Agenda packet — Pleasant Hill City Council, December 18, 2023 (part 4 of 4)

Name Comment City Response
Norma Brink Hello, I just reviewed the new housing implementation water need for these plan and I do not see anything addressing the water needs for all the future housing. It is all very well to say lets add a blank number of homes to the area but where is the water coming from for them? This State is at the beginning of a water crisis and no-one locally seems to be addressing it. I know many seniors who no longer use their pools but they need to to be kept full of water. They are willing to remove but cannot afford the $30,000 price tag to remove them. The CCCWD doesn't seem to address the issue either. They have a program to help owners remove their front lawn but nothing about back lawns or pools.

I hope you are able to propose some solution before people move. thank you
The City has added the following action to Program AAA: Energy Conservation Outreach:
• The City shall engage with CCCWD, EBMUD, and Martinez Water annually to identify opportunities to provide assistance to lowerincome seniors with costs related to the removal of unused inground swimming pools.

Please see the Availability of Infrastructure summary, beginning on page 4-161 of the Public Review Draft.

Water needs and supply will be further analyzed in the General Plan Update environmental (CEQA) analysis.

Bruce Irion, David
Blau, Annette
Gelinas, &
Shereen
Motarjemi
We want to compliment staff on their very comprehensive Housing Element document. Hopefully HCD will be equally impressed although given their track record of rejecting initial submitals that might be too much to hope for.

It is very evident Pleasant Hill’s Housing Element was prepared to comply with HCD’s extensive requirements. Thus, by its nature, the lens of the review is biased toward HCD’s vision which among other things presumes that every city’s housing should be a microcosm of the Bay Area as a whole. Setting aside whether this is desirable, it’s questionable whether this is statistically viable for smaller areas such as Pleasant Hill.

As just one example, consider Figure 4-37 on page 123, Home Values of Owner-occupied Units. Compared with Contra Costa County or the Bay Area, home values in Pleasant Hill span a narrower range of values. Given the size of Pleasant Hill, this is what one might expect - a more homogeneous, narrower range of home values. So, while it is true there is less lower-value/more affordable housing, it is also true that there are not the excesses in housing value seen in other parts of the county or Bay Area.

Further HCD’s guidelines set specific expectations for review and focus on finding shortcomings as opposed to highlighting accomplishments.

But consider the following:

Pages 77 and 78 detail the success of increasing group housing in Pleasant Hill which is important to service the city’s growing senior population. Yet HCD and RNHA targets do not allow consideration of this class of housing.

Pages 78 and 79 show the significant increase in ethnic diversity which has occurred in Pleasant Hill in the past twenty years. So, while it is true that Pleasant Hill’s population remains predominately white, there has been great progress in increasing ethnic diversity.

Figure 4-10 on page 88, Jobs-Household Ratio shows that Pleasant Hill has maintained a more consistent jobs to household ratio than either Contra Costa County or the Bay Area both of which show trends of adding jobs without adequate additional housing. Thus, Pleasant Hill has done better at balancing housing and economic growth than the county or region.

HCD’s emphasis seems to focus on housing units as opposed to housing people. We mentioned previously that HCD does not consider the increase of persons in group housing. As a further example, consider Figure 4-13, page 94, Population by Age and Figure 4.5, page 83, Housing Tenure by Age. Figure 4-13 shows that Pleasant Hill’s population of persons over 55 years of age increased from 7.3k to 10.8k persons. Figure 4.5 shows that a significant portion of owner-occupied units (which tend to be single family homes) are owned by persons Comments noted.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 2 of 29 ends

over 55 years of age. Based on experience in our neighborhoods, as these houses turn over, we can expect one or two person households to be replaced by families increasing the number of persons housed.

Thus, reading a Housing Element review drafted under guidelines set by HCD’s lens, it is very easy to focus on shortcomings and lose sight of the positive progress that has actually been made. We're not suggesting that Pleasant Hill change its Housing Element, rather we just wish to provide balance to the perception one might get of housing in Pleasant Hill when viewed through HCD’s lens.

Marlina Hartley First of all, thank you to those who put in the amount of work this plan involves. It is impressive. I admit that I didn’t read everything completely or search through every chart and table. Perhaps the items listed below have been considered and are addressed. In case they aren’t, however, these are my thoughts:

In reading that a mix of housing—very low income, low income,, senior, those with special housing needs—is desired in high opportunity areas, I question the houses built by the new library on Oak Park Blvd. The other housing development on Alhambra Ave. at Boyd likewise includes no range of housing units. Every housing development should include a mixture of income levels—not just multi-unit buildings.

The new construction objectives re 1,182 lower income and 1,237 moderate and above moderate units. So many homes in our neighborhoods are being updated for higher sales price or purchased and then remodeled that the number of lower income units should be drastically increased and the other reduced. Our community should strive to blend all economic levels into our neighborhoods.

In looking at low income areas that exist now, it appears that many were placed without any thought to public transportation. For instance, the ones on Grayson require a car. This should not happen again.

Architectural design is important at every cost level. There is no reason for low income to mean ‘ugly’. Is landscaping considered? Low water needs landscaping should be a part of every new plot plan—not just low income either. New home owners at any new or renovated project should feature low water use.

This plan needs to be more proactive about energy efficiency. It is obvious that change is required and this is the time to ensure it is being addressed. Why would new housing use gas heating, gas appliances? Many locations are banning these in new developments. Why isn’t Pleasant Hill?
Does the ‘payment of a fee in-lieu-of building the unit’ in “inclusionary provision to provide affordable housing” mean a contractor does NOT have to build affordable units? This is wrong. There should be no opt out fee.

The use of the Diablo Valley College overflow parking lot for 350 units of low income housing is great! If the old JC Pennys building could be used for housing that is also a plus except for the unattractive location. It would need to be developed to include landscaping, outdoor seating and play areas.

Although a number of underutilized properties are mentioned, the huge parking lot by the Sears store in Sunvalley Mall is not. What is happening to this? Please know that every underutilized area should not be filled with a mix of housing an commercial. We need access to small businesses such as small produce stores, hardware stores, small restaurants, drug stores scattered throughout the residential areas for people to walk/bike to: Definitely not strip malls, but well landscaped with limited parking.

Before more housing is put in the Monument Blvd. area near Crossroads shopping center, the traffic needs to be addressed.

The City has included Program T, which addresses the City’s in-lieu fee and ensures that costs are equivalent to real cost of construction. The City uses these funds in support of affordable housing development.

Comments noted.

The City of Pleasant Hill is nearly built-out and vacant land appropriate for multifamily development appropriate is scarce. The City contains one low resource area, and lower-income units were not concentrated there. City staff, the GPAC, Planning Commission, and City Council worked diligently to find lower income sites that struck a balance between being dispersed throughout moderate and high resource areas of the city, and being located in proximity to transportation, jobs, goods, and services.

The City has adopted Objective Design Standards for residential development to ensure neighborhood compatibility. For information on the City’s energy conservation actions related to housing, see goals H-8 in the Policy Document.

The DVC parking lot, as well as the old JCPenney site have been included within the sites inventory.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 3 of 29 ends

Jack Prosek Received the email Notice yesterday evening for the Public Review of the November 2022 Draft version of the Housing Element portion of the General Plan Update for 2040. After a very brief scan over the 368 pages of documents, I already have a number of questions & comments, as follows.
page 4-1 - it would be helpful if these initial paragraphs included explicit references to the Housing "Needs Assessment" AND the "Policy Document".
page 4-3 This portion of the document starts with "The Introduction" whereas the Headers on the even numbered pages call it the "Policy Document" - confusing at best !
page 4-4 P. 4.2-1. - should this refer to the Housing Needs Assessment which starts on sheet # 39 ? Also note that it is rather confusing to have two sets of pages numbered 4-1 thru 4-38 in the same document package!! page 4-1 # 2 (sheet # 39) - where was the photo taken that appears on the cover of the Housing Needs Assessment ? I cannot connect it to any Pleasant Hill location; it looks more like something from Walnut Creek! page 4-103 - Table 4-22: City Residential Parking Requirements - anyone who participated in the multitude of reviews for the original housing proposed for the 401 Taylor site is well aware of the deficiencies in the current City Municipal Code for multiple single family home developments. Simply requiring a 2-car garage is insufficient for most homes, especially those with ADUs, & guest parking spaces are also needed on the streets nearby without having an overflow into the adjoining neighborhoods! Surveys of two mature neighborhoods revealed that the average was less than one vehicle in each 2-car garage since one stall was always occuppied by bicycles, yard equipment, general storage or other uses while homes of 3 or more bedrooms almost always have multiple vehicles. We also note that the County's design team provided an 18' minimum long 2-lane driveway for each of the homes as well as 17 guest parking spaces in the 34 house development (w/ 7 attached ADUs) at 1750 Oak Park in order to obtain City Approval for the small lot sizes!! page 4-115 - Table 4-26: Entitled or Approved Residential Projects - Application 18-0383 - this housing development is on the site of the old PH Branch Library (NOT the"Former Oak Park Elementary" School site). The obsolete Library buildings there were demolished (NOT an "abandoned public elementary school"). Can we take credit for the seven attached ADUs as well?? page 4-117 - Table 4-27: Pending Residential Projects - please clarify the meaning of "harb". Waiting to see how Habitat is going to meet all the City & other requirements as needed to build 7 units at 250 Cleaveland & 4 at 85 Woodsworth. . . . . pages 4-125, -126 & -127 - Figures 4-48, -49 & -50 - these maps are nearly impossible to read accurately at the scale that they were presented. The detail could be increased by 50% if they were shown in landscape format on 3 pages with 40% of the current vertical on each allowing a 10% overlap above & below the center sheet.
page 4-126 - Figure 4-49: Identified Sites by Type of Site - the large vacant lot on the south side of Buskirk (across from DSW) is not shown here; nor is the Mangini-Delu farm property on PH Road!! page 4-129 - Site A: DVC Overflow Parking Lot - despite multiple requests made to City Staff, we have NEVER seen any documentation on how the separate Community College District might be interested in developing this site!!! We also need to once again note that DVC has a very long history of allowing its student parking demands to overflow - totally flooding the surrounding neighborhoods with their vehicles. It is only during the Covid era that this parking lot has been underutilized ! Since this site is the obvious place to construct additional parking spaces to meet their needs, it is essential that this issue be resolved as part of any new development here. page 4-129 - Site A : DVC Overflow Parking Lot - given the intensity of the proposed allowable development, it is essential that the height limits also be addressed AT THISTIME - not some later date. This also applies to all other developments that are adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods. Otherwise, most of the home owners will not be able to appreciate the full impact of what is being proposed !!! page 4-129 - Site A: DVC Overflow Parking Lot - my recollection from all the previous public hearings regarding this property was that half (five acres) of the site were being proposed for development - how did that grow to SIX acres as shown in this Assessment? The City has adapted the format of the Housing Element for clarity. The documents have been published under separate cover, each with a description of the document and their relationship to each other.

Revisions to the Housing Element have been made based on the comments under “Minor corrections”
The City has revised page 4-115 accordingly.

Enforcing high parking standards can be a constraint to development, and particularly, affordable housing development.

By State law, affordable residential uses must now be allowed in office and commercial areas.

Height restrictions and other development standards are regulated by the zoning code. Following the General Plan and Housing Element Updates, the City will undertake a comprehensive zoning code update.

Development standards will be reviewed at that time.

Regarding the JCPenney site, the parking lot is underutilized, and has the potential for redevelopment. Most of the parking lot, including all parking to the north of Wells Fargo lies within the JC Penney parcel..

Redevelopment could include shared parking or other solutions, but these would be implemented at the discretion of the developers.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 4 of 29 ends

page 4-131 - Site B: JCPenney - the purple shading for this site continues to include the parking lots on the N&S sides of the existing Wells Fargo Bank building without which the building would be useless. This is a REPEAT comment!!! page 4-137 - Site E: Gregory Gardens Shopping Center - it would be sensible for the current residential properties that back up to this shopping center be included in the planned development considering that these are older homes& their quality of life would be seriously impacted - did the owners all reject the idea that they should be included?? pages 4-156 thru 4-159 - Table 4-44: Vacant Sites - why are the vacant property on the south side of Buskirk and the Mangini-Delu farm properties NOT included in this Table??
page 4-156 thru 4-159 - Table 4-44: Vacant Sites - since one of the overall planning objectives is to provide homes near JOBS, why would you add housing at a current PAO /Office site? Several other sites, such as 1900 & 1680 Oak Park, might also be more suitable for office or commercial development rather than additional housing!! page 4-159 - Table 4-44: Vacant Sites - are the "vacant" sites at 243 & 245 Gregory Lane actually the overflow parking lot that the City REQUIRED the Rec & Park District to build ten years ago as part of our new Senior Center building project? Are you now backtracking on that requirement??
Minor Corrections: we also noted several minor corrections that are needed in the text such as the reference to Site "H" on page 4-139 which shows Site "F". Also the mention of a business (Green Garden) that disappeared a year or two ago on page 4-137; given the requirements for Business Licenses & City Approvals for occupancy &signage, the City Staff should be fully aware of the current occupants at least as of 7-01- 2022.

I do not claim to have any particular expertise with the intricacies of the General Plan Update process . . . . . just noting the observations that I made while doing a quick Common Sense review!!
Bruce Irion, David
Blau, Annette
Gelinas, Shereen
Motarjemi
We are writing to submit questions and comments on Pleasant Hill’s Housing Element.

Implementation program R on Page 22 describes the implementation program for “missing middle housing”, described on page 2 as “multiple units compatible in scale and form to detached single family homes”. Yet the implementation program calls for revision of development standards including height restrictions, set-backs, and parking ratios. How will development be compatible in scale and form if it modifies the characteristics which define single family homes?
For Implementation program L, Flexible Parking Standards, can you provide more specifics of what is meant to “provide appropriate flexible parking requirements that allow shared use in locations being considered for higher-density housing development”? Our concern lies with parking spillover and traffic congestion that results from failure to provide sufficient parking.

We support implementation program KK, Residential Zoning, that discourages non-residential uses in residential zones. Commercial or mixeduse zones are the appropriate location for non-residential uses.

We would like to understand what is mean by Goal H-1 on page 9 which says “Encourage development at the maximum allowed density to increase the quantity and affordability of the city’s housing stock”. Every zoning and land use designation has a range of allowed densities.

While we understand the desire to increase the quantity and affordability of housing, this should be considered when zoning and land use designations are set.

To further layer Goal H-1 on top of this compromises the integrity of the zoning and land use designation process and associated public comment.

Related to Program L: This is current City practice. The City currently allows requests (and has also approved) for parking reductions for all types of projects within the City and will also consider non-traditional parking types (tandem, stacked, etc.). We have clarified this in the Program L.

Missing Middle housing types are compatible with single-family homes, but are unique in their own ways. Program R commits the City to evaluate development standards to ensure that development standards promote a mix of housing types.

In order to meet the current housing need, the City would like to encourage developers to use land efficiently, within the bounds of the zoning code.

Bruce Irion, David
Blau, Annette
Gelinas
We are writing in response to the answer we received on Goal H-1 (see bottom of email). While we understand that the City is trying to show every effort to meet their RHNA target in their Housing Element, Goal H-1 is superfluous and should be removed or at a minimum, modified.

The goal does not encourage developers to consider the most appropriate density for a development rather it urges development at the maximum allowed density. Further, because Goal H-1 would develop housing at the maximum allowed density as opposed to the average In order to meet the current housing need, the City would like to encourage developers to use land efficiently, within the bounds of the zoning code.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 5 of 29 ends

density, it understates new housing numbers 24% without any credit having been taken in the City's Housing Element (see table below).

Hence the goal is unnecessary, pointless, and should be removed or modified.

The GPAC draft from which this Housing Element was taken read as follows:

The original wording (in red) was "Encourage higher density housing". This suggests the City carefully consider higher-density housing in Land Use and Zoning to encourage the quantity and affordability of the city's housing stock. This is in full alignment with state housing policy and the RHNA target. The revised wording (in blue), "Encourage development at the maximum allowed density" implies no such careful consideration. Rather it suggests City policy is to encourage development at the maximum allowed density without regard to what is appropriate for a site. Surely this was not the GPAC's intent!!! We therefore encourage removal of Goal H-1 or at a minimum returning it to say "Encourage higher-density housing to increase the quantity and affordability of the city's housing stock".

OUR QUESTION:

We would like to understand what is meant by Goal H-1 on page 9 which says “Encourage development at the maximum allowed density to increase the quantity and affordability of the city’s housing stock”. Every zoning and land use designation has a range of allowed densities.

While we understand the desire to increase the quantity and affordability of housing, this should be considered when zoning and land use designations are set. To further layer Goal H-1 on top of this compromises the integrity of the zoning and land use designation process and associated public comment.

CITY RESPONSE:

The goal, supported by the GPAC, was, each land use designation has a minimum and maximum density range. This goal is to realize development towards the upper end of the allowed density range. This does not require development at the top, but it does encourage thoughtful thinking as development is proposed and where possible, look to develop towards the higher end of the density range as that usually results in more affordable housing.

Rich and Julie
Golinski
I am writing to provide comment on Pleasant Hill’s Housing Element.

The original wording of Goal H-1.5 was "Encourage higher density housing". This suggests the City carefully consider higher-density housing in Land Use and Zoning to encourage the quantity and affordability of the city's housing stock. This is in full alignment with state housing policy.

The revised wording, "Encourage development at the maximum allowed density" implies no such careful consideration. Rather it suggests In order to meet the current housing need, the City would like to encourage developers to use land efficiently, within the bounds of the zoning code.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 6 of 29 ends

City policy is to encourage development at the maximum allowed density for all development without regard to what is appropriate for a site.

Surely this was not the GPAC's intent!!!
I therefore encourage removal of Goal H-1.5 or at a minimum returning it to say "Encourage higher-density housing to increase the quantity and affordability of the city's housing stock".

Additionally, several sections in the Housing Element encourage revisions to housing policy and code requirements to facilitate more affordable housing. While the intent is laudable, I encourage the city to proceed carefully especially where parking is concerned. Policy and code set minimum requirements which cannot enforceably be pulled back. Failure to provide adequate parking leads to traffic congestion and blight.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide my comment
Anamarie Courey I am writing to provide comment on Pleasant Hill’s Housing Element.

The revised wording, "Encourage development at the maximum allowed density" implies no such careful consideration. Rather it suggests City policy is to encourage development at the maximum allowed density for all development without regard to what is appropriate for a site.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide my comment
In order to meet the current housing need, the City would like to encourage developers to use land efficiently, within the bounds of the zoning code.

Maxwell Davis
and the 2500
members of East
Bay for Everyone
East Bay for Everyone is a membership organization advocating for housing, transit, tenant rights, and long-term planning in the East Bay. We write to provide comments on the City of Pleasant Hill’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Public Review Draft.

Summary of feedback:
● Pleasant Hill did not plan for housing in line with AFFH and the proposed sites will exacerbate systemic inequality in the region.
● The programs in this draft will not enable more housing production unless revised ● The city must rezone more land for multifamily development throughout the city and reduce barriers to development.
● Site specific feedback
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing concerns:

The draft states: “sites identified for lower income housing are spatially distributed throughout Pleasant Hill and are not concentrated in lower resource areas.” However, the graphic (Figure A-33, copied below) shows the opposite, with Low Income sites concentrated in the lowest resource areas available and along large arterial roads. Furthermore, while the majority of the census tracts in the city are deemed racially concentrated areas of affluence (RCAA) by HCD, the draft makes no mention of RCAA or how the site locations will reduce or The City has added the following action to Program UU:
• The City shall require all developments within 1,000 feet of a freeway to include air filtration methods that meet MERV 13 standards or higher.

The Mangini-Delu site is a General Plan focus area that is schedule for redesignation through the current General Plan Update to include higher

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 7 of 29 ends

exacerbate the inequities of the region. The city should make broader rezonings to enable multifamily developments across the city, not just along commercial corridors in the lowest resourced areas of the city.

Increased density in single family zones
It's legal to construct buildings that are the size of duplexes or triplexes but only if they are for a single family. For example, 256 Douglas Lane is a recently constructed 5000 square foot house with 6 bedrooms and 4 bathrooms that just sold for $1.88 million, a price that is out of range of most families.
density development. The site was included in the previous two Housing Element and has not developed.

The City has recently approved a 100 percent affordable senior housing project and has approved several affordable units through the inclusionary ordinance. As shown in the sites inventory, the City currently has 106 lower-income units in the pipeline, all of which will be certified for occupancy within the planning period.

Following the General Plan and Housing Element Updates, the City will undertake a comprehensive zoning code update. Development standards, such as parking requirements, will be reviewed at that time, as well as through implementation of Program R, through which the City will consider comments related to increased density in single-family zones.

The City notified property-owners of all Housing Opportunity Sites and removed parcels the City deemed as infeasible for redevelopment based on owners’ doubt or a lack of interest in redevelopment during the upcoming 6
th Cycle planning period. Some owners, such as Diablo Valley College met with the City to voice their support. Some owners chose not to object. For all lower-income sites, the City has provided additional evidence of feasibility including building age and improvement/land value ratio, consistent with the direction provided in HCD’s Sites Inventory Guidebook.

Sites in southwest Pleasant Hill were considered by the GPAC, but were not considered as feasible for lower-income redevelopment in the upcoming 6th Cycle planning period.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 8 of 29 ends

If it is legal to build a 5000 square foot house for one family it should also be legal to build two 2000 square foot homes or three 1300 square foot homes in the same building envelope throughout Pleasant Hill. Consider amending zoning to permit 5 DUA on all parcels. This can be achieved without an EIR thanks to Senate Bill 10.

Programs are insufficient
Given that Pleasant Hill has built zero Low Income Housing in the last 7 years, the programs for this element must be ambitious. However, the programs in the draft largely begin with language like “The City shall continue to…” or “The city shall monitor…” which are either continuations of existing policies or have no clear goals other than “studying” and “monitoring” existing city policy.

