My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
07
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2013
>
091713
>
07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2013 12:21:45 PM
Creation date
9/12/2013 3:42:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
9/17/2013
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
07
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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).
View images
View plain text
Ms. Stern explained that the three -foot and five -foot setbacks assume that the structure <br />is not habitable, such as sheds and other types of units, as opposed to second units <br />which are habitable and potentially would have the windows open and some privacy <br />issues. She noted that these structures already have established setbacks that are <br />greater than the usual accessory structures. <br />Commissioner Ritter commended staff for a great job on the analysis. He inquired what <br />is driving this to happen and if the City is getting a lot of requests for second units. <br />Ms. Diamond replied that the City is implementing its General Plan Housing Element, <br />which includes policies and action programs that the City needs to consider and move <br />forward on, one of which relates to second units. She noted that a number of Code <br />Amendments have been processed to date, following the adoption of the Housing <br />Element. <br />Commissioner Ritter inquired if this is part of an affordable housing package. <br />Ms. Diamond replied that it is related to affordable housing in that the Housing Element <br />policy is to encourage the development of second units as a source of affordable <br />housing. <br />Mr. Dolan noted that during the Housing Element process, this was discussed at the <br />Task Force, the Planning Commission, and the City Council levels, and the Council <br />agreed that it was a good idea and adopted it, and it is now being implemented as <br />instructed. <br />Acting Chair Olson noted that there was also a change in the California Code. <br />Ms. Diamond replied that back in 2003, there was a change in the State regulations <br />requiring that cities allow second units by right under certain conditions. <br />Acting Chair Olson commented that the City is then basically catching up with the <br />California Code. <br />Ms. Diamond replied that the City is actually caught up as the regulations that exist in <br />the City's Code are in conformance with State regulations. She added that the City is <br />trying to make it a little more flexible for homeowners. <br />Commissioner Allen inquired how these units count in terms of housing affordability <br />category: whether they are low- income or moderate - income, and how they count and <br />help the City toward RHNA numbers. <br />Ms. Stern replied that in other jurisdictions where there has been more likelihood that <br />these second units have been rented out, they have been put in the category of low - <br />and moderate - income housing. She added that the City's Housing Specialist, Scott <br />Erickson, is trying to help owners who might want to rent their second units gain the <br />EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, August 14, 2013 Page 2 of 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.