Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08251987 - 2.3 HOUSING AUTHORITY'OF THE COUNTY OF.CONTRA COSTA TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE: August 14, 1987 FROM: cc: Perfecto Villarreal , Executive Director SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO RESIDENTIAL SECOND UNITS ORDINANCE I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: RECONSIDER amendment to Residential Second Units Ordinance which would not permit tandem parking spaces to be considered in meeting the off-street parking requirements of the Residential Second Units Ordinance; and ESTABLISH parking requirements for primary and secondary units at three parking spaces to be provided on-site (The location of which is subject to the Zoning Administrator's review). , II. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None to the County. III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors on August 11, 1987 took action on a proposed Residential Second Unit Ordinance. One of the amendments approved by the Board would not permit tandem parking spaces, nor parking spaces provided for in any of the property setbacks, to be considered in meeting the off-street parking requirements of the ordinance. This amendment on parking is restrictive and, thereby, severely limits the effectiveness of the ordinance in permitting the creation of residential second units. In the two years the Housing Authority has operated the Double Unit Opportunity (DUO) Program, the staff has provided extensive services to forty-two client families. Sixty-four percent of these clients would not have been able to meet the parking requirements of the new ordinance. Moreover, half of the fourteen DUO clients who have applied for land use permits under the old standards would not have received approval if the new parking standards had been in effect when they applied. I The overall parking standard approved by the Board - three off-street parking spaces for the use of the primary and secondary units - is fair and workable. However, the added conditions that these parking spaces -be neither tandem nor provided for in any of the property setbacks will make it impossible for most second unit applicants to meet the requirements. The net result will be that very few residential second units will be built under the new ordinance. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR RECOMMEND ION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON ALU',ust 25 , 1 987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER _X IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the reuqest from the Housing Authority that the Board reconsider its action of August 11 , 1987 prohibiting tandem parking_ and parking in property setbacks in connection with the Residential Second Unit Ordinance is CONTINUED to September 15 , 1987 . VOTE OF Supervisors LINANIMOUS (ABSENT _, 3 ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS A TRUE AND AYES: NOES: CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF Supervisors SON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Housing Authority ATTESTED August 25 , 1987 County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors M382/7-83 BY _Qom Low � L DEPUTY 4' • 4 Board of Supervisors August 14, 1987 Page -2- IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION: Based upon the experience of the Housing Authority in administering a Residential Second Unit Program for the last two years, the restrictive parking requirement of not permitting tandem parking spaces would result in almost no second units being created because the parking requirements of the Second Unit Ordinance could not be met. Thus, an opportunity to produce 10 to 20 affordable rental housing units per year through the creation of residential second units would be lost.