These programs should be modified to have concrete objectives and measurable and trackable results and be ambitious enough to spur new housing production.

In HCD's determination letter to Lafayette, this type of language was deemed insufficient ("Programs containing unclear language (e.g., “consider”; “review”, “conduct a study to assess” “create a plan”, “evaluate impacts” etc.) should be amended to include specific and measurable actions that will lead to actual housing outcomes") , 1 and should instead be replaced with language that relates to actual concrete goals, for example, the production of low-income housing, or reduction of housing costs below some target number.

The city plans to add new mixed-use zones (described as Mixed Use Neighborhood, Mixed-Use, Mixed-Use High-Density, and Mixed-Use Very High-Density in Program F) and references those zones in multiple programs and in the sites inventory, but the city has not provided clear details on those zoning categories and the requirements in the zoning, for example heights, setbacks, or required parking minimums.

Consider zero front setback to permit shade on the sidewalk and a minimum pedestrian travel time, and no more than 5 feet on other sides.

Heights should be demonstrated to accommodate the highest allowable density in comparison projects in nearby cities.

Freeways
A large number of apartments in Pleasant Hill are right next to the freeway and a preponderance of sites in the Sites Inventory are concentrated relatively close to the freeway. Pollution from freeways leads to higher levels of stress, respiratory problems, and leads to issues such as low birth weight infants. Students who go to schools near the freeway perform worse on standardized tests than students who don't.

Consider adding a program to upgrade the air filters in existing buildings near the freeway to a MERV 13 standard, subsidize the purchase of air purifiers in apartments and schools, and educate residents about health risks and ventilation best practices.

Analysis of Constraints is insufficient
The draft Housing Element does not take a serious look at the constraints to housing development in Pleasant Hill and states “There are no significant undue or uncommon governmental constraints to housing in Pleasant Hill.” which seems unlikely considering the lack of recent development in the city.

Lack of land zoned for multi-family in High Resource areas and the need for by-right development Currently, Pleasant Hill does not have much land zoned for multi-family within its High Resource and Highest Resource areas. The areas that are zoned for multifamily housing are largely located adjacent to I-680. This is not aligned with AFFH, which requires distribution of housing income levels throughout the community.

Rezoning more land for multi-family housing would be a strong commitment to Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

Earlier drafts of the Housing Element identified Mangini Farm, a large undeveloped area in the Highest Resource area of Pleasant Hill and the removal of this site over large public backlash shows that Pleasant Hill will have an uphill battle to undo the historical patterns of racial segregation that exist in the region, and to meet its commitments to affirmatively furthering fair housing. This NIMBY opposition is a nongovernmental constraint that the city should overcome by allowing by-right development of multifamily sites in the inventory. We urge you to add a program to this effect.

Reduce minimum lot sizes. Pleasant Hill’s minimum lot sizes are very large, even for the region. The smallest minimum lot size is 6,000 square feet with most of the city zoned for 7,000 and 10,000 square foot minimum lot sizes. Much more housing could be built if lot sizes were

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 9 of 29 ends

reduced to 2-3,000 square feet. See for example Gray and Furth, "Do Minimum-Lot-Size Regulations Limit Housing Supply in Texas?" suggesting that lot sizes in this range frequently serve as a constraint to new development. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3381173 Landscaping requirement
Pleasant Hill’s “Minimum Site Landscaping” requirements are uniquely large and constrain the developable area for multifamily housing.

Please remove or reduce these requirements, especially to help make lower income housing feasible to construct.

Increase FARs, building heights and eliminate setbacks in current multifamily zones Setbacks decrease the amount of buildable area, increase the distance pedestrians need to travel to reach their destination, and reduce the sidewalk shadow on hot days. Pleasant Hill’s set-backs requirements are larger than other high income areas in the region. To encourage development and non-car trip modes, Pleasant Hill should increase FARs and amend setbacks to make development more feasible and increase pedestrian comfort.

Remove parking requirements from multifamily developments. Given Pleasant Hill's strict height requirements, parking will likely need to be constructed underground, which can cost $90,000 per space, a cost which gets passed on directly to developers and buyers, who need to take out larger loans and interest payments. Additionally, in the sites inventory the draft specifically mentions that Site B, Site C, Site D, Site F, Site G, Site H, Site L and Site I are considered underutilized specifically because of their large parking lots. Therefore it is clear that Pleasant Hill is “overparked” and the parking requirements do not align with real demands.

Parking minimums also encourage people to buy cars and drive cars, which crowd out other trip modes like walking, cycling or taking the bus.

A key goal for Pleasant Hill's General Plan 2040 is to increase the share of non-car trip modes. Parking minimums impede progress toward this goal by subsidizing car usage.

Further, because parking must be cited on the ground floor or underground, high parking minimums make it difficult to offer ground floor retail, which is not only a more beneficial use of ground floor space than car parking, but contributes sales tax revenue that can be used for all sorts of other pro-social programs.

Pleasant Hill must study the impact of parking on development or remove parking minimums, leaving it up to the developer to decide the right balance of parking and housing at a site. Please consider lowering parking minimums to 1 space per unit, with no guest parking, throughout the entire city.

Site specific feedback:

For all non-vacant sites:
● Please provide a copy of a letter from the property owners stating they are open to developing the site at the prescribed density ● Please provide evidence that the existing leases will end in time for development in this housing element cycle Site A: DVC Overflow parking lot
● Please provide a copy of a letter from DVC stating they are open to developing the site at the prescribed density.

Site B: Former JC Pennys
● Consider shifting density from 40-70 to 70-100 du/acre to increase the feasibility of development, even these higher densities can still be achieved with 5-7 stories of wood frame over concrete and wouldn’t require moving to more expensive concrete or steel construction, and thus would permit optimal development of those sites
● Consider adding the Wells Fargo, Burger King and pediatric dentistry at the corners of the site inventory after consultation with the property owners.

Site H: Monument Triangle

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 10 of 29 ends

● Consider shifting density from 40-70 to 70-100 du/acre to increase the feasibility of development. These higher densities can still be achieved with 5-7 stories of wood frame over concrete and wouldn’t require moving to more expensive concrete or steel construction, and thus would permit optimal development of those sites.

Mangini Farm
● We would like to see this site included in the Sites Inventory with a minimum permitted density of 30 DUA, which would permit the development of affordable housing on this site.

Southwest Pleasant Hill
● In general, the Sites Inventory is concentrated in the north and east of Pleasant Hill which are, comparatively speaking, the lower income parts of Pleasant Hill. All of the sites accommodating lower income housing are in the north and east parts of the city. Please increase the zoning and add additional sites in the southwest area of the city, which is also the closest area of the city to the BART station.

We look forward to continuing to engage with the City of Pleasant Hill in the Housing Element process.

Peter Symonds I have the following comment on the housing element as currently drafted.

First, the introductory sections and the needs assessment fail to discuss this issue regionally. There are substantial negative impacts from the current unmet need regionally including traffic from cars passing through our town from residences far afield, and our inability to find key services due to lack of workers. The true need for housing far exceeds what is identified in the needs assessment; and the latent demand is clear due to the consistently high cost of housing. Failing to fix the true demand issue will ensure that Pleasant Hill changes in character as our children will be unable to afford to live in the city.

Table 4-1 of the needs assessment hints at this but does not fully articulate the issue: Pleasant hill grows as fast as the available housing stock; and the available housing stock has grown less than 10% in 30 years. When my kids or the neighbors kids want to live on their own they’ll have no where to live in pleasant hill because the housing stock has fallen far behind the growth rate of California and of the average family. Our kids love the community we have in pleasant hill and it’s a shame they won’t be able to continue on with that. The failure to allow for sufficient growth will negatively impact schools, PHBA, soccer clubs, Boy Scout Troops and everything that makes Pleasant Hill special.

Comment noted.

Wendy Gollop
and Alan Bade
Dear Planning Commissioners and City Council people.

I want to comment on the parking requirements in the Housing Element of the General Plan. I think that it is both ridiculous and very simplistic to think that by eliminating parking and parking requirements, people are not going to own cars. There is much more to life than commuting to work. Most people in suburban areas have at least two vehicles. An informal survey around Poets Corner showed that many houses have 3 or more vehicles at their house. Keats Cir has at least two houses with 4 and 5 vehicles and this is not uncommon. I think that the goal of the housing element is to increase housing for moderate and lower income residents. Yet these are the people who probably need more than 1 vehicle per household the most. A lot of these workers are blue collar and have work trucks or company vehicles that they park at home. Others are in construction and need big trucks to haul supplies and drive to various job sites. Some workers have more than one job in a day, and it would make it tough for them to get to these jobs without a vehicle. Also, not everyone works at a business office on a public transit line. I used to work at the Martinez Health Clinic on Alhambra Avenue Martinez, about 6 miles away. It would have taken me 1 hour and 40 minutes to take public transit and I would have arrived after 8 AM. That does not take into account walking time to the bus stop. Alan worked at a cabinet shop over an hour's drive away and it was impossible to get to it on public transit. A neighbor works in Public health and has to commute to different centers throughout the day. I do not think that electric scooters would work in that situation.

People have elderly family members with mobility issues that need transportation to doctors and events, People take vehicles on vacation and to access day trips for recreation to all of our wonderful open spaces. Eliminating parking spots will not change this. The only way people are going to almost completely rely on public transit is if it is cheap, convenient and reliable. Older neighborhoods in Pleasant Hill have streets too narrow to accommodate buses running every half hour for people to hop on to run errands. I doubt that people are going to wait Enforcing high parking standards can be a constraint to development, and particularly, affordable housing development. In an effort to reduce reliance on autos, the City considered proximity to transit opportunities was considered in the selection of higher-density sites in the sites inventory.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 11 of 29 ends

over 1 hour for public transit just to run to the drug store or to try and lug a week's worth of groceries home on a bus. Parents use vehicles to pick kids up from school and take them to extra curricular activities or day care. Traffic around schools attests to the use of cars for transportation. People living in apartments do not seem less likely to live without a vehicle either. If proof is needed, just drive by some of the apartment complexes in Pleasant Hill and note the abundance of cars parked on the street.

Living near the Oak Park Shopping Center we are inundated with street parkers to the establishments. I do not see very many people using bikes, scooters or other alternative means of transportation to these venues. Lack of parking only inconveniences the local residences by having to endure constant on-street parking as well as deterring patrons from going to the other local businesses because of lack of parking. I almost never do business in Walnut Creek because of traffic and parking. I do not want to see Pleasant Hill become like Walnut Creek.

Parking is essential to a well functioning City and a prosperous business community.

Minimizing parking requirements also conflicts with electric vehicle charging goals. Charging EVs takes more time than filling a tank with gas, and it is reasonable to expect that residents in new multi-family housing in mixed-use developments will need to charge their vehicles.

I hope that you will take these comments into consideration in the new housing element.

Thank You
Wendy Gollop Dear City Council and Planning Commission
I want to comment on setbacks for housing developments and commercial areas.

I think that it is important to have setbacks and planting areas around development to grow trees and other living vegetation. Trees and landscaping soften a city's hardscape and makes it more livable. Trees clean the air and reduce the heat island effect. A new study of the Portland area showed that the parts of the city with more trees encouraged people to walk more and resulted in a healthier and less stressed population. Trees in parking lots large enough to produce shade are much sought after on hot summer days. Planting strips also help with water runoff and bioswales help to clean water before it enters the local waterways. These are all things that a city can do to make a city much more liveable and help to mitigate global warming and help our environment. Many argue for setbacks to be minimum, but this conflicts with other General Plan goals. Please consider keeping setbacks and planting areas to provide for a quality urban environment.

Following the General Plan and Housing Element Updates, the City will undertake a comprehensive zoning code update. Development standards will be reviewed at that time.

Wendy Gollop
and Alan Bade
Dear Planning Commission and City Council
I would like to request that heights for proposed densities be included in the discussion of the housing elements. This will give people a better idea of what is proposed. If, for example, 70 to 100 units per acre are the proposed zoning for a parcel, then a maximum possible height should be included in the description. Consequently, consideration should be given to how this would shade adjacent lower rise buildings nearby. Many people are adding expensive solar power panels systems to their properties and to have them shaded when a proposed new building is built would negate the considerable investment in the solar system.

High Density mixed use development next to single family housing needs to be carefully integrated into the neighborhood. Operational rules will make these developments much more successful. Issues such as noise from maintenance, deliveries and patrons can cause conflict.

Odors from restaurants as well as overflow parking is another. Truck traffic and idling next to single family homes needs to be addressed.

Some roads in older neighborhoods are not as wide as current code would require and this can be a problem with large semi delivery trucks and pedestrians in the area. There needs to be a way to deal with these issues and not just to pretend that they will not come up. It is important to remember that how these developments are implemented greatly influences their livability and success. Policies need to address delivery schedules, idling truck noise and air pollution, and parking, among others.

Housing Element H5 and H6 have goals to maintain and enhance the quality of Pleasant Hill neighborhoods so that they retain their value as they mature. It also has goals to retain existing housing. Yet the General Plan and the housing element wants to rezone entire neighborhoods. For example, focus area 5 is proposed to be rezoned from single family to mixed use 12 to 40 units per acre. This is in Following the General Plan and Housing Element Updates, the City will undertake a comprehensive zoning code update. Development standards will be reviewed at that time.

The City needs to provide capacity for high-density residential uses to meet State-mandated target of 1,803 units.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 12 of 29 ends

conflict with those goals. Rezoning houses backing up to Contra Costa blvd makes sense, but the whole area does not need to be zoned with the new density. These houses are much more affordable than the new single family houses that are currently being built or are zoned to be built in other areas. Building high rise buildings and mixed use in the middle of single family houses will be very disruptive to the neighborhood and is not compatible with the goals in the general plan to preserve the character of Pleasant Hill and its neighborhoods.

Thank you
Wendy Gollop
and Alan Bade
Dear City Council and Planning Commission.

The new housing Element is proposing much denser development than is present today. One of the goals in the General Plan is a goal of 3 acres of open space/parkland per 1000 residents. I do not see a plan in place to be able to achieve this goal. Most areas of the city already do not meet this goal. With the addition of much higher density, this ratio will only get worse. There needs to be a plan to achieve these goals or they will not be met. Please look for areas that could meet this goal and consider them as you inventory building sites in the housing element. I know that new developments need to contribute to a parkland dedication fund to support this goal. I think that at the very least, there should be some pathway in the housing element or the General Plan to achieve the goal of 3 acres per 1000 residents. If areas are not identified as possible places to add to parks or open space while listing housing sites, it will not be possible. It will just be an item that makes the General Plan sound good but really will not have any value.

Thank You
Comment noted.

Marshall Lewis Hello,
I have several major concerns with the draft Housing Element. First and foremost, I want to echo the concerns voiced by East Bay for Everyone in their letter[1] to the city that the draft HE may not comply with applicable housing law. In particular, the concentration of lowincome sites near 680 may not be consistent with the requirement to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing, and the language in the programs section likely needs significant strengthening in order to relate to specific, concrete, achievable goals. Failure to have a compliant, HCDapproved Housing Element by the January 31, 2023 deadline means that the city will become ineligible for certain state funds and will lose control over many of its land use decisions as the builder’s remedy becomes available to developers.

Beyond the compliance issues, we currently face a housing crisis and a climate crisis, and the draft HE does not rise to either of these challenges. Scientists agree that transportation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions, and that new suburban sprawl has serious ramifications for the fight against climate change. On the other hand, dense infill projects near transit reduce vehicle miles traveled and the associated emissions.[2] Pleasant Hill is an already built-up area near several BART stations and job centers, and is thus a clear location for densification. Every housing unit that we fail to build is a unit that gets built in Tracy or Patterson, with the associated long commutes and high greenhouse gas emissions.

Even setting aside the climate implications, Pleasant Hill needs both a greater amount of housing and a greater diversity of housing types.

California’s housing crisis is well-known and extensively documented. As a 2015 LAO report summarized:
“First and foremost, far less housing has been built in California’s coastal areas than people demand. As a result, households bid up the cost of housing in coastal regions. In addition, some of the unmet demand to live in coastal areas spills over into inland California, driving up prices there too. Second, land in California’s coastal areas is expensive. Homebuilders typically respond to high land costs by building more housing units on each plot of land they develop, effectively spreading the high land costs among more units. In California’s coastal metros, however, this response has been limited, meaning higher land costs have translated more directly into higher housing costs.”[3] Some cities have taken aggressive steps to address this problem. For example, Emeryville’s Housing Element targeted 150% of RHNA and identified capacity for 203% of RHNA.[4] Pleasant Hill’s Housing Element, on the other hand, only identifies capacity for 118% of RHNA, just 5% beyond the legally required buffer. It’s unfortunate that we have set such unambitious goals.

The City has added the following action to Program Q: Place-based Density Increases:
• The City shall evaluate and consider adoption of SB 10 provisions that allow for up to ten units on urban-infill sites in transit rich areas.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 13 of 29 ends

It’s also important to plan for a variety of housing types. Pleasant Hill overwhelmingly consists of single-family homes, which are wonderful for raising families, but are not well-suited to young adults. Someone who is just entering the workforce does not need (and cannot afford) a 2,000 sq ft single family home. Instead, young adults typically live in apartments, of which Pleasant Hill has a serious shortage. When I was young, I ended up being displaced from the city because there were so few housing options for young single adults like me. I ultimately moved back to the city after getting married, but most of the members of my generation who left did not return. This represents a serious failing of public policy, and I hope that we will learn from our mistakes and avoid subjecting the next generation to similar experiences.

The single best way to address the above problems (especially given the limited amount of time before the 1/31/2023 deadline) is to take advantage of SB10, which supports the development of small-scale multi-family units. Units of this type are already found tucked away in unobtrusive corners of the Diablo Valley, and integrate seamlessly and unremarkably with the surrounding single-family homes. My old neighborhood of Poet’s Corner would be well-suited to this kind of development because of its proximity to both Pleasant Hill and Lafayette BART stations, and also because its existing architectural diversity makes it easier for new designs to blend in. My current neighborhood near Morello would also be well-suited because of its proximity to DVC, which results in strong demand for single-occupant units. (We also have some particularly excellent restaurants, which are more likely to remain in business if they have more customers nearby.) I encourage Council to implement SB10 and make any required zoning changes across the whole city. Council should also identify additional sites that aren’t concentrated so close to the freeway,[5] increase the density for the sites that have been identified, and strengthen the language in the programs section. By promoting the development of new multi-family projects, the city will move towards a healthier mix of single and multi-family homes, reduce the displacement pressures on the city’s young people, and do more to address the housing and climate crises that we face.

Thank you,
Planning
Commission
Khalfin
Related to Program CC: Priority Processing (for special needs, senior, and workforce housing). Please move the timeframe up. The City has revised the timeline for review of processing procedures to “by 2025” such that revisions to procedures happen within the comprehensive zoning code update.

Councilmembers
Noack and
Carlson
Minor revisions requested for clarity:
▪ Policy 5.1: High Quality Neighborhoods
• Provide additional detail that maintaining and enhancing the quality of neighborhoods is accomplished through high quality designed projects, ensuring new development respects, and is designed, while taking into consideration surrounding uses, and through maintenance and improvement of public infrastructure such as roads and public spaces. ▪ Program H-2.6: revise title to, “ZoneAllow for Lot Splits and ADUs” ▪ Page 79 of the staff report:
• Clarify that the City is proposing no rezoning on the Mangini-Delu site in the Housing Element, but that the Preferred Land Use Alternative (General Plan Update) does include a new land use designation. ▪ Page 82 of the staff report:
• Clarify that much of Fund 34 is already committed to various affordable housing projects within the City. ▪ Page 84 of the staff report:
▪ Clarify that the 81 low-income units identified serving those with development disabilities are lower-income senior units.

The City has revised the Housing Element accordingly.

East Bay
Municipal Utility
District
See scanned document included below. Comments noted and passed to the General Plan Update Team working on the Environmental Impact Report.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) This page is intentionally left blank.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 14 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 15 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 16 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 17 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 18 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 19 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 20 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 21 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 22 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 23 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 24 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 25 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 26 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 27 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 28 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Comments on Public Review Draft Housing Element
December 2022

Page 29 of 29 ends

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA)

4. Housing Element
Certified November 22, 2023 D-1
Appendix D: Public Response to the Revised HCD Draft
The City held public hearings with the Planning Commission (May 3, 2023) and City Council (May 18, 2023) to consider the Revised HCD Draft. These meetings generated significant community interest and concern, primarily focused on the inclusion of the Morello Terraces and Paso Nogal sites within the Housing Element. This appendix summarizes the concerns raised by the more 400 emails/comment letters and more than 100 in-person comments made during the hearings. All comments have been sent to the California Department of Housing and Community Development along with the Adopted Housing Element.

The bullets below summarize comments in opposition to the proposed rezoning of the Morello Terraces and Paso Nogal sites.
▪ Morello and Paso Nogal are not high resource areas as defined by the community, relative to access to services, employment, and alternative modes of transportation; ▪ The roadways in the area are already unsafe and dangerous, adding more traffic to the area will exacerbate these conditions;
▪ Currently, traffic is bad, especially during peak travel periods; ▪ There is a severe lack of parking;
▪ Not opposed to low-income housing, but opposed to the rezonings of these sites; ▪ The site is not conducive for development and would require too much grading which degrades the surrounding environment;
▪ Development on these sites affects open space assets in the area; ▪ The proposed density (30-40 du/ac) is too high and allows too many units for such a small site;
▪ The site is not conducive for development based on soil stability and history of geological impacts;
▪ The selection of this site will have negative impacts to wildlife; ▪ Development should shift back to areas with surrounding employment (i.e., JC Penney and Contra Costa Boulevard areas);
▪ Access to these sites is limited and increases safety issues; ▪ High density housing is not compatible with the surrounding low-density neighborhood; ▪ Increasing density on vacant parcels near single-family homes will negatively impact property values in the neighborhood.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Certified | Needs Assessment
D-2 Certified November 22, 2023
While the vast majority of these comments were in opposition to the inclusion of the Morello Terraces and Paso Nogal sites, a handful of in-person comments and a few letters supported their inclusion or the need to provide affordable housing generally. These comments are summarized below.
▪ Affordable housing is needed to address the housing crisis. ▪ Affordable housing is needed throughout the city.
▪ Neighborhood opposition is a constraint to the development of affordable housing in Pleasant Hill. Please note, this comment was sent directly to HCD and a copy was provided to the City.

