PC 2017-08-01_8b DCA 17-002 Rooftop Decks, ADU, UndergroundingMEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: TERESA MCCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: f, A , SAM ANDERSON, PLANNING TECHNICIAN
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17-
002; AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 16 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING ROOFTOP DECKS,
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS, AND UNDERGROUNDING OF
UTILITIES; LOCATION -CITYWIDE; APPLICANT -CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE
DATE: AUGUST 1, 2017
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
recommending the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance regarding rooftop
decks, accessory dwelling units, and undergrounding of utilities.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
No impacts to financial and personnel resources are projected as a result of
adopting the Ordinance.
BACKGROUND:
Accessory Dwelling Units
On January 1, 2017, SB 1069 and AB 2299 went into effect, which are intended
to further reduce barriers and streamline approval for the development of new
accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These ADU regulations, among other things,
reduce, and in some cases completely remove, parking requirements, prohibit
local governments from adopting ordinances that preclude ADUs , and make any
local ordinance that does not conform to new state regulations null and void upon
January 1, 2017. Due to this, the City's regulations are currently not enforceable
until updated to be in conformance with State regulations.
Rooftop Decks
On February 21, 2017, the Planning Commission considered an interpretation
regarding the definition of a "story," and the applicability of the Viewshed Review
process in re spect to th e construction of a new rooftop de ck. A Vi ewshed Revi ew
permit is required whenever any " ... second-story addition (is) erected or enlarged
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17-002
AUGUST 1, 2017
PAGE2
on any single-family home within the PD, PS, SF and MF districts." The request
for interpretation was to clarify whether a new rooftop deck should be considered
a "second story addition" and be subject to the Viewshed Review process. At that
meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to formulate a directive series of
regulations to provide a more clear process for the construction of rooftop decks.
Undergrounding Utilities
On May 25, 2017, the Community Development Director received information
from a local building contractor. It was recommended the City re-examine Arroyo
Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) Section 16 .68.050.B.1.a, which states "All
projects (discretionary or ministerial) that involve the addition of over one
hundred (100) square feet of habitable space shall be required to place service
connections underground." It was believed that, in comparison with neighboring
jurisdictions, the City's undergrounding requirement was overly onerous, and
prevented minor investments and projects from taking place, impacting both local
residents and the City .
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Accessory Dwelling Units
The proposed Ordinance will amend AGMC Section 16.52.150 to be brought into
conformance with state law. In general, these regulations include provisions
regarding:
• Changing all references to "second residential dwellings" to "accessory
dwelling units;"
• Setback modifications for ADUs constructed above garages;
• Provisions regarding on-site parking for new ADUs;
• Replacement parking when garages or other parking structures are
converted into ADUs; and
• Modification to owner occupancy requirements.
The most significant impact to existing ADU regulations are provisions modifying
on-site parking requirements. ADUs constructed within one-half (Yi) mile of an
existing transit stop, such as a bus stop (Attachment 1 ), cannot be required to
provide on-site parking beyond the currently required two (2) enclosed parking
spaces per single family dwelling. Additionally , in locations where parking
standards will not be exempted, additional parking shall be able to be provided
as tandem parking , and may be located anywhere on the property besides the
non-driveway front yard setback. When existing garages are converted to ADUs ,
replacement parking will still be required but will be able to be provided in any
configuration , such as uncovered or tandem spaces.
All chang es, besid e s the modification to owner occupancy requirements, are
mandatory under State law. The existing AGMC Section regarding occupancy
currently states that "second residential dwellings shall not be offered for sale
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17·002
AUGUST 1, 2017
PAGE 3
apart from the primary residence and shall be occupied on a month-to-month
basis or longer." In light of the Vacation Rental and Homestay Ordinance
approved in 2014, the proposed Ordinance will remove the month-to-month
occupancy requirement in order to allow property owners to rent their ADUs as
vacation rentals or homestays. The property owner is still required to record a
deed restriction against the title of the property restricting sale of the ADU apart
from the primary residence, and is still required to occupy one of the dwellings on
the premises in any Single-Family zoning district. Property owners in the Multi-
Family zoning districts will not be required to occupy one of the dwellings on the
premises, but will still be unable to sell an ADU apart from the primary residence.
General Plan
The General Plan, and more specifically the Housing Element, repeatedly calls
for the construction of secondary (accessory) dwelling units. For example,
Policy A.2 states "The City shall continue to utilize the following incentives for the
production of affordable housing: a) allowing secondary dwelling units under
specified criteria ... " and program G.1-1 states "The City shall encourage
construction and/or rehabilitation of housing units for low, very-low, and
extremely low income households by ... updating the City's second unit ordinance
to reduce barriers to second units development in residential zone ... " The State
required modifications to the City's ADU Ordinance reinforce these General Plan
policies and programs.
Rooftop Decks
The proposed Ordinance will add Subsection 16.48.180 to the AGMC in order to
ensure that new rooftop decks in the City do not unnecessarily or unreasonably
infringe upon the privacy of adjacent properties. The proposed Ordinance also
provides a simpler and clearer path forward for a property owner to construct a
new rooftop deck. The Ordinance provides a series of design standards to
facilitate permitting and plan review. The Ordinance allows for the construction of
a rooftop deck above a single story structure with the issuance of a Building
Permit, contingent upon compatibility with the proposed design standards. A
rooftop deck constructed above a two-story structure will require the issuance of
a Viewshed Review permit prior to Building Permit submissions due to the more
impactful nature created by the viewing angles of second story rooftop decks.
The proposed Ordinance will reduce the cost of submittal and time invested in
project review for applicants by n longer requiring the Viewshed Review process
and associated fee of $768.00. Additionally, as a consequence of no longer
requiring the Viewshed Review process, applicants proposing new single-story
rooftop decks will no longer be required to notice neighbors within 300' of an
addition that will likely generate similar viewing angles to a standard second story
addition. The design standards for rooftop decks are in place to offset the
reduction in review of potential privacy impacts created by elevated construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17-002
AUGUST 1, 2017
PAGE4
These standards include increased setbacks for decks, access requirements,
lighting restrictions, and maximum height.
Maximum height for all residential districts is currently thirty feet (30') or two (2)
stories, not including properties located in height restricting overlays. Mandatory
guard rails and other accessory structures and furniture located on the roof deck
will be counted towards maximum height and shall not at any time be located any
further than thirty feet (30') from the average finished grade of the home.
The Ordinance is designed to apply only to decks that are proposed to be located
on top of existing structures. A standard deck that extends past the exterior walls
of a structure will not be held to the proposed design standards, but will be
required to obtain a Viewshed Review permit prior to construction.
General Plan
The Land Use Element of Arroyo Grande aims to protect the character and feel
of Arroyo Grande. Policies such as LU12-2.3 state "provide building elevations
that are well-articulated in order to break up building bulk. Incorporate one-story
elements in two-story structures," and LU12-2.7 states "Use appropriate and
simple roof forms, including shed, gable, and hip roofs, alone or in combination,
to achieve a variety of roof lines along the streetscape; avoid unarticulated flat
roofs." Undesirable flat roofs can be redesigned into rooftop decks to create a
more interesting and diverse visual aesthetic.
