Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Potential Number of Accessory Dwelling Units (Existing Ordinance) '7 A... oS <br />Council requested that staff investigate the "ripple effect" of each of the proposed <br />changes. Those impacts are discussed under each option in the next section. However, <br />an important question is: <br /> <br />. What is the potential number of second units that could be built in Redwood City? <br /> <br />A random survey was conducted in 1991 to answer this question. It examined the <br />potential number of second units for each neighborhood1. Please see survey details <br />in the appendix. The survey indicated that a total of 1,700-second units could be legally <br />built, with most of them occurring in the Roosevelt, Canyon, Eagle Hill, and Woodside <br />Plaza Neighborhoods (see attached map). Yet, the total build-out is expected to be <br />much lower since not everyone will apply for second units and many of the potential <br />sites have been built out over the years with new homes and additions. Staff estimates <br />approximately 400 total second units can actually be built. Experience with the <br />ordinance indicates that this estimate is fairly realistic. <br /> <br />In reviewing these impacts, it's important to realize that demand to construct new, legal <br />second units is not high in Redwood City. The City only receives 10 -15 second unit <br />applications a year, and the impacts are minimal. <br /> <br />Issues <br />A. PARKING REQUIREMENTS <br /> <br />One of the major constraints to legally constructing accessory units is meeting the parking <br />requirements. In fact, many of the existing illegal second units are deemed "illegal" <br />because they can't meet the required parking. Most of these illegal units are in the Friendly <br />Acres, Centennial, Central, Ampex, and Roosevelt Neighborhoods. Cars normally park on <br />the street and/or in the driveway since these illegal units don't have sufficient parking. <br /> <br />Currently, three off-street parking spaces are required for properties with accessory units <br />(two for the main unit and one for the second unit). For those homes originally built with <br />just a one-car garage, staff has only required two parking spaces (one for the main unit and <br />one for the second unit). <br /> <br />The parking requirement throughout the City (since the mid 1950's) is two covered spaces <br />per residential lot. Depending on the number of spaces currently on the property, the <br />parking space for the accessory unit may have to be covered (either with a garage or <br />carport). The Zoning Ordinance requires that two-thirds of all required parking spaces <br />must be covered. For example, if there is already a two car garage (Le., two covered <br />spaces), then the third parking space for the second unit can be uncovered. However, if <br />one or more parking spaces on the property is not within a garage or carport (Le. <br />uncovered parking space), then the third space for the second unit will have to be covered. <br /> <br />The City does not count any parking space within the front yard garage setback (the first <br />20 ft. of the driveway), and within the side yard setback, (usually 6 ft.) as meeting the <br />parking requirement. The intent of this law is to make the street frontage more attractive <br /> <br />1 Staff selected a random sample of 323 parcels which had the following characteristics: zoned residential, <br />had a single-family home, were owner occupied, and had at least 6000 sq. ft. (minimum R-1 lot area). <br />The lots were then examined using aerials and site visits to determine if they could accommodate a third <br />parking space not within the required 20-ft. garage setback. <br />2 <br /> <br />> "~>--,-> > >~ T » <br />