Laserfiche WebLink
9.A - Page 9 <br />to bid on. The Council would ultimately approve the scope of work and consultant <br />contract. Staff would keep the neighborhood up to date via neighborhood notices. <br />Based on Council comments, staff will move forward with a series of actions, many of <br />which will come to the Council for approval. The action plan will also be widely <br />circulated, and made available to the general public. <br />ALTERNATIVES <br />The City Council may wish to suggest other changes to the single-family home design <br />review process, and/or historical review process. <br />FISCAL IMPACT <br />A significant amount of staff time is spent on single-family design review, as well as <br />historical review. Any and all of the suggested changes within the report will require <br />additional staff time, and will affect the delivery of other projects. Based upon City <br />Council feedback at the study session, staff will return with proposed activities, cost <br />estimates, timelines and workload impacts associated with conducting the Mount <br />Carmel historical review and Residential Design Guidelines. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW <br />This study session does not qualify as a project per the California Environmental Quality <br />Act, therefore environmental review is not required at this time. However, many of the <br />actions noted in this report will require review per CEQA. <br />AARON AKNIN <br />ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR <br />MELISSA STEVENSON DIAZ <br />CITY MANAGER <br />ATTACHMENT 1: Architectural Permits Issued For Single Family Residences <br />ATTACHMENT 2: Tips for Success for Single -Family Home Architectural Permit <br />ATTACHMENT 3: Examples of Revisions Made During Architectural Permit Process <br />ATTACHMENT 4: Iris Street <br />