Undergrounding Utilities
The City's undergrounding requirements are significantly more stringent than
other neighboring communities. Arroyo Grande is the only local community that
requires the undergrounding of utilities for projects involving single-family homes
that were not required to underground utilities at the time of construction. Other
communities, such as San Luis Obispo and Paso Robles, focus on establishing
undergrounding districts that are funded by impact fees collected from
development projects.
The proposed Ordinance will modify the AGMC Section 16.68.050.B.1.A
requirement to underground service drops whenever any addition of over one
hundred (100) square feet of habitable space is approved to a three hundred
(300) square foot minimum addition. This change will reduce the financial burden
that can be imposed by undergrounding requirements on minor additions and
other projects. It is important to note that projects where the cost of
undergrounding is greater than twenty-five percent (25%) of the cost of the total
project, waivers are granted to waive the undergrounding requirement. The three
hundred (300) square foot limit is intended to be flexible enough to allow minor
residential additions but still require undergrounding of utilities as prioritized by
the City Council when the one hundred (100) square foot limit was implemented.
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17-002
AUGUST 1, 2017
PAGE 5
General Plan
The Housing and Land Use Elements do not specifically mention the aesthetic
benefits of undergrounding utility lines, but general aesthetic recommendations
found in the Economic Development Element such as ED5-1.4 call for
"infrastructure projects that ... include underground utility projects ... " Changing
the requirements for undergrounding utilities could allow for minor additions while
still requiring undergrounding on larger additions, in conformance with the intent
of the undergrounding regulations, which is to "increase the aesthetic
appearance of residential, commercial and mixed use areas by avoiding or
eliminating the concentration of overhead service and distribution facilities, (2)
promote the safe and orderly control of pedestrian and vehicular traffic along
streets, roads or rights-of-way, and (3) provide a coordinated and economical
method of placing existing utilities underground ."
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Planning Commission 's
consideration:
• Adopt the attached Resolution recommending the City Council adopt the
Ordinance as proposed;
• Modify and adopt the attached Resolution recommending the City Council
adopt the Ordinance; or
• Provide direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Accessory Dwelling Units
Bringing AGMC Section 16.52.150 into conformance with State law will re-enable
the City to have local control over the establishment and construction of ADUs.
Rooftop Decks
The proposed Ordinance will simplify and elucidate the process for the
construction of a rooftop deck. The proposed Ordinance will remove regulatory
barriers while establishing regulations that will provide for orderly and appropriate
deck design and, at the same time, protecting the privacy of neighboring
properties.
Undergrounding Utilities
The proposed Ordinance will reduce the financial burden created by the existing
AGMC undergrounding requirements , promoting small residential projects.
DISADVANTAGES:
Accessory Dwelling Units
None identified .
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 17-002
AUGUST 1, 2017
PAGE6
Rooftop Decks
The current interpretation of the Viewshed Review process requires the issuance
of a Minor Use Permit -Viewshed Review prior to construction of a rooftop deck.
This process both permits a higher level of review over the impacts to the
surrounding areas created by new two-story construction as well as notifying the
neighboring community of impending development. Removal of the Viewshed
Review requirement for single-story rooftop decks may potentially lead to an
increase in privacy concerns created by this type of project.
Undergrounding Utilities
Overhead utility lines are typically viewed as an aesthetic blight upon the
Cityscape, and reduction of undergrounding requirements will slow the rate at
which this aesthetic issue is corrected. Although the one hundred (100) square
foot limitation is stricter than surrounding jurisdictions, waiving of the requirement
is common when reviewing minor additions.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
Community Development Department has determined that the project is
statutorily exempt per Section 15282(h) of the Guidelines regarding projects
involving the adoption of an ordinance regarding second units in a single-family
or multifamily residential zone by a city, as well as categorically exempt per
Section 15308 of the Guidelines regarding actions by regulatory agencies for
protection, maintenance, and enhancement of the environment.
PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT:
A notice of public hearing was published in The Tribune and posted at City Hall
and on the City's website on Friday, July 21, 2017. The Agenda was posted at
City Hall and on the City's website in accordance with Government Code Section
54954.2. At the time of report publication, no comments have been received.
Attachments:
1. Map showing ~ mile radius of transit stops in Arroyo Grande
2. Correspondence received from Linda Keating
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN
ORDINANCE APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO.
17-002; AMENDING TITLE 16 OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL
CODE REGARDING ROOFTOP DECKS, ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS, AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES; LOCATION -CITYWIDE
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande ("City") currently does not regulate rooftop
decks; and
WHEREAS, the City, through the Minor Use Permit -Viewshed Review process, does
regulate similar second story additions with similar impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that, unless properly regulated, rooftop
decks can result in adverse impacts to adjacent properties; and
WHEREAS, The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that new rooftop decks
constructed in the City conform to the scale and character of the neighborhood in which
they are located and do not unnecessarily or unreasonably infringe upon the privacy of
adjacent properties; and
WHEREAS, on September 27th, 2016, Assembly Bill (AB) 2299 and Senate Bill (SB)
1069 regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) were signed into law; and
WHEREAS, AB 2299 and SB 1069 became effective January 1st, 2017; and
WHEREAS, AB 2299 and SB 1069 require the City to amend Title 16.52.150 of the
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) for consistency with State law; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance further amends the City's ADU regulations in order to
comply with AB 2299 and SB 1069; and
WHEREAS, the City currently requires the placement of service connections
underground as part of all projects that involve the addition of over one hundred (100)
square feet of habitable space; and
WHEREAS, the requirement to underground service connections on additions of one
hundred (100) square feet discourages minor projects and investments in the City; and
I
WHEREAS, the City wishes to promote growth and minor projects in the City; and
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE2
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing and recommended the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending the City's
rooftop deck, ADU, and service connection undergrounding regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds, after due study, deliberation and public
hearing that the proposed Ordinance will further promote the health, safety and welfare
of the community by regulating the visual and aesthetic impacts created by rooftop
decks, will bring City ADU regulations into conformance with State law, and promote the
public welfare by reducing barriers to residential additions.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Arroyo Grande hereby recommends the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving
Development Code Amendment No. 17-002 amending Title 16 of the Arroyo Grande
Municipal Code as attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this
reference.
On a motion by Commissioner
following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
, seconded by Commissioner
The foregoing Resolution was adopted this 151 day of August, 2017.
