1 OFFICE OF HISTORIC RESOURCES City Hall, 200 N. Spring Street, Room 620, Los Angeles, CA April 12, 2010 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HPOZ Boards, HPOZ Alliance, Certified Neighborhood Councils & Interested Parties Ken Bernstein, AICP, Office of Historic Resources Update on Completion of HPOZ Preservation Plans In January, the Department of City Planning sought input from the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) Boards, the HPOZ Alliance, Certified Neighborhood Councils, and other key community stakeholders on a new proposed initiative to complete Preservation Plans for all HPOZs that do not currently have an adopted Plan. Because the current City budget crisis is resulting in more than a 40% decrease in the Department of City Planning s staff capacity, the continued success and growth of the HPOZ program requires that we work together to identify opportunities to streamline our HPOZ review. We greatly appreciate the time that many of you took to review the proposal and to provide substantive input. Department staff has reviewed these comments carefully and, based on this input, has significantly revised the recommendations for the Preservation Plans Exemptions and Delegations (minor work that is either exempt from review altogether or delegated for review to Planning staff), as described on pp. 5-9 below. The changes from the January draft are shown in underline/strikeout form. Department staff will work with the HPOZ Boards to take forward for approval this fall by the City Planning Commission all of the 17 remaining Preservation Plans, for all HPOZs that wish to pursue Plan adoption at this time. Each Board will have a three-month period, ending on August 1, to craft tailored design guidelines, based upon a citywide Preservation Plan template, to guide future project review. In order to ensure greater citywide consistency among the Preservation Plans and the needed gains in efficiency, it is essential that all new Plans provide the same level of Exemptions and Delegations. The HPOZ Boards will continue to review all Certificate of Appropriateness cases, as well as all Conforming Work requests that may lead to a discernable change in a historic structure. The Boards will continue to provide their neighborhood-based perspective and preservation expertise in the review process. Planning staff will be able to provide expeditious review for those proposals that are clearly in conformance with the HPOZ s design guidelines, as developed by the Boards. The Department invites you to join us for a citywide public workshop on Monday, May 3, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m., to kick off the Preservation Plan adoption process, to explain the proposed Exemptions and Delegations, and to review the new template for Preservation Plan Design Guidelines. The workshop will be held at the Hollywood Seventh Day Adventist Church, 1711 N. Van Ness Ave (at the intersection of Hollywood Blvd., just east of the 101 Freeway). Limited free parking is available in the lot adjacent to the church and on the surrounding streets; carpooling or public transit use is encouraged (the church is five blocks west of the Hollywood/Western Red Line station).
2 Benefits of the Proposal Delegating review of minor projects that comply with the design guidelines to Department staff substantially reduces the required staff time spent on projects that constitute positive restoration work. Based on the Department s experience with several existing HPOZ Preservation Plans, delegation of review has resulted in considerable time savings and has provided a key incentive to convince homeowners to execute projects that clearly conform to the guidelines. Homeowners can receive approval for restoration and minor work almost immediately; whereas projects that may change a home s historic appearance would require a lengthier review process. Most large cities preservation commissions have elected to delegate certain cases involving minor work to staff for review, while referring larger cases to its preservation commission for review. The proposed streamlining plan is completely consistent with this practice from around the nation: the 25 HPOZ Boards (our city s equivalent to a single preservation commission) would still review all proposals that could have a visible impact on historic properties and historic districts. The HPOZ Boards will continue to review most cases on which they have traditionally provided substantive input, including many categories of Conforming Work cases. Staff analyzed 313 Conforming Work applications during 2009; more than a third of these cases (121 of 313 cases) would still have gone before an HPOZ Board for decision under this proposal. Department staff gave careful consideration to an alternative proposal by some stakeholders that sought to achieve savings in staff time by withdrawing Planning staff from most HPOZ Board meetings. However, the Department believes that this alternative would not result in the needed efficiency gains and would significantly undercut the productive partnership between City government and the HPOZ Boards. As a policy matter, the City should be conveying to applicants, residents and property owners that the HPOZ program is an official, City-sanctioned process, not a neighborhood association acting on its own. The Preservation Plans provide other important benefits to the administration of the City s HPOZ program. The Plans are crucial to providing greater certainty for applicants, offering clarity about the HPOZ process to neighborhood residents, and providing stronger, more focused protection to each neighborhood s unique historic resources. However, in recognition of objections raised by some HPOZ stakeholders, an existing HPOZ Board will have the option of voting not to pursue a Preservation Plan that incorporates the consistent Exemptions and Delegations. The adoption of these Plans would be deferred for an indefinite period, until staff becomes available to process their adoption. Preservation Plan Approval Process Following the May 3 public workshop, the Department will begin working with the HPOZ Boards and other stakeholders to complete all 17 remaining Preservation Plans by this fall. To achieve some economies of scale during this difficult time, all of the Plans would be considered for approval together by the City Planning Commission. The eight HPOZs that already have adopted Preservation Plans would not currently be required to create a new Plan with the new template for Exemptions and Delegations; these HPOZs may keep their existing Plan, if they so choose.
