Sac'to Dictates, LB Council To Consider, These Zoning Changes To Ease Restrictions On "Accessory Dwelling Units" (Granny Flats Not Restricted To Grannies) With No Add'l Parking Req'd (Outside Coastal Zone Or Parking Impacted Areas) '

' Sac'to Dictates, LB Council To Consider, These Zoning Changes To Ease Restrictions On "Accessory Dwelling Units" (Granny Flats Not Restricted To Grannies) With No Add'l Parking Req'd (Outside Coastal Zone Or Parking Impacted Areas) '

LBReport.com

News

Sac'to Dictates, LB Council To Consider, These Zoning Changes To Ease Restrictions On "Accessory Dwelling Units" (Granny Flats Not Restricted To Grannies) With No Add'l Parking Req'd (Outside Coastal Zone Or Parking Impacted Areas)

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.

(Oct. 9, 2017, 9:55 a.m.) -- At its Oct. 10 meeting, the City Council will conduct a public hearing on the terms by which it will change LB's currrent zoning code to make it easier for residential property owners to build "accessory dwelling units" (ADUs), a second dwelling unit on one's property, more commonly called "granny flats" (but not restricted to grannies; they can be occupied by and rented to anyone the property owner chooses.)

The change was effectively dictated by Sacramento lawmakers who passed two bills (SB 1069 and AB 2299) that require cities to give rubberstamp ("ministerial"/clerk level) approval to ADUs that meet state-decided standards. (On AB 2299, Assemblyman O'Donnell voted "yes" in June and "no" on final passage in August (concurrence in Senate amendments.) State Senator Lara voted "yes" on AB 2299; state Senator Nguyen voted "no." On SB 1069, Assemblyman O'Donnell and state Senator Lara voted "yes"; state Senator Nguyen voted "no.")

Sac'to's bills made LB's more restrictive standards on ADUs (in terms of allowable square footage and parking) unenforceable and City Hall is making the proposed changes in an effort to comply with Sac'to's demands.

And yes, this could increase de facto residential density (to an extent currently speculative)...because the Sac'to legislation prohibits requiring parking for ADUs located within one-half mile of "public transit" and city staff's agendizing memo acknowledges that "nearly all residential property is within a one-half mile radius of public transit stops within the City." Therefore, there's no parking requirement for ADUs proposed outside of the coastal zone or in current parking impacted areas.

[Scroll down for further.]

The Planning Commission recommended that the Council allow ADUs to be no more than 50% of the primary dwelling or up to a maximum of 1,000 square feet, whichever is less. City staff says that while Sac'to requires cities to allow ADUs in single family zones, cities can also allow ADUs in multi-family residential zones. "Areas may be designated based on criteria that can include, but is not limited to, the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of ADUs on traffic flow and public safety," city staff's memo states, adding:

The proposed Ordinance would allow ADUs as an accessory use in 17 residential zoning districts, as well as Planned Development Districts, or Specific Plans, or subareas thereof that allow for single-family residential dwellings (refer to Table 31-1 in the City Council Ordinance). Exceptions apply when these areas are within either a designated parking impacted area or the Coastal Zone. An ADU must conform to all development standards of the zone in which the property is located including, but not limited to, lot coverage, floor area ratio, and landscape requirements, except as indicated in the proposed Zoning Code amendment.

City staff notes that state law "prohibits requiring parking for ADUs located within one-half mile of public transit" and -- in a statement arguably pertinent to other Sac'to legislation beyond ADUs -- staff says it "has determined that nearly all residential property is within a one-half mile radius of public transit stops within the City (see Exhibit B - Long Beach Transit Stop Map) and would be exempt from providing parking for an ADU. Therefore, no parking requirement is recommended for ADUs located outside of the Coastal Zone and parking impacted areas. However, replacement parking is recommended in all cases where a garage for the primary unit is converted to an ADU. The City is able to require parking within the Parking Impacted Areas because State law permits cities to determine where ADUs may be allowed based on criteria that includes the impact of ADUs on traffic flow and public safety. Parking Impacted Areas were first established in 1988 by the City Council based on the fact that on-street parking conditions were creating a detrimental condition affecting health, safety, and welfare of the community, in addition to impeding traffic flow."

Sponsor

Sponsor

Staff's memo adds: "It is proposed that ADUs without parking be prohibited within parking impacted areas. In addition, parking may be required within the Coastal Zone because the new State regulations pertaining to ADUs do not supersede the California Coastal Act, which seeks to maximize public access to the coast. Allowing AD Us without parking would be inconsistent with the California Coastal Act as inadequate parking resources could negatively impact access to the coast."

Staff also proposes that "To ensure that properties developed with an ADU continue to function as single-family properties, the proposed Ordinance requires a recorded covenant to ensure: 1) the property shall be owner-occupied; 2) the ADU shall not be sold separately from the primary dwelling; 3) continued availability of on-site parking; 4) prohibition of short-term rentals; and, 5) restrictions on status and size of the ADU."

Sponsor

City staff's memo continues

...As a legislative act, there are no required findings for a Zoning Code amendment. However, a Zoning Code amendment must be consistent with the General Plan. The proposed Ordinance not only implements State law, but is consistent with the Housing Element, Mobility Element, and Local Coastal Program (Exhibit F - General Plan Conformance).
The proposed Ordinance is tailored to the City's local development patterns and conditions. It builds upon State law to establish standards that preserve and protect the character of residential neighborhoods while encouraging the responsible development of ADUs. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council determine the amendment is consistent with the General Plan and adopt an Ordinance approving Zoning Code Amendment No. 17-010 to amend Title 21 pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units and the related sections as proposed.
In general, new development creates additional demands for services provided including transportation, police, fire, and parks and recreation facilities. To account for these demands, the City Council has adopted various Development Impact Fees (DIF) to be collected for new construction projects. The State law pertaining to ADUs reestablishes that all impact fees must be charged in accordance with the State Fee Mitigation Act. In response, all affected City Departments that have established DIFs are recommending modifying the fees charged for the construction of ADUs to ensure the fees are commensurate with the expected size of the units and expected occupancy rates of the units. The suggested fees are less than typical fees charged for larger-sized dwelling units. As nexus studies are conducted in the future, there may be further suggested changes to the fee structures for ADUs. These Departments include: 1) Public Works; 2) Parks, Recreation and Marine; 3) Police Department; and, 4) Fire Department. The proposed fees are detailed in Exhibit G...
TIMING CONSIDERATIONS
City Council action is requested on October 10,2017, since the City's current Ordinance is null and void. There are a number of property owners currently awaiting the local regulations to develop an ADU on their property. Long Beach Municipal Code Section 21.25.103.A.1 of the Zoning Regulations requires a hearing on this item by the City Council within 60 days of the Planning Commission hearing, which took place on July 6, 2017. Although October 10, 2017 exceeds 60 days from July 6,2017 this date was the first available opportunity to conduct a hearing.
FISCAL IMPACT To ensure that the development impact fees charged for ADUs are proportional to the demand for new services as required by State law, modifications to the established DIF structure are proposed as part of this recommendation (Exhibit G - Interim ADU Development Impact Fees). The proposed Interim ADU DIFs will reduce the total mitigation fees applied to each ADU. The total revenue impact of the proposed fee modifications is not known at this time; however, revenues for each of the four development impact fees that are collected within the Capital Projects Fund (CP) in the Public Works, Fire, Police, and Parks, Recreation and Marine Departments are expected to decline.
A comprehensive update to the ADU DIFs is anticipated later in FY 18. A full assessment of the fiscal impact of further modifications to the fee structure, if any, will be provided to City Council at that time.

Sponsor

Sponsor