and by the
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
GLENN MARTIN
CHAIR
ATTEST:
DEBBIE WEICHINGER
SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION
AS TO CONTENT:
TERESA MCCLISH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ARROYO GRANDE AMENDING TITLE 16 OF THE
ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING
ROOFTOP DECKS, ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS,
AND UNDERGROUND UTILITIES
EXHIBIT A
WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande ("City") currently does not regulate rooftop
decks; and
WHEREAS, the City, through the Minor Use Permit -Viewshed Review process, does
regulate similar second story additions with similar impacts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, unless properly regulated, rooftop decks can
result in adverse impacts to adjacent properties; and
WHEREAS, The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that new rooftop decks
constructed in the City conform to the scale and character of the neighborhood in which
they are located and do not unnecessarily or unreasonably infringe upon the privacy of
adjacent properties.; and
WHEREAS, on September 271h, 2016, Assembly Bill (AB) 2299 and Senate Bill (SB)
1069 regarding Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) were signed into law; and
WHEREAS, AB 2299 and SB 1069 became effective January 1st, 2017; and
WHEREAS, AB 2299 and SB 1069 require the City to amend Title 16.52.150 of the
Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) for consistency with State law; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance further amends the City's ADU regulations in order to
comply with AB 2299 and SB 1069; and
WHEREAS, the City currently requires the placement of service connections
underground as part of all projects that involve the addition of over one hundred (100)
square feet of habitable space; and
' WHEREAS, the requirement to underground service connections on additions of one
hundred (100) square feet discourages minor projects and investments in the City; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to promote growth and minor projects in the City; and
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE2
WHEREAS, on August 1, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing and recommended the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending the City's
rooftop deck, ADU, and service connection undergrounding regulations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on TBD, 2017 and,
after consideration of all testimony and relevant evidence, has determined that the
following Development Code Amendment findings can be made in the affirmative
manner:
A. The proposed rev1s1ons to Title 16 is consistent with the goals, objectives,
policies and implementation measures of the General Plan, particularly the Land
Use Element, and is therefore desirable to implement the provisions of the
General Plan.
The proposed Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General
Plan by protecting the physical, social, and economic stability and viability of
residential, commercial, industrial, public/quasi-public, and open space uses
within the City, by reducing or eliminating the visual and aesthetic impacts
created by rooftop decks, maintaining the City's conformance with State
regulations regarding ADUs, and reducing barriers to residential growth.
B. The proposed revisions to Title 16 will not adversely affect the public health,
safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern.
The proposed Development Code Amendment will not adversely affect the public
health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern because the
amendments proposed will protect the public welfare by regulating the visual and
aesthetic impacts created by rooftop decks, will bring City ADU regulations into
conformance with State law, and promote the public welfare by reducing barriers
to residential additions.
C. The proposed revisions to Title 16 are consistent with the purpose and intent of
Title 16.
The proposed Development Code Amendment is consistent with the purpose
and intent of Title 16 due to the revisions being made to protect the aesthetic and
physical advantages through the reduction or elimination of visual and aesthetic
impacts of rooftop decks, the protection of the physical and economic stability of
the residential market through conformance with State ADU regulations, and the
protection of economic stability increasing flexibility of residential additions.
D. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed revisions to Title 16 are
insignificant, or there are overriding considerations that outweigh the potential
impacts.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 3
The proposed Development Code Amendment is statutorily exempt per Section
15282(h) of the Guidelines regarding projects involving the adoption of an
ordinance regarding second units in a single-family or multifamily residential zone
by a city, as well as categorically exempt per Section 15308 of the Guidelines
regarding actions by regulatory agencies for protection, maintenance, and
enhancement of the aesthetic environment.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitals and findings are true and correct and incorporated
herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Subsection 16.52.150 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby
amended in its entirety as follows:
16.52.150 -Accessory Dwelling Units
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of these standards is to ensure. that accessory
dwelling units located in residential districts do not adversely impact either adjacent
residential parcels or the surrounding neighborhood, and are developed in a
manner which protects the integrity of the residential district, while providing for
needed housing opportunities. There are environmental and service constraints the
city faces, which limit the addition of accessory dwelling units. In particular, such
dwellings may not be appropriate on hillside lots because of environmental
constraints. The addition of a second residential dwelling is limited by urban service
capacity, public safety standards, traffic conditions, fire hazards, privacy impacts
and compatibility with neighboring uses and structures. This chapter addresses
these limitations.
B. Applicability.
1. 16.52.150 -Second residential dwellings Accessory Dwelling Units.
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of these standards is to ensure that second
residential dwellings accessory dwelling units located in residential districts do not
adversely impact either adjacent residential parcels or the surrounding
neighborhood, and are developed in a manner which protects the integrity of the
residential district, while providing for needed housing opportunities. There are
environmental and service constraints the city faces, which limit the addition of
second dwellings accessory dwelling units. In particular, such dwellings may not be
appropriate on hillside lots because of environmental constraints. The addition of a
second residential dwelling is limited by urban service capacity, public safety
standards, traffic conditions, fire hazards, privacy impacts and compatibility with
neighboring uses and structures. This chapter addresses these limitations.
B. Applicability.
1. Second residential dvveliings Accessory dwelling units may be permitted in any
residential district, subject to the standards set forth in this section.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE4
2. ~cond residential dwellings Accessory dwelling units may be attached to or
detached from the main dwelling, but are not allowed on the second floor above
the primary residence or garage unless approved through the minor use permit
-Viewshed Review process. If the second dwelling accessory dwelling unit is
attached to the main dwelling, each shall be served by separate outside
entrances. The interior wall(s) of an attached dwelling which separate it from
the main unit shall be fire rated according to the most recent uniform building
code. An "attached second residential dvveliing accessory dwelling unit" shall
mean a dwelling that is either combined within the living area or attached to the
primary residence. A "detached seBond residential dwelling accessory dwelling
unit" shall mean a dwelling that is not combined within or attached to the
primary residence. For the purposes of this chapter, "a dwelling" shall not
include a garage or any accessory structure. "Primary residence" shall mean an
existing detached residential structure that conforms with all applicable zoning
regulations.
3. A!! second residential dwelling accessory dwelling unit may be constructed
simultaneously with or after construction of the principal residence. In addition,
an existing principal residence may be considered the second residential
dwelling accessory dwelling unit, and a new residence may be constructed
which would then be considered the primary residence, provided the standards
set forth in this section are met.
Property Development Standards. The second residential dwelling accessory
dwelling unit shall comply with all zoning regulations and property development
standards of the district in which it is located, existing building, health, safety and
fire codes, and architectural review criteria, including, but not limited to, setbacks,
height limits, floor area ratio, and maximum lot coverage. In addition, the following
standards shall apply:
1. Minimum Lot Size. The minimum lot size for a parcel to be eligible for a second
dvv1elling an accessory dwelling unit shall be six thousand seven hundred-fifty
(6,750) square feet, excluding all rights of way and private access easements.
2. Building Separation. A detached second residential dweliingaccessory dwelling
unit shall be located a minimum distance equal to twice the applicable side yard
setback from the primary residence.
3. Yard Setbacks. The second residential dwellingaccessory dwelling unit shall
have the same minimum yard setback requirements as the base zone of the
primary residence on the parcel as outlined in Table 16.32.050-A and Table
16.32.050-B. Setbacks outlined in Appendix C.W.D.219 as referenced in Table
16.32.050-B and Table 16.32.050-A shall not be applicable to second
residential dwellings. Accessory dwelling units constructed above a garage
shall have the setback requirements of five feet (5') in the side and rear yard,
regardless of underlying minimum setback requirements.
4. Architectural Compatibility. The second residential dweliingaccessory dwelling
unit shall be architecturally compatible with the primary residence and the
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 5
surrounding neighborhood, and shall incorporate the same colors and materials
as the primary residence.
5. Maximum Size. Table 16.52.150-A defines the maximum square footage
allowed for an second dwellingaccessorv dwelling unit in each residential
zoning district. In no case shall the square footage of an accessory dwelling unit
second dwelling exceed fifty (50) percent of the square footage of the primary
residence.