3 An HPOZ Board may also choose not to participate in the Preservation Plan adoption process, by adopting a formal resolution of the HPOZ Board declining to participate. The Board s resolution should not occur until after the May 3 rd citywide workshop, and must follow a public hearing at an HPOZ Board Meeting. Adequate notice and outreach on this decision must be provided to the HPOZ s residents and property owners, who may wish to comment on whether to proceed with a Preservation Plan at this time. Each HPOZ Board will have an opportunity to tailor the design guidelines of the Plan to be responsive to the architectural styles, neighborhood character, and community priorities in your HPOZ. The Boards will start with an updated template for Preservation Plans design guidelines, based on the Preservation Plan Workbook that has been used by the Department and HPOZ Boards for several years. The Boards revisions to the Preservation Plan design guidelines will be due no later than August 1. Staff planners will then finalize the Preservation Plans, prepare the required staff reports, organize public workshops and hearings, and bring the Plans to the Cultural Heritage Commission for review and comment and to the City Planning Commission for adoption. Following adoption of the Plans, the Department plans to conduct a systematic review of the newly adopted plans in 2012, to make any necessary changes to the Exemptions and Delegations based on experience with implementation. The Department would also put into place new policies for communication between staff and HPOZ Boards so that Board members would remain aware of all cases within their HPOZ. Status of Proposed HPOZs The adoption of these new Preservation Plans will be crucial to freeing up the staff capacity necessary to allow for future growth of the HPOZ program. Currently, eight proposed HPOZs (Windsor Village, Country Club Park, Garvanza, Hollywood Grove, 27 th /28 th St., Tifal Brothers 52 nd Place, Vermont Square, and Jefferson Park) have completed historic resources surveys and have been stalled since last year, awaiting staffing to process their adoption. As discussed with the HPOZ Boards and the HPOZ Alliance, the Department will be asking proposed HPOZs, wherever feasible, to combine with existing HPOZs to avoid creating an additional Board that will require separate staffing. The Department is currently prepared to process the three proposed HPOZs Windsor Village, Country Club Park, and Garvanza that have had Interim Control Ordinances for nearly three years and that cannot be extended again past this October. Windsor Village and Country Club Park are already working closely with the existing Wilshire Park HPOZ in laying the groundwork for a single HPOZ Board and Preservation Plan. Garvanza would become an expansion of the existing Highland Park HPOZ. The Department does not presently have the staff capacity to process the other five remaining proposed HPOZs. Approval of these proposed districts will likely be contingent upon the approval of significant streamlining measures through the adoption of the new Preservation Plans this fall. The Department greatly appreciates the patience of these proposed HPOZ neighborhoods, and intends to take every step possible to allow for the consideration of these districts adoptions as expeditiously as possible.
4 Conclusion The Department of City Planning greatly values our successful partnership with the HPOZ Boards and HPOZ neighborhoods of the City. We do not want to see our important HPOZ program become another victim of the fiscal crisis. We therefore look forward to working with the HPOZ community on this new partnership to help the HPOZs move forward with long-delayed Preservation Plans, and to do so in a way that will enable the HPOZ program to grow and sustain itself into the future.