Following the Planning Commission hearing, the City re-evaluated vacant sites within city limits, however no other vacant sites were identified that meet HCD’s criteria for lower-income capacity to meet the RHNA due to small parcel size (less than 0.5 acres) or issues related to accessibility, and location in flood zone areas. The City Council considered all comments received and discussed options at the adoption hearing on May 18, 2023. Although the Council agreed that the Morello Terraces and Paso Nogal sites have challenges, without additional vacant parcels to consider, the City has no alternative options to fully address HCD comments, which require that less than 50 percent of the lower-income RHNA is provided through nonvacant (underutilized) sites. However, despite changes to income assumptions in the sites inventory of the Housing Element, the Council supported additional land use changes included in the General Plan Land Use Element that redesignate all General Plan focus areas to high density mixed use, including DVC overflow parking lot and nonvacant sites along major transportation corridors. These areas include a minimum density of at least 40 dwelling units per acre and the City will work to incentivize production of affordable housing on these sites through the Housing Element planning period. The City Council adopted both the Housing Element and General Plan, without changes to the Land Use Element or Housing Element.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA)

4. Housing Element
Certified November 22, 2023 E-1
Appendix E: Public Response to the Revised Adopted
Housing Element
Following adoption of the Housing Element on May 18, 2023, the City submitted the Adopted Housing Element to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for 60-day review. On July 31, 2023, the City received a comment letter from HCD indicating the remaining revisions needed to achieve certification and full compliance with State law.

The City revised the Adopted Housing Element to respond to each of HCD's comments and held a study session with the City Council to review and discuss the revisions. Following the study session, the City posted the Revised Adopted Housing Element for a 7-day public review, as required by State law.

The City received 11 comments, both prior to the City Council study session and during the 7-day review period. This Appendix summarizes comments received and the City’s responses. Please note, all comments have been sent to the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

Comment:

The Housing Element should commit the City to revising land use controls to overcome constraints, including the promotion of missing middle housing types.

Response:

The City is currently undertaking a Zoning Code Update that is working to further quantify and overcome constraints. The City is committed, through Housing Element Program H, to complete the Update by 2026 and to remove constraints to residential development related to height, lot coverage, parking, and setbacks along scenic routes. Additionally, Program R, commits the City to further missing middle housing types by adding new mixed-use zones and evaluating and revising development standards such as minimum lot sizes; setback, lot coverage and building height restrictions; and required parking ratios to allow for missing middle housing types, particularly on vacant sites in high opportunity, low-density areas.

Comment:

The City should include programs that specifically address constraints related to fees.

Response:

The City understands the potential constraints imposed by both development and impact fees. The City works diligently to ensure that development fees are not more than the actual costs of processing applications. Additionally, the largest fees imposed on new projects are water connection fees that are outside of the City’s control. Further, the City has included a number of programs that work to overcome constraints related to fees for affordable housing, including:
• Program P commits the City to adopting incentives for ADU development. In implementing this program, the City will consider deferred or waived fees, or capping total fees. The City will implement incentives for ADU development within the Zoning Code Update currently underway.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Certified | Needs Assessment
E-2 Certified November 22, 2023
• Program T commits the City to amend the Inclusionary Housing ordinance to update in-lieu fees to reflect real costs of developing affordable housing. • Program Z commits the City to providing $100,000 to support redevelopment projects through direct-financing or indirect means, such as waived fees. • The City’s Lot Consolidation Ordinance currently provides reduced fees as an incentive to encourage lot consolidations. Program DD commits the City to revise the Lot Consolidation Ordinance to update incentives, including reduced fees. • Program FF commits the City to adopt incentives to encourage affordable multi-unit projects in low-density higher resources areas, and identifies reduced, waived, or deferred development fees as a potential incentive. The City will implement incentives within the Zoning Code Update currently underway.
• Program JJ commits the city to pay 100 percent of the application processing fees for development in which five percent of the units are affordable to extremely low-income households.
• Program EEE commits the City to incentivize development on the Morello and Paso Nogal vacant sites. The program specifies that the City shall identify funding to help offset costs of grading for 100 percent affordable developments on these sites, with a goal of providing $100,000 through direct funding or reductions to fees or permit processing costs.

Comment:

The sites inventory relies solely on two vacant sites for all of Pleasant Hills’ new low-income housing, setting aside accessory dwelling units and developments already permitted.

Response:

This comment is incorrect. As shown in the Sites Inventory in the Adopted Housing Element, the City has provided capacity for just over half of the lower-income RHNA through the combination of pending and approved projects, ADUs, and vacant sites. This change was made at HCD’s request.

The remaining lower-income capacity is provided through underutilized housing opportunity sites, and these sites are focused primarily in higher resourced areas and/or racially concentrated areas of affluence, as requested by HCD.

Additionally, while the revised Housing Element includes two new vacant lower-income sites, the City is still committed to rezoning the underutilized lower-income housing opportunity sites previously identified in the HCD Review Draft to mixed use high density (40-70 du/ac). Although these underutilized sites have appropriate size and density to continue be counted as lowerincome capacity, many were conservatively assumed toward moderate or above-moderate RHNA capacity in the Adopted Housing Element. In short, the two new vacant sites simply add to the City’s lower-income capacity.

Comment:

The slope percentage for the Morello and Paso Nogal sites are based on google earth, but other sources show steeper average slopes.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA)

4. Housing Element
Certified November 22, 2023 E-3
Response:

The City has updated the Housing Element to identify the range of data available related to the estimated slope of the Paso Nogal site. Regarding the Morello Terraces site, public comments identified a County data source that estimates a slope of more than 35 percent, however, City staff reviewed the source of the data and determined that the estimate slope from this information was approximately 25%, which is more than the google earth data (20%). The City is including this additional information as it is derived from a known County data source.

Additionally, in response to the constraints imposed by slopes on these sites, the City has committed through Program EEE to:
• revise development standards related to grading, building height, and density on these sites to ensure that maximum densities allowed under the multiple family high density residential (MRH) zone are achievable without necessitating a variance, conditional use permit, or discretionary action;
• adopt incentives to encourage the development of 100 percent affordable projects on sloped sites;
• seek partnerships with affordable housing developers and/or nonprofit agencies in pursuit of Federal and State grant funding, tax credits, or other financing to benefit 100 percent affordable projects on these sites; and
• identify funding to help offset costs of grading for 100 percent affordable developments on these sites, with a goal of providing $100,000 through direct funding or reductions to fees or permit processing costs.

Finally, as documented in the Sites Inventory, the following Housing Element programs encourage/incentivize affordable development on these sites:
• Program L commits the City to providing flexible parking standards for affordable housing. • Program M commits the City to providing streamlined ministerial review to affordable housing developments.
• Program S commits the City to allowing additional density bonuses to 100 percent affordable developments.
• Program EE commits the City to adopting incentives to encourage development on housing opportunity sites and vacant lower-income sites, potentially including, assistance with entitlement processing, flexible development standards, streamlined processing for affordable housing projects, and financial support when available. Incentives will be applied to projects incorporating a minimum of 20 percent of units affordable to lowerincome households. • Program FF commits the City to adopt additional incentives to encourage affordable multiunit projects in highest opportunity areas, high opportunity areas, and low-density moderate opportunity areas where fair housing issues are less concentrated. The Morello

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) Certified | Needs Assessment
E-4 Certified November 22, 2023
Terraces and Paso Nogal sites are in areas that quality for all incentives under this program.
• Program JJ commits the City to providing financial incentives to developments in which five percent of units are affordable to ELI households. These incentives would apply to this site, if the affordability criteria is met.

Comment:

Realistic capacity calculations for Site A have used varying acreage, initially stated at five acres, then increased to seven acres.

Response:

The City’s realistic capacity calculation for Site A has always been a conservative estimation that includes less than the total acreage of the site. Through early engagement efforts, the City discussed a realistic capacity for the site with the public and, based on public input, identified a realistic capacity of 350 units, which has remained consistent throughout the Housing Element Update. The acreage associated with this realistic capacity assumption was initially based on the minimum density allowed in the zone, however, due to HCD requirements for making this calculation, the City provided a deeper analysis that uses maximum density and then reduces capacity based on land use controls, development trends, and land use mix. This analysis, guided by HCD’s sites inventory guidebook, indicated that seven of the ten acres would be required to be considered in order to reach the 350 unit realistic capacity identified with public input. While the ten-acre site can accommodate more than 700 units under the proposed zoning (Mixed Use Very High Density, 70-100 du/ac), a realistic capacity of 350 units on seven acres remains a conservative estimation of capacity toward the RHNA consistent with early discussions with the public.

Comment:

Pleasant Hill must adopt its final housing element to achieve substantial compliance.

Response:

Based on HCD’s guidance, when the City adopted the Housing Element, language was included in the adoption resolution that allows staff to make non-substantive revisions to the Housing Element that are responsive to requests by HCD to achieve compliance with State law and certification. The City Council has reviewed the revised Housing Element and completed a publicly noticed study session on the revisions during the November 16, 2023, council meeting. After reviewing the Element and hearing public comments, the City Council indicated (during the public meeting) that the revisions were necessary to achieve compliance with State law and that these revisions do not require readoption of the Housing Element.

10.2.f
Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Attachment F - 2023-2031 Housing Element (Housing Element Related ZOA) 1 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s City of Pleasant Hill
City Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards 2017 Residential Guidelines | 2021 Residential Objective Design Standards Residential Objective Design Standards
Adopted by City of Pleasant Hill City Council Resolution No. 18-22 Please note that these Guidelines and Standards are used in conjunction with the City of Pleasant Hill Zoning Ordinance, General Plan and Public Works Standards

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 2 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Contents
I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 4 A. Purpose of City-Wide Design Guidelines......................................................................... 4 B. Purpose of City-Wide Objective Design Standards.......................................................... 5 C. Design Guidelines & Objective Design Standards Considerations................................... 5 D. How to Use the City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards .............. 6 E. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)................................................................................. 7 F. Organization.................................................................................................................... 9 II. RESIDENTIAL....................................................................................................................10 A. Single-Family Residential ...............................................................................................10

1. Single-Family Site Planning Design Guidelines...........................................................10

2. Single-Family Site Planning Objective Design Standards............................................13

3. Scale and Mass Design Guidelines.............................................................................15

4. Scale and Mass Objective Design Standards..............................................................16

5. Building Architecture and Appearance Design Guidelines...........................................16

6. Building Architecture and Appearance Objective Design Standards ...........................19

7. Accessory Dwelling Units Design Guidelines ..............................................................21

8. Landscaping Design Guidelines..................................................................................21

9. Landscaping Objective Design Standards...................................................................25

10. Fences and Walls Design Guidelines..........................................................................26

11. Fences and Walls Objective Design Standards...........................................................27

12. Lighting Design Guidelines .........................................................................................28

13. Lighting Objective Design Standards ..........................................................................29

14. Infill Design Guidelines ...............................................................................................29

15. Subdivision Design Guidelines....................................................................................32

16. Hillside Residential Design Guidelines ........................................................................36

17. Environmental Sustainability Design Guidelines .........................................................38 B. Multi-Family Residential .................................................................................................42

1. Site Planning Design Guidelines .................................................................................42

2. Site Planning Objective Design Standards..................................................................44

3. Scale and Mass Design Guidelines.............................................................................45

4. Scale and Mass Objective Design Standards..............................................................47

5. Architecture/Appearance Design Guidelines...............................................................49

6. Architecture/Appearance Objective Design Standards................................................53

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 3 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

7. Environmental Sustainability Design Guidelines .........................................................55

8. Private Open Space Design Guidelines ......................................................................59

9. Private Open Space Objective Design Standards .......................................................60

10. Common Open Space/Amenities Design Guidelines ..................................................60

11. Common Open Space/Amenities Objective Design Standards ...................................61

12. Landscaping Design Guidelines..................................................................................61

13. Landscaping Objective Design Standards...................................................................67

14. Fences and Walls Design Guidelines..........................................................................68

15. Fences and Walls Objective Design Standards...........................................................68

16. Lighting Design Guidelines .........................................................................................69

17. Lighting Objective Design Standards ..........................................................................71

18. Circulation and Parking Design Guidelines .................................................................72

19. Circulation and Parking Objective Design Standards ..................................................77

20. Service Facilities and Utilities Design Guidelines ........................................................79

21. Service Facilities and Utilities Objective Design Standards .........................................82

22. Public Improvements Design Guidelines.....................................................................82

23. Signage Design Guidelines.........................................................................................83 C. Drainage and Stormwater Requirements........................................................................83

1. Drainage Design Guidelines .......................................................................................83 III. STREETSCAPE AND GATEWAYS....................................................................................85 A. Streetscape ....................................................................................................................85 B. Gateways .......................................................................................................................88 IV. Credits................................................................................................................................89 V. City of Pleasant Hill Resolution of adopting the City Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards .....................................................................................................................90 VI. City of Pleasant Hill Resolution of adopting the City Wide Design Guidelines (Resolution 68- 17) 91

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 4 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Pleasant Hill incorporated as a City in 1961. Its history goes further back than that, as it was farmland and orchards before residential and commercial uses started to spring up.

Over the course of many years, the City has developed into many distinctive neighborhoods and areas, with different characteristics. In part, design guidelines and objective design standards help to ensure that these areas of the city maintain their character while allowing updates that will keep things current. Through the use of City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards, the City can help to ensure that future development will occur in ways that will enhance and contribute to the overall appearance of the City.

A. Purpose of City-Wide Design Guidelines
These Design Guidelines are intended to inspire thoughtful interpretation and response to design opportunities, while promoting and reinforcing the physical image of residential and commercial areas of the City of Pleasant Hill. The design guidelines use permissive language such as “should” or “may,” and are not intended to replace existing standards (e.g., Public Works Standards) or establish new mandatory requirements for the Zoning Ordinance or the General Plan or Public Works standards, All the regulations of those documents remain applicable and must be adhered to when designing projects.

However, the Design Guidelines are intended to encourage quality, well-designed development throughout Pleasant Hill that enhances existing neighborhoods, creates identity, and improves the overall quality of life within the City. The guidelines are intended to promote a desired level of future development in Pleasant Hill that:

1. Preserves the sense of a small-scale, small-town community and maintains the surrounding environment.

2. Contributes to a positive physical image and identity and preserves the surrounding environment.

3. Provides design assistance to the development community, architects/designers and property owners.

4. Promotes high-quality development that stimulates investment in and strengthening of the economic vitality of all areas of Pleasant Hill.

5. Facilitates the development of projects that establish a sense of place while complementing the character of traditional design established within the existing neighborhood and the City.

6. Implements the goals, objectives, and policies of the Pleasant Hill General Plan.

7. Maintains and enhance property values and pride of ownership.

The guidelines are intended to promote a desired level of future development in Pleasant Hill that: These Residential Guidelines are meant for use by homeowners, developers, and architects in achieving a superior quality design of new construction and additions to existing buildings. The guidelines do not seek to impose an overriding style, colors or theme. The goal of the guidelines is to promote quality designs that have been carefully considered that have well integrated building features and architectural elements. These guidelines complement required development standards found in the City’s Zoning Code and Public Works Standards, among other documents. These guidelines will be revised in the future as policy, technology, and techniques evolve.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 5 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s B. Purpose of City-Wide Objective Design Standards
The purpose of Objective Design Standards is to provide developers with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations for all residential project design. The design standards are written as objective requirements that use “shall” and “will” statements to confer mandatory compliance, opposed to the more permissive language found in the design guidelines. Accordingly, all residential projects shall comply with each objective design standard. Importantly, the design standards regulate site and structure design only. All residential projects are required to comply with all applicable building permit requirements, zoning ordinance requirements, development standards (e.g., ingress/egress, height and setbacks, drainage, etc.), and all other applicable City, County and State provisions. The City-Wide Objective Design Standards are shown in GREEN in this document.

C. Design Guidelines & Objective Design Standards Considerations The following are the main design principles of the City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards. All of the individual design components provided in the document ultimately support the City’s desired design principles. While the design guidelines in this document support the following design principles, the objective design standards contained herein may not.

1. Aesthetics – High quality design composition and details to enhance an existing site and surrounding neighborhood.

2. Scale – Relationship between the human experience and the built and natural environment.

3. Context – Design related to the surrounding environment.

4. Pattern – Composition of design and functional elements with the neighborhood.

5. Massing – Design of structures related to surrounding structures to provide optimal visual harmony.

6. Topography – Relationship of the structure to the existing site topography.

7. Circulation/Connectivity – Pedestrian, bicycle, auto, and other connections within neighborhoods and the City.

8. Climate – Design to respond to the local climate and seasonal changes, through the use of passive and active solutions towards energy conservation.

9. Water Conservation – Landscape and site planning to more efficiently use water and reduce runoff.

10. Sustainability – Short and long-term impacts to reduce maintenance/repair while extending the useful life.

11. Environmental Sensitivity – Incorporate design solutions and materials that will preserve natural resources.

12. Open Space – Incorporate development that maintains and creates open spaces.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 6 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s D. How to Use the City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards

1. General
The Design Guidelines are intended to generally influence the design of development/redevelopment of land uses throughout the City. The Design Guidelines are a policy document that guide development in Pleasant Hill. By contrast, the Objective Design Standards are a regulatory framework that, when used in conjunction with the applicable standards in the Pleasant Hill Zoning Ordinance, governs design of residential projects. The Pleasant Hill General Plan defines the community vision and establishes a framework to guide decision-making about development, land use, resource management, public safety, public services, and general community well-being.

Both the Pleasant Hill Zoning Ordinance and City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards are tools that implement the General Plan and are applicable to both new projects and improvements to existing projects (remodels and renovations). The City’s zoning rules and objective design standards (e.g., minimum yard setbacks, maximum building heights, etc.) are the required development regulations, while the design guidelines reflect City policy preferences and recommendations that influence the design of structures, landscape, etc. when an applicant proposes building and site improvements.

The Design Guidelines should be used as a starting point for the creative design process and should not be looked upon as the only viable solution for design. Owners should strive to be creative and innovative and should try to avoid plain or disjointed architectural and landscape treatments.

While the Design Guidelines incorporate specific design recommendations, the designer should incorporate recommendations while keeping in mind the needs of their specific project. Individual design recommendations should not be incorporated into proposals for the sole purpose of satisfying a guideline; the effect on the overall project design should also be considered.

2. Design Guidelines and the Architectural Review Process Applicants are strongly encouraged to consult the Design Guidelines prior to beginning the design review process and submitting a project to the City for review. Once submitted for review, the City Planning Staff will review the project and will work with the applicant to refine the project proposal by offering design input and recommendations that may be forwarded to the Architectural Review Commission (ARC). Incorporating components of design guidelines does not guarantee project approval; however, substantial compliance with all, or a majority, of the applicable design guidelines will increase the probability of a successful outcome with few, if any, further revisions.

During the design stage, applicants should use these guidelines achieve the highest level of design quality and should consider the guidelines’ flexibility intended to foster creativity in response to existing conditions. An applicant may request a study session with the City’s ARC to receive preliminary feedback.

While projects should be designed to incorporate many of the design recommendations provided in the following pages, above all else, the City’s design review process will always encourage applicants to seek superior design solutions. The Design Guidelines should not seek to suppress creative, new, or innovative design; rather, they are intended to support and achieve good design.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 7 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Lastly, a successful project can also be impacted by the level, skill, and talent of the designer who creates the proposal and the craftsmen that construct the project. This means having plans prepared by a licensed professional, having a complete design application submitted to the City, and hiring a professional and competent construction team.

3. Objective Design Standards and the Architectural Review Process The objective design standards contained in this document offer clear design direction and are applicable to all residential development projects citywide. The objective design standards contain objective language that avoids personal or subjective judgement.

Further, these standards are applicable to those residential projects that qualify under State law for streamlined review. Pursuant to State law, certain qualified projects that meet all the objective design standards within in this document based on proposed typology (single-family vs. multi-family) are not subject to the City’s discretionary review process. Those projects that qualify for streamlined review pursuant to State law will be subject only to the City’s ministerial process (i.e., the City’s Building Permit application process). The Planning Division shall review qualified projects to verify compliance with all objective design standards. Those projects that do not qualify for streamlined review, or any applicant who elects not to pursue a streamlined review process for a qualified project, shall be subject to the ARC review process, as specified in the Pleasant Hill Zoning Ordinance.

E. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
The following are frequently asked questions that users may have when designing a project.

1. What is the purpose of this document?
The purpose of this document is to provide design guidance, direction, and applicable objective design standards to those proposing residential development applications to the City.

2. When should I use this Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards document?
You should use these guidelines and standards for any project that incorporates physical changes to a property. This can range from a new accessory structure to the smallest building addition or landscape change, to a large apartment complex. In addition, the guidelines and standards should be used during the early stages of the design process. More specifically, an applicant should review the Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards prior to the creation of project plans for review by the City. Staff suggests contacting or meeting with City planning staff for preliminary feedback prior to formal plan submittal.

3. What is the best way to use this document for my project? Since the document is separated into different topics and sections, the first step is to identify what kind of project you are working on (i.e. single-family residential, multifamily residential, etc.) and refer to the relevant section of the Design Guidelines document. In addition, while there are many recommendations in the document, it is not always beneficial or possible to incorporate all of them into your project. The preferred option would be to incorporate recommendations that relate and improve your project.