Table 16.52.150-A
Zoning Designation
Village Residential (VR)
Single-Family (SF)
Residential Suburban (RS)
Residential Rural (RR)
Residential Hillside (RH)
Residential Estate (RE)
Condominium!T own house (MF)
Apartments (MFA)
Multifamily Very High Density
(MFVH)
Mobilehome Park (MHP)
Maximum Size of Second D·.uellingAccessorv
Dwelling Unit
640 square feet
850 square feet
1,200 sq. ft. for lots~ 12,000; 850 s.f. for lots<
12,000 s.f.
1 ,200 square feet
1,200 square feet
1,200 square feet
1 ,200 square feet
1,200 square feet
1 ,200 square feet
Not Permitted (NP)
6. Maximum Slope. The building site upon which the second residential
d111ellingaccessory dwelling unit will be constructed shall not have an average
slope in excess of twenty percent. A topographic map and slope analysis, as
recommended by the community development director, shall be stamped and
signed by either a registered civil engineer, registered architect, or registered
landscape architect. Average slope is defined as follows:
S= Ix L x 100
Ax 43,560
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE6
Where
S = average natural slope, in percent.
I = interval, in feet, of the contour lines.
L =the sum, in feet, of the length of the contour lines, at selected contour interval "I".
A= the total area, in acres, of the' site.
7. Parking. A minimum of one off-street parking space shall be provided for each
bedroom in the second residential dwellingaccessory dwelling unit, up to a
maximum requirement of two off-street parking spaces, in addition to the off-
street parking spaces required for the main dwelling. All parking spaces shall
be exclusive of front and street side yard setbacks Such parking spaces shall
be located in close proximity to the second residential dwellingaccessory
dwelling unit so as to provide convenient access for the occupant. These
spaces may be provided as tandem parking, including on an existing driveway
or in setback areas, excluding the non-driveway front yard setback. Proposed
tandem parking requires approval of a conditional use permit.
a. Additional parking shall not be required in the following cases:
__ i. If the accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile by travelled
distance of an existing transit stop;
__ ii. The accessory dwelling unit is located in the D-2.4 Historic Character
Overlay District;
__ iii, The accessory dwelling unit is located in a neighborhood where on-street
parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the
accessory dwelling unit;
__ iv. A car share vehicle is located within one block of the accessory dwelling
unit.
v. The accessory dwelling unit is part of the existing primary residence or an
existing accessory structure.
8. Replacement Parking. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is
demolished or converted in conjunction with the construction of an accessory
dwelling unit, replacement parking may be located in any configuration on the
same lot as the accessory dwelling unit. including, but not limited to. as covered
spaces, uncovered spaces, or tandem spaces. or by the use of mechanical
automobile parking lifts. This requirement shall not apply to projects described
in Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Subsection 16.52.150.C.7.a.
9. Occupancy Requirements. Second residential dwellings not be offered for sale
apart from the primary residence and shall be occupied on a month to month
basis or longer. Either the primary residence or the second residential dwelling
must be occupied by the owner of the property.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 7
10. Driveway Access. Second residential dwellin§&-Accessory dwelling units shall
be served by the same driveway access to the street as the primary residence.
Properties located on a corner of two public streets are allowed a separate
access from the primary residence, provided that access for the second
dwellingaccessory dwelling unit is from a different public street than the primary
residence.
11. Deed Restriction. A deed restriction shall be recorded against the title of the
property containing a.o. second residential dwellingaccessory dwelling unit prior
to issuance of a building permit. Such deed restriction shall stipulate that the
second dwellingaccessory dwelling units cannot be sold apart from the primary
residence and, within Single-Family zoning districts. the owner of the property
must occupy one of the dwellings on the premises. The owner occupancy
restriction shall not apply to properties containing accessory dwelling units
located in Multi-Family zoning districts.
12. Utility Meters. For any lot zoned for multiple family or single-family uses, the
second residential dvvellingaccessory dwelling unit may, but is not required to,
have an electric, gas, or water meter, or sewer lateral, separate from the
primary residence on the property. Applicable utility and development impact
fees for the second dwellingaccessory dwelling unit will be assessed at the time
a building permit is issued, based on building area and fixtures added.
13. Conditional Use Permit or Minor Use Permit. Any proposed deviation from
these standards shall be processed through a conditional use permit or minor
use permit application as determined by the community development director.
14. Other Conditions.
a. Second residential dv.'elH-R@sAccessory dwelling units shall be served by city
water. Second residential dvv'ellingsAccessory dwelling units shall be prohibited
on lots containing a guesthouse, converted garage, mobile home, or more than
one existing single-family dwelling.
b. Second residential dvv'ellingsAccessory dwelling units shall comply with such
other conditions or standards which, in the judgment of the city, are necessary
or appropriate to mitigate possible adverse impacts on the neighborhood.
D. State Law Applicable. The provisions of this section shall be subordinate to and
superceded by the controlling provisions of any applicable state law or laws.
SECTION 3. Subsection 16.48.180 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby
added in its entirety as follows:
16.48.180 -Rooftop Decks
A. Purpose and Intent. The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that new rooftop
decks constructed in the City conform to the scale and character of the neighborhood in
which they are located and do not unnecessarily or unreasonably infringe upon the
privacy of adjacent properties.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 8
B. Definition. Any deck supported by a structure, with no portion cantilevered past the
exterior walls of the structure it exists upon.
C. Applicability. All rooftop decks shall comply with the design standards listed in
subsection (D). Rooftop decks constructed above a second story may be permitted only
with the approval of a Minor Use Permit -Viewshed Review. Rooftop decks constructed
above a single story are exempt from the Minor Use Permit -Viewshed Review
requirement.
D. Design Standards for Rooftop Decks.
1. Side yard setback. If constructed above a second story, the rooftop deck shall
be setback an additional minimum of five feet (5') from applicable side yard
setbacks.
2. Front and rear yard setback. If constructed above a second story, the rooftop
deck shall be setback an additional minimum of five feet (5') from applicable front
and rear yard setbacks.
4. Rooftop deck access. Access to the rooftop deck shall be architecturally
integrated into the structure and shall be located in such a way to minimize visual
impact to neighboring properties. Interior access or concealed exterior access is
encouraged.
5. Maximum height. Guards or guardrails as defined in the Building Code shall be
required of all rooftop decks and shall count towards the maximum height of a
structure. Furniture and other accessory items shall also count towards the
maximum height of a structure. Rooftop deck guards and associated accessory
items shall not exceed the maximum height identified in development standards
of the underlying Zoning District.
6. Lighting. Lighting shall be designed to prevent unnecessary or excessive
lighting impacts onto neighboring properties. Rooftop decks with proposed
lighting shall include a lighting plan in submittals demonstrating conformance with
this standard.
SECTION 4. Subsection 16.68.050.B.1.a of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is
hereby amended in its entirety as follows:
16.68.050 -Underground utilities
B. Applicability.
1. Service Drops.
a. All projects (discretionary or ministerial) that involve the addition of over eoo
hundred (100) three hundred (300) square feet of habitable space shall be
required to place service connections underground.
SECTION 5. lf any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause of
this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unlawful, such decision shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The
City Council hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection,
subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or
more section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, or clause be declared
unconstitutional.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE9
SECTION 6. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper
published and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the
City Council meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified
copy of the full text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City
Clerk. Within fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the
names of those City Council Members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be
published again, and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such
adopted Ordinance.
SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption.
On motion of Council Member
following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
, seconded by Council Member , and on the
The foregoing Ordinance was adopted this __ day of ______ , 2017.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE10
JIM HILL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
JAMES A. BERGMAN, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY
Debbie Weichinger
From:
Sent:
To:
Linda Keating •••'9••••• ..
Wednesday, July 26, 2017 2:36 PM
Debbie Weichinger
Subject: AG Public Hearing 8/1 Accessory Dwelling Units
Letter to J_Hill.pdf Attachments:
Importance: High
Sent via e-mail to dweichinger@arroyogrande.org and delivered hard copy.
Subject: Public Hearing 8/1--Use of Accessory Dwelling Units for Homestay vacation rentals
Planning Commission Members:
I received a notice that you will be discussing Accessory Dwelling Units at a Public Hearing 8/1. The notice did not
include discussion points. If not included, I would like to propose that you add the issue of the rental use of these
ADUs. Currently, there are three ADUs that are being used as Homestay short term vacation rentals . This conflicts with
the stated purpose and use of these units. But, the city has allowed this to occur.
I have attached a copy of a letter sent to the Mayor and City Manager last month that details the situation. I have also
attached the response from the City Manager.
When Assembly Bill 1866 went into effect in 2003, it made it easier to build Accessory Dwelling Units. An updated ADU
bill went into effect this January that lifted even more restrictions, allowing these units to be created at an even a lower
cost.
The Arroyo Grande Housing Element 2014-2019 document adopted by the City Council as Resolution No. 471S on
3/2016, the City recognized the significance of Accessory Dwelling Units (Formerly Second Residential
Dwelling). Quoting from this d~cument:
• Stated definition of a Second Residential Dwelling.
"In the City's Development Code, second dwelling units are referred to as a "Second Residential Dwellings". A
Second Residential Dwelling is either a detached or attached dwelling unit that provides complete, independent
living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and
sanitation on the same parcel as the primary residence."
• Expressed the importance of Second Residential Dwelling units.
"Second units can be an important source of affordable housing since they are smaller than primary units and
they do not have direct land costs. Second units can also provide supplemental income to the homeowner, thus
allowing the elderly to remain in their homes or moderate-income families to afford housing."
• Rental of Second Residential Dwelling units (Arroyo Grande Development Code)
"Shall be occupied on a month-to-month basis or longer. Either primary residence or second residential
dwelling must be occupied by the owner of property."
One major demographic segment effected by the lack of affordable housing is the over SS group -of which I am a
member. According to published data, 3S.7% of the Arroyo Grande population is in this age group. Over the last 10
years, this group's retirement funds were hit very hard by the recession/market downturn and housing collapse . I have
several friends who had to pull out funds to live at the market low, lost houses and have been forced out of rentals
because they were sold due to the recovery . Unable to find housing, they have moved out of the area or into
temporarily living with family/friends while wait-listed for low-income facilities.
Other local cities (San Luis Obispo and Morro Bay) specifically exclude Accessory Dwelling Units from their Vacation
Rental programs. In fact, I was only able to find one California city with a Vacation Rental policy that permitted the use
of Accessory Dwelling Units as short-term rentals . This was Oakland .
I urge the city of Arroyo Grande to take a responsible position on this issue and encourage the construction of Accessory
Dwelling Units but only for their intended use .
Sincerely,
Linda Keating
-Myrtle Drive
PROVIDE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THAT ARE SO DEPAERATELY NEEDED-
NOT AFFORDABBLE AIRBNB LODGING
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
2
July 5, 2017
(Sent via e-mail and USPS)
Mr. Jim Hill
Mayor City of Arroyo Grande
300 E. Branch St.
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Dear Mayor Hill:
I am writing because of the Airbnb Homestay that is operating across form my property. The unit being rented
was permitted for construction 10/2015 as a Second Residential Dwelling. The Homestay usage of this property
is in direct conflict with the purpose, intended use and standards set forth by the City of Arroyo Grande in its
Housing Element 2014-2019 document for Second Residential Dwelling units.
Additionally, since the Second Residential Dwelling rental unit is NOT an owner-occupied dwelling unit, it falls
outside the definition of a Homestay rental.
.,., To date, there have been three Second Residential Dwellings that have received Homestay permits. It seems
very odd that two of the three are associated with City Council members. One is owned directly by Council
member Caren Ray. Another is owned by the father of Council member Kristen Barneich, Chuck Fellows who
was a former Council member and now a current member of the City's TBID Advisory Board.
Second Residential Dwellings -Definition, Importance and Development Standards
Assembly Bill 1866 (Wright) went into effect on July 1, 2003 making the approval of Second Residential
Dwellings a governmental rather than discretionary process. Which means that a request to build could not be
denied by a local government if the project met the basic State requirements.
In the Arroyo Grande Housing Element 2014-2019 document adopted by the City Council as Resolution No. 4715
on 3/2016, the City recognized the significance of this bill and its intent. (Section attached.) The Housing
Element document did the following:
• Stated definition of a Second Residential Dwelling.
"In the City's Development Code, second dwelling units are referred to as a "Second Residential Dwellings". A
Second Residential Dwelling is either a detached or attached dwelling unit that provides complete, independent
living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and
sanitation on the same parcel as the primary residence."
• Expressed the importance of Second Residential Dwelling units.
"Second units can be an important source of affordable housing since they are smaller than primary units and
they do not have direct land costs. Second units can also provide supplemental income to the homeowner, thus
allowing the elderly to remain in their homes or moderate-income families to afford housing."
• Set Standards for Second Residential Dwelling units.
~ Ir·. -... "-;..a-.11:••'::.J."!:• -·i•••T•Ti o.1.Wl:..J."I. .. -... " . ... .-r-1 --... -
standards S.Cond Residential Dwelling
Shall comply with all zonng regulations and property development standards
of the district ir. wtich it is located.
O.velopment My proposed deviation from standards of Development Code Section standards 16.52.150 (second residential dwelingsJ shall be processed through a
condftional use pem1t or mnor ~e pemit opplicotion as determned by fhe
Communitv Development Direcfor. ~
Minimum Lot Size 6,750sl
MaximumSiz:e 509£. of squore footage of primary residence'
Rental of Unit Sholl be occupied on roonth-to-month bosis or longer. Either primary re9dence
cr second residential dwe11ing must be occupied by owner of property
Building Sepe " Detached second residenlial dwelling -located a mnirrum distance equal to
tlNice the applicable side yard setback from primary residence.
Average SIOF ~\ 20\lb max. ...
Parking 1 space/bedroom [max. 2 spaces)
"Rental of Unit: Shall be occupied on month-to-month basis or longer. Either primary residence or second
residential dwelling must be occupied by owner of property."
Arroyo Grande Vacation Rental Policy
In May 2014, Arroyo Grande modified the city's ordinance to allow permitting vacation rentals. The
modifications defined two types of rentals. The least expensive and easiest to obtain is called Homestay.
Definition: "Homestay" means an owner-occupied dwelling unit where a maximum of two (2) short-
term lodging rooms are provided for compensation.
