My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
17
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
031511
>
17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2011 3:39:11 PM
Creation date
3/10/2011 3:29:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/15/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
69
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Figure 2: Window Locations <br />Neighbors <br />Horse <br />Zoning Administrator Hearings <br />A Zoning Administrator hearing was conducted on December 21 and December 22, <br />2010. During the December 21, 2010, Zoning Administrator hearing, staff noted that the <br />two existing east elevation bedroom windows did not meet current building code <br />standards for egress; however, the installation of a new window was not required. If a <br />new window were to be installed, it would have to meet the 2010 California Code <br />requirements, which requires a 5.7 square -foot openable area with a minimum 20 -inch <br />clear width, a minimum 24 -inch clear height, and a maximum window sill height of 44- <br />inches from the finished floor (Please refer to the Building and Safety Division's Egress <br />Window Requirements handout in Attachment 6, Exhibit I). Given these egress <br />requirements, it would riot be possible for the proposed window to have a higher <br />window sill unless the eas: elevation windows were modified to meet current egress <br />standards. Mr. Susanto and Ms. Pranoto requested that Leroudiers modify their <br />existing windows and install a window on the south elevation that has a higher window <br />sill so that there would not be a direct line of sight onto their property. The Leroudiers <br />did not agree to this request because they wanted as much southern light exposure as <br />possible for the room. <br />Given the location of existing second -floor windows and the orientation of the two lots, <br />the Zoning Administrator ncted that both parties currently have views onto each other's <br />properties and, therefore, the Zoning Administrator approved the Leroudiers' request as <br />proposed. For the Council's consideration, the Zoning Administrator meeting minutes <br />can be found in Attachment 6, Exhibit G. <br />Page 3 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.