5 Chapter 3 Function of the Plan 3.1 ROLE OF THE PRESERVATION PLAN This Preservation Plan is a City Planning Commission approved document which governs the [name of HPOZ] Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ). The plan, through its design guidelines, as well as its goals and objectives, aims to create a clear and predictable set of expectations as to the design and review of proposed projects within the district. This plan has been prepared specifically for this HPOZ to clarify and elaborate upon the review criteria established under the HPOZ Ordinance. The [name of HPOZ] Preservation Plan serves as an implementation tool of the [name] Community Plan (a part of the land use element of the City s General Plan). HPOZs are one of many types of overlay districts, policies, and programs that serve to advance the goals and objectives of the Community Plan. The [name of HPOZ] Preservation Plan outlines design guidelines for the rehabilitation and restoration of single and multiple-family residential structures, commercial structures, the public realm including streets, parks, street trees, and other types of development within the HPOZ. The Preservation Plan is to be made available to property owners and residents within the [name of HPOZ] HPOZ, and shall be reviewed by the Board every two years. The [name of HPOZ] HPOZ Board makes recommendations and decisions based on this document. The Department of City Planning uses this document as the basis for its determinations. The [name of HPOZ] Preservation Plan articulates the community s vision and goals regarding the HPOZ by setting clear guidelines for the development of properties within the district. The [name of HPOZ] Preservation Plan will be used by the Historic Preservation Board when reviewing projects. It will serve as a resource for property owners planning repairs or alterations, as an educational tool for both existing and potential property owners, residents, and investors, and will also be used by the general public to learn more about the City of Los Angeles and its unique neighborhoods. All proposed work within the district is review by the HPOZ Board, unless exempted from review, or the authority to review has been delegated to the Director of Planning. The HPOZ Board reviews each application against the applicable criteria and guidelines within this document. 3.2 ORGANIZATION OF THE PRESERVATION PLAN Each Preservation Plan is required to contain seven elements: The Mission Statement, Goals and Objectives, Function of the Plan, the Context Statement, the Historic Resources Survey, Design Guidelines, and the Preservation incentives/adaptive reuse policies located in the Appendix. The Angelino Heights Preservation Plan contains two parts. Part I contains five chapters: The Mission Statement establishes the community s vision for their Preservation Plan. The Goals and Objectives chapter states the Goals to accomplish and offers specific programs or actions (Objectives) as the means to accomplish these Goals. The Function of the Plan reviews the role, organization, and process of the Preservation Plan. The Context Statement briefly outlines the history and significance of the community s development. The
6 Historic Resources Survey identifies all Contributing and Non-Contributing structures and includes Contributing landscaping, natural features and sites, and vacant lots. The Historic Resources Survey also serves as the starting point for the Architectural Style pages and the Rehabilitation and Infill Guidelines found within this Preservation Plan. Part II is the Design Guidelines which contains five chapters: Design Guideline Overview, Architectural Styles, Residential Design Guidelines, Commercial Design Guidelines, and Public Realm. The Architectural Styles pages provide an overview of the predominant architectural styles present within Angelino Heights. The Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines for Rehabilitation/Infill identify the detailed character defining elements of the various architectural styles, and the Public Realm chapter provides preservation guidelines for public spaces within the HPOZ district. The Architectural Style pages are intended to work together with the applicable chapters of the Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines, as well as the Public Realm chapter. An appendix of other useful information is found at the back of this Plan. This appendix includes a compilation of preservation incentives and adaptive reuse policies, process charts, and the HPOZ Ordinance. 