Pertinent Homestay Conditions:
5. The owner shall reside on the premises.
6. Individual guest stays shall be limited to fourteen (14) days with a seven-day period between stays.
Homestay Permits granted to Second Residential Dwellings
To date, three Homestay permits have been granted to properties that are Second Residential Dwellings. All are
being actively advertised on Airbnb. These are:
• PPR 14-008_202 Canyon Way Owned by Council member Kristen Barnich's father Chuck Follows,
(appointed to Arroyo Grande TBID Advisory Board 6/13/2017).
• PPR 15-012-709 Mustang Cir --Owned by Michael Chaney
• PPR 17-001_756 Myrtle St. -Owned by Council member Caren Ray
The advertising for these three units is attached.
Need for affordable housing is real
Again, quoting the City's Land Use document --"Second units can be an important source of affordable housing
since they are smaller than primary units and they do not have direct lond costs". Attached is a recent article
from The Tribune "Affordable housing tough to find in San Luis Obispo County". I personally have friends who
have been forced out of their long-time rental units because they have been sold to investors . As a result, they
had to move away or in with friends . They are now on long waiting-lists for low-income apartments.
Major cities, New York, San Francisco, Chicago, Portland to name a few are taking aggressive measures to make
it very difficult to operate an Airbnb profitably. These cities all face affordable housing crises. Having investors
purchase low-end units that they rent on Airbnb, is squeezing out the people who really need the units. There is
an attached article describing San Francisco actions . "Airbnb, San Francisco settle lawsuit over short term rental
suit".
I am not asking that any ordinances or laws be altered. I am simply asking that the codes be observed as
intended.
I am requesting that the city of Arroyo Grande immediately stop issuing Homestay permits for Second
Residential Dwellings. Second Residential Dwellings are to be rented on a month to month basis or longer.
If the owner of a Second Residential Dwellings elects to rent a room in the Primary Residential Dwelling as a
Homestay, this could be done. But, the Secondary Residential Dwelling, must be reserved for its intended
use.
I am requesting that all Homestay licenses for the three Second Residential Dwellings be terminated. When
the owners of these properties took advantage of the legislation allowing them ability to construct a Second
Residential Dwelling, they were aware of the intended and permitted use of these units. Especially those who
were/are members of the City Council. Hopefully, these owners will respect the intended use of these
structures and put these Second Residential Dwellings into the rental pool to help provide the affordable
housing this area so desperately needs. This provides the owners income as well as maintaining the character
of the existing neighborhood.
I am also requesting that an investigation be conducted to determine how the Homestay permits were issued
when the language defining a Homestay and the City of Arroyo Grande Development code seems to clearly
prohibit these Dwellings. San Luis Obispo specifically excludes them on the permit form (See attached).
Morro Bay recently voted to exclude them.
Additionally, I would suggest that Arroyo Grande follow the actions that San Francisco has taken with Airbnb
-no license, no listing. If an unlicensed property is listed, Airbnb pays a hefty fine to the City until it is
removed.
Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Linda Keating
313 Myrtle Dr.
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
CC: Jim Bergman, City Manager
Heather Whitham, City Attorney
CLEAN QUAINT WINE-COUNTRY
COTTAGE
Arroyo Grande, CA, United States * * * * * 92 reviews
Entire home/apt 2 Guest!> 18edroom ,,,
About this listing
• Linda And
Chuck
~
1 Bed
Spotless, peaceful cottage w/ private back deck, fire pit, and full kitchen. Walk to
charming, historic village of Arroyo Grande = boutiques, restaurants, bars, bakeries,
coffee houses. groceries & antique shops. Reach aver 200 WINERIES in 45 minutes
Private Guest House-modern
farmhouse design
Arroyo Grande, CA, United States • • • • • 13 reviews
!]
Entire home/apt 4 Guests 1 Bedroom
About this Ii~
Caren
~
2 Beds
Private guest house that's brand new (2017), with modern conveniences and antique
design touches. It's a short easy walk to the historic Village of Arroyo Grande, and a 5
minute drive to area beaches. The guest house is a gorgeous addition to our historic 1 •
farmhouse. The proceeds from your stay will go toward the restoration and renovation of
the main house, so you're contributing to saving a historic landmark! See more by
searching historic rice house arroyo grande.
Beautiful Central Coast
Guesthouse
Arroyo Grande, CA, United States * * * * * 61 reviews
Entire home!apt 8 Guests 3 Bedrooms
About this I~
Mike
~
4Beds
Private, 3 bedroom 1600 sq ft guesthouse in Arroyo Grande, CA (Central Coast) 3 miles
from Pismo Beach. 1st class accommodations close to beaches, wineries, golf,
restaurants, and shopping. Pool/hot-tub, game-room, and laundry. Kids and pet friendly.
Large patio and garden/lawn area. Fully stocked kitchen with everything needed to
prepare and serve meals. Induction style cook tops, plenty of pans, knives, settings, etc.
Coffee maker, crock pot, microwave. Table seating for 8.
City of Arroyo Grande 2014-2019 Housing Element
Emergency Shelters and Transitional Housing
State legislation SB 2 requires jurisdictions to permit emergency shelters without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or
other discretionary permits, and transitional housing and supportive housing must be considered residential uses and
must only be subject to the same restrictions that apply to the same housing types in the same zone. Programs K.2-1
and K.2-2 are proposed to amend the Development Code to allow emergency shelters without any discretionary review
(by right) in at least one zone and to define transitional and supportive housing as required per SB2.
Secondary Dwelling Units
To encourage establishment of secondary dwelling units on existing developed lots, State law requires cities to either
adopt an ordinance based on standards set out in the law authorizing creation of second units in residentially zoned
areas, or where no ordinance has been adopted, to allow second units if they meet standards set out in the State law.
State law requires ministerial consideration of second unit applications in zones where single-family dwellings are
permitted. Local governments are precluded from totally prohibiting second units in residentially zoned areas unless
they make specific findings (Government Code §65852.2). Second units can be an important source of affordable
housing since they are smaller than primary units and they do not have direct land costs. Second units can also provide
supplemental income to the homeowner, thus allowing the elderly to remain in their homes or moderate-income
families to afford housing.
In the City's Development Code secondary dwelling units are referred to as a "second
residential dwellings". A second residential dwelling is either a detached or attached dwelling unit that provides
complete, independent living facilities for one or more persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping,
eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as the primary residence.
Table 5-5 sets out the primary standards for second residential dwellings in the City. The City's standards do not conflict
with State law governing second units. However, having a minimum parcel size requirement for a second residential
dwelling can often be a constraint to developing secondary units.
106
City of Arroyo Grande 2014-2019 Housing Element
L";t'":v'"""~U..:.;-~ .~_;;~~ ~¥J!:'r;~'""~$~"'r,~,..,,,,,-..,,.~~':"'~~f;l_.~,ez:",,.,f' .. ~:jt'fl1~4+:?~,.."~"~4rlit~.'M~t,~!.!:.a.c"~ ~#~·~4!~':'!'!'"''"' • " ~.
~~--~-: --~·Table S'o7 Sernnd ·Resid~ntial Dwellings.Development Standards . ,~ •
--~_J---~j(--..._ ~~.--.---.-: --~L. _:---..:.~-~·,. _:_~-t_-=__ ,f .,.':_ ____ ._
Standards Second Residential Dwelling
Shall comply with all zoning regulations and property development standards of the district in
which it is located.
