Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner O’Connor inquired if the application would be a major modification <br />should EBRPD object. <br />Mr. Pavan said yes. <br />Mr. Pavan then advised that staff had earlier received questions from the applicant, to <br />which responses were provided to both the applicant and the Commission. He inquired <br />if the Commission would like staff to review those questions and answers. <br />Chair Olson said yes. <br />Mr. Pavan then read the questions and responses into the record. <br />1. Please provide evidence for Condition #2; fire sprinklers are required for this lot. <br />The Planning Commission has required fire sprinklers on custom homes as part <br />of its discretionary review. <br />2. Please explain why planning could not issue an administrative variance to allow <br />windows on the sides of the second story with findings stating the PUD condition <br />nd <br />conflicts with the building code by allowing living space in the 2 story but not <br />allowing for property ingress/egress and lighting and ventilation to accommodate <br />this space. <br />The City Council with its approval of the Rhenquist minor modification directed <br />staff to review all changes to the Yolanda court development standards as PUD <br />development plan modifications on a case-by-case basis with comment from the <br />East Bay Regional Park District. Because of the Council’s direction, the <br />proposed attic window must be handled as a PUD modification that in all <br />likelihood will be called up to the Council’s level. Development must satisfy the <br />Municipal Code and the California Building Code. Lighting and ventilation to the <br />second floor attic area can be achieved by a combination of doors, windows, and <br />skylights. Egress becomes an issue only when a room is designated as a <br />bedroom or a sleeping space by the applicant. <br />Additional findings to support the variance are that the windows on the side of the <br />nd <br />2 story don’t look directly into the park and thus meet the intent of the condition. <br />Staff will factor this into its review of the minor modification and its discussion <br />with the Park District. <br />Further support for a variance is that an adjacent lot was allowed to have a full <br />second story with windows on all sides (Mike Renquist lot). <br />Staff will factor this into its review of the minor modification and its discussion <br />with the Park District. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, November 10, 2010 Page 7 of 13 <br /> <br />