3.3 EXEMPTIONS As instructed by the City Planning Commission, and City Council (notwithstanding LAMC to the contrary), the following types of work are exempt from HPOZ review in the [HPOZ Name] (unless the work is located in the public right-of-way). a. Interior alterations that do not result in a change to an exterior feature; b. The correction of Emergency or Hazardous conditions where a City enforcement agency has determined that such conditions currently exist and they must be corrected in the interest of public health, safety and welfare. When feasible, the City agencies should consult with the Planning Department on how to correct the hazardous conditions consistent with the Preservation Plan; (exemption already provided under HPOZ Ordinance); c. Department of Public Works improvements where the Director finds that a) The certified Historic Resources Survey for the Preservation Zone does not identify any Contributing Elements located within the Right-of-Way and/or where the Right-of-Way is not specifically addressed in the Preservation Plan; and b) Where the Department of Public Works has completed a CEQA review of the proposed improvement and the review has determined that the work is exempt from CEQA, or will have no potentially significant environmental impacts (the HPOZ Board shall be notified of such Projects, given a Project description and an opportunity to comment); (exemption already provided under HPOZ Ordinance); d. Alterations to City Historic-Cultural Monuments and properties under an approved Historical Property (Mills Act) Contract; (exemption already provided under HPOZ Ordinance); e. Work specifically authorized by a Historical Property Contract approved by the City Council;
7 f. Rear yard (non-corner lots only) landscape/hardscape work that is not visible from the street and that does not involve the removal of any tree or feature identified in the historic resources survey; g. Planting and maintenance of existing plantings in front and side yards, not including: new hardscape; installation of artificial turf; fences; hedges; planting of new trees; or removal/trimming of any tree or feature identified in the historic resources survey; h. Installation or repair of fences, walls, and hedges in the rear and side yards (non corner-lots only) that do not require a Zoning Administrator s approval for height or location; (Moved to Delegations) i. Installation or repair of in-ground swimming pools located in the rear yard not visible from the street; j. Rear yard grading and earth work on Non-Hillside lots as determined by the LAMC; k. Installation and expansion of rear patios or decks that are not visible from the street, that are no higher than five feet above finish grade (including railings), not including balconies, roof structures, trellises, gazebos or other similar structures; l. Installation, replacement or repair of HVAC equipment that is not visible from the street; m. Installation or repair of solar collectors, skylights, antennas, satellite dishes and broadband internet systems on rear-facing facades/roof surfaces or garage roofs; (Moved to Delegations) n. Installation of lighting devices on facades that are not visible from the street; o. Exterior painting with no change from previously approved existing paint colors; p. Maintenance and repair of existing foundations with no physical change to the exterior; q. Removal of non-historic security grilles and/or gates that were installed outside of the Period of Significance; r. Removal of non-historic fences that were installed outside of the Period of Significance. s. Alterations to façade openings, such as new doors or windows, to facades that are not visible from the street; (Moved to Delegations) t. Installation of window security bars or grills, located on facades that are not visible from the street; (Moved to Delegations) u. Repair or replacement of gutters and downspouts. (Moved to Delegations)
8 3.4 DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING In the [HPOZ Name] HPOZ, the review of the following types of work is delegated to the Director of Planning and therefore shall not require review by the HPOZ Board but the HPOZ Board shall receive a notice of the Director of Planning s action or decision. The Director of Planning shall utilize the Design Guidelines contained within this Preservation Plan to determine whether the proposed project may be found to be Conforming Work. Projects that do not comply with the Design Guidelines shall be brought before the HPOZ Board for review and consideration, either as Conforming Work or as requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness or Certificate of Compatibility. a. Minor front and side yard landscaping projects including: installation of artificial turf; trimming of trees identified in the historic resources survey; installation of new hardscape (originally included in error) installation of new trees. and excluding Minor front and side yard landscaping does not include new fences, walls or hedges; b. In-kind hardscape replacement within the front yard (driveway, walkways, etc) that does not expand the hardscape footprint; c. Exterior painting involving new paint colors and not including paint applied to previously unpainted surfaces such as stone, masonry or stained wood; d. In-kind replacement of damaged historic features, which does not result in a change in material, design or outward appearance; e. Ordinary maintenance and repair to correct deterioration or decay that does not involve a change in the existing design, materials or exterior paint color; f. Restoration and/or reconstruction of historic features based wholly on historic documentation (plans, photographs); g. Removal of non-historic materials when underlying historic materials can be repaired or replaced in-kind; h. Installation