Development
Standards Any proposed deviation from standards of Development Code Section 16.S2.1SO (Second
residential dwellings) shall be processed through a conditional use permit or minor use
permit application as determined by the Community Development Director.
Minimum Lot Size 6,7SO sf
Maximum Size 50% of square footage of primary residence 1
Rental of Unit
Shall be occupied on month-to-month basis or longer. Either primary residence or second
residential dwelling must be occupied by owner of property
Building Separation
Detached second residential dwelling -located a minimum distance equal to twice the
applicable side yard setback from primary residence.
Average Slope 20% max.
Parking 1 space/bedroom (max. 2 spaces)
Source: City of Arroyo Grande Development Code
Development Processing and Development Impact Fees
Like most cities in California, Arroyo Grande charges planning, building, and impact fees for residential developments.
Table 5-6 summarizes the planning fees charged by the Community Development Department for processing residential
applications. These fees are established by the City Council to cover the staff and other costs associated with processing
a housing development application. These fees are comparable to other area jurisdictions and not considered excessive.
The fees charged at the time oft he issuance of a building permit for residential development include standard building
permit plan check and inspection fees as well as impact fees set by the City. Building fees are set by the Building Code
and represent the costs for plan review and inspection of the project construction. Given the nature of these fees, they
are not considered excessive in that they are essential to ensure the health and safety of the project construction.
Impact fees cover the costs of infrastructure and public services. Given the current tax structure the City must operate
under, there are not adequate general funds to provide the services and infrastructure necessary for new residential
development, thus development impact fees must be charged to cover the costs of the services or infrastructure
requirements.
107
High housing costs play a big role in the Central Coast's unaffordability, as underscored by National Low Income Housing
Coalition data released this week. Affordable rental housing -units that cost residents no more than 30 percent of their
income -is tough to find in San Luis
Obispo County and across the country, especially for those working for minimum wage. Joe Johnston
jjohnston@thetribunenews.com
May 27, 2016 8:19 PM
Affordable housing tough to find in SLO County,
California
By Lindsey Holden
It's not easy being poor in San Luis Obispo County. Or even middle class, for that matter. High housing costs play a big
role in the Central Coast's unaffordability, as underscored by National Low Income Housing Coalition data released this
week. Affordable rental housing -units that cost residents no more than 30 percent of their income -is tough to
find in San Luis Obispo County and across the country, especially for those working for minimum wage.
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development estimates a fair market two-bedroom apartment averages
about $1,056 in the U.S. A resident would need to earn about $20.30, or $42,240 per year, to afford such housing. The
federal minimum wage is currently $7.25 per hour, meaning a worker would have to work about 112 hours per week to
pay for their housing.
In California, where the minimum wage is $10 per hour, the Housing Coalition's study ranks
California as having the third most expensive housing in the country. A resident must earn about $28.59 per hour, or
$59,464 per year, to afford the $1,487 monthly rent for a typical two bedroom apartment. Although the state's
minimum wage is set to go up to $15, the cost of housing still outpaces the jump in salary.
SLO County's rental housing costs more than in most other areas of the country, but it still costs residents less than
those living in the famously expensive San Francisco Bay Area. SLO County residents need a job paying about $25.19 per
hour, or $52,400 per year, to rent a $1,310-permonth two-bedroom apartment, which makes SLO County the 17th most
expensive county in California.
In Marin County -the most expensive county in California -residents must earn $44.02 per hour, or $91,560 per year,
to afford the typical $2,289-per-month rent for a two-bedroom apartment.
Even so, young professionals juggling student loans with rent and other monthly expenses find it tough to eke out a
living in SLO County.
Ray Scott, a physical therapist assistant, said he and his wife are preparing to move in with family in the Bay Area
because they can't afford to live in the area and pay rent on their own. They pay about $1,100 per month to live in a
guest house in San Luis Obispo, which he said is hard to manage, especially because his wife wants to go back to school.
"As far as wages versus rent, it's just not sustainable," Scott said.
Even though SLO County isn't the priciest place to live in California, its highly competitive housing market makes a
decent apartment hard to find. The countywide vacancy rate is 1.7 percent, said Scott Smith, executive director of the
Housing Authority of San Luis Obispo. A healthy vacancy rate is about 5 percent, Smith said.
"It's a supply issue," said John Fowler, president of nonprofit Peoples' Self-Help Housing.
Smith said affordable housing is important to consider because it affects employers as well as residents. It's hard to
convince both professionals and minimum wage earners to work in an area with such high rents, Smith said.
HASLO helps low-income residents with housing subsidies and builds affordable units throughout the county. People's
Self-Help does similar work as a private nonprofit in SLO, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties .
Fowler said he's seen some area officials push back against building more housing, especially due to concerns about
water and limited resources. Even so, he said it's possible to balance such concerns with the need for housing.
Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article8050735 7 .html#storylink=cpy
Airbnb, San Francisco settle lawsuit over short-term rental law
By Heather Somerville and Dan Levine I SAN FRANCISCO
Airbnb Inc and the city of San Francisco have settled a year-long lawsuit over a local ordinance forbidding the home-
rental company from taking bookings from hosts who have not properly registered their homes.
The settlement, which Airbnb announced during a call with reporters on Monday, marks the latest effort by the
company to compromise with cities and improve its relationship with regulators globally as it eyes an initial public
offering. Airbnb is an online marketplace for shortterm lodging, with "hosts" who rent their homes in 65,000 cities.
City officials across the globe have sought to minimize Airbnb's impact on tight housing supplies and rental costs,
sparking legal fights with the company, which has argued that, as an Internet platform, it is not responsible for the
listings on its website.
As part of the settlement with San Francisco, where Airbnb is headquartered, the company will create a registration
system requiring that anyone in the city who wants to rent room or house on Airbnb must first supply their name,
address and zip code, said Airbnb global policy chief Chris Lehane. Only after registering can hosts list their homes for
rent.
"Every host on the Airbnb platform will be registered, which is what the city has said it will be looking for," Lehane said.
The company will turn over host registration information to city officials. The city last year enacted an ordinance,
sparking the lawsuit, making it illegal for Airbnb to collect fees for providing booking services for rentals that had not
been properly registered. Airbnb makes money by charging a service fee on bookings.
Airbnb's new registration system, expected to roll out in early 2018, will not prevent hosts that are not compliant with
city laws from registering, meaning there could be a lag period during which illegal hosts can rent out homes before city
officials identify them. San Francisco limits each host to one rental unit and caps the number of nights a unit can be
rented.
Airbnb will also deactivate listings ifthere is an invalid registration, San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herrera said in a
statement. Currently, there are 2,100 registered short-term rental hosts in San Francisco, but Airbnb has more than
8,000 listings in the city.
Herrera called the settlement "a turning point when it comes to enforcement."
The settlement must still be approved by the San Francisco mayor and board of supervisors. Airbnb has similar
registration systems in the works in Denver, New Orleans and Chicago.
In a statement, Mayor Ed Lee said the settlement "protects our rental housing stock while allowing residents who follow
the rules to gain income to help make ends meet."
