Distinctive Neighborhood Program Policy Options Outreach Presentation. City of San José. Demolitions. Incompatible New construction. Incompatible Additions. Background.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Distinctive Neighborhood Program Policy OptionsOutreach Presentation City of San José
Demolitions Incompatible New construction Incompatible Additions Background The City Council approved funding for the development of the Distinctive Neighborhoods Program to address the following concerns:
Existing Permitting Process A Single-Family House Permit is required if: • New construction exceeds 30 feet or 2 stories in height, • The floor area ratio (F.A.R.) of the house exceeds 0.45, • The house is listed on the Historic Resource Inventory. Currently No Design Review Addition/Demolition below SF House Permit Size Thresholds and not listed on Historic Resource Inventory: Building Permit (No Design Review)
Project Initiation Compile Data Identification of Outcome and Goals Initial Outreach August September October November December 2008 Report on Outreach to Council Recommendation to City Council Outreach Follow Up Evaluation of Policy options May June January February March April 2009 Time Line
Four Focused Group Meetings Five Community Workshops Should the policy be city wide or neighborhood specific? What do you like about your neighborhood? What are your concerns? First Round of Outreach October - December 2008 Nine meetings
Architectural Style and Design Loss of Fabric Open Space Bulk and Scale Outreach Results Residents of Older Neighborhoods Residents of Newer/rural Neighborhoods
Outreach Results Residents of Older Neighborhoods Residents of Newer/rural Neighborhoods Architectural Style and Design Loss of Fabric Open Space Bulk and Scale • Loss of Landscaping and open space • Loss and maintenance of trees • Demolitions • Loss of architectural elements and details • Design of new construction • Attached garages • Inconsistent setbacks • Loss and maintenance of trees • High density infill • Monster Homes • Second stories • Loss of privacy
Outreach Results 3. Should policy be city wide or neighborhood specific? • Demolition and significant remodels • Relationship of high density to single-family neighborhoods • Every neighborhood is different • Some neighborhoods prefer tighter regulations while other do not • A Conservation Study Area is appropriate for older neighborhoods
Next Step – Policy Analysis City Wide Neighborhood Specific • Consider adding as SFH Permit Thresholds: • Demolitions of houses over a certain age (50) or built before a certain date (1942). • - Neighborhoods will initiate process • - City will create a Toolkit of overlays available to community: • Conservation Study Area • Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay • Neighborhood Specific Design Guidelines
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 1 - Conservation Study Area Zoning Overlay Allows for a streamlined survey process • Designation Process same as Conservation Areas Except: • Context Statement • No individual historic evaluations required at this time • Design Review • SFH Permit required • If proposal does not meet Guidelines then, • Individual historic evaluation required • Incentives • State Historic Building Code Potential Neighborhoods Affected: Northside, Willow Glen, The Rose Garden and other Older neighborhoods
Historic Districts and Areas in San Jose Landmark Districts Conservation Areas
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 1 - Conservation Study Area Zoning Overlay Pros – • Would make survey process quicker and less expensive upfront. • Will not require many resources for front end implementation. The Historic Preservation Code would need to be updated. • Not affect areas that are not interested in additional regulations. • Would address the needs of residents of most of the older neighborhoods. Cons – • Would require some resources to implement Code revision. • Would require some resources to process application for Conservation Study Area. • Would add more SFH Permit applications – more planners.
Distinct Development Standards for Designated Area New Thresholds for SFH Permit Requirement Linked to Toolkit 3: Neighborhood Specific Guidelines Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 2 – Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay Criteria for Designation: • Agreement of 2/3 of property owners. • The neighborhood should be clearly delineated. • The neighborhood must consist of at least X number of homes. • At least 75% of the homes in the neighborhood need to have the characteristic in question.
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 2 – Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay a. Single-Story District Limits development in certain areas to one story or x feet Potential Neighborhoods Affected: Eichler neighborhoods or other single-story Neighborhoods (Ranch neighborhoods)
50 ft Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 2 – Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay b. Neighborhood Specific Setback Requires specific setbacks in a certain areas Potential Neighborhoods Affected: Between the Gates, other
X ft 25 ft Public Right Of Way Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 2 – Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay C. Garages in Areas with Detached Garages should be…… Detached, or setback at least X feet from face of house, or be side loaded Potential Neighborhoods Affected: Willow Glen, The Rose Garden, Other
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 2 – Distinctive Neighborhood Zoning Overlay Pros – • Will not require many resources for front end implementation. A Code revision would be the only requirement. • No additional SFH Permit applications (Development Standard) • Not affect areas that are not interested in additional regulations. Cons – • This may take longer to establish then neighborhoods want it to. • Would require some resources to implement Code revision. • Would require some resources to process application for Zoning Overlay.
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 3 – Neighborhood Specific Design Guidelines Implementation Implications: Allocate funding Hire consultant to draft guidelines or draft them in-house Allocate planner to work with consultant This process would take at least a year Potential Neighborhoods Affected: Willow Glen, The Rose Garden, Northside, other
Policy Analysis – Neighborhood Specific Toolkit Option 3 – Neighborhood Specific Design Guidelines Pros – • Would facilitate a thorough analysis of the characteristics of an area leading to more compatible new construction in that area. • Through comprehensive analysis of one particular neighborhood Planning could discover some issues that may be relevant to other parts of the city Cons – • Process would take longer and require more resources compared with a Zoning Overlay. Front end implementation would require consultant work. • Design Guidelines would need to be combined with a Zoning Overlay that would require additional review.
Demolitions of homes over a certain age • (50 years) b. Demolitions of homes built before a certain date (1942) Policy Analysis - City Wide Demolitions Add one of the following as a SFH permit trigger Neighborhoods Affected: Older neighborhoods
Demolitions Policy Analysis - City Wide History of Single Family House Permits and Demolitions
Demolitions Cat. I SFH Permit including a historic evaluation Notification Sign House is a CEQA resource House does not qualify for the inventory House qualifies as a Structure of Merit Cat I SFH Permit No Hearing Cat II SFH Permit Hearing Policy Analysis - City Wide B. Demolitions of houses built prior to 1942
Policy Analysis - City Wide Demolitions Pros – • This is a quick solution to a major concern • Would increase the chances of saving candidate City Landmarks or properties eligible for the California or National Register. • The age requirement focuses attention on areas where residents were most concerned about demolitions. • Would build our Historic Resources Inventory • Would inform residents who may have additional information regarding the criteria of significance of a house. Cons – • Would add more process (especially Cat I SFH permits). • Would require some resource to implement Code revision. • The process for handling Structures of Merit remains unclear.
Outreach Results and Proposed Solutions Residents of Older Neighborhoods Residents of Newer/rural Neighborhoods Architectural Style and Design Loss of Fabric Open Space Bulk and Scale • Loss of Landscaping and open space – T2 • Loss and maintenance of trees • Demolitions - City Wide • Loss of architectural elements and details – T1 • Design of new construction – T3 • Attached garages – T2 • Inconsistent setbacks - T2 • Loss and maintenance of trees • High density infill • Monster Homes – T2 • Second stories – T2 • Loss of privacy- T2