of screen doors or windows that do not obscure the actual door or window; Installation of a historically appropriate wooden storm or screen window or doors that does not obscure the actual window or door; i. Replacement of non-original windows with windows that match the originals, when examples of original windows still exist on the structure; j. Construction or installation of ramps, railings, lifts, etc., on any non-visible elevation of a building intended to allow for accessibility; k. Any alterations to a structure that is identified as Non-Contributing in the Historic Resources Survey, not including additions, new construction, relocation or demolition; l. Additions of less than 250 square feet to any Contributing building or structure, where the addition does not break the side-planes or roofline of the existing structure, is contained
9 completely within the rear yard and is not visible from the street where the addition is not located within the front yard or street-side yard and no increase in height is proposed; m. Additions to Non-Contributing structures that increase the square footage by less than 30% of the existing square footage (as determined by LADBS) when the addition does not affect the front façade of the structure and is not visible from the public street; n. In-kind replacement of roof materials installation of historically compatible roofing material that meets the design guidelines (in the Roof section) that does not result in the removal of any historical material such as wood eaves, fascia, etc; o. Alterations to façade openings, such as new doors or windows, to facades that are not visible from the street (Moved from Exemptions); p. Installation or repair of fences, walls, and hedges in the rear and side yards that are not visible from the street (non corner-lots only) and that do not require a Zoning Administrator s approval for height or location; q. Installation or repair of solar collectors, skylights, antennas, satellite dishes and broadband internet systems on rear-facing facades/roof surfaces or garage roofs that are not visible from the street (Moved from Exemptions); r. Installation of window security bars or grills, located on facades that are not visible from the street (Moved from Exemptions); s. Repair or replacement of gutters and downspouts (Moved from Exemptions). All questions of visibility are to be determined by Department of City Planning staff. For the purposes of these Plans, visibility includes all portions of the front and side elevations that are visible from the adjacent street or sidewalk or that would be visible but are currently obscured by landscaping. It also includes undeveloped portions of a lot where new construction or additions would be visible from the adjacent street or sidewalk, such as the street-side side yard on a corner lot and the front yard. Finally, construction or additions to areas that are not currently visible but that will become visible following the construction or addition will be considered visible and reviewed accordingly. A street visible façade excludes those portions of the side elevations that are not visible from the adjacent street or sidewalk and all rear elevations. A street visible façade may also include side and rear facades that are generally visible from a non-adjacent street due to steep topography, or second stories that are visible over adjacent one story structures, etc. Projects requiring a Certificate of Appropriateness or Compatibility shall not have any part of their applications be exempt or delegated. The Department of City Planning retains the authority to refer any delegated project to the Historic Preservation Overlay Zone (HPOZ) Board for a recommendation.
CITY OF SAVANNAH HISTORIC DISTRICT BOARD OF REVIEW REQUEST FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS STAFF RECOMMENDATION PETITIONER: FILE NUMBER: ADDRESS: Demetrius Huddleston, R.A. 331 Kensington Drive Savannah,
(THESE GUIDELINES ARE FOR HOMES WHO S ACCOUNT NUMBER STARTS WITH: 04, 07, 08, 10, 11, 12, 14, E01, E02, E03, E04, P01, P02, P03, P04, P05, P06, P07, V01, V02, V03) IMPERIAL OAKS PARK POA, INC. ARCHITECTURAL
41XX-43XX LINDELL HISTORIC DISTRICT REHABILITATION AND NEW CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS The prime objective in the 4100-4300 Lindell Historic District is to maintain the distinctive character, quality of construction
16.20.110 - Industrial Suburban District ( IS ) Figure REFERENCE Typical Buildings in the IS District Figure REFERENCE Site Plan of a typical development in the IS District Sections: 184.108.40.206 Composition
Certificate of Appropriateness Instructions and Checklist (revised 1/16) SYRACUSE LANDMARK PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND CHECK LIST INSTRUCTIONS: Applicants
Sec. 16-20O.001. Statement of Intent Atkins Park Historic District Regulations (Chapter 20O) The intent of the regulations for the Atkins Park Historic District is as follows: (1) To recognize and maintain
PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS CITY OF FOSTER CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING/CODE ENFORCEMENT Most exterior modifications/improvements on residential and commercial properties
