04/26/89 - Laserfiche WebLink

Comm i s s i oner Mahern rev i awed a t ime she had to dea l wi th an a rch itectura 1 review board i n the C i ty o f Concord _ She said i t worked very we 1 1 _ There wa s an architect ~ l andscape a rch itect citizens and two p 1 ann ing commissioners _ The meetings were he 1 d on separate n fights Prom the p1 ann i ng commission _ She wou 1 d be i n favo r o P expanding the design review board but having the same kind o P powers the Design Review Board ha s r fight now _ S he d idn t want to c re ate another 1 ayer o P bureaucracy _ Commi s s i one r Mahern d i do • t Pee 1 it i s necessary Po r an a rch itectura 1 review board to get i nvo lved in a project ea r1 y on becaus e there are enough good peop l e on s to f £ presently who bring proj acts be fore the Design Review Board _ She d idn • t want to e 1 ongate the entire process _ Commissioner Horan a sked what the intent o f the subj act i s under cons fide rat i on and how doe s sta P P ]chow what d i rect i on to take w i th regard to review o f p 1 ans _ Mr _ Swift exp 1 a fined that the sta f f get s a Pee 1 Po r what the P1 ann i ng Commission and C i ty Counc i 1 pre fe r by v i rtue o P what they Piave approved and den i ed h i stor i ca 1 1 y_ Mr _ Sw i Pt exp 1 a fined that there have been recent c omp 1 a i nt s about c o lors o f bu i 1 d ings ~ very 1 arge re s ident i a 1 bu i 1 d i ngs put on sma 1 1 1 of s, etc _ S n the s e i nstances ~ no a rch itectura 1 review i s required at a 1 1 at the p resent t ime _ Mr _ Sw i Pt stated that PUD • s are 1 ooked at but s i ng fi e- Pam i 1 y propert i e s which Piave straight zoning requiring no arch i tectu ra 1 review by the C i ty _ Commissioner Horan d i s cus s ed credent i a 1 s o P pro fes s i ona 1 s and that many t ime s peop 1 e a ct a s architect s w i thout having a degree _ Doe s Counc i 1 want on1 y du 1 y- 1 i can s ed i nd iv idea 1 s o r any pro fe s s i ona 1- a rch i tecture -type person? Comm i s s i one r Horan c ited i n stance s where one person draws a p 1 an and anothe r du 1 y- 1 i cans ed find iv idea 1 may s i gn it _ Chairman M i the 1 ott i d i s cu s s ed the workload which m i ght be caused by another government body _ Mr _ Swift stated the workload created woul d depend upon the outcome o P the ordinance governing an a rch itectura 1 review board _ S f they a ct a s a Commission ~ there wou 1 d have to be written sta P P reports ~ £ i nd i ngs _ etc _ Chairman M i the 1 ott i a sked i f Counc i 1 i s w i 1 1 i ng to put more money i nto staff _ The Commissioners then d i s cus s ed various manners o f reporting to the Planning Commission and Design Rev i ew Boa rd by a rch i tectura 1 review committees ~ a rr iv i ng at the s ame conc 1 u s i on ~ i _ e _ ~ they d i d not w i sh to add another 1 ayer o £ Bove rnmenta 1 proce s s and more work f or staff _ Commissioner Horan s aid i t i s a fa 1 1 a cy i n p resumption that a design review pro Pe s s i ona 1 wou 1 d be read i 1 y access fib 1 e_ He d i d not Pee 1 that the desired re su 1 t s wou 1 d be obtained _ Chairman M i the 1 ott i reviewed the d i scus s i on s o P the C ity Counc i 1 meetings re 1 at i ng t o the i nt ant o f the arch i tectura 1 review board - 1 4 -