The settlement is the latest evidence that Airbnb has lessened its long-standing resistance to turning over data to city
officials . In his remarks , Lehane also indicated that Airbnb has backtracked somewhat from its previous argument that
any city rules to limit listings published on its website violated a broad federal law that protects internet companies from
liability for content posted on their platforms.
"We fundamentally do believe that platforms need to take responsibility," Lehane said.
Airbnb still has ongoing litigation in Miami and Santa Monica, California.
(Reporting by Heather Somerville and Dan Levine in San Francisco; Editing by Jonathan Oatis and Marguerita Choy)
~ City of San Luis Obispo
~ Homestay Permit
Community Development Department -919 Palm Snet. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 (805] 781-7110
Ftease pnnt dellrlf or type ~ 1t11s ~tam wltt ~r S __ ;iipflllellllcr.i ~ Tl'Js 1alm ¥.II te yaur pl!l'l'l'll when lllliJIV\oecl In
&Orne <a&es !l'Oll ~ hi-'! u. ~ v.tlh addCIOria.I c~1kll'I!
NOTE ~Ble propell!'t r~IQtllJ """' ai; ~ ~kJfl& or~. C0-'@11i8111&. aoo Re&1ncllofta (~'&) C1f ~!I· a85«1111Klll8 ""*' rei1100: OI ~DC llCf"le&IBr& e'len fl Mh llW Ill 81D\Wll er, Cl~ Aegi118llO'l9 ARllCBll!t ... ~ llCl ~ complal!Ci' """.eR¥
JqlfEll~ pm!R ~Ucm belllre 11ppf'l"1 ICI' cty awin"&I .
Bus111GSS
App11ca111 --------------Mame (cpbo1111): _______ Phone ----
Address· __________________________ l.oAB:~--------
This ll!Sldence ts a tAcble 1-brne C Yes C kc a Candcmntn 0 Yes 0 tfo ., a Ml::meiw.n!!r's Assooabnn C ..-es C Na
Requirements for Approval
Plannlnu AppllcatiDfl:
c c~ plpnan!l O!pplalim1
2 ll111lness UollllH & hz Cfitlftua:
w c~ Bu&~ Lic«iee & r~ ce..itcste-
;apph::Jltlcn
3 Verillc.nor1 of 0-,.r Oaa1.1p.ioy:
Tiie ope<alor or ~ holl1ill6Wp mul4 ()l'01tdeo ....eorrkatlon ttlil
ft aawtudr permllled dwelllll!J unil is Iha. pmnsy rHdence
and le occupltd by l!lietn ror lhe 11\iP Po'UOf\ of fl& ~ew
Please nd11de a CDp'f Qf ttie Hr:meGIM'lel"S Pqierty Tn
E:emphcm 11L llie ~ property If the ~ is unable
kl ~or.ilcle Yl'lil rilo1TM110n, ~ conaun-. Pla!Vlng 91BIT
tar Ollller ;nppropruue dztcymentabcn
c CQllli or ~eowr'W!rs Plt'J*IY Ta• Elltlfllo.P110n 111 the
u,ecr. pnllpL!Sly
Cl Olher dx:umenl*rl please speci!r.
4 A11p0ftslbl1 Party:
Tiie opeil~ of !he hct'llB&li~ ~ p-O'tde th& l'lill:'l'le and
07Rllc1 nfarmallon d a responsible r-t)' rt 1he 01'lne1-.
occupier ink~ N or 3tle rre, llOt be on f'le llf•ml9M -11 °" hmee dJJlllG IN tlome&tiJtii Nintal A Rnoooslble Piltf 1& ii
perscn ~n years fi zige ar defer WlhCJ IS des~mG by
t'tt a~ or 11\e llfOp&rtp ae <1 po"1 or ~ f(ir' Ille
h:lnu:s~ rental in the ~the Olllll~.oa:uptef is nnt Cl"I the
pn::iperty al ad mies dWTig the rertll Ill anSMf far !hi!
ma'118iwn ~ IN ~ alllt cOOCIUCt lll1d actt1 or
hcmlestl>j guesa ~ te5pCftlible plllly's cqnlac1 inlDrmllban
mufl bot f.i'll\'~ Ir> l'lolllealB" llliMl8 sncl <ld.lacenl
ne~bors
C 08&10ft8t~ raep.JMlble pell)'
~arne ~-~-------------A'tOne ______________ _
Add~ --------------~ 5 PllUflg:
Open1Dis Vlill mairuan lit least one (1) cn.seie cusll:mer
pafklog ~ r. 1111dl.l01\ 'IO IMI requued resllle<N pailelflg.
?aitang in a dnveW'a!i lh2lt has 11 mnl!IU'l1 depltl af 20 teet •°"' Ille bactc or 'Sidewall; <inct .a made ~able ~ ~
d111111g h~ 1~ snat meet 1tie oMnt>on ()1 it oanono
Sp.llCZ
6. S.Plan.:
!:I Site i:dan ind~: proper!)' hnes. buhbng tror plan
rdl:ilbng mcrns Ill be rslled; drns!a:ns af all pwied
palklna tpi)C@fl\ ior.111100 of recy~lillJ aniJ 1eM@o «l'llalJlef&;
any fll1llXISed im~ ;nlia-dl!mi:Umis leg wt1lls.
faflcea, elltellor ...,._ paf11111a all«'9J
7 o.htt ~ICILIRmMtt:
a Cal"ltad: 1nlDrmaban l'cr the property 0''*11er arid
'Kp.:osjbkl pilrt)' mu91 be prCMded '° ~ ~
<I/Kl ~ llill;hboffl
II At al limte w.wi • llomtSIWit l'el'llal 18 oc~. Ille
Ompl!rly ll'MN!r or ~nsllle party in.at ba 11oithin 11
'f41leen.flWlllle 411¥8 or lhe llfOpef'f!t ilnll awatablll -..a
teleptiooe ~r11Y·to11r l"Qors a dt!PJ, &eW!n Cla'IS a ...-,
'IO resp:ind ID CDll\llal:ts regdirlg the hamestay
c ~llftleStlly rerias shll41 mrnplr Wlll1 the pmJlelt)'
derH1lopmeoc jincJ l)e'fet~ &r.andar<:t' •ned tn
Ch~I& ,7 t 8 ..:I H ,g or !tie San l\11& ObiflPo
t.tuniapil Code
d All l!Uldng ;:ind 6re caire regablillflS shlfl be met
I! T'2 nt1ml:B' d mernight IJJ!5s snal be li'TrtJed tit ltu
acluhs ;u!d bedtaana stlld meet ltle rn111mim ss;re
·0:~111>01€<'1:$ a.;. o.;.r~ 111 uie toa•1J1og c~
Cl
ocx::q:lll!d d ... 'ello;i 11nit an lhl! ~
0 ~ rtPQla •e nDt Pllffllllled IP gue&t hOu5e6 OI
q-J~!rt~~
" -~tsemenls 1
bur.~ llO&ntie l'UTiber on-w ad\le"6lnll d the
L'lom@6tay iB pfl:f'libtt!d
APPUCANT I Ulld@rstiWld ~ II'. Jl4l'lltl I& 19811416, I must meet
'Ille RlqUllenll!nts Isled aba\le It ~ RlqUirements are net met
tile poafTllll 11111 ba V-OK! Bn4 IP'le tr~ '1lll81 c&aM Im~.
Date: