My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2020-02-10 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2020
>
AgdaPkt 2020-02-10 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2020 11:31:49 AM
Creation date
2/7/2020 2:47:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
2/10/2020
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.
/
401
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
A - Page 21 of 23 pir <br />21 Elements <br />Q. State law states parking is not required if "The accessory dwelling unit is part of the <br />proposed or existing primary residence or an accessory structure". We're interpreting <br />"accessory structure" in this sentence as an existing accessory structure. Is this correct? <br />Yes. <br />Q. Can a homeowner build an ADU if they have an existing nonconforming single family <br />dwelling in a commercial zone? <br />If the commercial or mixed-use zone allows single family or multifamily uses, the owner can <br />build an ADU. However, if the commercial zone does not allow single-family residences, then <br />the owner cannot build an ADU unless the City chooses to allow it. The special (e) provisions <br />only apply in residential and mixed use zones. <br />Q. It would be helpful to know HCD's interpretation regarding whether cities can prohibit <br />ADUs within the front yard setback since the legislation speaks to only side and rear setbacks, <br />but is silent on the front setback. <br />HCD has said, informally, that you can prohibit ADUs in the front yard, as long as a property <br />owner can build an 800/16/4/4 in the backyard. (However, some advocates disagree with this <br />interpretation.) <br />Daylight plane / shadows for detached ADUs. Can cities apply daylight plane rules on special <br />(e) ADUs if they prohibit the ADU from meeting the 4' rear and side setbacks? Some cities <br />have daylight plane rules that they apply to accessory structures that would not allow (e) <br />ADUs to be as little as 4' from the property lines, even if they have minimal height (normal 8' <br />walls on a slab and low -sloped roof). <br />The statute states that only four foot rear and side setbacks can be required. If there were a <br />health and safety reason to have larger setbacks (such as accommodating snow loads), possibly <br />those would be permitted, but it is unlikely that daylight plane standards would be upheld. <br />Can a jurisdiction default to its own existing building height maximums provided those <br />limitations allow for at least a 16 foot tall building height? <br />Yes <br />369 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.