Loading...
01 Staff Report - 2004 Retreat With Town Council 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 .. _--_._-----------"--_. ----------_..􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 ..-... _-----_.-----DATE: TO: FROM: COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT May 6, 2004 􀁍􀁁􀁙􀁏􀁒􀁁􀁎􀁄􀁔􀁏􀁗􀁎􀁃􀁏􀁕􀁎􀁃􀁾 DEBRA J. FIGONE, TOWN MANAGER MEETING DATE: 5/12/04 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION: PLANNING COMMISSION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMITTEE 20Q4 RETREAT WITH TOWN 􀁃􀁏􀁕􀁎􀁃􀁾 Attached is 2004 Retreat Questionnaire Information from both the Planning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee. Items for discussion with the Historic Preservation Committee include: • Redefine "historic structures" • Regulations of new fences on lots which contain historic structures Items for discussion with the Planning Commission include: • Role of Planning Commission and Planning Commissioner • Opinions of Town Council on PIaIlIl;ing Commission appeals • Council direction on upcoming development applications • Economic vitality when considering development applications. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission and Historic Preservation Committee 2004 Retreat Questionnaires Distribution: Planning Commission Historic Preservation Committee BNL:mdc 􀁎􀀺􀁜􀁄􀁅􀁖􀁜􀁃􀁎􀁃􀁌􀁒􀁐􀁔􀁓􀁜􀁐􀁃􀁈􀁃􀁐􀁒􀁥􀁴􀁲􀁥􀁡􀁴􀀮􀀵􀀱􀁾􀀮WP<!. 􀁇􀁾􀁾􀁾 PREPARED BY: BUD N. LO)ffZ:( Director of Community Development Reviewed by: 􀁾􀁁􀁳􀁳􀁩􀁳􀁴􀁡􀁮􀁴 Town Manager __Attorney __Clerk Finance __Community Development Revised: 5/6/04 3:15 pm Refonnatted: 5/30/02 ·__􀀮􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾 ---􀁾􀀭 ---􀁾􀁾 ----􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀁾 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 --------------􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮 ----------􀁾 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾 􀀭􀀢􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾.._---'_._--,. 2004 RETREAT QUESTIONNAIRE Commission/Committee: .Planning Commission Planning Commission Mike Burke Jeanne Drexel, Chair . Philip Micciche, Vice Chair Thomas O'Donnell Joanne Talesfore Morris Trevithick Lee Quintana Length of Term 4 years 4 years 4 years 4 years 4 years 4 years· 4 years Term Expires 01131106 01131105 . 01131107 01131108 01131108 01131106 01131107 Meeting Information Date: 2nd and 4th Wednesdays of everymonth Time: 7:00 pm -----------------------------Location: 110 E. Main Street, Council Chambers Staff: Bud Lortz, Director of Community Development Planning Commission N:\SHARE\04 Council Com Retreat\CD PlanninglPJanning Questionnaire.wpd Page 1 - 􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀮􀁾.._---_.__._..􀁾􀀮􀀭 _._-_.. 􀁟􀀮􀁾􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀀭 --------􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭 ---􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁟.._--_._--_.. -.__...__._-----􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 2004 Retreat Questionnaire Planning Commission Major accomplishments of the past year. Hillside Development Standards & Guidelines Outside consultants have helped to streamline the approval process. Proposed projects for upcoming year. Commercial Design Guidelines North 40 Specific Plan Residential design guidelines for pre-1941 structures Residential design guidelines for single and two family dwellings Implementation of the policy review outcomes of personal service businesses in the C-2 zone. Issues specific to Commission. Make conditions and motions more precise. What training would be beneficial to the Commission? Discussion with planners on what items should be included in the report to make the approval process easier. Workshop/mini retreat for Planning Commission/planners in June Workshop/training session with Town Consulting Architect Questions and comments for the Council. What is the role of the Planning Commission? What is the role of the Planning Commissioner? Is it necessary for Town Council to express opinion whether the Planning Commission action was right or wrong when considering an appeal? Should the Town Council provide direction to the Planning Commission on upcoming development applications? Should the Planning Commission consider economic vitality when considering development applications? N:\SHARE\04 Council Com Retre.atlCD PlanninglPlanning Questionnaire.wpd Page 2 -------------..._-􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭 􀁟􀀮􀀬􀀮􀁾􀀬􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀧􀁾􀀭􀀭 􀁾 ---􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 --_..􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀮􀁟􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀢􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟.. 􀁟􀀭􀀭􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭 --------------------- _. __.._..􀁟􀁾􀀭􀁾􀀭􀁾􀁾􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀁟􀀮􀁟􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭􀀭2004 RETREAT QUESTIONNAIRE Commission/Committee: Historic Preservation Committee Community Services Commission Leonard Pacheco·-Chair Kelly Blough':' Vice Chair Susan Burnett Jeanne Drexel -Planning Commission Joanne Talesfore -Planning Commission Length of Term 4 years 4 years 4 years 4 years 4 years Term Expires 08/01/03 08/01/06 08/01/04 01/31/05 01131/08 Meeting Information Date: 1st Wednesday of every month Time: 5:30 pm -----------'--------------------Location: 110 East Main Street, Council Chambers Staff: . Sandy Baily, Associate Planner N:\SHARE\04 Council Com Retreat\CD Planning\Historic Questionnaire.wpd Page I 2004 Retreat Questionnaire Historic Preservation Committee Major accomplishments of the past year. Working jointly with the Town's Consulting Architect for reviewing applications. Proposed projects for upcoming year. Develop brochures on the Town's historic preservation process. Work with Town's Consulting Architect to update the Pre-1941 Design Guidelines. Continue working on the historic fIre bell relocation project. Consider updating the Town Code defInition of an historic structure. Issues specific to Committee. Redefme "historic structure" At the 2003 Retreat, Town Council and the Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) discussed revising the