CITY OF BELOIT REPORT TO THE BELOIT LANDMARKS COMMISSION Meeting Date: May 19, 2009 Agenda Item: 5 File Number: COA-2009-09 Applicant: Lisa Anderson-Levy & Robert Levy Existing Zoning: R-1B, Single-Family
VILLAGE OF EAST HAMPTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM TIMBER-FRAME LANDMARKS, 1700-1850 GUIDELINES Design Review Board Inc. Village of East Hampton 86 Main Street East Hampton, New York 11937 (631) 324-4150
The Lakes at Discovery Bay Homeowners Association ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY OF RULES & PROCESS Approved 1/26/2011 The Association pursuant to the CC&R s Section 12.1 must approve
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE FOXFIRE VILLAGE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ADDING A NEW SECTION 7.12 RURAL ESTATE ZONING DISTRICT (RE) #2014-09 THE FOXFIRE VILLAGE COUNCIL ORDAINS: Section 1. Article VII of the Foxfire
Incentives for Historic Preservation Historic places help define the character of our communities by providing a tangible link with the past. Today, historic districts around the country are experiencing
Heritage Incentive Program Guidelines Photo: Public Archives of Prince Edward Island City of Charlottetown 2012 Heritage Incentive Program The Charlottetown Heritage Incentive Program includes both monetary
WINDOWS Application Guidelines Repair, Restoration and Rehabilitation Sash and Frame Replacement (including Master Plans ) Storm Windows New or Modified Openings The Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC)
PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS CITY OF FOSTER CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING/CODE ENFORCEMENT Most exterior modifications/improvements on residential and commercial properties
City of Pismo Beach Administrative Design Guidelines for Additions to Single-Family Homes These design guidelines augment the design direction provided in the Pismo Beach 1983 and 1998 Zoning Codes. This
Division 51-4.400. Yard, Lot, and Space Regulations. SEC. 51-4.401. MINIMUM FRONT YARD. (a) General provisions. (1) Required front yards must be open and unobstructed except for fences. Except as otherwise
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR UTILITY METERS D.C. HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW BOARD Introduction Utility meters are a necessary component for any building. When older buildings were originally provided with utility
Renovating and Building in Westmount Annex 1 Obtaining a Building Permit 1 When is a building permit required? A building permit is a document that grants legal permission to start construction of a building
Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION HEARING DATE: November 19, 2009 TIME: 10:00 AM PLACE: City Hall, Room 1010 200 N. Spring Street Los Angeles, CA
Color-Keyed Legend for Tracking Categories of Proposed Ordinance Amendments Clean-up/Housekeeping- correcting errors, omissions, internal inconsistencies; provide additional clarity for interpretation;
(Bill No. 100200-AAAA) AN ORDINANCE Amending Title 14 of The Philadelphia Code, entitled Zoning and Planning, by amending Section 14-231, entitled Residential District Rules and Exceptions, by providing
Special Exception Approval Process PLANNING DIVISION COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT To: From: Salt Lake City Historic Landmark Commission Cheri Coffey, Assistant Planning Director; firstname.lastname@example.org
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT FROM: SUBJECT: Kathi Cook, Community Development Director Prepared by: Richard McLeod, Senior Planner PH-15-02 Canton Street Commons CITY COUNCIL: March 23, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION:
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (RE/RL) Planning Division DENSITY STANDARDS (MMC 17.12.020) Lot Size (applies for the creation of new lots and lot line adjustments) ZONE MINIMUM LOT AREA MINIMUM LOT
PROGRJa.MMATIC AGREEMENT -' FOR HOUSINIG AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT-FUNDED PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA WHE:REAS, the City of Miami, Florida (City) now administers or may administer in
Application for Tax Abatement for Rehabilitation of Property in a Local Historic District Historic Preservation Office Austin, Texas 512-974-2727 Adopted December 2012 To encourage preservation and maintenance
Fernbrook Home Owners Association [HOA] Policy Memorandum No. 3 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Adopted by the Board This policy memo's objective is to guide homeowners, residents and members of the Architectural
D E S I G N G U I D E L I N E S Coolidge Corner Interim Planning Overlay District The Brookline Planning Board Town of Brookline, MA January 12, 2006 Acknowledgements The following guidelines were adopted
A Residential Owner s Guide to PERMITS CITY OF Elgin PLANNING & NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES CITY OF Elgin A Residential Owner s Guide Welcome! This booklet has been prepared to provide residential property owners
