My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
6
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2020
>
10-28
>
6
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/21/2020 5:54:05 PM
Creation date
10/21/2020 5:52:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
10/28/2020
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
Document Relationships
6_Exhibits A-E
(Attachment)
Path:
\BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\AGENDA PACKETS\2020 - PRESENT\2020\10-28
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Objective Design Standards <br /> The following changes were made regarding objective design standards for two-story ADUs: <br /> • The requirement to offset windows in an ADU from the existing windows in neighboring <br /> residences was deleted, as directed by the Planning Commission <br /> • The term "frosted" was added to the window mitigation measure (the term, "obscure" <br /> was retained). The meaning and purpose of both of these were clarified to indicate, <br /> "glass which is patterned or textured such that objects, shapes, and patterns beyond the <br /> glass are not easily distinguishable." <br /> The PMC amendments as drafted still include a "distance requirement," meaning that a new <br /> window(s) in an ADU must implement one of the privacy mitigations if it is located 25 feet or <br /> less from a property linen. Although one Planning Commissioner at the July 8 meeting <br /> commented that the "distance requirement" should not be maintained, staff proposes to keep it <br /> so that ADUs located a substantial distance from a property line would not be required to <br /> implement privacy measures (an effort to be less, rather than more, restrictive in these cases). <br /> Owner-occupancy Requirements for ADUs <br /> The City has received public comment regarding owner-occupancy requirements for ADUs <br /> constructed prior to 2020 (state law prohibits local jurisdictions from imposing owner- <br /> occupancy requirements for ADUs approved between 2020 and 2025). This was also a point <br /> of discussion between the Planning Commission at the June 24 and July 8 meetings: the <br /> Planning Commission directed staff to modify the PMC such that owner-occupancy for either <br /> the ADU or the primary residence would not be required. This change has been implemented <br /> to the draft PMC amendments and would apply retroactively to properties for which owner- <br /> occupancy has been required, as well as to new approvals. Owner-occupancy between the <br /> primary residence and a JADU, if proposed, is still required. For both an ADU and JADU, the <br /> rental period is required to be longer than 30 days. <br /> Secondly, existing language in the PMC that states the property owner can rent both the <br /> primary residence and the ADU to a single party is proposed to be deleted.3 Therefore, the <br /> primary residence and the ADU could be rented to a single tenant or each could be rented to <br /> two different tenants, as long as the rental periods are longer than 30 days. <br /> Finally, as drafted, the PMC also removes the requirement for a deed restriction for both ADUs <br /> and JADUs. The deed restriction was to serve as documentation regarding the ADU to future <br /> buyers of a property with an ADU, but the usefulness of the deed restriction has been called <br /> into question by members of the public that are interested in removing owner-occupancy <br /> requirement for all ADUs. Since the deed restriction language refers property owners to <br /> enforceable provisions contained within the PMC, and there are no provisions of the deed <br /> This 25-foot measurement is to replace the previously proposed requirement imposing one of the window mitigations if a <br /> new window in a proposed ADU was facing either a neighboring residence or a neighboring private yard. This change is <br /> intended to simplify the standard and remove ambiguity that could arise from the term,"facing"as was discussed in response <br /> to the example presented at the July 8 Planning Commission meeting. <br /> The PMC will continue to include the provision that the owner of a property with a JADU may rent both the primary unit <br /> and the JADU to a single party. <br /> P20-0412, Accessory Dwelling Units Planning Commission <br /> 4 of 7 <br />