pages: CityCouncil/2022-03-01.pdf, 14
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2022-03-01 | 14 | preemption to all SB 9 units; discussed requirements for non-SB 9 units: Christopher Buckley, AAPS. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft stated there is concern that the units will be used for AirBNB rentals; inquired whether the matter is addressed in the ordinance. The Planning Building and Transportation Director responded in the affirmative; stated a pre- condition of building SB 9 units requires a deed restriction stating the property cannot be used for rentals that are less than 30 days. Councilmember Daysog inquired whether staff has comments regarding AAPS's letter referencing limiting the preemption of local standards only to the smaller 800 square foot unit size; requested staff to clarify the background and theory. The Planning Building and Transportation Director responded the R1 District has a 20 foot rear yard setback; stated the front yard setback is much smaller and the side yard setback is 5 feet; the City can regulate back and side yard setbacks based on State law; the proposed ordinance states SB 9 units should have a 4 foot setback from the rear and side yard; the process is ministerial and will be handled by staff without the Planning Board or a public hearing process; the goal is to have a clear and objective ordinance that requires the minimum amount of staff judgement and discretion; property owners in the R1 District have a good idea of where to place second units; 2021 yielded about 20 second units; most property owners think about and do not wish to have issues with neighbors; staff rarely finds poor placement of second units; implementing the AAPS idea brings second units as close as possible to the main unit in order to keep as much of the rear yard setback as possible; second units typically work better with space between the main and second units; Council can direct staff to use AAPS's approach. Councilmember Daysog stated that he is concerned about the height standard; inquired whether SB 9 unit have to be subordinate to the height of the primary unit; expressed concern about backyard mansions. The Planning Building and Transportation Director responded the ordinance has a 30 foot height limit; stated a two-story house with a pitched roof would be an appropriate SB 9 unit; staff has not recommended a lower height limit; the limit will likely create a smaller footprint; a lower height limit would require a larger footprint; the entire R1 District has a 30 foot height limit. Councilmember Knox White stated Council has come to a decision that makes sense and honors both SB 9 and the 2020 election result; expressed support for staff to return with the Housing Element; stated that he has a concern with historic preservation and design rules adding time and cost to processes; the new rules allow for discretionary Historic Advisory Board review; he would like to give direction to staff to come back with tighter rules on how determinations can be made within the Housing Element; votes have gone against the findings of fact and he would like to honor the historic extensions. Councilmember Knox White moved approval of the staff recommendation [including introduction of the ordinance] with direction that the City will look at clarifying and specific rules under the Housing Element. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft proposed a friendly amendment of having a smaller maximum square footage for units. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council March 1, 2022 12 | CityCouncil/2022-03-01.pdf |