PC 062420 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner O'Connor referenced the condition around second-story windows, stating it could become too restrictive if it became part of the regulation. Commissioner Balch inquired whether Commissioner O'Connor was referencing the side windows. Commissioner O'Connor responded the proposed regulations might be too restrictive. Commissioner Balch referenced a previously approved ADU, potentially a JADU, where neighbors had concerns over the second-story windows. Commissioner Allen recalled additional screening was imposed to help mitigate the privacy concerns as a result of the windows. Ms. Clark responded it was difficult to develop a single standard that met all the necessary requirements and staff could further look into how to make adjustments to respond to some of the concerns. Commissioner O'Connor stated the concern was to prevent being too restrictive where the State would respond over how restrictive the ordinance had become. Commissioner Allen confirmed that obscured glass windows could still be operable. Discussion Point C: Does the Planning Commission have a preference for the treatment of garage doors where the garage space is converted to an ADU? Commissioner Pace stated that either approach would preserve the look and feel of the neighborhoods, while honoring the legislature. Commissioner O'Connor stated he did not have a preference as long as it did not change the look of the structure and ensuring it did not look like a duplex. Commissioner Brown stated either style was acceptable. Commissioner Balch agreed and indicated he was amenable to either style. Commissioner Allen also agreed and indicated she would like to leverage ADUs over time to count for Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers. She then stated it would be beneficial to promote ADUs. Ms. Clark stated ADUs were already counted towards moderate- income housing for the City's RHNA based on a survey conducted of rental spaces and properties throughout Pleasanton. She also mentioned it may change but if the rental prices remained consistent, they could continue to be counted. Commissioner Balch further clarified that counting it towards RHNA was why ADUs were required to have a separate address. Commissioner Balch requested future discussion of height restrictions and clarification on the minimum square footage. Commissioner Brown suggested consideration of whether it was necessary to prevent conversion of unused shared spaces in multifamily. Commissioner Balch moved to continue the item to the July 8 Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Pace seconded the motion. Planning Commission Minutes Page 7 of 9 June 24, 2020 erated his concern about the restrictions on second story windows on ADUs. He did not want the approved ordinance eventually getting kicked back from the State because of window standards. Chair Ritter asked if the State provided specific guidelines regarding windows and Ms. Clark indicated the State regulations did not outline window regulations. She explained staff decided on these standards, in the absence of being able to conduct design review, because they were the most common points of contention between neighbors. Commissioner O'Connor suggested looking at each unit individually instead of applying blanket standards. Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 of 9 June 24, 2020 between eaves and ridges and ADUs measured from the ground to the top of the structure. Commissioner Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 9 June 24, 2020 lanning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 9 June 24, 2020 ure. Regarding windows, she confirmed the windows would have to be six feet above the finished floor or have obscured glass. Ms. Clark further noted, it might be reasonable to develop exceptions for existing windows to allow for those windows to be the same size, shape, and height. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 June 24, 2020