CHAPTER 5 - "R1" SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Section 5-1. Regulations: The regulations set forth in this chapter, or set forth elsewhere in this ordinance when referred to in this chapter, are the
Historic Preservation Guidelines & Requirements for the RIDGELY S DELIGHT HISTORIC DISTRICT Published by Ridgely s Delight Association & Ridgely s Delight Architectural Review Committee in accordance with
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL ISSUED JULY - SEPTEMBER 2014 DATE PROJECT ADDRESS PROJECT DESCRIPTION 07/02/14 212A King George Street Remove existing picket fence from side yard
OLD BUSINESS 321 Lake Street (LSHD) Mike Hauser, applicant. Add second story master bedroom over existing one-story addition on the east side yard at rear of house. Applicable standards: [Alteration] 1
Members Mark McIntire, Chair Ross Buffington, Vice Chair Edward Echtle Ken House Imad Al Janabi, PhD. Fred King Megan Luce Bret Maddox, S.E. Ha Pham Pamela Sundell Kathryn Longwell, North Slope Ex-Officio
City of Independence Chapter 11: Demolition In this chapter you will find: Demolition Mothballing Treatment Types of Demolition By Neglect and Recommended Corrective Measures DEMOLITION Photograph on cover
building_inspection_faqs Page 1 of 5 Sign In Mayor City Manager Departments Calendar Document Center Select Language Business Government Resident West Nile Virus FY13-14 Budget Financial Transparency 311
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 6, 2013 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Joe Woollett and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Daniel Ryan,
Ninth Street Historic Park Acknowledgements This project was paid for in part by a State Historical Fund grant from the Colorado Historical Society. The contents contained herein do not necessarily reflect
CITY POLICY REFERENCE: City Council 1988 October 25 Historical Resources Act RSA 2000 ADOPTED BY: City Council 2008 October 29 SUPERSEDES: C450A PREPARED BY: Planning and Development DATE: 2008 September
This document outlines the rules and regulations of Berkshire and Winslow Park. If there are any discrepancies between this document and the Restrictive Covenants, the Restrictive Covenants take precedence.
Los Angeles Department of City Planning RECOMMENDATION REPORT CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION HEARING DATE: June 19, 2008 TIME: 10:00 AM PLACE: City Hall, Room 1010 200 N. Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012
Moving a House in Pasadena To assist homeowners and contractors wishing to relocate a home in Pasadena, this handout summarizes the steps in the permitting process. Please keep in mind that the sequence
REQUIRED RESIDENTIAL PERMITS AND INFORMATION TO SUBMIT FOR PERMIT Any item listed that requires a permit also requires a permit application to be filled out completely at the time of the plan submittal.
ARTICLE 875. PD 875. SEC. 51P-875.101. LEGISLATIVE HISTORY. PD 875 was established by Ordinance No. 28842, passed by the Dallas City Council on November 14, 2012. (Ord. 28842) SEC. 51P-875.102. PROPERTY
HEATING, VENTILATING, AND Application Guidelines The Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) is the Mayoral agency charged with designating and regulating individual landmarks and historic districts. The
Page 1 CITY OF VAUGHAN SCHEDULE O LOT GRADING DESIGN FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CIVIC CENTRE 2141 MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE MAPLE ONTARIO L6A 1T1 905-832-2281 Page 2 SECTION 1 - GENERAL OBJECTIVES To provide
Design Guidelines in the City of Birmingham: Process, Methods & Outcomes November 16, 2006 Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan The 2016 Plan was a master plan created in 1996 for downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan
Section 20.920.060 Tier 2 Infill Standards. In addition to the Tier 1 standards and incentives, Tier 2 infill parcels and land divisions and the subsequent development on those Tier 2 infill parcels shall
CITY OF MADISON LANDSCAPE WORKSHEET Section 28.142 Madison General Ordinance Project Location / Address Name of Project Owner / Contact Contact Phone Contact Email ** Landscape plans for zoning lots greater
The City of Maplewood Public Works Department Guidelines to Obtaining a Building Permit Topic Page WHAT IS A BUILDING PERMIT? 2 WHY DO I NEED A BUILDING PERMIT? WHEN DO I NEED A BUILDING PERMIT? EXAMPLES
1 of 6 To: MUIRFIELD DESIGN CONTROL COMMITTEE Application for: New Home Construction Date: Lot #: E-mail Address: Name: Phase # Address: This application is presented to the Muirfield Design Control Committee
Block A-24 REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction II. Description of Project Area A. Existing Uses and Conditions B. Boundary Description III. Goals and Objectives IV. Redevelopment Activities
FEDERAL INVESTMENT TAX CREDIT B E L L I N G H A M M A Y 2 9, 2 0 1 3 Nicholas Vann, State Historical Architect DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION FEDERAL INVESTMENT TAX CREDITS 20% Federal
17 East Main Street Cuba,NewYork 14727 www.cubany.org 585-968-1560 Code Enforcement Useful Information Office Information What is zoning? When Do I Need a Building Permit? When are Permits Not Required?
