AgdaPkt 2004-04-12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

(0.26-2 4) Prohibits local governments from restricting second unit occupancy to seniors or family members. Besides limiting incentives for senior housing, this measure directly conflicts with 65852.1 of the Government Code, which promotes the construction of second units for seniors in the state. 5) Prohibits a local government from establishing a Tlinimum or maximum size requirement that is less than 600 square feet, unless "equested by the property owner. Local governments currently have the flexibility to estaùlish their own size requirements to match local housing stock, lot sizes, topography. density and other issues. This bill represents the State attempting to dictate a universal standard. 6) Reduces local parking requirements by limiting parking to one space per unit, and prohibits local governments from requiring covered parking. Existing law allows parking at one space per bedroom, but allows flexibility to match existing neighborhood standards. Elimination of the covered parking issue may conflict with specific neighborhood standards as well as covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs) in homeowner associations. Reduced parking can exacerbate local parking conditions, impede traffic flow, and alter neighborhood standards. Parking should continue to remain a local decision. In regard to school site housing, AB 2702 does the following: 1) Pre-empts local zoning affecting housing on school sites by stating that when a school district agrees to allow single-family or multifamily housing to be built on a school site, the density shall be the maximum density allowed on any multifamily-zoned parcel within 300 feet or within the community plan, plus increases for density bonus projects. Besides usurping local zoning authority, this is irresponsible planning with no understanding of location, traffic, site conditions, or other local issues. In order to preserve Redwood City's local decision-making authority for such land use issues in our own community, this bill should not move forward. The bill is opposed by the League of California Cities, the California Chapter of the American Planning Association, the California Association of Counties, and by many local governments. Alternative The Council could choose not to adopt this resolution and therefore not go on record in opposition to AB 2702 and its attempt to usurp local zoning authority. Fiscal Impact . There is no fiscal impact associated with theõio~ at :tì~t~on. CAv~ '". ,>.e' Malcolm Smith Ed Everett I Public Communications City Manager Manager Attachments Draft Resolution Text of AB 2702