defInition of the age of an historic structure to be consistent with State requirements, which is 50 years or older. No direction to change the defInition was given at that time. Subsequent to this discussion, the Committee noted that they were reviewing several applications for structures that were designated historic due to age, but had no real historic signifIcance. The majority of these applications are for structures that are not listed in the original Historic Resources Inventory. However, according to County records, these structures were built prior to 1941 and are therefore considered historic. These structures are added to the inventory as they are discovered. In order to expedite the permit process and to save the Town time and money in processing historic applications, the HPC would like to discuss the defInition of the age of an historic structure. The Committee suggests that it be modilled to be consistent with State requirements. The HPC will also suggest that only structures which have specific historic . significance be forwarded to the HPC for review as this will streamline the planning process. The Town's Historic Resources Inventory has 25 ratings for historic properties which range from "listed on the National Register of Historic Places" to "contributes to the Town's historic' atmosphere". Based on a preliminary review of the historic ratings, staff believes that structures with a rating "appears eligible for local designation" and all higher ratings should be referred to the HPc. This matter was discussed with staff at the State Office of Historic Preservation who concurred that not all structures which are determined to be historic due to age, should be referred to the HPC. The State's rationale is provided below. • Not all historic structures have historic signillcance. • The purpose of rating an historic structure is to determine whether or not a structure has any historic significance. • The review process for applications of a nonsignifIcant historic structure would be unnecessarily slowed down if referred to an HPC. S:\04 Council Com Retreat\CD Planning\Historic Questionnaire.wpd Page 2 . 2004 Retreat Questionnaire Historic Preservation Committee • The public would be more acceptable to having their structure designated as historic. Due to current budget constraints and workload, staff recommends that only applications which involve an historic structure with historic significance be forwarded to the HPC. This change will streamline applications, and will also allow the Committee to spend more time on other special high priority projects (ie: update of Pre-1941 Design Guidelines). If Council agrees with these recommendations/suggestions, staff will survey other jurisdictions to determine what historic ratings are considered significant and will iniate an amendment to the Town Code concerning the historic review process and the definition of an historic structure. Based on this suggested change, the HPC hopes that Council will consider changing the definition of an historic structure for any structure that is over 50 years old. This will make the Town's definition consistent with State requirements. At this time, the Town is not aware of any structure that was built after 1941 which has historic significance. Therefore, the change in the date of an historic structure would only result in meeting State requirements and would not impact any additional properties. However, the Town should do a minor 􀁵􀁰􀁤􀁡􀁾􀁥 to the historic inventory every year to include the properties that have structures which are over 50 years of age. This could be done by running a report from Metroscan. The Town's Historic Resources Inventory is approximately 15 years old and should be updated in the near future by a professional consultant to rate the historic properties added over the last several years and for any new properties added in the future. However, the State 􀁤􀁯􀁾􀁳 not require inventories to be updated. The Town could apply for CertifiedLocal Governl11ent Grant to help cover the cost of this update if Council believes the inventory should be professionally updated. The Town's CLG status is not being jeopardized with the current definition of an historic structure and the State has not questioned the Town's definition. Therefore, it is n(>t imperative that the definition be revised, but the HPC recommends the change be consistent with State requirement. Regulation of new fences on lots which contain an historic structure The Historic Preservation Committee is concernedthat fences are only partially regulated on lots which contain historic structures. Section 29.40.030 of the Town Code restricts front yard fences within an Historic District or with a Landmark Historic Preservation Overlay Zone, to a maximum height of three feet with an open design. Fences located on a side yard abutting a street and fences for 'sites that are not historic but have an historic structure are not regulated. Policy CD.P.1.19 of the Community Design Element of the General Plan states that solid fencing over three feet high shall be designed to not isolate the structures from the street or shall be set back and landscaped. Recently concerns have also been raised about fences in hillside areas because they impact wildlife migration corridors and along arterial streets because of aesthetic concerns. Fences are difficult to regulate since a building permit is not required for fences or walls that are six feet in height or less. There have been occasional discussions in the past to regulate fences. N:\SHARE\04 Council Com'Retreat\CD Planning\Historic Questionnaire.wpd . Page 3 2004 Retreat Questionnaire Historic Preservation Committee However, since regulation of new fences would be difficult to enforce and due to the significant number of existing fences which would become nonconforming, the Town has chosen not to pursue the matter and only restricted fences for historically zoned parcels as noted above. What training would be beneficial to the Commission? Workshops/Conferences relating to historic preservation that are certified by the 􀁓􀁴􀁡􀁴􀁥􀁾 Questions and comments for the Council. See discussion items under, "Issues specific to Committee". N:\SHARE\04 Council Com Retreat\CD Planning\Historic Questionnaire.wpd -Page4