4. Are these Guidelines required?

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 8 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s The Design Guidelines reflect the policies of the General Plan. While no individual guideline is specifically required of any project, the Guidelines collectively are presented to assist the designer in creating a proposal that is consistent with the Zoning Code and the General Plan. In addition, since these Guidelines are endorsed by the City, it is expected that if the project incorporates design recommendations that improve the project, it will receive a higher level of support during the City design review process.

5. Are these Guidelines relevant to my small project?
Yes. There are design recommendations that can be incorporated into the smallest building addition, new fence, or landscape change. For example, a small building addition could incorporate a design recommendation to include an awning or provide a complementary roof and material design that will match the remainder of the structure, or a landscape modification could include a deciduous tree that is planted on the south end of the home to help provide shade during the warm summer months but allow sunlight to come through during the cooler winter months.

6. Are these Standards required?
The Objective Design Standards are applicable to all residential projects. If your project qualifies for streamlined review pursuant to State law, these standards alone apply to your project (the City’s Design Guidelines do not). Alternatively, if your project does not qualify for (or you elect not to pursue) streamlined review pursuant to State law, your project design should be consistent with both the Objective Design Standards and Design Guidelines. Further, your non-qualified residential project is subject to the applicable permitting process(es) outlined in the Pleasant Hill Zoning Ordinance.

7. This document contains a lot of information, where do I begin? The document is broken up into different sections. If you are a homeowner, a good place to begin would be within the single-family residential portion of the document. If there are specific issues that you are struggling with, there is a table of contents that will help to direct you. For example, if you are looking at doing landscape changes, there are landscape guidelines for single-family residential and that would be the appropriate location to begin.

8. Do I have to incorporate every Design Guideline component mentioned? No. Consider the design components that are relevant to your project

9. Do I have to incorporate every Objective Design Standard component mentioned? Yes, the applicable objective design standards must be applied to your project typology (i.e., single-family vs. multi-family).

10. If I use the recommendations contained in the Design Guidelines, does this mean an automatic approval of my proposal?
No. However, submitting a proposal that reflects the Design Guidelines will increase the likelihood that your project is viewed favorably by the City through the design review process.

11. What are the benefits of using these Guidelines?

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 9 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s The benefits include a potentially improved design, potential energy cost saving, or less long-term maintenance. In addition, using the recommendations contained in the Design Guidelines document could result in a greater level of support from the City.

12. Is there anything else that I need to know?
In addition to the City-Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards, there are also applicable building codes, City Engineering provisions, outside agency requirements (e.g., County Fire, the water district, PG&E, etc.), and zoning ordinance regulations that must be followed. Remember that that Design Guidelines offer additional design instruction that should be incorporated into your project, while the Design Standards provide additional regulations that residential projects must satisfy.

Additional information on the building code, City Engineering provisions, and zoning regulations is available online at https://www.pleasanthillca.org/55/Services. Any permit submittal (i.e. Building Permit, Zoning Permit, etc.) will be routed to the Building, Engineering, and Planning divisions and reviewed accordingly; many applications will also be routed to relevant outside agencies for their comments.

Alternatively, prior to making a formal submittal, applicants may contact any of these City divisions or any outside agencies to discuss conceptual plans and identify potential issues.

F. Organization
The document is organized in sections according to the following categories:

1. Single-Family Residential (includes guidelines and objective standards)

2. Multi-Family Residential (includes guidelines and objective standards)

3. Streetscape and Gateways (includes guidelines)
Topics include site planning, building massing and scale, architecture and appearance, landscape, fences and walls, open space, utilities, circulation, and streetscape design.

Design Guideline Graphics
Graphics and photos are provided throughout the document to provide the reader a greater understanding of the specific design guideline. Graphics and photos are provided for illustrative purposes of a specific guideline and do not necessarily represent an overall design preference (i.e., a photo describing a specific roof style does not also represent a City preference for related architecture, building size, or landscaping).

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 10 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s II. RESIDENTIAL
A. Single-Family Residential
Single-family residential uses are lots or parcels containing single-family detached units or attached housing (such as a duet or duplex).

1. Single-Family Site Planning Design Guidelines
Structure/home location of a building on its lot has an impact on the site and on user functionality of the building and its interplay between building and site. Location and appearance of the site entry is critical to the image of a home, either by reinforcing the architecture of the building or breaking down the appearance. a. To enhance the character of the development, the layout should preserve existing natural site features such as topography, views, and vegetation. Public views of such features should be preserved and incorporated into development proposals.
b. Integrate new single-family residential developments into the surrounding environment. Find a balance between new and older homes that respects both interests.
c. A walkway from the front door to the street can be welcoming. d. New dwellings should have a strong relationship to the street. e. Set back garages or de- emphasize garages from the front of the dwelling. (See Figure 1.e,f)
f. Encourage variable setbacks, while still complying with Zoning Ordinance setback requirements, for front facing elevations of homes and garages to create a visually interesting streetscape.

Figure 1.(e, f) (Graphics and Photos are provided for illustrative purposes only) g. Site plan designs should take into account position regarding sun patterns and similar impacts to onsite and adjacent buildings. Buildings should not be sited to obstruct one another. (See Figure 1.g)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 11 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 1.g
h. Design and orient buildings so that sunlight directly enters the home during some part of the day year-round.
i. Direct line-of-site between dwelling units, specifically bedrooms and bathrooms should be minimized.
j. New homes should minimize the loss of existing mature trees on-site, using thoughtful and creative design.
(i) Removal of existing heritage or protected trees is limited to circumstances where the tree is dead or dying, poses a life/safety hazard, in situations that renders the site undevelopable, or in other exception cases as noted Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.110.
(ii) An arborist report is required to be submitted with any project resulting in loss of heritage or protected trees and is subject to peer review. (iii) Encroachment into existing tree canopies should be minimized. (iv) Any encroachment into/beneath a heritage or protected tree canopy should include an arborist report to ensure that new construction does not negatively impact the long-term survivability of the tree.
(v) Balance the needs of the property owner with the City’s goals of mature tree preservation.

Trees are determined to be mature based on different standards including species, health, and age of tree.
k. New two-story homes or additions, when adjacent to single-family dwellings, should transition appropriately to respect the privacy of adjacent single-story buildings. Second- story features should minimize any potential impacts on adjacent sites in regards to privacy and/or shadowing to the greatest extent possible. (See Figure 1.k)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 12 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 1.k
l. New homes and building additions should be sensitive to existing structures and minimize obstruction of existing outward views where possible. m. Projects should be designed to minimize impervious surfaces and incorporate landscape elements to reduce runoff. Pervious pavements can help to reduce runoff.
n. Stormwater impacts need to be addressed in the early stages of project design as they often have an impact on site design. See City Engineering website for additional information -http://www.ci.pleasant-hill.ca.us/379/NPDES-Program. o. Urban Creek Guidelines.
(i) A larger setback should be provided for structures when located near deeper creeks (Per PHMC Section 18.50.150).
(ii) Development near and adjacent to creeks should minimize impacts to existing drainage facilities
(1) Proposed improvements should not diminish the capacity of the creek. (2) Proposed improvements should not increase flooding potential. (3) Runoff should be detained on-site prior to discharge into the creek. (4) Proposed improvements should not cause an increase in erosion or cause instability of the creek banks.
(5) Outfalls to creeks should minimize creek erosion.
(iii) Development adjacent to creeks should minimize impacts to the riparian habitat.
(1) Improvements should be kept away from riparian corridors. (iv) Improvements within creeks are discouraged; however, when proposed, should be limited to outfalls, infrastructure improvements, and landscaping approved by local, state, and regional agencies.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 13 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (v) Creek stabilization should incorporate soil bio-engineering and plant-based methods.
(1) Creek improvements should require minimal maintenance. (vi) Access for the maintenance and monitoring of creeks should be provided. (vii) Improvements within creeks should be designed for longevity.

2. Single-Family Site Planning Objective Design Standards a. Site Placement.
(i) Projects with two or more structures shall be staggered with a minimum twofoot variation measured from the front setback with the intent of providing a varied street elevation. varied so that front setbacks of adjacent homes and garages differ by a minimum of two feet and a maximum of six feet. b. Site Development.
(i) Residences shall have a front entry sited from parallel to within 45 degrees of parallel, to the street.
(ii) Front entries shall include a covered projection (porch) with a minimum area of 20 square, as measured from the supporting elements. Porches may be a combination of projection and recess but shall not be completely recessed within the building footprint. At minimum, the entry doorway shall be covered within one foot of either side of the door and three feet of the face. A porch may encroach a maximum of 20 percent into the front setback. (See Figures

2.b.ii)
Figure 2.b.ii
Figure 2.b.ii

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 14 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iii) Vehicle charging facilities shall be housed within a garage or screened from view from the street by a fence or landscaping.
c. Utility and Service Areas.
(i) Above-ground utilities, transformers, and other mechanical equipment placed between the front or street side of a residence and a public street or vehicular or pedestrian accessway, shall be screened from view by a fence, wall, or landscaping. (See Figure 2.c.i)
Figure 2.c.i
(ii) Excluding solar panels, roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden from view from the public street behind roof peaks or parapets.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 15 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iii) Utility and mechanical equipment shall not obstruct pedestrian pathways.

3. Scale and Mass Design Guidelines
The size and scale of a new structure should relate to the scale of other buildings in the immediate neighborhood, thus, creating visual unity. The following design guidelines apply to scale and mass of single-family residences:
a. Architectural elements of new residential buildings should be designed to reduce the mass of large structures and provide a pedestrian scale to the buildings. b. The scale and mass of new single-family residential buildings or additions should be harmonious and visually compatible with the physical condition of the existing neighborhoods.
c. The scale and mass of new infill buildings should transition appropriately to the street and adjacent smaller structures. (See Figure 3.c) d. Rooflines and pitch of new residential buildings and additions should be harmonious and consistent with the building as well as to surrounding development.

Figure 3.c
e. The scale of the building should relate to the pedestrian with complementary ground floor elements including, but not limited to, canopies, porches, awnings, and through the use of varied pavement surfaces. (See Figure 3.e)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 16 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 3.e

4. Scale and Mass Objective Design Standards
a. Structures shall be vertically (height) and horizontally (depth) articulated along the front elevations. Vertical articulations shall include a change in total height of a minimum of two feet, or a change in roof pitch or form, or the inclusion of a gable or dormer, and such articulation shall occur at intervals of a maximum of 15 feet. Horizontal articulations shall include a change of wall plane by a minimum depth of two feet at intervals of a maximum of 20 feet.

5. Building Architecture and Appearance Design Guidelines It is sometimes the little details that are often ignored that can elevate the appearance of a home from good to great. It is the desire of the City to not have plain/undistinguished buildings, rather to encourage interesting details that are the hallmark of great neighborhoods.
a. New homes should convey a small-town feel, emphasizing the pedestrian scale and entrance over the vehicular, stepping back two-story buildings from the street, and visually breaking up facades into smaller components. b. Individual expression is encouraged while still maintaining balance with the surrounding neighborhood
c. Buildings should be designed to reinforce the relationship to streets. (i) This can be accomplished through the use of front porches and windows at the front of the building.
(ii) De-emphasize the garage through the use of side access garages, stepping it back from the main building facade, being located at the rear, etc.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 17 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s d. Structures should be visually and architecturally pleasing by varying the height, color, setback, materials, texture, trim and roof shape, and landscape. e. Facades should be varied and articulated to provide visual interest to the street and pedestrians.
f. Buildings should include architectural details that may include, but not limited to:
porches, bay windows, balconies, railings, fascia boards, and trim to enhance the character of the building. (See Figure 5.f)
Figure 5.f
g. Building materials and colors should enhance the neighborhood and be compatible to the neighborhood.
(i) Colors should be carefully selected to complement the overall design composition.
(ii) To help reduce the appearance of bulk, building body colors should be lighter than trim colors.
h. No building façade should consist of an unarticulated blank wall or an unbroken series of doors.
i. Recessed windows should be used where appropriate.
j. Architecture should treat the structure entirely and finish appropriately on all sides of the building to provide continuity. (See Figure 5.j)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 18 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 5.j
k. For most architectural styles, the number of colors on the exterior should be minimized with additional contrasting color for accents. l. Building additions/renovations should blend with the remainder of the building and not appear “added” on.
m. Building Features.
(i) High quality doors and windows should be used with style and placement that is consistent with the architectural design of the building. (ii) Building features, such as lighting fixtures, mailboxes, and address numbers, should be placed with care.
(iii) Shutters and vents placed, sized, scaled to the building. n. Roofs (See Figure 5.n)
(i) Roof materials should relate to the design and architectural style of the building.
(ii) Roofs materials should have texture and relief.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 19 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 5.n

6. Building Architecture and Appearance Objective Design Standards a. Architectural Appearance.
(i) Second floor balconies shall not be positioned along any side elevation within 20 feet of the adjacent property line.
(ii) If used, shutters shall be sized to cover 100 to 105 percent of the window and match the exact window shape.
b. Materials.
(i) Accessory structures shall be constructed of the same materials, colors, roof type as the primary structure. (See Figures 6.b.i)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 20 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 6.b.i

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 21 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (ii) Windows shall be recessed by a minimum of two inches from the wall plane or shall include wood, metal, or engineered wood trim with a minimum width of three inches and minimum depth of three-quarters of an inch. (iii) Single family subdivisions with two or three units shall provide a minimum of two-color schemes. Single family subdivisions with more than three residential structures shall provide a minimum of three-color schemes and shall not use a single-color scheme on more than 40 percent of the residential structures. Structures shall incorporate a color scheme that contains a maximum of four distinct colors per building. A color scheme is defined as (body one and/or body two, trim, and a contrasting accent color).

Adjacent structures shall not use the same color scheme.

7. Accessory Dwelling Units Design Guidelines
Recent State laws have further encouraged the creation of second dwelling units throughout the State of California. New laws will allow attached and detached accessory structures at larger sizes that could have an effect on residential neighborhoods, particularly related to massing, privacy, air, and light intrusion. Thus, to provide guidance for these types of structures, the following should be considered when designing attached or detached accessory dwelling units:
a. The attached or detached accessory dwelling unit shall be designed to be compatible with the main residence, through the use of complementary colors, materials and overall design.
b. Attached or detached accessory dwelling units should be considerate to neighboring properties by placing windows in locations that would minimize privacy impacts, particularly when an attached accessory dwelling unit is located on the second level of the residence.
c. Taller detached accessory dwelling units and attached building additions to accommodate accessory dwelling units should be located away from adjacent properties to the greatest extent feasible to minimize light, air, and privacy impacts.
d. Exterior access to the accessory dwelling unit should be screened from public views.

8. Landscaping Design Guidelines
Landscaping is an integral component of any project. Landscaping should complement good architectural design and help create a finished project. The following design guidelines apply to landscaping for single-family residences:
a. Landscaping should be an integral part of the overall site design. (See Figure

8.a)
b. Landscaping should be used to complement good design, not hide substandard architecture.
c. Select landscape materials and plants that are appropriate in scale and function with the site and for the site conditions.

There are no Accessory Dwelling Unit Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 22 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 8.a
d. Heritage and protected trees are required to be preserved for the community’s enjoyment subject to Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.110. (i) Heritage trees are those that have been enrolled in the City’s Heritage Tree Program and must have a trunk diameter of 16 inches or more or any tree grouping in the City with at least one tree of this diameter. (per Municipal Code Section 18.50.110.E.).
(ii) Protected trees are identified as a native or indigenous tree with a trunk diameter 9 inches or greater at a height of 54 inches from the ground, or any non-native tree with a trunk diameter greater than 18 inches at a height of 54 inches from the ground (per Municipal Code Section 18.50.110.A.). e. Existing heritage and protected trees should be preserved to the greatest extent possible as per PHMC Section 18.50.110. In addition, the loss of mature trees should be minimized where possible.
(i) Removal of existing heritage and protected trees should be limited to circumstances where the tree is dead or dying, poses a life/safety hazard, in cases that renders the site not developable, or in other exception cases as noted in PHMC Section 18.50.110.
(ii) New structures should be designed to avoid conflict with existing heritage and protected trees where possible.
(iii) Any loss of heritage or protected trees require an arborist report as part of the project request and may be peer reviewed for accuracy by the City. (iv) Replacement of removed trees should be replaced at a higher ratio than the number removed. In addition, native and indigenous trees should be replaced with like trees, while non-native trees may be replaced by a broader palette of tree species.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 23 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s f. Plant material should be sited to respect lighting and allow emergency apparatus access. Trees and large shrubs should be sited to avoid potential damage to overhead lines or underground utilities.
g. Trees should be sited to respect solar access to photovoltaic (PV) facilities. h. In areas of natural predominance, trees should be planted in a random manner where possible. (See Figure 8.h)
Figure 8.h
i. Native, drought tolerant plant materials and other plant species which are well adapted to local climatic conditions should be strongly considered as they can preserve water resources and can better achieve compliance with the City’s water efficient landscape requirements (PHMC Chapter 18.52 of the Zoning Ordinance).
j. To provide for better fire protection, landscape plans for properties in close proximity to open space areas should reflect the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's guidelines for "Defensible Space." k. Landscape plans should maximize the use of shade (deciduous) trees to provide cooling during the warm summer season. (See Figure 8.k)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 24 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 8.k
l. Deciduous trees should be planted 20’-40’ apart on the south and west side of buildings for maximum solar protection during the summer and gain during the winter. (See Figure 8.l)
Figure 8.l
m. The scale and nature of landscaping materials should be appropriate to the site, structures, and neighborhood.
n. When selecting plant materials, the following design guidelines should be followed:
(i) When replacing existing mature trees, new trees should be 36–48-inch box size to quickly replace the lost tree canopy or smaller trees should be planted in numbers that replace the lost tree canopy.
(ii) Trees species and sizes should be selected that best fits the planting areas.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 25 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iii) Shrubs species and sizes should be selected that best fit the planting environment. (iv) Ground cover should be planted using spacing and sizes that will accomplish ground coverage within a short amount of time. o. Landscaping should avoid creating a green wall of vegetation (typically greater than three feet in height) at the front yard.
p. Hardscape should be minimized in the front yard.
(i) At least 50% of the front yard should have live landscaping consistent with Zoning Ordinance provisions (PHMC Section 18.20.040.G.). q. Air conditioning/mechanical equipment should be placed out of view from the public right-of-way through the use of landscaping or walls/fences (PHMC Section 18.50.090).
(i) Where possible, air conditioning and mechanical equipment should be located on the north and east sides to minimize stress on the systems during warmer months.
r. Landscaping should be selected and planted in a way that will avoid costly and repeated maintenance and discourages weeds and other invasive growth from affecting the original landscape plan.
s. Sight distance zones are to be kept clear in compliance with City requirements (PHMC Section 18.50.100 & 18.55.130).

9. Landscaping Objective Design Standards
a. New development shall plant a minimum of one tree along the street frontage.

Trees shall be a minimum box size of 24 inches at the time of planting. b. The front yard shall not exceed a maximum of 50 percent of pavement or hardscape. (See Figure 9.b)
Figure 9.b

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 26 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s c. Runoff shall be detained on-site prior to discharging to any creek or storm drain facility. Outfalls shall be used to discharge water to creeks. d. All areas not occupied by structures or pavement shall be landscaped.

Landscaped areas shall consist of plantings, lawn/turf, mulch, or bark. Artificial turf may be used if it and its substrate is permeable and has a minimum pile height of 1.25 inches.

10. Fences and Walls Design Guidelines
Fences and walls are often used to delineate property boundaries. Good design of fences and walls can add to the appearance of the property while affording the privacy that owner’s desire.
a. The design of fences and walls should be architecturally compatible with the primary structure. (See figure 10.a)
b. Front yard fences should have a transparent appearance, such as the use of picket, rail, grid or wire type of fencing. (Chain-link fences are discouraged.) c. The design of fences and walls in the front yard should create a visual openness.

Fences and walls that isolate the front of the dwelling from the streetscape are strongly discouraged.

Figure 10.a
d. Vehicular gates are discouraged.
e. Vertical elements, fence height changes, or change in plane should be incorporated into the design of fences and walls especially for long runs. (See figure 10.e)
f. Landscaping should be used as part of the design of the fence or wall to soften and screen large masses of blank wall surface area.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 27 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 10.e
g. Fences and walls taller than 3 feet are prohibited within all vision triangles (street corners and driveway entrances) (PHMC Section 18.50.100 & 18.55.130) Fences, mailboxes, walls, and other landscape structures are prohibited in the public right-of- way.
h. To keep scenic corridors in its natural appearance, the use of walls and fences should be minimized to preserve scenic corridors along designated corridors.

11. Fences and Walls Objective Design Standards
a. Walls and fences shall not be placed in the street frontage(s) in hillside areas (with a project site greater than an average of 15 percent slope) and along scenic corridors.
b. Front yard fence pickets shall be separated by a minimum width equivalent to 50 percent of the width of the picket. (See Figure 11.b)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 28 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 11.b
c. Chain-link fences are prohibited.

12. Lighting Design Guidelines
Lighting in single-family neighborhoods can add to the appearance of a home through accent lights but can also negatively impact a site and the surrounding environment with too much light that may cause light spillage and glare. a. Lighting should be provided in balance with neighborhood concerns. b. Lighting should be located and designed to minimize glare and spillage onto adjacent properties. (See Figure 12.b) and should be consistent with the maximum allowed foot-candle levels cited in Section 18.55.140b of the Zoning Ordinance.
c. Lighting should be used for accent, not attract attention to a site. d. Light fixtures should be compatible, in-scale, and placed appropriately on the building.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 29 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 12.b
e. Exterior light fixtures should incorporate full cutoff fixtures designed and installed so that no emitted light will break a horizontal plane passing through the lowest point of the fixtures.
f. Each situation is different as the effect of accent lighting may be minimized due to the existing built environment.

13. Lighting Objective Design Standards
a. All entryways, porch areas, pedestrian pathways, and gates shall include lighting for safety and security. Lighting shall be fully shielded, directed downward (not above the horizontal plane), and shall not spill onto adjacent properties. Light fixtures shall be a maximum of eight feet from the ground plane. Lighting shall use light emitting diodes (LEDs) with a maximum temperature of 3000 kelvins.

