My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2000-10-16
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2000
>
AgdaPkt 2000-10-16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2012 3:23:21 PM
Creation date
7/6/2005 8:58:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Date
10/16/2000
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
241
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
$P�• �e <br /> Options: <br /> 1. Require the property owner to reside on the property, either in the main or second unit. <br /> The owner shall record a deed restriction stating that fact. An exception to this rule <br /> shall only occur if there is undue hardship as determined by the Zoning Administrator <br /> (Recommended). <br /> I mpacts <br /> A few elderly owners have expressed an interest in living in the smaller, secondary unit, <br /> . and renting out the main unit. This change could lead to a slight increase (2 units per <br /> year) in the number of second unit applications. The targer units (the main house) could <br /> be available to families in need of housing. <br /> 2. Require the property owner to reside only in the main unit (current requirement). <br /> I mpacts <br /> Most of the inquiries about new second units have been by property owners who plan <br /> to live on the property so this would have minimal impact. There have been a few <br /> absentee landlords who tried to apply but were either tumed down or were asked to <br /> submit proof that they intended to occupy the site. It has been more common to have <br /> absentee landlords try to legalize illegal existing units. <br /> Note: Owner occupancy should also be required for existing second units that may <br /> become legal through relaxation of the parking requirement via an amnesty program. <br /> Without this provision the City would allow more single-family districts to become <br /> duplex districts. <br /> D. PUBLIC HEARING <br /> Currently there is no public hearing required for accessory units. An applicant first submits <br /> for a building permit, and the project is approved as long as it conforms to the Accessory <br /> Unit Ordinance. There is no notification of adjoining neighbors, even though the density <br /> and appearance of adjoining properties may change. Under state law, staff must grant the <br /> accessory unit as long as it meets the requirements of the ordinance. <br /> Options: <br /> 1. Require a"non-discretionary" permit with notification of surrounding property owners. <br /> This process is very similar to the large family day care process that the City recently <br /> adopted. After receiving the building permit, staff would notify surrounding property <br /> owners of the pending application and its approval as long as it meets the zoning <br /> ordinance. This process does not require a public hearing, unlike a Conditional Use <br /> Permit (Recommended). <br /> I mpacts <br /> This process does allow for public notification, but neighbors cannot change the <br /> approval as long as the unit conforms to the City Ordinance. <br /> 2. Require a Conditional Use Permit including notification of adjoining property owners <br /> and a formal public hearing. <br /> I mpaCts <br /> There would be a minimal cost to the applicant ($400), but neighbors will be notified of <br /> the application. IYs important to note that a public meeting may give the false <br /> s <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.