pages: PlanningBoard/2008-11-24.pdf, 5
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-11-24 | 5 | Staff replied that second units are not counted towards the residential density of a site. Regarding parking and set backs, the builder would still be required to comply with the requirements of the R-1 Zone District. Vice President Ezzy Ashcraft asked about the parking requirement and noted it is less for a second unit. She would like to preserve the character of the neighborhoods but understands the code for second units must comply with State law. She mentioned a project on Morton that would be a good example of a second unit being built. Board member Cook expressed concern that cars will fill the streets instead of being parked off-street. Board member Lynch asked Mr. Buckley about the AAPS letter and the owner/occupancy requirement and how a property owned in trust would be dealt with. He believes that at least one owner should live on the property. Mr. Buckley deferred to the City Attorney for legal guidance. It was clarified that the requirement that an owner occupy the unit is not part of the ordinance. City Attorney Faiz clarified that it is permissible to require owner occupancy of one of the units on the site. Board member Cook addressed the 10,000 square foot requirement and stated that it was a first step in implementing the second unit ordinance. She said that it was a way to protect the integrity of the R-1 districts. Board member Cunningham asked if there had been any applications for a second unit and asked if there was a definition for an attached unit. He supports a minimum lot size for second units. Board member Cook asked what was preventing someone from building a second unit and converting both units into one single-family unit. She expressed concern that design review would not be required. Staff clarified that if an applicant wants to convert the units, it would have to be architecturally compatible and the kitchen in the second unit would have to be removed. Board member Lynch asked about the lot size and the minimum requirements. He suggested that parking and setbacks be looked at carefully. Staff provided the Board with the number of lots in the 'R' zoning districts and the different sizes. Page 5 of 12 | PlanningBoard/2008-11-24.pdf |