Second floor accent lighting is prohibited. A photometric plan shall be provided to show compliance.

14. Infill Design Guidelines
Larger homes and additions are becoming more common in the City. Many are located in older neighborhoods, which were developed at a time when smaller homes were common and styles were more modest in their outward appearance.

Larger homes should not be allowed to overwhelm their neighbors and should maintain the neighborhood context. The general scale and character of the neighborhood should be respected.

The following are design guidelines with respect to infill development:
a. Design Principles
(i) Reinforce prevailing neighborhood home orientation and entry patterns. (ii) Respect the scale and character of homes in the neighborhood.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 30 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iii) Design homes to respect their immediate neighbors. (iv) Preserve mature landscaping.
b. Design Techniques
(i) Utilization of similar roof forms and pitches.
(ii) Use of similar scale entries.
(iii) Keeping first floor eave heights similar to neighboring homes (iv) Use first floor roof elements to break up two story walls. (See Figure 14.b(iv)) The use of such elements helps to break up the massing of large unadorned second-story walls and provides additional architectural interest. (v) Limiting second floor area and volume.
(vi) Setting back second floor walls from first floor walls below. (See figure

14.b(vi))
Figure 14.b (iv)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 31 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 14.b (vi)
(vii) Setting back second floor walls from first floor walls below. (See Figure

14.b(vi)) Design windows that are harmonious and respect the character of the neighborhood. (viii) New homes and additions to existing structures should be located to minimize
(viii) blockage of sun access to living spaces and actively used outdoor areas of adjacent homes. (See Figure 14.b(viii))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 32 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 14.b (viii)
(ix) Second floor windows should be designed to preserve the privacy of adjacent properties where possible.
(x) New development should be considerate of existing outward views.

While development preferences and style changes over time, change evolves and occurs gradually. Thus, drastic changes from the existing environment cannot always be supported.

15. Subdivision Design Guidelines
New residential subdivisions are an opportunity to develop large pieces of property.

The goal should be to set a framework for the entire area that creates a sense of community and preserves the surrounding environment. Designs for new subdivisions should provide high-quality site, architectural, and landscape design plans that promote a sense of community. Site planning of new subdivisions should link the subdivisions’ various components to each other. In addition to the other There are no Infill Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 33 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s design guidelines, the following are specific to new single-family residential subdivisions:
a. Existing mature trees should be preserved on-site to the greatest extent possible to maintain the City’s existing urban forest.
(i) Removal of existing heritage or protected trees is limited to circumstances where the tree is dead or dying, poses a life/safety hazard, in situations that renders the site undevelopable, or in other exception cases as noted in Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.110.
(1) Any loss of mature trees requires an arborist report as part of the project request and should be peer reviewed for accuracy by the City. (ii) Buildings and roadways should be sited to save as many mature trees as possible
(iii) When mature trees are removed, the amount of replacement trees should be adequate to replace the lost canopy.
(iv) Incorporate tree protection measures to save significant sized trees. (v) Incorporate designs that ensure the long-term longevity of trees. b. The circulation system should be logical, predictable, and not confusing. Streets should connect to adjacent neighborhoods to provide access to schools, parks, and community centers.
(i) Pedestrian paths, trails, etc. should be provided throughout the entire community without dead ends.
c. New streets (public and private) are required to meet all City standards (as per Public Works Standards).
(i) Non-arterial streets should minimize width to the greatest extent possible. (ii) New streets should be designed to accommodate alternative modes of transportation.
(iii) Connect to the existing street network.
d. Sidewalks should be incorporated as per Public Works Standards. e. Street patterns that create long uninterrupted walls at the property line should be avoided.
f. Traffic calming devices can be incorporated into the project on a case-by-case basis.
g. Varied front yard setbacks (as allowed by the Zoning Code) should be used throughout the subdivision. (See Figure 15.g)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 34 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 15.g
h. Corner lots should be bigger than inside lots to avoid penalizing development of the lots.
i. Mass grading should be minimized, especially in hillside areas, to the greatest extent possible and as per PHMC Section 18.35.040.B.).
j. Subdivisions that back up to non-residential uses and arterial streets should incorporate landscape buffers, fencing, or deeper yards to mitigate potential noise, aesthetics and land use compatibility impacts to the greatest extent possible.
k. Homes should employ varying color combinations and architecture to provide variety within the subdivision. Three different models/architectural packages should be submitted for subdivisions.
l. New subdivisions should physically connect to adjacent neighborhoods. m. Lighting should be sited appropriately to enhance a projects appearance and for safety reasons.
(i) Use alternative fixtures/luminares for illumination rather than typical streetlights including pedestrian scale lighting where appropriate. (See Figure

15.m(i))
(ii) Public street lighting fixtures are required to be approved by the City prior to installation.
(iii) Minimize night sky pollution.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 35 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 15.m(i)
n. Landscaping
(i) Visual focal points such as fountains, sculpture, and public art are strongly encouraged in larger subdivisions. (See Figure 15.n(i)) Figure 15.n(i)
(ii) Design and material elements of walls and fences should be consistent in style throughout the subdivision.
(1) Open space areas should have easy access, clear visibility, and not hidden by buildings and structures.
(2) Provide adequate visitor parking.

There are no Subdivision Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 36 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

16. Hillside Residential Design Guidelines
Hillside areas of the City (areas that have an average slope of greater than 15%) include unique features, scenic views, and the sloping topography. Hillside development should minimize impacts on the natural, native environment and be sensitive to the impacts of development on the hillside. The following design guidelines apply to development within hillside areas of the City. a. New structures and additions are strongly encouraged to be designed to relate to the existing topography and surroundings and minimize the structures mass and bulk.
(i) Projects should be designed to avoid disturbing natural slopes and preserve existing open spaces and scenic views.
(ii) Development should follow existing contours (i.e., structures should be “stepped” on hillsides).
b. Development on hillsides should have an adequate buffer from the peak of hilltops and other prominent natural features. (See Figure 16.b) Figure 16.b
c. Grading and fill should be minimized for hillside developments [Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.35.040.B]. (See Figure 16.a(ii))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 771 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 37 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 16.a(ii)
d. Drainage patterns should be preserved or improved to the greatest extent possible.
e. Hillside structures should be clustered together to provide maximum open space. (See Figure 16.e)
Figure 16.e
f. Landscaping should be native and drought tolerant species (except immediately adjacent to residential structures, PHMC Section 18.35.050.C) and relate to the existing vegetation in the area.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 772 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 38 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s g. To provide for better fire protection, landscape plans for properties in close proximity to open space areas should reflect the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's guidelines for "Defensible Space." h. Use of fences should be minimized. When proposed, an open design is encouraged.
i. Use of retaining walls should be minimized with designs that are low in height and reduced in bulk and mass. The maximum height of retaining walls should be limited to 4 feet in height. If greater heights are needed, appropriately spaced terracing should be implemented in the design.
j. Use of colors in the hillside should be neutral without causing sharp contrast. k. Use of exterior lighting in the hillside should be minimized. (i) Lighting should be minimized where possible and should only be used for safety reasons.
(ii) Use alternative fixtures/luminares sources for illumination rather than typical streetlights including pedestrian scale lighting where appropriate. (iii) Public street lighting fixtures are required to be approved by the City prior to installation.
l. Use of pervious materials is encouraged to reduce surface runoff. m. Building and landscape materials that reduce fire hazards should be used throughout hillside developments.
n. Utilities, transformers and other mechanical equipment should be designed to be shielded from public views as per PHMC Section 18.50.090. o. Larger land area is needed in the hillsides compared to comparable development in areas that are flat.

17. Environmental Sustainability Design Guidelines
Building “green” is an environmentally responsible construction technique that continues to be accepted and demanded, not only in the region, but for the nation.

Building responsibly provides benefits for people and the environment in the name of preservation of natural resource, reduced impacts on the environment, and long-term lower maintenance and utility costs.
a. Green Building Techniques
(i) Using landscape to reduce energy costs.
(1) Use of trees to cool buildings in the summer.
(2) Use of deciduous trees to take advantage of shade during the summer and allow the sun to shine through during winter months. (3) Refer to the previous Landscape section for additional recommendations.

There are no Hillside Residential Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 39 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (ii) Using recycled materials, low energy bulbs and low flow fixtures, energy efficient appliances, windows, tankless water heaters, etc. (iii) Recycle and reuse materials from the existing structure. (iv) Using higher quality, long lasting materials that result in reduced maintenance and greater longevity. (See Figure 17.a(iv))
Figure 17.a(iv)
(v) Implement advanced building techniques and materials, including some listed below:
(1) Use of web floor trusses.
(2) Consider the use of recycled steel material, rather than lumber. (3) Use of structural insulated panels (SIP).
(4) Use engineered lumber.
(5) Use of cool roofs.
(vi) Installing attachments and pre-wiring for solar energy in new construction. (vii)Ensure equipment used to harness the energy of the sun is located in the most opportune location to make use of the full extent of natural energy. (1) Trees should be sited to respect solar access to solar cell facilities. (2) Solar cells should be sited in positions that will allow the greatest extent of sunlight exposure. (See Figures 17.a(vii)1 and 17.a(vii)2)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 40 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 17.a(vii)1
Figure 17.a(vii)2
(viii) Projects should incorporate electric/alternative fuel vehicle charging facilities within new/remodeled development projects, consistent with zoning ordinance requirements. Furthermore, the vehicle charging facilities should be located close to the garage’s electrical panel and should “blend in” with the house design/color to provide architectural compatibility. (Per PHMC Section 18.55.070A)
(ix) Follow recommendations included in the United States Green Building Council for Green Building and encourage projects to be compatible with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. b. Water Efficient Landscaping

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 775 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 41 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (i) Ensure compliance with City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance provisions (Per PHMC Chapter 18.52).
(ii) Protect and keep native soils and vegetation in its existing state to decrease the need to replant.
(iii) Reuse plant materials from the site if appropriate. (iv) The use of native plants that requires less irrigation.
(iv) Use of irrigation systems that effectively use water resources. (v) Provide for on-site water catchment/retention to reduce the need for water. (vi) Use lighter colored paving materials and open grid paving systems. (1) Use colors that reflect, rather than absorb heat.
(2) Consider decomposed granite or crushed rock instead of asphalt where appropriate.

There are no Environmental Sustainability Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 776 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 42 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s B. Multi-Family Residential
Multi-Family residential uses include multiple dwelling units and include townhouses, condominiums, and apartment complexes. The following design guidelines apply to multi- family residential uses.

1. Site Planning Design Guidelines
Multi-family developments are characterized by higher density residential buildings comprised of attached units and common facilities such as parking, open space, and recreation areas. Site planning includes managing the building’s relationship to the street, placement of the buildings, location of common facilities, open space, and parking. The following design guidelines apply to site planning for multi-family developments:
a. Setback patterns within the immediate vicinity should be maintained. b. Buildings should be placed in a manner that maximizes solar access during cooler months and limits it during warmer months.
c. Buildings should be oriented to promote privacy to the greatest extent possible.

Figure 1.d,e,m
d. Buildings should be sited to maximize areas for open space and common space areas. (See Figure 1.d,e,m)
e. Buildings, roadways, and parking should be sited to preserve existing heritage, protected, and mature trees subject to Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.110. (See Figure 1.d,e,m)
(i) Removal of existing heritage and protected trees should be avoided except circumstances where the tree is dead or dying, poses a life/safety hazard, in cases that renders the site not developable, or in other exceptional cases as noted in PHMC Section 18.50.110).

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 777 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 43 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (ii) An arborist report is required for any project that results in loss of heritage and protected trees and the report is subject to peer review by the City. (iii) Encroachment into existing tree canopies should be minimized to the greatest extent possible.
(iv) Any encroachment into/beneath a tree canopy requires an arborist report to ensure that new construction does not negatively impact the long-term survivability of the tree.
(v) Removed trees should be replaced with quality species trees at a number that the site can reasonably accommodate. Native and indigenous trees should be replaced with like trees, while non-native trees may be replaced by a broader palette of tree species.

Trees are determined to be mature based on different standards including species, health, and age of tree.
f. Buildings and structures should be sited to allow maximum sunlight onto private and community open spaces.
g. Buildings should be sited so that sunlight directly enters each dwelling unit during some part of the day year-round.
h. New buildings/structures should be sensitive to existing structures and minimize obstruction of existing outward views where possible.
i. Buildings should relate to the street and be located on the site to reinforce street frontages.
j. All building entries should be prominent and visible. k. Uses should be buffered from incompatible development through the use of increased setbacks, fencing, and landscape screening.
l. Vehicular gated projects are discouraged.
m. Common facilities should be centrally located on the project site. (See Figure

1.d,e,m)
n. Open space areas should have easy access and clear visibility. o. Stormwater impacts need to be addressed in the early stages of project design as they often have an impact on site design. See City Engineering website for additional information -http://www.ci.pleasant-hill.ca.us/379/NPDES-Program. p. ADA requirements need to be addressed in the early stages of project design as they often have an impact on site design.
(i) Compliance with current California Building Code (CBC) and American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements is required
(ii) CBC and ADA requirements affect various project areas including common areas and most exterior areas.
q. Urban Creek Guidelines
(i) A larger setback should be provided for structures when located near deeper creeks per PHMC Section 18.50.150.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 778 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 44 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (ii) Development near and adjacent to creeks should minimize impacts to existing drainage facilities.
(1) Proposed improvements should not diminish the capacity of the creek. (2) Proposed improvements should not increase flooding potential. (3) Runoff should be detained on-site prior to discharge into the creek. (4) Proposed improvements should not cause in increase in erosion or cause instability of the creek banks.
(5) Outfalls to creeks should minimize creek erosion.
(iii) Development adjacent to creeks should minimize impacts to the riparian habitat.
(1) Improvements should be kept away from riparian corridors. (iv) Improvements within creeks are discouraged; however, when proposed should be limited to outfalls, infrastructure improvements, and landscaping approved by local, state, and regional agencies.
(v) Creek stabilization should incorporate soil bio-engineering and plant-based methods.
(vi) Creek improvements should require minimal maintenance. (1) Access for the maintenance and monitoring of creeks should be provided.
(vii)Improvements within creeks should be designed for longevity.

2. Site Planning Objective Design Standards
a. Structures shall be sited from parallel to within 45 degrees of parallel, to the street.
b. Corner structures that face two public streets shall include entries that are sited from parallel within 45 degrees of parallel, to each street. (see Figure 2.b)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 779 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 45 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 2.b
c. All entries facing a public street shall have a pedestrian pathway that connects to the public sidewalk or a public street.
d. All public property that fronts a project shall be improved to current Public Works standards and specifications. Projects shall install and dedicate street improvements including, but not limited to curb and gutter, sidewalk, driveway aprons, street paving, storm drainage facilities, sewer and water, fire protection, undergrounding of utilities and street lighting.

3. Scale and Mass Design Guidelines
The overall size, shape, scale, and massing of a new building can impact the surrounding neighborhood. The overall form of a new building should incorporate as much variety as possible and avoid large expanses of flat wall or roof. Design techniques can be used to minimize the size of multi-family structures, in keeping with a small-town feel.
a. Buildings should be articulated to help minimize the appearance of bulk and provide a more pedestrian scale. (See Figure 3.a)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 780 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 46 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 3.a
b. Overall height of new structures should be in scale with other buildings in the neighborhood.
c. Appropriate buffers and transitions should be used when locating multi-story buildings adjacent to single story buildings. (See Figure 3.c) Figure 3.c
d. Facades of horizontal buildings should be broken into smaller components through use of vertical elements or recessing of the building. e. Long rooflines should be broken up and provided with articulation. (See Figure.

3.e)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 781 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 47 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 3.e

4. Scale and Mass Objective Design Standards
a. Structures shall be vertically and horizontally articulated along all facades that face or will be visible from a public street. Horizontal articulations, including change in total height of a minimum of two feet, change in roof pitch or form, or inclusion of a gable or dormer, shall occur at intervals of a maximum of 20 feet. b. Second floor balconies shall not be positioned along any side elevation within 10 feet of an adjacent multifamily property line or within 20 feet of an adjacent single-family property line.
c. Vertical articulations shall include a change in wall plane by a minimum depth of two feet at a maximum interval of 30 feet, incorporating a projection or recess with a minimum width of two feet and a minimum height of eight feet and a minimum depth of two feet, or stepping back the floors above the ground floor by a minimum of two feet. (see figure 4.c.i and 4.c.ii) An illustrative example of how a finished products would incorporate these vertical articulations is shown in Figure 4.c.ii.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 782 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 48 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 4.c.i
Figure 4.c.ii

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 783 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 49 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 4.c.iii

5. Architecture/Appearance Design Guidelines
The following design guidelines are intended to promote a high-quality appearance of multi-family buildings.
a. New multi-family buildings should be designed with pedestrian scale architecture, emphasizing the pedestrian entrance over the vehicular, stepping back multilevel buildings from the street, and visually breaking up facades into smaller components. (See Figures 5.a)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 784 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 50 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figures 5.a
b. Designs should be visually appealing and include varied facades and pleasing exterior elevations.
(i) Special architectural treatment should occur at the ends/corners of buildings. (See Figures 5.b(i))
(ii) Structures should have varying height, color, setback, materials, texture, landscaping, trim and roof shape.
(iii) Facades should be varied and articulated to provide visual interest to the street and pedestrians.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 785 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 51 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figures 5.b(i)
c. Building materials and colors should be complementary to the surrounding area.

Appropriate colors should be used to better blend with the surrounding area. d. To help reduce the appearance of bulk, building body colors should be lighter than trim colors.
e. The use of foam for trim should be minimized and only used when natural materials are not feasible.
f. No building façade should consist of an unarticulated blank wall or an unbroken series of garage doors.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 786 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 52 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s g. Windows should be recessed to the building façade to provide increased visual interest to the building.
h. The finished architecture should treat the whole structure and finish appropriately on all sides to provide continuity. (See figure 5.h)
Figure 5.h
i. Windows should be appropriately sized, spaced, and composed on the building. j. Architectural features (such as awnings, shutters, tile, and metal elements) should be used on the exterior to provide increased visual interest to the building where appropriate. (See Figure 5.j)
Figure 5.j
k. Roof materials should relate to the design and architectural style of the building. l. Plans submitted to the City should be prepared by a licensed professional.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 787 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 53 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

6. Architecture/Appearance Objective Design Standards
a. Windows located on upper floors within 15 feet of an adjacent structure shall utilize one or more of the following techniques to minimize privacy impacts on adjacent properties and/or structures:
(i) Use clerestory windows located at a minimum height of 5 feet measured from the finished floor;
(ii) Use of non-transparent or frosted glazing; (See Figure 6.a.ii) Figure 6.a.ii
(iii) Installation of permanent architectural screens or louvers in front of windows; and/or (See Figure 6.a.iii)
Figure 6.a.iii

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 788 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 54 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iv) Position the window so that it is not in line or directly face a window on an adjacent structure.

Figure 6.a.iv
b. For structures of four or more stories, upper and lower stories shall be distinguished by incorporating one or more of the following features (i) Incorporate a change in wall material in addition to a change in wall plane of at least one inch in depth at the transition between the two materials. (ii) Treat the ground floor with materials such as stone, concrete, or other similar masonry or cementitious materials that are distinct from the remainder of the structure.
(iii) Set back the top floor(s) of the structure a minimum of 5 feet from the remainder of the building façade.
(iv) Incorporate a horizontal feature such as a bellyband or belt course. (see figure 6.b.iv)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 789 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 55 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 6.b.iv
c. Trim surrounds with a minimum depth of three-quarters of an inch shall be provided on all exterior window and door openings. In lieu of window trim, windows shall be recessed from the wall plane by a minimum of two inches.

7. Environmental Sustainability Design Guidelines
Building “green” is an environmentally responsible construction technique that continues to be accepted and demanded, not only in the region, but for the nation.

Building responsibly provides benefits for people and environment in the name of preservation of natural resource, reduced impacts on the environment, and long-term lower maintenance and utility costs.
a. Using landscape to reduce energy costs.
(i) Use of trees to cool buildings in the summer.
(ii) Use of deciduous trees to take advantage of shade during the summer and allow the sun to shine through during winter months.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 790 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 56 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (iii) Refer to landscape section for additional landscape recommendations b. Using recycled materials, low wattage bulbs, low flow fixtures, energy efficient appliances, windows, tankless water heaters, etc.
c. Recycle and reuse materials from the existing structure. d. Using higher quality, long lasting materials that result in reduced maintenance and the need to use new materials less frequently.
e. Quality Insulation in buildings can better moderate inside temperatures. f. Implement advanced building materials and techniques, including some listed below:
(i) Use of advanced framing design.
(ii) Consider the use of recycled steel material, rather than lumber. (iii) Use of structural insulated panels (SIP).
(iv) Use engineered lumber.
(v) Use of cool roofs. (See Figures 7.f (v))
Figures 7.f(v)
g. Installing attachments and pre-wiring for solar energy in new construction. h. Ensure equipment used to harness the sun is located in the most opportune location to make use of the full extent of natural energy. (i) Trees should be sited to respect solar access to photovoltaic (PV) facilities. (ii) Solar cells should be sited in positions that will allow the greatest extent of sunlight exposure. (See Figure 7.h (ii))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 791 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 57 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 7.h(ii)
i. Follow recommendations included in the United States Green Building Council for Green Building and encourage projects to be compatible with Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards.
j. Achieve “ENERGY STAR” certification through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). k. Projects should incorporate electric/alternative fuel vehicle parking spaces and facilities within new development projects, consistent with Zoning Ordinance requirements. Furthermore, private vehicle charging facilities should be located close to the garage’s electrical panel and should “blend in” with the house design/color to provide architectural compatibility.
l. Water Efficient Landscaping
(i) Minimize disruption to existing native soils and vegetation to decrease the need to replant.
(ii) Reuse plant materials from the site if appropriate. (iii) The use of native plants that require less irrigation. (iv) Use of irrigation systems that effectively use water resources. (v) Provide for on-site water catchment/retention to reduce the need for water. (vi) Ensure compliance with City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance requirements.
(vii)Consider decomposed granite or crushed rock instead of asphalt where appropriate.
m. Provide shade at hardscape areas (See Figure 7.l)
n. Use less paving, lighter colored paving materials, and open grid paving systems.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 792 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 58 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 7.l
There are no Environmental Sustainability Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 793 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 59 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

8. Private Open Space Design Guidelines
A major component of multi-family developments is private open space. Private open spaces are areas that are connected to multi-family units and usually are defined as patios, balconies and decks. They are especially important since residents of multifamily developments do not have a yard or other open spaces that are common with single-family residences. Private open space areas should be usable and in areas that will have an appropriate level of privacy.

