My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
100317
>
11
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/27/2017 4:35:21 PM
Creation date
9/27/2017 3:37:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/3/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
119
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
As stated above, the Zoning Administrator specifically asked the Johnsons if a vegetative <br /> screen and frosted glass on the proposed second-story windows that directly or indirectly faced <br /> their property would adequately address the privacy concerns. They indicated that such a <br /> design modification would be insufficient because the windows could still be opened and allow <br /> views into their backyard/swimming pool area, especially the proposed second-story window on <br /> the north-facing elevation and to some extent the proposed second-story windows on the west- <br /> facing elevation. Additionally, the Johnsons stated there was no guarantee that a vegetative <br /> screen would be adequately maintained to obstruct views from the proposed second-story <br /> windows and that more vegetation close to the property line would introduce root intrusion and <br /> debris to their swimming pool. Accordingly, the Zoning Administrator added Condition of <br /> Approval No. 3 to the project approval, citing the privacy concerns of the Johnsons and also <br /> stating a belief that a design solution could be identified that would allow for the desired number <br /> of bedrooms and the removal of the proposed window on the second-story of the north-facing <br /> elevation. Staff notes that the Zoning Administrator also required a 1:1 tree replacement to off- <br /> set the removal of the two trees, but did not specify that these replacement trees have to serve <br /> as privacy screening for the project. <br /> To further clarify Condition of Approval No. 3, the Zoning Administrator framed the language of <br /> the condition such that maximum flexibility would be provided to the applicants/appellants for <br /> obtaining a design solution that worked internally for their needs but also would facilitate <br /> compliance with the Building Code requirements for bedroom emergency egress, lighting, and <br /> ventilation. Given the Building Code requirements, it is anticipated that the windows on the <br /> second-story of the west facing elevation would need to be modified. For the Commission's <br /> information, the applicable Building Code requirements for bedroom emergency egress, lighting, <br /> and ventilation are as follows: <br /> o The minimum net clear opening area for emergency escape and rescue windows is <br /> 5.7 square feet per bedroom. <br /> o Eight percent of the total bedroom floor area requires window glazing to allow for natural <br /> light penetration. <br /> • Four percent of the total bedroom floor area requires openable windows to allow for <br /> ventilation. <br /> PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENTS <br /> Notices of the Administrative Design Review application were sent to surrounding property <br /> owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot radius of the site for the Zoning Administrator hearing. <br /> Staff has provided the location and noticing map as Exhibit J for reference. Staff met with four <br /> residents prior to the Zoning Administrator hearing including the Johnsons, Bob Wittig, and Ed <br /> Broome. Their comments have been described above and/or attached as Exhibit F. Staff also <br /> received approximately a dozen phone calls from concerned residents sharing similar concerns. <br /> Notices of the appeal were sent to surrounding property owners and tenants within a 1,000-foot <br /> radius of the site for the Planning Commission Hearing. Staff has provided the location and <br /> noticing map as Exhibit J for reference. At the time this report was published, staff had received <br /> one letter with comments about the project (Exhibit I). These comments are similar in nature to <br /> those already described in detail in this report. <br /> P17-0372, 3552 Yellowstone Court Planning Commission <br /> Page 9of10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.