Article 16 Article 16 Section 16.01 Accessory Structures (a) The following accessory uses are permitted in any yard and any district: (1) Arbors or trellises, (2) Air conditioning equipment shelters, (3)
Exhibit B The Village of Bayberry North Maintenance Corporation I. General Considerations: Architectural Design Guidelines Maintain and be compatible with the overall design of the Community Colors, construction
D Sample Notices to Property Owners, Sample Affidavits, and Other Material These samples are offered to illustrate specific points in the Desk Reference. States and communities should examine them carefully
City of Pomona 2016 Mills Act Program Application Guide City of Pomona Planning Division Community Development Department 505 S. Garey Ave. Pomona, CA 91766 Phone: 909 620-2191 Fax: 909 469-2082 City of
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR SINGLE FAMILY INFILL HOUSING PURPOSE: These guidelines supplement the Shaker Heights Zoning Code, and The Architectural Board of Review Design Guidelines and Standards, the Shaker
Design Guidelines And Standards Shaker Heights Architectural Board of Review Revised March 2, 1998 Index Introduction Repair and Maintenance Guidelines Residential Design Standards for Staff Review Residential
Parrish Park Homeowners Association Architecture Committee Guidelines for Property & Home Improvements June 2002 1 INTRODUCTION When you first became a homeowner in this community, you received a booklet
Common Property Maintenance Code Violations An illustrated guide 1) Lawn and Vegetation Overgrown weeds, grass, or vegetation. Vegetation obstructing sidewalks, driveways, and other right of ways. Improper
DeKalb County Historic Preservation Commission Monday, April 28, 2014-7:00 P.M. Staff Comments Consent Agenda A. 2148 East Lake Road (DH), Ed Erkes & Jane Erkes. Rear addition. 19188 Built 1950. (15-237-01-015)
PROJECT DRAWINGS: The following drawings and information must be included with your application submittal. Note that in the City of West Hollywood, drawings must be prepared and certified by licensed design
St. Louis County Department of Public Works Division of Code Enforcement When is a Building Permit required for Residential Projects? BUILDING CONSTRUCTION WORK A Building Permit is required to construct,
ORDINANCE 2005-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD, TENNESSEE PROVIDING THAT THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD BE AMENDED BY REVISING SECTION 78-10, PROVIDING FOR MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
Design Essentials Stockland Residential Communities 1 st January 2014 WELCOME TO THE DESIGN ESSENTIALS The Design Essentials form part of your Contract of Sale and assist when designing your home and landscape.
Guide to the R-4A Zoning District Planning & Economic Development Department 418 Main Street Lemont, IL 60439 (630) 257-1595 Planning & Economic Development Department What and where is the R-4A District?
City of Hill Country Village Residential Construction/Development Packet City Hall has developed this Construction/Development Packet to consolidate instructions, the permits required, and zoning rules
NEW EDINBURGH HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN DRAFT July 30, 2015 DRAFT Send your comments to: Lesley Collins, Planner City of Ottawa Planning and Growth Management Tel: 613-580-2424 ext. 21586 E-mail:
WALNUT GROVE SPECIAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) 504-20. INTENT. It is the intent of the Board of Supervisors in adopting the Special Planning Area (SPA) Ordinance to recognize the existing uses in this community
TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 2 A. Background... 2 B. Modification Committee and Review Authority... 2 II. GOVERNMENTAL REQUIREMENTS... 3 III. INTERPRETATION... 3 IV. AMENDMENTS... 3 V. ARCHITECTURAL
M E M O R A N D U M PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF SANTA MONICA PLANNING DIVISION DATE: September 10, 2007 TO: FROM: The Honorable Landmarks Commission Planning Staff SUBJECT: 11A.
DRAFT Solar Panel Installation Policy and Standards Local Districts in the City of St. Louis Intent and Introduction City Ordinance #64689 states that the Preservation Board shall be responsible for policy
Historic District Design Standards 2-1 DESIGN STANDARDS INTRODUCTION "Preservation" is a term that everybody understands in some way, but the number of interpretations is surprising. To some it means museum