Common storage needs are often overlooked, yet storage areas can be critical in making private open space work for residents. The following design guidelines are to be used for private open space:
a. Well designed and adequately sized private open spaces should be provided for each unit consistent with Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section

18.20.040.E. (See Figure 8.a,b,c)
b. Each unit should have some amount of private open space. (See Figure 8.a,b,c) c. Private open space should be easily accessible from individual units. (See Figure

8.a,b,c)
d. Balcony walls should be designed to allow outward visibility. e. e. Fencing and walls should be provided to define private open spaces and to enhance security and privacy. (See Figure 8.a,b,c
f. Design and orientation of open space areas should provide shelter to noise and traffic of adjacent streets or other uses.

Figure 8.a,b,c

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 794 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 60 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

9. Private Open Space Objective Design Standards
a. Each unit shall include a minimum of 48 square feet of private open space with a minimum horizontal dimension of six feet in either direction (width/depth). This requirement is exempt if the unit is directly adjacent to a common open space area.
b. Ground floor private open spaces shall be separated from common areas by an opaque fence or wall between three and seven feet in height.

10. Common Open Space/Amenities Design Guidelines
Shared outdoor area and amenities are intended for use by all residents and should be created with this in mind. Such areas should have easy access from any dwelling unit in the project and should include clear boundaries so that residents and visitors understand what is common and what is private. These areas should be designed for use at night as well as during the day. The following design guidelines apply to the design of common open space and amenities:
a. Common open space and amenities should have access from any dwelling unit in the project.
b. The amount of space and amenities should be larger in size and quantity in proportion to the size of the project.
c. Open spaces should be provided as large components rather than unusable fragments. (See Figure 10.c)
Figure 10.c

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 795 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 61 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s d. Open space areas should be designed to take advantage of sunlight and open air.
e. Projects should provide common amenities to enhance the livability of the project, including, but not limited to pools, exercise rooms, play facilities, and community rooms.
f. Play areas should be centrally located and designed in a manner that allows for adult supervision and child safety.

11. Common Open Space/Amenities Objective Design Standards a. Developments shall provide amenities as follows:
(i) Two to five dwelling units shall provide one amenity. (ii) Six to 15 dwelling units shall provide two amenities. (iii) Sixteen to 30 dwelling units shall provide three amenities. (iv) Thirty-one or more dwelling units shall provide one additional amenity for each 20 units or fraction thereof.
b. Approved amenities include:
(i) Childcare: Playroom, playground, or tot lot with play structures (ii) Fitness and Wellness: Fitness center, pool (indoor or outdoor), spa, sports courts, meditation rooms, yoga/spin studio.
(iii) Outdoor Passive Recreation: Community garden, courtyard/patio area, rooftop deck, al fresco dining area with BBQ.
(iv) Pet-Friendly Amenities: Dog Park or run, self-service pet grooming. (v) Home Office: Conference rooms, co-working spaces, conference call booths, printing services, Wi-Fi lounge.
(vi) Entertainment: Private event space, game room, sports lounge, theater.

12. Landscaping Design Guidelines
Landscaping is a critical component that complements good architectural design to create a finished product. A variety of plantings should be selected and provided appropriately for their intended use. The following design guidelines apply to landscape design:
a. Landscaping should be used as a unifying element within a project to obtain a cohesive appearance and to help achieve compatibility of a new project with its surroundings. (See Figures 12a, 12b)
b. Landscaping should be used to complement good design, not hide substandard architecture. (See Figures 12a, 12b)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 796 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 62 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 12.a
Figure 12.b
c. Select landscape materials and plants that are appropriate in scale and function with the site and for the site conditions.
d. Landscape should generally have a logical tiered system. e. Heritage and protected trees should be preserved for the community’s enjoyment to the greatest extent possible.
(i) Heritage trees are defined as any tree enrolled in the City’s Heritage Tree Program and with a trunk diameter of 16 inches or more or any tree grouping

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 797 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 63 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s in the City with at least one tree of this diameter [per Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.110.E].
(ii) (ii) Protected trees are identified as a native or indigenous tree with a trunk diameter 9 inches or greater at a height of 54-inches from the ground, or any non-native tree with a trunk diameter greater than 18 inches at a height of 54- inches from the ground (as per PHMC Section 18.50.110.A). f. Existing, mature trees should be preserved to the greatest extent possible and incorporated within the overall landscaping plan.
(i) New structures should be designed to not impact existing mature trees to the greatest extent possible.
(ii) Arborist reports should be provided for new development with existing heritage and protected trees at the site.
(iii) An arborist report is required for any project resulting in loss of mature trees and the report may be subject to peer review for accuracy by the City. (iv) Incorporate tree protection measures to save heritage and protected sized trees. (v) Incorporate designs that ensure the long-term longevity of trees. g. Provide landscaping that supports solar gains. (See Figure 12.g) (i) Providing shade trees to help cool buildings during summer months. (ii) Planting deciduous trees 20’-40” apart on the south and west sides of buildings to shade during the summer and allow sunlight through during winter months.
(iii) Use 1/3 evergreen trees for winter structure and variety. (iv) Trees should be sited to respect solar access to photovoltaic (PV) facilities.

Figure 12.g
h. Hardscape areas should be naturally shaded.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 798 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 64 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s i. Landscaping should be incorporated into projects to create an inviting and comfortable environment for residents. (See Figure 12.i) Figure 12.i
j. Landscaping should avoid creating a green wall of vegetation (typically greater than three feet in height) at the front yard.
k. Landscape and hardscape elements should define useful public and private spaces. (See Figure 12.k)
Figure 12.k

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 799 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 65 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s l. Seating options in landscaped areas should be provided. m. Visual focal points such as fountains, sculpture, and art are strongly encouraged to be integrated into landscaping. (See Figure 12.m)
Figure 12.m
n. Walls in alleys abutting residential uses should be screened with landscaping such as clinging vines. Landscape areas adjacent and between garages in alleyloaded residential areas are encouraged. (See Figure 12.n) Figure 12.n

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 800 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 66 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s o. Up-lighting should be provided to highlight and accentuate special or significant landscape elements.
p. Vines and climbing plants integrated upon buildings, trellises, and perimeter walls are encouraged.
q. Structural soil should be used in planting areas that are small and constrained. r. Landscaping should be protected from vehicular and pedestrian encroachment through the use of curbs and raised planting surfaces.
s. Plant material should be sited to respect lighting and allow emergency apparatus access. Trees and large shrubs should be sited to avoid potential damage to overhead lines or underground facilities
t. Utilize landscaping to provide screening of above ground equipment, trash facilities, and parking lots.
(i) Where possible, air conditioning and mechanical equipment should be located on the north and east sides to minimize stress during warmer months. u. Vines and climbing plants integrated upon buildings, trellises, and perimeter walls are encouraged. (See Figure 12.u)
Figure 12.u
v. When selecting plant materials, the following design guidelines should be followed:
(i) When replacing existing mature trees, new trees should be 36–48-inch box size to quickly replace the lost tree canopy or smaller trees should be planted in numbers that replace the lost tree canopy.
(ii) Trees species and sizes should be selected that best fit the planting areas. (iii) Shrub’s species and sizes should be selected that best fit the planting environment.
(iv) Ground cover should be planted using spacing and sizes that will accomplish ground coverage within a short amount of time.
w. To provide for better fire protection, landscape plans for properties in close proximity to open space areas should reflect the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District's guidelines for "Defensible Space."

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 801 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 67 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s x. Encourage the use of alternative sources of water (rainwater, recycled) where possible for irrigation.
y. Landscaping should emphasize native and water-efficient plants. z. Irrigation
(i) Automatic sprinkler controls with rain sensors should be installed to ensure that landscape areas would be watered adequately.
(ii) Sprinkler heads and risers should be protected from dogs, movers, gardeners, and car bumpers. Pop-up heads should be used near curbs and sidewalks.
(iii) The landscape irrigation system should be designed to prevent run-off and overspray.
(iv) Irrigation should use drip and low flow systems to minimize use of water. (v) Irrigation should be designed consistent with the City Water Efficient Landscape requirements of the Zoning Ordinance (PHMC Chapter 18.52). aa. To ensure successful and attractive landscaping on multi-family sites, landscape plans should be prepared by a landscape designer, licensed landscape architect, or other qualified professional.

13. Landscaping Objective Design Standards
a. Pedestrian pathways, hardscapes, front setbacks, and parking areas shall be shaded, with minimum 24-inch box shade trees at intervals of a maximum of 30 feet. A minimum of 50 percent of the trees selected shall be of deciduous variety. b. All areas not occupied by structures or pavement shall be landscaped.

Landscaped areas shall consist of plantings, lawn/turf, mulch, or bark. Artificial turf may be used if it and its substrate is permeable and has a minimum pile height of 1.25 inches.
c. Trees shall be planted along the street frontage at intervals of a maximum of 30 feet and a minimum of 50 percent shall be of deciduous variety. A deciduous tree shall be provided in the rear yard or along a side yard to the west of the primary structure. Trees shall be a minimum box size of 24 inches at the time of planting. d. A maximum of 25 percent of the front yard area shall be paved or hardscaped. e. Landscaping shall be protected from vehicular and pedestrian encroachment through the use of curbs and raised planting surfaces with a minimum height of six inches.
f. Runoff shall be detained on-site prior to discharging to any creek or storm drain facility. Outfalls shall be used to discharge water to creeks. g. Development adjacent to creeks shall position structures along setbacks opposite the creek setback, so that open yard areas, rather than structures, are positioned along creek setbacks.
h. Creek stabilization shall incorporate soil bio-engineering and plant-based methods.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 802 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 68 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

14. Fences and Walls Design Guidelines
Fences and walls are used to demarcate private space and public space, while creating visual openness and visual interest. The following are design guidelines for fences and walls:
a. The design of fences and walls should be architecturally compatible with the primary structures.
b. Walls with public views should be decorative, include vertical elements, and change in elevation. (See Figure 14.b)
Figure 14.b
c. Solid walls and fences are discouraged unless used to demarcate private spaces, separate from adjacent uses, or provide sound separation from busy streets.
d. Fences and wall should not be placed within the public right-of-way.

15. Fences and Walls Objective Design Standards
a. Fences and walls visible from the public street shall incorporate vertical elements with a minimum width of four inches at intervals of no more than six feet. (see figure 15.a)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 803 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 69 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 15.a
b. Walls and fences shall not be placed in the street frontage in hillside areas (with a project site greater than an average of 15 percent slope) and along scenic corridors.
c. Chain-link fences are prohibited.

16. Lighting Design Guidelines
Lighting can serve dual purposes - to enhance the appearance of the project when the sun goes down, and also to provide safety and security. However, lighting can also be intrusive to neighbors and residents as well as to the neighborhood when too bright or inappropriately directed.
a. Lighting levels should be minimized to preserve the night (dark) sky. b. Dark areas within pedestrian and vehicular areas should be avoided for safety purposes.
c. Light fixture design should be compatible and relate to the design and the use of the principal structure on the site.
(i) Pedestrian, vehicular, and wall lighting fixtures should complement each other and the architecture of the building.
(ii) Light fixtures should complement the main structures and not attract attention.
d. Lighting plans should be designed in conjunction with the landscape plan. e. Height of the light poles should be appropriate for the project and the surrounding environment.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 804 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 70 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (i) As a general rule, the height of the light poles should be lower than the main building height. (See Figure 16.d(i, ii))
(ii) Pedestrian scale lighting should be appropriate to the setting. (See Figure

16.d (I, ii)
Figure 16.e(I,ii)
f. l Parking lot lighting should be in scale with the project yet provide adequate lighting for safety and visibility purposes.
g. Parking lot lighting should incorporate full cutoff fixtures designed to be consistent with Zoning Ordinance provisions - PHMC Section 18.55.140. (See Figure 16.g)
h. Shield light sources to prevent any glare or direct illumination on adjacent properties. (See figure 16.f)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 805 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 71 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 16.g
Figure 16.g
i. Wall pack glare should be shielded and minimized.
j. All pedestrian and vehicular areas should be well-lit for safety and security. k. Subtle illumination to enhance the architectural form of a building is encouraged.

17. Lighting Objective Design Standards
a. All entryways, porch areas, pedestrian pathways, parking areas, and gates shall include lighting for safety and security. Lighting shall be fully shielded, directed downward (not above the horizontal plane), and shall not spill onto adjacent properties. Lighting shall use light emitting diodes (LEDs) with a maximum

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 806 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 72 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s temperature of 3000 kelvins and shall be consistent with the maximum allowed foot-candle levels cited in Subsection 18.55.140(b) of the Zoning Ordinance. A photometric plan shall be provided to show compliance.
b. Light fixtures that are not used for security and safety purposes shall be a maximum of eight feet from the ground plane in pedestrian areas and 12 feet in parking areas. Upper floor accent lighting is prohibited unless necessary for security and safety purposes.

18. Circulation and Parking Design Guidelines
a. Circulation. On-site circulation is provided to connect residents to common facilities, such as parking lots, mailboxes, trash enclosures, other project amenities, other dwelling units, and to points outside the project. Vehicular circulation is important to minimize conflicts between pedestrian and vehicular uses, and to minimize the amount of paving in projects. The following are design guidelines for on-site circulation:
(i) Vehicular
(1) Site access and internal circulation should promote safety, efficiency and convenience. Conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians should be avoided (per PHMC Section 18.55.100).
(2) Continuous circulation is encouraged, with dead-end driveways minimized.
(3) Site access points should be minimized and located as far as possible from street intersections.
(4) Decorative pavement should be used at entries and pedestrian crosswalks.
(5) In the isolated instances that security gates are incorporated into a project, adequate queuing space and turn-around area should be provided to prevent blockage of adjacent streets.
(6) Parking lot design should conform to standards identified in the Zoning Ordinance [Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Chapter 18.55]. (ii) Pedestrian
(1) Facilitate pedestrian access and circulation. Entry design should incorporate sidewalks on both sides of the driveway.
(2) Direct access from public streets should be provided to entries. (See Figure 18.b (2))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 807 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 73 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 18.b(2)
(3) Access is encouraged to adjacent uses.
(4) When in close proximity to trails and other established pedestrian paths, direct access should be provided.
(5) Pedestrian walkways should be safe, visually attractive, and well defined by landscaping and lights. Use of decorative pavement is encouraged in hardscape areas, at a minimum it should be used to delineate crossings. (See Figure 18.b (5))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 808 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 74 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 18.b(5)
(6) Walkways should be at least 4 feet clear in width.
(7) Circulation should take into account CBC & ADA requirements in the early stages of project design.
b. Parking. Parking is an important issue that needs to be properly addressed in multi-family housing development. Large parking spaces can dominate a site and consume open space possibilities; however, it is needed in adequate amounts as part of a successful development. Parking areas should be safe and secure and allow easy access from housing units.
(i) Parking areas should be well-designed and safe, located away from public views.
(ii) Parking lots should be sited at the rear or side of the site to allow a majority of the dwelling units to front the street. (See figure 11.b(ii)) (iii) Garages/carports should be architecturally integrated with the main building and be architecturally consistent with the style/design. (iv) d. Multiple small parking lots should be built in-lieu of one large lot. (See Figure 18.b(iv))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 809 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 75 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 18.b(ii, iv)
(v) When parking lots are along the street frontage, they should be screened with landscaping.
(1) Trees and shrubs should be planted to soften the impact of parking areas and provide shade for parking to the greatest extent possible. (See Figure

18.b (v.1))
Figure 18.b(v.1)
(vi) Perimeter landscaping should be provided around parking lots as per Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.140.
(vii) Trees should be provided to allow for 50% canopy coverage of parking lots at tree maturity to the greatest extent possible. (See Figure 18.b(vii)) (viii) Landscape islands should be a minimum of four feet wide to allow adequate spacing for trees. (PHMC 18.55.140.C)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 810 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 76 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 18.b(vii)
(ix) Trees should be located to avoid contact with vehicle overhang and car doors.
(x) When parking structures are proposed, blank and unarticulated walls should be avoided or decorated with artwork and/or vegetation. (See Figure 18.b(x)) (xi) Parking lots should be sited in proximity to dwelling units to allow for casual surveillance.

Figure 18.b((x)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 811 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 77 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (xii)The number of driveways should be minimized and located an adequate, safe distance from street corners.
(xiii) Driveway entrances (from streets) should receive special landscape and paving treatments to break up paving expanses and to define the site entrance. (See Figure 18.b(xiii))
Figure 18.b(xiii)
(xiv)Parking spaces off of main vehicular entryways should be at least one car length (15’ minimum) away from the street to allow safe ingress and egress for the first parking space.
(xv) Accessible parking spaces will be required to comply with current requirements.
(xvi)Parking lots should be drained to landscape or other filtering solutions to minimize polluted runoff.

19. Circulation and Parking Objective Design Standards
a. Parking shall be prohibited between the structure front and the street. b. Parking spaces located off main vehicular entryways shall be a minimum of 20 feet away from the street to allow safe ingress and egress for the first parking space. (See Figure 19.b)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 812 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 78 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 19.b
c. Projects with more than 10 units shall provide a minimum of two parking areas.

No more than 60 percent of the parking stalls may be sited in a single parking area unless in a multi-level structure.
d. Exterior facing walls of parking structures shall be articulated with artwork, natural ventilation, and/or landscaping at minimum intervals of 10 feet. The articulation shall occupy a minimum area of 16 square feet of wall surface area. (See Figure 19.d)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 813 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 79 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 19.d
e. Carports shall use a color scheme from a structure within the development. f. Parking areas shall be lined with 24-inch box shade trees planted every 30 feet, on average.
g. Perimeter landscaping shall be provided around parking lots as per PHMC Section 18.50.140.
h. Parking areas, excluding those with carport-mounted solar panels, shall include one tree for every three stalls. Trees shall be a minimum of 24-inch box size at the time of planting.
i. Parking areas shall be interconnected and shall use shared driveways accessing the development.
j. All structures, amenities, parking areas, building entries, and common spaces shall be connected by pedestrian pathways with a minimum width of four feet. k. Pedestrian pathways shall be connected to the public sidewalk along each street frontage.

20. Service Facilities and Utilities Design Guidelines
An important part of multi-family residential projects that is often overlooked is the siting of service facilities and utilities. They should not be treated as after thoughts, but should be designed to enhance or at least not negatively impact the overall site plan. The following are
a. Locate service facilities and drives away from public streets and nearby residential uses. Place service uses in the least visible areas.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 814 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 80 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s b. Provide access for service vehicles and separate from other on-site circulation patterns when possible.
c. Fully screen all service facilities from the public street and adjoining properties.

Screening should match the design and material of the main building. d. When new transformers are required within public views and within the front yard setback, they should be undergrounded. In all other locations it should be screened from views consistent with Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 18.50.090. (See Figure 20.d)
Figure 20.d
e. Mechanical Equipment
(i) Mechanical equipment should be sited in side and rear yard areas of the project, hidden from public views or designed to be located within the associated building (i.e. Fire District risers) to avoid a “tacked on” appearance.
(ii) Locate mechanical equipment away from on-site and adjacent uses to not cause noise problems.
(iii) Fully screen roof top equipment from public views as per PHMC Section

18.50.090. (See Figure 20.e(iii,iv,v))
(iv) Screening for roof top equipment should use architecture that matches the overall building design. (See Figure 20.e(iii,iv,v))
(v) Avoid multiple roof screens; all equipment should be within one cohesive screen. (See Figure 20.e(iii.iv,v))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 815 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 81 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 20.e(iii, iv, v)
f. Trash and Recycling Facilities
(i) All multi-family projects should provide for adequate storage of trash and recyclable materials in enclosed areas (PHMC Section 18.50.070). Typically, for any enclosed area, 40% of the floor space should be allocated for trash, 40% for recycling, and 20% for organics. Where an enclosure contains both carts and bins, an area that is 150% of the sum of bin and cart footprints is recommended.
(ii) Trash enclosures should be conveniently accessible by collection trucks and sufficient space provided to move bins and carts as needed by users. (iii) Enclosures should be in rear and side yards.
(iv) Provide a pad durable enough (i.e. reinforced concrete pad, reinforced paving) to withstand garbage collection activities in front of and within enclosures.
(v) Enclosures should be located within close proximity (within 300 feet) of each unit for user convenience.
(vi) Trash enclosures should screen trash containers on all 4 sides to the full height of the container, consistent with PHMC Section 18.50.070. Enclosure gates should be equipped with a mechanism (i.e. self-latching/self-closing gates) to secure the doors in the open and closed position. Enclosure should be covered to prevent storm water contamination
(vii)The style, material, and color of enclosures should be similar to those of the main structure. (See Figure 20.f(vii))

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 816 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 82 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 20.f(vii)

21. Service Facilities and Utilities Objective Design Standards a. Trash, recycling, and organic waste bins and dumpsters (trash containers) shall be housed within covered refuse enclosures with a metal gate or door(s) that latch shut. Wooden refuse enclosures that house trash containers are prohibited.

