My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
CCMIN 02162021
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
MINUTES
>
2020 - PRESENT
>
2021
>
CCMIN 02162021
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/17/2021 1:36:59 PM
Creation date
3/17/2021 1:36:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
2/16/2021
DESTRUCT DATE
PERMANENT
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Senior Planner Bonn reported staff is requesting the development of preapproved ADU designs to <br /> streamline the City's review process and clarify architectural and detailing benchmarks. She advised <br /> other cities have either developed or are developing a similar plan. She noted homeowners would not <br /> be required to use one of the templated plans but would simply be a courtesy provided by the City. <br /> In response to Councilmember Narum's inquiries, Senior Planner Bonn reported the City has approved <br /> approximately 200 ADUs and, of the 55 approved since 2011, 15 (27%) are two-story. She confirmed <br /> the City is obligated by state law to approve an office, rumpus room, or other space above a garage <br /> being converted into an ADU with many of the new requirements not applying to the conversion of <br /> existing space. She confirmed a resident looking to build a new ADU over an attached garage would be <br /> limited to 16 feet in height by the January 19th Council decision. Director Clark advised that even <br /> without the January 19th decision state law states an ADU must be approved without a discretionary <br /> hearing which limits the City's control. <br /> In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiries, Director Clark advised the City's proposed ordinances <br /> exceed the state requirements by not allowing two-story ADUs and by allowing detached non-converted <br /> space ADUs to be up to 1,200 square feet. She also advised state law prohibits owner-occupancy <br /> requirements from 2020-25 but noted the City could continue to impose previous standards to units <br /> approved before 2020. She advised the Planning Commission's proposal heard on January 19th was to <br /> eliminate prior requirements so there would be a unified group of ADU standards moving forwards. She <br /> confirmed the 1,200 square foot maximum unit size is in the prior ordinance and it was kept in the <br /> interest of continuity. <br /> In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiry, Director Clark confirmed a 1,200 square foot building is <br /> larger than an 800 square foot building so it may have longer walls for a neighbor to view. <br /> In response to Councilmember Testa's inquiries, Director Clark confirmed the ADU would have to meet <br /> setback requirements regardless of size. Assistant City Manager Brian Dolan clarified that if the ADU is <br /> over 800 square feet the City can enforce the regular zoning setbacks. He advised state law states <br /> those setbacks cannot be enforced if it prohibits the ADU but the City could require the unit to be <br /> smaller to get normal setbacks. Director Clark clarified it could not obstruct the construction of the ADU <br /> but the City would push for achieving the most protective setbacks possible potentially by reducing the <br /> size of the unit. Assistant City Manager Dolan believes the City would attempt to enforce setbacks but <br /> the law states the City cannot do anything which would prohibit the creation of an ADU. <br /> In response to Councilmember Arkin's inquiries, Director Clark clarified the perception at the January <br /> 19th meeting on having two stories under 16-feet implied a full-height unit. She advised the Building <br /> Code allows for ceiling spaces as low as seven feet so two stories could fit into 16 feet. She advised it <br /> would contradict state law to limit what could be done within those 16 feet. <br /> Senior Planner Bonn confirmed state law does not specify how to measure height but noted the code <br /> for ADUs is consistent with how the City measures height in general. She advised gabled roofs are <br /> measured from the midpoint and not the peaks. Director Clark confirmed this would allow an attached <br /> ADU to exceed 16 feet at points if it is attached to the main structure. <br /> In response to Councilmember Balch's inquiries, Senior Planner Bonn explained the 10-foot setback <br /> from a street is described elsewhere in city codes which is why it was used as a basis. Director Clark <br /> confirmed that under the state law an ADU is not confined to the building envelope and can be <br /> anywhere on the property and confirmed the City can pull an ADU into the building envelope so long as <br /> it does not restrict the construction of a unit. She also stated discretionary design review cannot be <br /> applied even if the addition is vertical and attached but the City could apply more stringent objective <br /> development standards to those ADUs. <br /> City Council Minutes Page 6 of 16 February 16, 2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.