CC Min 1990-08-27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

a. Addition of 2nd unit would not alter height of existing structure. b. Addition of 2nd unit would not change the neighborhood as uphill houses are three levels. c. The word "existing" in C.G.C. 65852.2 has been interpreted by Redwood City to mean residences built before 1983; but the 1983 law was amended in 1987 which created a reenactment of the law and the Redwood City Ordinance was never changed. "Existing" does not mean before the law was enacted. The state statute declares that existing housing resources are vastly underutilized and that improved utilization of this state's existing housing resources offers an innovative and cost - effective solution to the housing crisis. Also, the statute speaks to the benefits of 2nd family units on existing single family "lots" and therefore does not exclude dwellings built after 1983. Redwood City Housing policy is to allow 2nd units but the Redwood City ordinance restricts 2nd units. Councilman Murray commented that C.G.C. 65852.2 refers to existing not new housing; C.G.0 65852.2 (b) does not apply to local agencies that have adopted an ordinance covering 2nd units; the requirements stated by Mr. Grandsaert do not apply to Redwood City; there is nothing in the state statute prohibiting the policy of the current ordinance; and subsection (c) allows total exclusion of 2nd units based on findings. Mr. Grandsaert stated the interpretation of "existing" as meaning before 1983 does not conform to subsection (a) as it is not in keeping with the intent of the state statute; and, that no city would exclude 2nd units as it would impact health, safety and welfare, and in fact Redwood City did not exclude 2nd units from its Housing Policy. d. State statute authorizes 2nd units and recognizes that single family units are vastly underutilized. e. Redwood City Ordinance violates General Plan Housing Policy No. 3 which allows 2nd units if they do not change the character of the neighborhood. f. Redwood City Ordinance is not lawful as it adds a senseless restriction. g. Denial of appeal would violate state law, Redwood City General Plan and Redwood City Housing Policy. h. Approval of appeal would mean no change in the appearance of the neighborhood or exterior of the house; it would provide a much needed low to moderate income housing unit and would assist Mr. Grandsaert financially. In response to Council questions Mr. Grandsaert advised he would be willing to abide by conditions of the Use Permit ensuring rental to low to moderate income person or persons, except for eventual use by members of his family; characterized traffic as "light" but parking as inadequate on Highland which is an unimproved street, although his design allows for 5 off - street parking places. Reg. Mtg. Minutes MINUTE BOOK NO. 50 August 27, 1990 Page No. 053 Page 4