Refuse enclosures shall be painted the same colors as a residential structure within the development. Refuse enclosures shall screen trash containers on all four sides to the full height of the container, consistent with PHMC Section

18.50.070 and shall occupy an area that is a minimum of 150 percent of the sum of the waste bins.
b. Refuse enclosures are prohibited in the required front setbacks and shall be screened from view from the street by landscaping with a minimum height of six feet.
c. Above-ground utilities, transformers, and other mechanical equipment placed between the front or street side of a structure and a public street or vehicular or pedestrian accessway, shall be screened from view by a fence, wall, or landscaping.
d. Excluding solar panels, roof-mounted equipment shall be hidden from view from the public street behind roof peaks or parapets.
e. Utility and mechanical equipment shall not obstruct pedestrian pathways.

22. Public Improvements Design Guidelines
When a new project is proposed within the City, it can be reasonably expected that construction will also occur within public property (roads, easements, trails, etc.).

When this occurs, the private developer is responsible to repair any damage. It is also the expectation that improvements will occur along all frontages related to the project boundaries and any relevant areas that will be impacted by the proposed development.
a. All public property that fronts a project should be improved to current standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 817 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 83 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (i) Improvements include streets, sidewalks, and landscaping. (ii) ADA improvements are required.
(iii) Street widening may occur when deemed appropriate for an area. (iv) New lighting and signage may also be required.
b. Improvements can be required further away from the project site. (i) Lane widening to accommodate traffic increases.
(ii) A new or modified traffic signal at nearby intersections.

23. Signage Design Guidelines
Please see the City Sign Design Guidelines section contained in the Non-Residential Design Guidelines for further guidance in regard to signs.

C. Drainage and Stormwater Requirements
The City of Pleasant Hill has various creeks that run through the City limits. Because of this, large portions of the City are susceptible to flooding during the rainy season. The flooding threat can be minimized by designing projects that allow rainfall to absorb back into the ground rather than rolling off of impervious surfaces. In addition, recent requirements by the State have made the reduction of stormwater runoff and polluted runoff a priority for development projects. This helps to reduce flooding impacts as well as keeping water that flows into environmentally sensitive areas as clean as possible.

The following are design guidelines with regard to drainage and stormwater runoff:

1. Drainage Design Guidelines
a. Development and redevelopment projects will be required to incorporate drainage elements in site design as specified in the Subdivision Ordinance, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, Pleasant Hill Municipal Code (PHMC) Section 15.05 Stormwater Management and Drainage Requirements, and Public Works Standards. See City Engineering website for additional information - http://www.ci.pleasant-hill.ca.us/379/NPDES-Program. (i) Proposals should consider existing topography, soil types, existing drainage pattern, and creeks.
(ii) Drainage facilities should be low maintenance.
b. Projects should be designed to minimize impervious surfaces, allowing infiltration of stormwater.
(i) Pervious pavement materials should be considered. Turf block, gravel, unit pavers, porous asphalt, and pervious concrete are encouraged. (ii) Shared driveways and reduced width should be considered.

There are no Public Improvement Objective Design Standards.

There are no Sign Objective Design Standards.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 818 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 84 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s c. Projects should maximize and preserve existing open space. Development layouts should be clustered or arranged to maximize open space. d. Projects should incorporate landscape elements to reduce pollution from urban runoff.
(i) Runoff should be routed into landscaped areas for treatment and detention. (See Figure 1.d (i,ii))
(ii) (ii) Landscaped areas should incorporate appropriate species. (See Figure

1.d (i,ii)) Some trees species for consideration can include, but are not limited to, Western Redbud, Raywood and California Ash, Box Elder, Hybrid Laurel, Victorian Box, Japanese Black Pine, Strawberry Tree, Catalina Cherry, Big Leaf Maple, Buckeye, Red Alder, White Alder, Black Walnut, Western Cottonwood, Red Willow, Elderberry, and California Bay Laurel. (iii) (Irrigation should be efficient.

Figure 1.d(I, ii)
(iv) Refuse areas should be located away from roofs and inlets, and should be covered or screened.
(v) Medians should be level or concave to contain and capture runoff. (See Figure 1.d (v))
Figure 1.d(v)
e. Drainage facilities should be integrated into landscaping, but also be identifiable.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 819 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 85 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (i) Dry swales and infiltration planters should be lined or covered with cobbles that blend in with the landscape.

III. STREETSCAPE AND GATEWAYS
A. Streetscape
Streets are an integral part of any community and play a role in the appearance of a city.

Streets serve many purposes including connecting people and places, providing buffers between uses, serving as an exercise tool for bikers and joggers. Streets play an important role in strengthening neighborhood interaction and livability.

Streets can be a benefit as mentioned above and can also be a detriment by bringing traffic, air pollution, and congestion to a city. To ensure that the streets of Pleasant Hill continue to be an asset to the City, the following streetscape guidelines will help to maintain and improve streets:

1. Scenic Corridor/Routes – As designated within the City of Pleasant Hill General Plan a. Maintain a 50-foot setback for new development.
b. Encourage development/improvements that enhance the scenery of the area. (i) Encourage landscaping that is appropriate to the planting area without radically altering the existing vegetation.
(ii) Encourage landscaping that reflects the natural history and culture of the area, and Pleasant Hill in general.
c. Support improvements that enhance the scenery and open vistas along scenic corridors.

2. Arterial Streets
a. Arterial streets carry the bulk of traffic through the City. Arterials provide direct service to major traffic generators and connect to the freeway system. Arterials typically have higher speeds and because of the traffic loads, are often susceptible to traffic and congestion. Arterials mainly serve vehicles; however, alternative modes of transportation can be thoughtfully integrated with design while not impacting traffic flow.
b. To maintain existing flow of traffic, additional ingress and egress points are discouraged.
c. Bus turnouts should be provided to maintain efficiency of arterial streets. (See Figure 2.c)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 820 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 86 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 2.c
d. Traffic light signals should be synchronized.
e. Adequate buffers between sidewalks and roadways should be maintained through a four-foot landscape strip between the street and sidewalk. f. Wide medians should be provided as space allows.
(i) Medians should consist of more than paint striping. (See Figure 2.f (i)) Figure 2.f(i)

3. Collector Streets
a. Collector streets are used as connectors between arterial streets that serve the City in general, and local streets that serve neighborhoods. Collector streets connect adjacent neighborhoods and carry through-traffic city-wide. b. Alternative modes of transportation should be thoughtfully integrated and designed within collector streets.
c. Landscaping should be integrated along collectors especially when located within residential areas. (See Figure 3.c)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 821 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 87 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s Figure 3.c
d. Larger street setbacks should be incorporated along collector streets.

4. Local Streets
a. Local streets are an integral component of neighborhoods and function primarily to provide access to destinations both inside and outside the neighborhood.

Local streets should function to serve multiple modes of transportation including vehicle, pedestrian, bicycle, and other alternative modes of transportation. Local streets should be designed for use mainly by the neighborhood and encourage reduced speeds, rather than allow for high traffic speeds, congestion, and short cuts to get from one point to another.
b. b. When improvements at a site occur, new sidewalks should be provided to create a safer and better pedestrian network throughout neighborhoods as per Public Works Standards.
c. Street trees should be incorporated when sidewalks are rebuilt or added to a site. d. Streetlights should be minimized on local streets; however, should be used when addressing safety concerns.

5. General Streetscape Guidelines
a. Street Trees
(i) Street trees should be of a species without intrusive roots and consume minimal amounts of water. In addition, street trees should be appropriate for their location. If the tree is to be located in a tight median, the tree selected should be smaller.
(ii) (ii) When planting street trees, the minimum size should be 24 inch box. (1) Smaller sizes may be appropriate in small or tight planting areas or when availability issues arise.
b. Sidewalks

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 822 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 88 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s (i) Sidewalks located on wider streets should be separated from the roadway with a landscape strip. (See Figure 5.b (i))
(ii) New sidewalks installed at infill locations should match the existing sidewalks in the immediate area.

Figure 5.b(i)
c. Current and relevant CBC/ADA requirements are required to be satisfied with every project.

B. Gateways
Gateways are visual design features that allow residents and visitors to recognize when one is entering a special place or area. Well-designed gateways help to establish, strengthen, and provide an identity to the City, and will help to identify when someone is in the City of Pleasant Hill. The City of Pleasant Hill currently has gateway treatments at certain locations in the City

1. City identification signs should represent the City of Pleasant Hill - its history and present.

2. Gateway treatments should represent the identity of the City of Pleasant Hill on arterial streets and on major trails that enter and exit the City.

3. City gateways should use appropriate signage, landscaping, artwork, architectural features, and appropriate scale.

4. Sites at prominent gateway locations should provide additional landscape treatments and design amenities (including artwork) to help identify the transition into the City.

5. Utilities should be under-grounded to not detract from prominent gateway locations.

6. City designed projects should implement additional gateways features at prominent locations that help to create a sense of entry into the City.

7. When near gateways, service yards, storage areas, and parking lots should be screened.

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 823 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 89 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s IV. Credits
The City of Pleasant Hill would like to thank the following for their time and efforts on this document in addition to all community members who provided valuable input.

City Council
Mayor John Hanecak
Vice-Mayor Suzanne Angeli
Councilmember David E. Durant
Councilmember Michael G. Harris
Councilmember Terri Williamson
Planning Commission
Chairperson Steve Wallace
Vice-Chairperson Lola Fellinger
Commissioner Robert Abbott
Commissioner James Bonato
Commissioner Ken Lombardi
Commissioner Dave Mascaro
Commissioner Diana Vavrek
Architectural Review Commission
Chairperson Thor Scordelis
Vice-Chairperson John Hart
Commissioner George Corrigan
Commissioner Pamela Simonds
Commissioner Richard Stanton
City of Pleasant Hill Staff
Steve Wallace – Public Works and Community Development Director Casey McCann – Public Works and Community Development Deputy Director Troy Fujimoto – Senior Planner
Rod Wui – Associate Engineer
Debra Margolis – City Attorney
Illustrations and Formatting
Lawrence Ko Leong
Robert Becker

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 824 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 90 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

APPENDIX A
V. City of Pleasant Hill Resolution of adopting the City Wide Design Guidelines and Objective Design Standards

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 825 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA)

RESOLUTION NO. 18 - 22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF PLEASANT HILL, ADOPTING

CITYWIDE RESIDENTIAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS THAT WILL BE

CONTAINED WITHIN THE EXISTING CITY OF PLEASANT HILL

CITYWIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, the City of Pleasant Hill staff initiated amendments to adopt Citywide Residential Objective Design Standards; and
WHEREAS, amendments to Title 18 of the Pleasant Hill Municipal Code are proposed to amend and add provisions related to objective design standards; and WHEREAS, the City wishes to establish objective design standards that can be applied to residential projects throughout the City, including qualifying residential projects that are eligible for limited and streamlined City review pursuant to state law; and WHEREAS, in light of the state legislature’s adoption of several bills signed into law by the governor to address the statewide housing crisis, including but not limited to, Senate Bill (SB) 9, SB 330, SB 35, SB 167, AB 678 and Assembly Bill 1515, among others, there is now a need for the City to adopt additional residential objective residential development standards applicable to projects that qualify for expedited and streamlined review pursuant to state law; and WHEREAS, adoption of Citywide Objective Design Standards would provide clear direction to design professionals, property owners, and homeowners, when making design and land use applications; and
WHEREAS, City staff has proposed Objective Design Standards for inclusion within the existing Citywide Design Guidelines applicable to all residential projects throughout the City; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Commission held a study session on July 1, 2021, to consider the proposed objective design standards; and WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been duly, regularly, and lawfully given, a public hearing on the proposed Objective Design Standards was held by the Architectural Review Commission on November 18, 2021, where all interested persons might appear and be heard, and the Architectural Review Commission adopted Resolution No. 04-21 recommending approval to the Planning Commission and City Council; and
WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been duly, regularly, and lawfully given, a public hearing on the proposed Objective Design Standards was held by the Planning Commission on January 11, 2022, where all interested persons might appear and be heard and the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 03-22 recommending approval to the City Council; and

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 826 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA)

2 WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been duly, regularly, and lawfully given, a public hearing on the proposed Objective Design Standards was held by the City Council on March 21, 2022, where all interested persons might appear and be heard.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pleasant Hill approves the Residential Objective Design Standards as noted in Attachment B of the March 21, 2022 City Council Staff Report and based on the following findings:

1. The City Council finds that the Citywide Residential Objective Design Standards included in the Citywide Design Guidelines will preserve and enhance residential neighborhoods.

2. The City Council finds that the Citywide Residential Objective Design Standards included in the Citywide Design Guidelines will promote variety, excellence and compatibility with existing development for new and significantly remodeled residential developments.

3. The City Council finds that the Citywide Residential Objective Design Standards included in the Citywide Design Guidelines will improve the general appearance of the City by providing design standards for residential projects that reflect the design preferences of the City.

4. This Project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, the lead agency has determined with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed project could have a significant impact on the environment as it does not directly approve any physical development.

ADOPTED by the City Council, City of Pleasant Hill, on the 21st day of March, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: Carlson, Flaherty, Noack, Rinn, Harris
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
_____________________________________
MICHAEL G. HARRIS, OD, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
DANIELLE HABR, City Clerk

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 827 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) 91 | P l e a s a n t H i l l D e s i g n G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s

APPENDIX B
VI. City of Pleasant Hill Resolution of adopting the City Wide Design Guidelines (Resolution 68-17)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 828 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 829 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 830 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA)

10.2.g
Packet Pg. 831 Attachment: Attachment G - Residential Design Guidelines and Standards (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Jack Prosek
To: Haley Croffoot
Cc: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: Study Session 1 - Planning Commission meeting 11-01-2023 Date: Saturday, October 28, 2023 12:41:10 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Project Planners -
Attachment "A" is the Draft Proposed Ordinance Amendments that is being presented during the Study Session # 1 at the November 1st meeting of the PH Planning Commission.

It appears to me that the diagrams on pages 8 and 19 are incorrect. In the Stepback diagram on the left side, Dimension "3" Required Side/Rear Yard is shown to be measured to the Upper rather than the Lower portion of the subject buildings.

Please confirm which is correct !!
Jack Prosek
PH Resident / Homeowner
zz

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 832 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Jack Prosek
To: Haley Croffoot
Cc: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: Study Session 1 - PC meeting 11-01-2023 - Staff Report Date: Sunday, October 29, 2023 9:35:31 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Project Planners -
The documents for the Agenda packet include a Staff Report for the Planning Commission's Special Meeting on November 1st. There are a number of questions & comments on this Staff Report as follows:

Housing Element: on page 1 the Staff Report refers to a HE document revised "October 2023" whereas Attachment "B" on page 5 refers to a HE document "Adopted May 18, 2023" - the actual Attachment "B" in this packet is the SEPTEMBER Revision of the HE that was Adopted on May 18th.

Maximum Building Height: where do we find the map showing the proposed new building heights of up to "60 feet" as noted in the first paragraph on page 3 and the Development Standards paragraph on page 4 ?? The 60' maximum will prove to be inadequate for MixedUse buildings with commercial / retail uses on the ground (first) floor level - an 80' maximum would be more conducive to actual development of these sites !! Commercial Uses: what is the definition of the word "Commercial" as used in these documents ? Mixed Use Zoning for MX-NB denotes this to include coffee shops, grocery stores & retail establishments while MX & MX-VHD adds hotels, offices, entertainment & personal services, MX-HD omits hotels from their list.

Non-Residential Uses: should the word "commercial" be changed to "non-residential" in the paragraphs on Land Use & Development Standards ??
Parking Requirements: what is the basis for reducing the Guest Parking requirements by 50% from 1 per 2 du to 1 per 4 du ?? Will the overflow go into the adjacent existing RESIDENTIAL neighborhoods ??
VMT: this term should be described since most residents have no idea what it means.

Please address ALL of these points during your presentation so that the Public Comments made during the meeting might be more meaningful.

Jack Prosek
PH Resident / Homeowner
zz

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 833 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Jack Prosek
To: Haley Croffoot
Cc: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: Study Session 1 - PC meeting 11-01-2023 - Ordinance Amendments Date: Monday, October 30, 2023 3:23:02 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Project Planners -
The documents for the Agenda packet include Attachment "A" - Draft Proposed Ordinance Amendments for the Planning Commission's Special Meeting on November 1st.

There are a number of questions & comments on these Proposed Amendments as follows:

18.20.010 - paragraph "B": do you need to ADD a 12th residential district for the MXVHD Zoning that allows 70 - 100 du/ac ?

18.20.010 - paragraph "B-8": should the maximum number of units be 70 rather than 73 shown for MRVH ?

18.20.040 - paragraph "D-2" & 18.22.040 - paragraph "C-2": suggest that you ADD a second example of the Stepback requirements for a building of more than 45' high - perhaps at 60' since that is the maximum height shown in this document.

18.22.020 - pages 14 & 15: are ALL of the listed "Commercial Uses" allowed in ALL of the Mixed-Use Districts ???
Schedule 18.22.030 - Development Regulations: the Maximum Building Height restrictions for the four new Mixed-Use Districts are far too severe.

If you truly want to see some worthy developments being submitted, these numbers should be increased to something like 45 - 60 - 70 - 80 ft.

Table 2-10 Setback Encroachments (page 20): for Utility Structures, does "size" refer to the floor area (say 2' x 3' = 6 sf) ? Should there also be a height limit for such structures ??

18.22.040 - paragraph "N-1": this Development Regulation appears to prevent the future use of the DVC North / Overflow Parking Lot (Site "A") to meet a portion of their needs for Student & Staff parking - is that your intent ???
When on-site attendance returns to its pre-pandemic levels, it will ONCE AGAIN show that DVC does NOT have an adequate number of Parking Spaces to meet the needs of their Students & Staff. The result is that HUNDREDS of vehicles are parked in the RESIDENTIAL neighborhoods that surround their PH Campus. This situation needs to be corrected with any future building project on this Site "A" !!!

18.55.030 - Guest Parking (page 21): what is the basis for the proposed 50% reduction in

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 834 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) the number of Guest Parking spaces ??
ALL of these issues deserve to be addressed by the Planning Commissioners during the course of their Study Session on the Proposed Ordinance Amendments . . . . .

Jack Prosek
PH Resident / Homeowner
zz

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 835 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Kelvin Kwan
To: Planning; Haley Croffoot
Subject: Planning Commission Study Session - Public Comment (November 1, 2023) Date: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 10:49:33 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Dear Ms. Croffoot and Planning Commission Members:

I would like to make a public comment regarding the proposed zoning ordinance amendment related to parcels 152-010-004 and 154-140-015.
1) According to the Pleasant Hill Municipal Code 18.05.020. "The broad purposes of the zoning ordinance are to protect and promote the public health, safety, and general welfare." Given that all the residential development parcels within the City with an average slope of 15 percent are subject to the HPUD standards, will exempting those two parcels pose a threat to public safety?
2) I believe the City needs to explain to the public why the two parcels are suitable to be exempted from the HPUD standards. Are there any regulations/evidence to support the decision? How do the City council / planning commission members determine that it's appropriate to exempt these two parcels? Should this be reviewed by the City engineer? 3) It appears this is not conforming with the Contra Costa County Land Use Element (https://www.contracosta.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/30913/Ch3-Land-Use-Element? bidId=) implementation measure 3-t. "Enforce the restrictions on open hillsides and significant ridgelines in Open Space Element and protect hillsides with a grade of 26 percent or greater through implementing zoning and other appropriate measures and actions." And potentially violates other Local and Regional policies and ordinances.

Best regards,
Kelvin
Links contained in this email have been replaced. If you click on a link in the email above, the link will be analyzed for known threats. If a known threat is found, you will not be able to proceed to the destination. If suspicious content is detected, you will see a warning.

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 836 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Matt Kennedy: 11/1 Special Study - Planning Commission Decisions Are Safety Decisions Date: Friday, November 3, 2023 1:06:33 PM
From: Matthew Kennedy <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, November 2, 2023 3:52 PM
To: Chadwick Wyler <[email protected]>; Diana Vavrek <[email protected]>; David Field <[email protected]>; Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]> Subject: Matt Kennedy: 11/1 Special Study - Planning Commission Decisions Are Safety Decisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Hi All,
(I attempted to add all Planning Commission members, but emails weren't working, please pass on to your colleagues)
I wanted to reach out in regards to the conclusion of yesterday's Planning Commission Meeting Special Study (11/1); I had to leave immediately after my comment and am just now updated on what was discussed after I left.
*It was stated by the Commission that they believe their exemption of Morello Terraces and Paso Nogal Hill from HPUD codes is purely aesthetic and that they are not dismantling safety codes.*
I strongly disagree with these statements. However before I delve into my reasoning, I would like to state the following.

I believe the Planning Commission and the Council are quite guilty of falling for the sunk cost fallacy and as a result of our interactions strictly limited to public comment, there is an unspoken consensus that the commenter is not educated on the topic and therefore the parties that are receiving city money should remain the only source on information because well "what are we paying them for". I would be willing to bet even right now your brain is resisting considering my stance simply because I am not in your "in-group".

As an example of this fallacy, I would use my own comments. I have provided numerous comments, reports, questions, etc. with negligible response; it seems I am being ignored in favor of the experts...but is the designation of uninformed public comment vs. expert comment correct? I have a BS and MEng in Bioengineering and Mathematics, I've worked in risk analysis for over five years, specifically in auto/industrial/medical device failures, as well as the design of medical devices. I've also published original research on cardiac arrhythmia math modeling as an undergrad which was featured by a Cambridge professor. In short, I can learn how very complex things work quite quickly, and I understand deeply the role humans play in project and outcome failures.

Why do I tell you this? It is not to gloat, because believe me...I also have extensive weaknesses. It is because I want you to understand that our community has an incredibly diverse pool of talent and by you defaulting to neglecting public comment in favor of a paid

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 837 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) consultant, you are missing out on a lot of beneficial information and may I remind you...beneficial information that you don't have to pay for. This default is also resulting in the outcome of this project even more tightly pigeonholed than before with zero flexibility in the future.

Are we properly auditing our consultants and their performance to ensure our City's current and future needs are being addressed? Or are we rushing to get compliance and letting HCD dictate every decision with no analysis?
Now back to (*) from above.

