pages: PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf, 6
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-12-08 | 6 | State requiring cities to provide secondary housing unit regulations is to encourage development of second units. The regulations developed should facilitate rather than discourage the creation of second units. Ezzy asked for staff input on info provided by AAPS concerning owner occupancy. The public hearing was opened: C. Buckley stated that the ordinance will permit second units by right as long as standards are met. Neither public review or design review is required. Alameda Architectural Preservation Society (AAPS) suggests using the City of Berkeley's ordinance as a guideline for incorporating owner occupancy requirement. To avoid future disputes AAPS would like the Historic Preservation Ordinance cited specifically within this ordinance. Requests that second units which do not conform to the standards require design review. The public hearing was closed. Staff requested feedback from the Board for the purpose of the owner occupancy requirement. President Kohlstrand stated the difficulty of reviewing the second unit ordinance independently of the housing element. She inquired whether there was a goal of housing production to be generated as a result of this ordinance. Vice President Ezzy Ashcraft stated the purpose of the City creating the secondary unit ordinance was to tailor it to meet existing housing criteria. Board member McNamara inquired whether second units would count towards affordable housing requirement. Staff stated that since there is no income limitation on who can rent the units on these sites it will not count towards the affordable housing goals. The units will count towards the overall production of housing in Alameda. Based on existing regulations Staff stated it will be difficult for a property owner to meet the requirements for a second unit given the restrictions in Alameda. There are not many sites in Alameda that will be able to provide a second unit in compliance with all the regulations without getting an exception, for example a use permit. President Kohlstrand stated there is a concern in the community with protecting the character and integrity of the residential neighborhoods. She inquired if staff was stating that the 7,500 square foot minimum lot size along with the 60% lot coverage puts greater restrictions on an owners' ability to create a second unit. Staff responded the 60% coverage does not present a major problem but the location of where the buildings are positioned on the site (near or at the required front yard Page 6 of 17 | PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf |