Former City Council Members and Planning Commissioners Attempted Changes to Proposed Design Guidelines for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) – “Second Units.”

Few Piedmonters have been engaged in the proposed ADU rules despite the impact on all Piedmont properties.

The following are safety matters the Planning Commission and the City Council have not considered.

“The designation of areas may be based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety.”  65852.2  (A) State law.

“Off­street parking shall be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions.”65852.2 (II) State law.

During the Piedmont school winter break, on Tuesday, February 18, 2020 at 7:30 pm in City Hall, the Piedmont City Council will consider approval, disapproval or changes to the Design Guidelines recommended for approval the prior week by a majority of the Piedmont Planning Commission with Chair Jonathan Levine voting no.  See link to the staff report at the end of this article. 

Thus Far No Checklist is Available to Clarify Process & Requirements

The Planning Department attempted to provide Design Guidelines to protect existing neighborhood standards and concern for adjoining properties. Consideration of applications for new ADUs is required to be “objective” without subjective opinions from staff or neighbors.  Although requested at the Planning Commission meeting, no checklist has been produced to let applicants and others view a complete list of what is required for approval. Processes were also not specifically provided.

Planning Commission Chair and former Piedmont City Council Member Jonathan Levine has repeatedly expressed concern for neighborhood impacts, notification, clear processes and guidelines reviewed prior to approval. 

Unappealable  Staff Decisions

Staff alone will make unappealable decisions on permitting ADUs.  Typography, street safety, parking issues, fire safety, emergency access, etc., are yet to be resolved. The Piedmont Fire Marshall is given the all important, yet “subjective” task of determining whether an  application for an ADU will be “safe.”  

Inoperable windows, parking, notice, story poles, fences, privacy, neighbors involvement, public notice, curb cuts, light and air were matters brought up at the Piedmont Planning Commission meeting on Feb. 10, 2020. 

During consideration of recommendations, some current Planning Commissioners displayed little knowledge of the new State laws and the difference between the previously approved ordinance and the Design Guidelines they were acting upon. The fact that ADU approval could not be discretionary, appealed, or subjective came as a surprise to some. 

Planning Director Kevin Jackson explained that there could be no notice to neighbors or appeal of the staff decisions.  He stated that the design issues such as required 6′ fences and non-operable translucent windows had been  recommended by staff to protect neighborly privacy in an objective manner. Both measures were changed by the Commission. Jackson argued for prompt adoption of the guidelines with future amendments as identified.

Comments & Suggestions by Former Officials

Former City Council member Garrett Keating suggested requiring story poles be installed prior to staff approval to allow the staff to definitively know where the ADU would be built. 

Former Planning Commissioner Melanie Robertson argued for a number of improvements, including allowing curb cuts to facilitate parking on site. 

Former Planning Commissioner and Planner Michael Henn presented a number of language conflicts within the guidelines. Henn wanted the Commission to wait until the California Department of Housing and Community Development booklet outlining compliance requirements had been provided.  Henn further advocated greater community engagement in determining the requirements to allow increased consideration by Piedmonters.

Piedmont City Council ADU Design Guidelines staff report for 2/18/2020 Council meeting:

https://piedmont.ca.gov/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16462354

********

Piedmont City Council ADU ordinance previously enacted :

https://piedmont.ca.gov/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16415861

Click to make comments to the City Council, > citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov

League of Women Voters of Piedmont Election Forum

Candidates for Alameda County Offices

Tuesday, February 11, 2020, 7:00 – 8:30 p.m.

Piedmont City Council Chamber Chambers – 120 Vista Ave. Piedmont, CA 94611

The League of Women Voters of Piedmont will host a Candidates Forum on February 11, 2020 in advance of the upcoming March 3 election. The event will be held in the Council Chambers at Piedmont City Hall and focus on candidates running for Alameda County Offices. This event is co-sponsored by the Bay Area, Oakland, Berkeley, Albany & Emeryville Leagues of Women Voters. The forum will include candidates for the following races:

 Alameda County Superior Court, Seat 2: Elena Condes, Mark Fickes, and Lilla Julia Szelenyi.

 15th Assembly District: Sarah Brink, Jeanne M. Solnorda, and Buffy Wicks. (Ms. Wicks is likely unable to attend; the League has invited her to submit a written statement.)

 Alameda County Supervisor, District 5: Keith Carson and Nick Pilch.

The community is cordially invited to attend this event.

The forum is designed to provide voters with an opportunity to hear from candidates and pose questions. The program will be simulcast on KCOM-TV, channel 27 and be made available for streaming. KCOM viewers are invited to submit questions during the forum by emailing lwvpiedmont@gmail.com. 

The League of Women Voters is a non-partisan organization whose mission is to promote active and informed democratic participation. Visit www.lwvpiedmont.org for more information.

Piedmont League of Women Voters

Is the cart getting in front of the horse ? Adopt the Ordinance then its requirements ?

Council plans to approve an ADU ordinance on Feb. 3, and some time later consider what the “objective” standards for approved ADUs will be, therefore leaving both applicants and neighbors without clear and specific requirements regarding safety and other issues.

Concerns over regulations have arisen over applications for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) being exclusively and “objectively” considered by staff.  

Before completion of the Piedmont ADU approval requirements – Design Review and safety regulations – the Piedmont City Council is being pressed  to act promptly on adopting a new ADU ordinance on February 3, 2020 at 7:30 pm in City Hall.

Major components of an “objective” review by staff have been shown to be incomplete. Items such as Design Review specifications, safety regulations etc. have not been put forward for Council consideration prior to the proposed second reading and adoption of the ADU ordinance.

A key, legally, allowed, qualification for ADU approval is safety – traffic, pedestrian, access for public safety services, distance from roadways, fire safety, terrain, etc.

Fire Safety:

With climate changes increasing fire conditions in California, fire safety in Piedmont requires prevention of barriers to fire fighting.  Strict avoidance of challenging conditions that would interfere with controlling fires is  necessary for protection of all in the move to densification of our small city. 

 The practice of asking the Fire Chief or Police Chief to determine safety issues appears not to be an identifiable “objective” practice.

The following is the staff suggestion for fire safety standard:

“5.03.03 FIRE SAFE CONSTRUCTION 1.Construction of any ADU or JADU shall be designed to meet fire safe construction and vegetation requirements as determined by the Piedmont Fire Marshal.”

Should Piedmont require ADUs to meet California Fire Code, and National Fire Protection Association Standards?  Piedmont has self-excluded certain fire safety standards.  Will the Piedmont Fire Marshal accept the California Code and National Standards?  Has the Council considered any exemptions?

What document will an applicant for a new ADU receive upon arrival at the Public Works counter in City Hall?  

Planning Commissioner Jonathan Levine pointed out, when voting no on the proposed ordinance, that no applicant document /checklist had been provided to the Commissioners during their consideration of the ordinance. Also, no such document has been provided to the City Council.  Viewing the document informs the Council and the public how the ordinance will be implemented and allows consideration of its objectivity.

Is the approval criteria objective?

Staff has pointed out the necessity of  “objective” criteria for new ADU applicants; however, while seeking approval of an ordinance requiring  compliance by ADU applicants the material provided by the staff to the City Council does not supply a full criteria package. 

 February 3, 7:30 pm – Council consideration of the ADU ordinance. See staff report below.

https://piedmont.ca.gov/common/pages/DisplayFile.aspx?itemId=16415861

The Planning  Commission is scheduled to initially consider the specific requirements on February 10, 2020, leaving open time between the adoption of the ADU ordinance and the completion of the requirements. The Planning Commission staff report and agenda on ADUs Design Review fall after the February 3 Council proposed final adoption of the incomplete ADU ordinance. 

The proposed “Design Review” process to be considered by the Planning Commission is linked below:

https://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/UserFiles/Servers/Server_13659739/File/Government/Departments/Planning%20Division/Planning-ADU-Report-2020-02-10.pdf

To make comments to the City Council, click > citycouncil@piedmont.ca.gov