Claim: "HPUD codes are aesthetic, not safety codes"
Answer: HPUD provides a first-level control of land use decisions as they relate to the sloping of a parcel. The slope gradient of a parcel is absolutely a design/safety parameter. As the slope of a parcel increases, so does the physical risk to structure stability. One does not need an engineering degree or accredidation to understand that as materials are exposed to gravity a force is applied. As the mass of buildings and the slope of this gradient increase, the internal/external forces greatly increase. Now I can already hear it...."but we aren't changing safety codes...the developer will comply and the building will be fine"..and to this I would say...what pool of developers do you think you are courting with this high density rezoning? You are naturally constraining the pool of interested developers to the highest risk-takers.

Deregulation in markets where the product lives in a regulated eco-system is a ripe initial condition to allow for future corner-cutting. The statement "we aren't making unsafe decisions" is deeply incorrect. Whether you like it or not, you are deeply involved in the engineering safety decisions, in fact I would argue you are one of the most important nodes of this product lifecycle. You are setting the market parameters that will inform who attempts this project in the first place. Yes, engineering mitigation does great things, but as an engineer I need to stress that large structural mitigations can absolutely cause unpredictable surrounding effects to foundations.

It was also stated numerous times that "Oh I doubt these will even be developed"..well then I would immediately respond and say then that this high-density rezone on a steep slope is the constraint to development and we need to inform HCD of that. What good are we doing anyone if we go through all this, have no projects proposed, wait another 8 years, and then what? That could have been years someone could have resided on these parcels if they were properly rezoned and analyzed...not defaulted to the state's buzzword jargon that is not rigorously centered. Even the pro-housing group East Bay for Everyone has provided comments that these parcels realistically would not hold high density and that we should shoot for a middle ground of distributed townhomes or 2-3 story apartments. To conclude, HPUD codes are a first control for safety considerations and absolutely are safety codes, and whether you like it or not, you are intimately a part of the engineering due diligence process.

The final thing I would like to address is the default response of deferring to our "experts". In the words of Ryan Lester, who works at Mintier and Harnish, "These HCD regulations are very new, so each time we submit there is very much an element of us guessing what HCD wants..." Now I am not here to debate Mintier & Harnish's credentials or their competence (that is your job to critique it) All I am trying to say is that if we are not critically analyzing our team's performance in a very new regulatory ecosystem, it sets us up to really be constrained in the future as HCD has shown precedent to defer to the Housing Element and enforce what is outlined within it using lawsuits. Therefore we need to get this right the first

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 838 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) time and consider the community, otherwise it is just pushing the friction down the road and potentially to a more hostile process.

To summarize it all:
-HPUD codes are the first control of hillside safety and review; exemption from them is an exemption from a safety control.
-The Planning Commission is intimately involved in the safety and efficacy of this engineering project; you are determining the type of developer that would look at this and constraining it to the highest risk taker.
-Our community is uniquely diverse and talented...stop ignoring it, leverage it! -A default to assuming our paid third party team members (with no local vested interest) are the commanding authority will result in pigeonholed outcomes that do not serve our community.

I seriously thank you if you took the time to read and consider this. It would be incredible if one could respond simply to acknowledge receipt; I understand we aren't going to have a fruitful discussion here...or perhaps one day we can.

Best,
Matt

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 839 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Jack Prosek
To: Haley Croffoot
Cc: Troy Fujimoto
Subject: PC meeting 11-01-2023 - Ordinance Amendments
Date: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 8:37:38 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Haley -
Taking some additional time & getting a referral to the examples of higher density housing developments that were displayed at the 2040 General Plan Townhall meeting held on October 27, 2021, I find that the higher building height limits that I suggested for Multi-Use developments may still be TOO LOW !!
The densities proposed in the Housing Element document for the nine Sites along Contra Costa Blvd., Gregory Lane & Monument Blvd. (except "F") are 40 to 70 dwelling units per acre. These Sites would all need to be zoned MX-HD. The corresponding examples are Town Center Apartments (54 du/ac), Coggins Square (58 du/ac) & Trestle Glen (65 du/ac).

These developments are all 4 or 5 stories of residential units - no Mixed-Uses or Commercial occupancies were indicated for any of these developments.

For the Commercial space on the ground floor level, one should expect a story height of 15 to 18' to allow for 12 to 14' high ceilings in those spaces.

For FOUR floors of apartments, one would need at least 4 x 9' = 36' vertically for the minimum 8' ceiling heights.

Adding 4' above the main roof deck level for the roofing & a parapet wall brings the subtotal to 55 to 58'.

And that is before considering the additional height needed for sloped roofs, mechanical equipment screens, the elevator penthouse AND solar panels, which could easily add another 6 to 10' for a total 61 to 68' overall height above grade. Developments that focus on Middle Income residents would want larger rooms & higher ceilings on each floor such as exist in the dwelling units in the 5 to 6 story buildings at Avalon Walnut Creek.

Even if one level of apartments were eliminated and the density were reduced to the bare minimum of 40 du/ac, the overall building height would still be upwards of 60' - well above the 50' height shown in the Proposed Revisions for MX-HD zoning.

Corresponding adjustments would be needed for the other three Multi-Use Zonings. My new recommendations would be 45', 60', 75' & 90' for the four Mixed-Use Zones.

These greater heights are needed if you are really going to encourage the best proposals for higher density developments !
We await the revised Ordinance Revision documents that will be presented to the Planning Commission for their Approval or Recommendation.

Jack Prosek

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 840 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) PH Resident / Homeowner
zz

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 841 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Mixed-Use Public Comment for 11/1/23 Session Date: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:13:11 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Garrett McDade <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 4:16 PM
To: Planning <[email protected]>
Subject: Mixed-Use Public Comment for 11/1/23 Session
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Dear Pleasant Hill City Council,
Over the past 100 years, California has become a state plagued by short-sighted zoning that only allows for singlefamily housing.

Mixed-use zoning, integrated with public transit routes (BART, County Connection), is indisputably positive for our city’s social and economic well-being.

Living in an equitable urban environment and being able to walk or bike to work is my right as a human being.

Make the positive change now. Zone mixed-use, high-density communities.

Future American generations who are no longer forced to live in isolated communities (single-use, low-density suburbs) and commute in isolated transportation (cars) will live fruitful lives and it will be because you respected their human rights today.

Sincerely,
Garrett

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 842 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Contextual Design is Respectful Design
Date: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:15:50 AM
From: Bruce Irion <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2023 9:23 AM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council <[email protected]>; David Blau <[email protected]>; annette gelinas <[email protected]>; Shereen Motarjemi <[email protected]> Subject: Contextual Design is Respectful Design
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

We were happy to see both the Nov 1st staff presentation and Planning Commission meeting discuss contextual design standards including, but not limited to, set-back and step-back standards. We know in the interests of encouraging housing, the state is trying to limit “discretionary” standards especially when it comes to ADU’s. But staff and the Planning Commission got it right when they said the purpose of city standards was to prevent encroachment on neighboring properties. For us, rather than being considered “discretionary”, such contextual design standards are a matter of “respect for others” which we have never considered discretionary.

Given recent overreach in state regulations, the city has less say in the matter, but we believe the city and neighbors should have a say when additions or ADU’s Are built with little set-back or zero lot lines and have windows that peer into neighbor’s yards,
Are built out of scale with the neighborhood,
Build additional housing units but eliminate existing parking, or Otherwise significantly infringe and encroach on the property of neighbors.

Don’t get us wrong. We're for housing development and building ADU’s so many of which are an enhancement to their neighborhood. But to say there should be no opportunity for public comment and no standards for set-back, step-back, parking, or other standards the state considers discretionary is to pander to people and developers who lack respect for neighbors, especially when alternatives are available.

Rather than have a window that peers into a neighbor’s yard, consider a skylight which respects both party’s privacy.

Incorporate a step-back or give up a little of the backyard rather than build something that is out of scale with the neighborhood.

Rather than eliminating existing parking especially in neighborhoods where parking is scarce, scale back the addition or ADU to retain parking and reduce street congestion.

Such “requirements” are NOT unreasonable as evidenced by the many landowners who build additions that respect these standards. Building with respect for your

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 843 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) neighbors builds strong communities and enhances property values, something everyone should support.

Bruce Irion, David Blau, Annette Gelinas, & Shereen Motarjemi

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 844 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Elisa FM
To: Planning
Cc: Haley Croffoot
Subject: I support the zoning ordinance amendment
Date: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 2:21:16 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Dear Pleasant Hill City Council,
I'm writing a brief email to voice my support for mixed-use and multi-family residential housing in Pleasant Hill.

There is a dire need for housing, especially affordable housing, and walkable neighborhoods in our community. As is, many people are being pushed to the outskirts of the East Bay, to cities like Antioch and Pittsburg, because they cannot afford to live here. Re-zoning singlefamily areas to allow for multifamily development--especially affordable housing--will attract more families to the city and encourage them to stay here long-term.

Rezoning parts of the city to allow for mixed-use development will position people closer to places of work, commerce, and entertainment. This will reduce the need for commuting, one of the worst parts of living in car-dominant suburban America, and reduce traffic in the city overall.

When I think about the places nearby where I see the most families gathered in one place, what comes to mind are the Martinez farmers' market, the green space at the Veranda, and our very own Off The Grid. These events have one thing in common: they are relatively car-free spaces where people can socialize and children can play in the blocked-off streets without fear of being run over by a careless SUV driver.

Cities should be built to support the prosperity and happiness of working-class people, not cars. I believe the city is moving in the right direction by amending the current zoning ordinance. Thank you.

Kind Regards,
Elisa

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 845 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Planning Commission Meeting & Parking
Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 1:31:50 PM
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Bruce Irion <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Date: 12/01/2023 11:24 AM PST
Subject: Planning Commission Meeting & Parking
I was disappointed in the Planning Commission’s Nov 1st and 29th hearings as they related to parking requirements. I was unable to attend the Nov 1st meeting but listened to it afterward and submitted questions I hoped to have addressed at the Nov 29th meeting. I understand the city is under great pressure to be responsive to the state who believes that reducing parking requirements will make housing more affordable and encourage use of public transportation. But such pressure should be cause for greater public engagement, not an excuse to stifle discussion with residents. There was no interest in discussing my questions on vehicle ownership or Transportation Authority plans and no curiosity or interest in asking about ways to incent people to reduce vehicle ownership to reduce parking demand. Further, for myself and several others who wrote in with concerns on parking, there was no real attempt to explain the need to rush to decision or commit to a more comprehensive and inclusive discussion of parking in the future. The only dialogue on parking was recognition by one commissioner that people need cars and the desire of the state to move people away from that need presents a difficult problem for city planners.

Moving beyond asking that Commissioners be more transparent and responsive to the public, the problems presented by reducing parking will not be solved by wishing them away – this is not a “Field of Dreams” movie. A 30% reduction in parking on the supply side must be matched equally by strategies on the demand side. The City should consider these options NOW so that reductions in required parking are contingent on developer and/or owner cooperation in commensurate reductions in parking demand.

I’ve investigated successful strategies to reduce parking demand and offer the following for consideration. I’m sure staff and members of the public can come up with more.

I’m going to assume the Transportation Authority will not materially increase service in Pleasant Hill. Frankly, having more buses drive around the city largely empty is probably not an efficient or effective way

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 846 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) to provide public transportation. Therefore, I recommend the city consider sponsoring a ride-share service and encourage establishment of car-share businesses near large multi-family dwellings. Funding for ride-share services can be funded by parking fees.

Residents need to understand the true cost of parking. This can be done by unbundling, permit parking, and parking meters.
·
Many cities have had success by unbundling parking at multifamily facilities so residents can make informed decisions about vehicle ownership. Parking can be sold or rented with proceeds used to fund public transportation.

To protect neighbors from spill-over parking, the city can issue permits for street parking. These can either be sold or issued to residents of neighboring areas where spill over parking is occurring.

In high demand areas, parking should be metered to allow for short term parking but discourage vehicle ownership.

Finally, education and outreach need to part of the solution. ·
The city should reach out to business about providing
infrastructure and services at multi-family facilities.

Infrastructure businesses like grocery and drug stores should be encouraged to provide nearby locations or discount delivery services to reduce the need to own vehicles.

Owner/Operators of multi-family facilities should encourage delivery services to offer discounts when orders are bundled to arrive at the same time as neighbors.

Owner/Operators of multi-family facilities should have
programs to educate residents on options that reduce the need to own vehicles, including internet delivery services, public transportation, ride-sharing services, and the like.

Again, I urge the city to consider such options NOW. Reductions in required parking at multi-family facilities must be paired with commensurate measures to reduce vehicle ownership or Pleasant Hill will have parking gridlock.

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 847 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Worse idea ever
Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 2:00:26 PM
From: Anne Merz <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 2:55 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Subject: Worse idea ever
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Hello,
I am writing to express concern that proposed reductions in parking requirements at multi-family housing will result in street congestion and parking gridlock. I ask that the City Council make such reductions in parking supply contingent on developers and owners participating in strategies to reduce parking demand. Such strategies could include, but are not limited to
·
Providing shuttle, van, or ride share services to reduce the need for vehicle ownership,
Selling or renting parking separate from housing so residents can make more informed decisions about the true cost of vehicle ownership, Having the city issue parking permits or install parking meters to restrict parking in neighborhoods and provide for guest, visitor, or service parking without encouraging long term parking on streets, and
Providing programs to educate residents on services, transportation options, and alternatives to vehicle ownership.

Sincerely,
Anne Merz

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 848 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Parking reduction
Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 2:00:38 PM
-----Original Message-----
From: Marian Crompton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 3:02 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Subject: Parking reduction
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

I am contacting you regarding the proposal to reduce parking requirements on housing developments. Reducing parking does not encourage people to use public transit. What induces people is better transit. Having shuttles or better bus routes and transit that is more efficient and comes more often.

Marian Crompton

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 849 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Dec 18th City Council Mtg - Input on Parking Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 2:00:50 PM
From: Bruce Irion <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 9:51 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>; Haley Croffoot <[email protected]> Subject: Dec 18th City Council Mtg - Input on Parking
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

The City Council will soon be hearing a recommendation by the Planning Commission and city staff to allow a 30% reduction in the parking requirement for multi-family housing. The multi-family housing built to current requirements already has parking filled to capacity. While I am not opposed per se to a reduction in required parking, doing so without a commensurate effort to reduce parking demand will result in street congestion and parking gridlock. I therefore ask that the City Council amend the Planning Commission recommendation to make reductions in parking supply contingent on developers and owners participating in strategies to reduce parking demand. Such strategies could include, but are not limited to ·
Providing shuttle, van, or ride share services to reduce the need for vehicle ownership,
Selling or renting parking separate from housing so residents can make more informed decisions about the true cost of vehicle ownership, Having the city issue parking permits or install parking meters to restrict parking in neighborhoods and provide for guest, visitor, or service parking without encouraging long term parking on streets, and
Providing programs to educate residents on services, transportation options, and alternatives to vehicle ownership.

It is important that that the proposal to reduce parking requirements be paired now with a requirement to reduce parking demand. To defer consideration of such action till later will open the city to accusations they are imposing new "discretionary" housing requirements.

Bruce Irion
Resident of Pleasant Hill

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 850 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) Hello,
I would like to provide public comment on, and propose an amendment to, Section 18.22.040 of the proposed multifamily development standards. As I understand it, this section aims to implement the Land Use Plan’s policy on promoting vertical and horizontal mixed-use, while still preserving the city’s existing commercial core and protecting existing uses. It does this by implementing a minimum commercial requirement for mixed-use developments, while grandfathering in existing single-family uses.

My concerns with this section are two-fold. First of all, the only existing uses that are grandfathered in are single-family uses, but one of the new mixed-use neighborhoods (along Oak Park Boulevard) contains existing multi-family uses. It’s not clear why this area receives unequal treatment.

Secondly, the proposed standard’s approach to horizontal mixed-use is not consistent with the actual parcel sizes in the city’s residential areas, which are generally too small to support a horizontal mixture of commercial and residential uses on one site. A better example of what horizontal mixed-use looks like in practice is the eastern side of the northern portion of Contra Costa Boulevard, which has a mixture of commercial and multifamily residential on separate parcels. I myself used to live in another such horizontal mixed-use neighborhood, along Clayton Road in Concord, in which originally single-family structures were used for a variety of purposes, including a duplex, a hair salon, a pre-school, transitional housing for at-risk youth, and my company’s offices. This kind of horizontal mixed-use can emerge organically as a result of liberalizing usage requirements, and can be a very pleasant place to live and work. It’s also a much more feasible model of horizontal mixed-use than the proposed standards’ model of requiring parcels to be developed with adjacent commercial and residential uses, even though the parcels in question are generally too small for this to be possible.

In order to remedy these issues, I’d like to propose that 18.22.040 (B) be amended as follows:

B: Mixed-use Commercial Exception. Any existing single-family use site with an existing residential use as of January 31, 2023 in a mixed-use zone (MXN, MX, MX-HD, MX-VHD) is exempt from compliance with the mixed-use requirements for percentage of commercial uses outlined in Table 18.22.040-1 and is considered a conforming use, and any such existing residential use is considered a conforming use. This exemption does not apply to sites designated as housing opportunity sites in the Pleasant Hill 6th Cycle Housing Element (2023- 2031).

This would allow a site with an existing residential use to be redeveloped as vertical mixed-use, 100% residential or commercial (i.e. horizontal mixed-use), or to continue the existing residential use. By adding a 1/31/2023 cutoff, it also prevents the provision from being circumvented by demolishing the existing structure.

I urge Council to pass the above amendment and the rest of the proposed multifamily development standards.

Thank you,
Marshall Lewis

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 851 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Dec 18th City Council Hearing on Proposed Zoning Revisions Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 4:22:16 PM
From: Catherine Boccellari <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 3:56 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Subject: Dec 18th City Council Hearing on Proposed Zoning Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Dear Mr. Fujimoto,
I am writing to express concern that proposed reductions in parking requirements at multi-family housing will result in street congestion and parking gridlock. I ask that the City Council make such reductions in parking supply contingent on developers and owners participating in strategies to reduce parking demand. Such strategies could include, but are not limited to
·
oProviding shuttle, van, or ride share services to reduce the need for vehicle ownership,
oSelling or renting parking separate from housing so residents can make more informed decisions about the true cost of vehicle ownership,
oHaving the city issue parking permits or install parking meters to restrict parking in neighborhoods and provide for guest, visitor, or service parking without encouraging long term parking on streets, and
oProviding programs to educate residents on services, transportation options, and alternatives to vehicle ownership.

Sincerely,
Catherine Boccellari

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 852 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA) From: Haley Croffoot
To: Haley Croffoot
Subject: FW: Dec 18th City Council Hearing on Proposed Zoning Revisions Date: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 4:22:27 PM
From: Shereen Motarjemi <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 3:58 PM
To: Troy Fujimoto <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Dec 18th City Council Hearing on Proposed Zoning Revisions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Dear Mr. Fujimoto,
My neighbors and I have concerns about parking requirements as new developments are built.

We are offering the city possible solutions for the problems caused by too many cars and inadequate parking:
·
Providing shuttle, van, or ride share services to reduce the need for vehicle ownership,
Selling or renting parking separate from housing so residents can make more informed decisions about the true cost of vehicle ownership,
Having the city issue parking permits or install parking meters to restrict parking in neighborhoods and provide for guest, visitor, or service parking without encouraging long term parking on streets, and
Providing programs to educate residents on services,
transportation options, and alternatives to vehicle ownership.

Sincerely, Shereen Motarjemi

10.2.h
Packet Pg. 853 Attachment: Attachment H - Public Comments (Housing Element Related ZOA)

CITY OF PLEASANT HILL

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

CITY COUNCIL

HOUSING ELEMENT RELATED LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR

RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED-USE ZONES

ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
Citywide, City of Pleasant Hill
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN by the City of Pleasant Hill that the City Council will hold a public hearing to consider a recommendation from the Planning Commission to introduce an ordinance amending the existing residential zoning district land use and development standards (Chapter 18.20), proposing land use and development standards for new mixed-use zoning districts (Chapter 18.22) and amending other related sections of Title 18 related including, but not limited to, off-street parking and loading regulations (Chapter 18.55), use classifications (Chapter 18.15), and definitions (Chapter 18.140). The proposed zoning ordinance amendments are necessary to implement the goals and policies of the recently adopted 2040 General Plan and 2023-2031 Housing Element. The City is first focusing on establishing development standards for sites identified in the residential sites inventory of the recently adopted 2023-2031 Housing Element which are required to be rezoned to multi-family residential or mixed-use to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligation. A comprehensive zoning ordinance update addressing all provisions of the recently adopted General Plan will follow this effort in 2024.

On May 18, 2023, the City of Pleasant Hill City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2040 General Plan. The EIR evaluated potential significant impacts that may arise from implementation of the 2040 General Plan and Housing Element. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162 City staff has determined that no further environmental review is required for the proposed ordinance amendments as the previously certified EIR adequately addressed the environmental impacts of the proposed land use changes and the scope of the proposed amendments is not more intensive than what was analyzed in the EIR.

The PUBLIC HEARING will be held by the CITY COUNCIL at 7:00 p.m. on MONDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2023, in the CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, City Hall, at 100 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill. Interested persons will be heard at this time at the meeting. More information on how to participate, including providing live comments during the meeting, will be provided on the posted City Council Agenda.

NOTICE IS ALSO GIVEN pursuant to Government Code Section 65009(B) that, if this matter is subsequently challenged in Court by you or others, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else has raised at a Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Pleasant Hill at, or prior to, the Public Hearing.

For information on this matter, please call or email Haley Croffoot, Senior Planner, at (925) 671-5297 or [email protected].

Troy Fujimoto
Zoning Administrator

10.2.i
Packet Pg. 854 Attachment: Attachment I - Public Notice (Housing Element Related ZOA)

Pleasant Hill City CouncilDecember 18, 2023

Pleasant Hill City Council
December 18, 2023