Laserfiche WebLink
7.A. - Page 6 of 6 <br />Architectural Advisory Committee Two Year Work Plan — FY2018 & FY2019 AM <br />128 <br />-. . <br />, -. <br />. -. . •. <br />-,r project. <br />. -.-. . <br />:ompletion? Staff or <br />.•_ . .... - <br />doing? ion Measurement criteria Timeline: <br />How will we know how we are <br />ongoing, <br />long-term <br />REQUIRED FUNCTIONS <br />Review large and sensitive <br />Improved architectural, <br />Y <br />N <br />• Staff analysis <br />Staff and AAC involvement <br />6-9 months total review <br />Adoption of resolutions and Ongoing <br />development applications <br />environmental, and urban <br />• Staff recommendation <br />time including staff, AAC, <br />recommendations to the Planning <br />and provide <br />design for new development. <br />• AAC review <br />PC <br />Commission. <br />recommendations to the <br />• Planning Commission review <br />approval authority. <br />Review DTPP development <br />Ensure that alternate design <br />Y <br />N <br />• Staff analysis <br />Staff and AAC involvement <br />3-6 months total review <br />Adoption of resolutions recommended Ongoing <br />applications seeking <br />details still implement the <br />• Staff recommendation <br />time including staff, AAC, <br />to the Planning Commission <br />deviations from development <br />overall DTPP objectives. <br />• AAC review <br />PC <br />guidelines. <br />• Planning Commission review <br />DESIGN STANDARDS <br />Provide input on design- <br />Establish high quality design <br />Y <br />N <br />• Staff analysis <br />Staff and AAC involvement <br />1-2 years <br />Feedback from planning staff, <br />Ongoing <br />related elements of updates <br />standards and best practices <br />• Staff recommendation <br />with <br />planning commission, city council, the <br />or new precise plans, specific <br />for future specific plans. <br />• AAC review <br />potential AAC subcommittee, <br />public, or those directly affected by <br />plans, area plans, or other <br />• Planning Commission review <br />if necessary <br />policy <br />policy implementation as <br />appropriate. <br />Review small cell wireless <br />Improved design standards <br />Y <br />N <br />• Staff analysis <br />Staff and AAC involvement <br />< 1 year <br />Visible aesthetic improvement to <br />1 -year <br />Aesthetic Standards <br />for small cell antenna sites <br />• AAC Review <br />small cell antennas installed after <br />that reduce aesthetic impacts <br />• Planning Commission review <br />adoption of design standard updates. <br />on streetscape design. Clear <br />• City Council review <br />direction on aesthetic design <br />standards for wireless <br />providers. <br />EDUCATION AND OUTREACH <br />Professional Education & <br />Promote exemplary <br />N <br />N <br />• Create list of training <br />Staff, AAC, and local AIA <br />6 months to 1 -year <br />Attendance from interested <br />1 -year <br />Development, AAC <br />architecture and urban <br />opportunities <br />chapter(s) involvement <br />architects, urban designers, planners, <br />sponsored presentation(s) <br />design within Redwood City. <br />• Attend or conduct a <br />subcommittee members, volunteers. <br />Information exchange <br />presentation on architecture <br />Conduct post -attendance feedback <br />between jurisdictions and <br />and urban design. <br />evaluation. <br />design professionals. AAC <br />• Public forum on Redwood <br />members receive information <br />City's architecture and urban <br />on current architecture <br />design with a panel of <br />issues. <br />distinguished planners, <br />urban designers and/or <br />architects <br />Annual Study Session with <br />Improved coordination with <br />N <br />N <br />• Staff coordination <br />Staff, AAC, and PC <br />< 1 year <br />Complete a study session with <br />1 -year <br />Planning Commission <br />Planning Commission. <br />• Planning Commission <br />involvement <br />Planning Commission <br />participation <br />128 <br />