Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Results 1 to 8 of 8

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #1
    Peter Schurch's Avatar
    Peter Schurch
     

    Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    Dear Friends,

    Sebastopol's 2nd Unit ordinance is up for discussion. This Tuesday, the Planning Commission will decide if they will allow bigger "Granny Units" to be built in the City. They will vote to increase the size restriction from 600 to 800 square feet. I think this a very good idea because it will make Sebastopol more affordable for singles, couples and small families, and it will take pressure off the City to grow outwards. 600 square feet is too small. 800 square feet is too small. 840 sqaure feet is just enough for two bedrooms and is the County standard.

    Also, I think we should not have to use more yard space for parking. Street parking works fine in most cases.

    There is space to make nice 2nd Units on many lots. Allowing affordable, small family sized dwellings inside the City could ease traffic and make Sebastopol a more pedestrian friendly town. It's not the solution to Global Warming, but it helps.

    I hope you can make it to the meeting at 7 pm Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at the Sebastopol Community Center Youth Annex and speak up on this community issue.

    Thanks---Peter Schurch
    Last edited by Barry; 01-23-2007 at 11:27 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. TopTop #2
    Peter Schurch's Avatar
    Peter Schurch
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    This clarification is from Amanda Claiborne:


    The meeting is at 7 p.m. at the Sebastopol Community Center Youth Annex on Morris Street next to Wischman Hall NOT at City Hall. Please come if you care about creating affordable housing with infill instead of huge projects like Laguna Vista. The current regulations are irrational and discriminate against older smaller homes. These changes will support multi-family communities and preserve our greenbelts.




    Sebastopol's 2nd Unit ordinance is up for discussion. This Tuesday, the Planning Commission will decide if they will allow bigger "Granny Units" to be built in the City. They will vote to increase the size restriction from 600 to 800 square feet. I think this a very good idea because it will make Sebastopol more affordable for singles, couples and small families, and it will take pressure off the City to grow outwards. 600 square feet is too small. 800 square feet is too small. 840 sqaure feet is just enough for two bedrooms and is the County standard.

    Also, I think we should not have to use more yard space for parking. Street parking works fine in most cases.

    There is space to make nice 2nd Units on many lots. Allowing affordable, small family sized dwellings inside the City could ease traffic and make Sebastopol a more pedestrian friendly town. It's not the solution to Global Warming, but it helps.

    I hope you can make it to the meeting at 7 pm Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at the Sebastopol Community Center Youth Annex and speak up on this community issue.

    Thanks---Peter Schurch
    Last edited by Barry; 01-23-2007 at 11:26 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  3. TopTop #3
    Treasure
    Guest

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    Granny unit.

    As I understand that term, it means it's not intended for families, but for grannies (or other singles). A "granny unit" of 800 or more square feet, built so that it could accommodate couples and families, would be a misnomer. Better change the name!

    My place is 500 square feet. It's a great design, a beautiful private place, and works well for me. No matter how fairly priced an 800 square foot place might be, it would very likely cost significantly more than I am now paying, and more than I care to pay.

    Best,
    Tara Treasurefield
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. TopTop #4
    cbauman
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    I am sorry to have misssed the meeting. I didn't know about it until today! Ces't la vie. I have a little space that could be turned into a granny unit in our backyard. I live in the downtown area. I looked into rennovating it but found it to be very expensive in large part due to the permits needed. So I decided against it. I hope they consider permit costs when looking to construction of granny units as more of a priority. That would be very helpful.

    I don't think that increasing granny units in Sebastopol will lessen congestion and traffic. Any time you add more people to the downtown area it is noticeable in the level of intensity and noise. That is a fact. However, granny units do make things more affordable and help ease the housing crunch.

    For me, increasing the amount of housing in the downtown area becomes an exercise of adjustment to my neighbors' needs, tolerance towards activity and cultivation of thoughtfulness and community-mindedness towards the people around me more than the orientation of pedestrian oriented streets, open space or quiet.


    Chris


    Last edited by Barry; 01-24-2007 at 07:53 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  5. TopTop #5
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    Please understand this: the ordinance does NOT hold the maximum at 600 sq. ft. It is: 40% of the size of the primary residence, OR 600 sq. ft., WHICH EVER IS THE LARGER. It was during my tenure on the Planning Commission that it was changed to allow for the 600 max. for smaller homes. Prior to that it was based only on the sq. ft. of the primary, so those with smaller homes, such as mine, were stuck with much smaller entitlements. I am grateful for the improvement. My primary happens to be 1134 sq ft, hence I was delighted to be able to build to 600 sq. ft. I am sorry to have missed the meeting, but didn't find out about it until 6 a.m. on Wednesday.My husband and I are preparing to move into our almost complete, just built 600 sq.ft. 2nd unit, built on the rear of our 50x150 ft. parcel near downtown Sebastopol. We are on a short, dead end street - no curbs, gutters, sidewalks. While I would have liked to have been allowed to build more than 600 sq. ft., I understand that a larger unit would attract families. Two bedrooms would allow for up to four residents, which means, unfortunately at this point in the evolution of our culture, more cars and which equals more parking and more traffic. We have one car between us, since my husband no longer drives. I think the ordinance is fine. It does what is was designed to do.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. TopTop #6
    Peter Schurch's Avatar
    Peter Schurch
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!


    The Planning Commission approved the change to the 2nd Unit Ordinance unanimously. Now it goes to the City Council, on the second meeting in February. They will likely approve it too which is great! I think we need smaller units as opposed to the MacMansion developments aound town. However, there are a few items I think need to be changed in the ordinance:

    The size limit should be 840 not 800 square feet. That matches the County limit and the State requirement too. A uniform guideline simplifies the design process. I've talked to 5 architects and they agree. Also, 840 sf. makes two bedrooms much more feasible. A single person with a home office, a couple who each need some private space, a single parent all need two bedrooms. One bedroom can be too tight for many people.

    I live in a 500 sf granny myself and have been happy here for 10 years. I also have a large 400 sf. accessory building to use as a home office and plenty of extra space (garage, gardens and outbuildings). However, my girl friend who wanted to move in could not find enough space here for herself and her two kids.

    I would also like to eliminate the need for extra on-site parking for two bedrooms ( one per bedroom). I think that will make two bedroom units hard to build. Street parking for one car works fine in most neighborhoods. Also, adding more required parking paves over too much yard space and looks ugly.

    If you have any thoughts or questions on this issue, please post them here and write a letter to Sam Pierce. He's the point person on the City Council. [email protected] <[email protected]>


    Thanks---Peter Schurch
    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Helen Shane:
    Please understand this: the ordinance does NOT hold the maximum at 600 sq. ft. It is: 40% of the size of the primary residence, OR 600 sq. ft., WHICH EVER IS THE LARGER. It was during my tenure on the Planning Commission that it was changed to allow for the 600 max. for smaller homes. Prior to that it was based only on the sq. ft. of the primary, so those with smaller homes, such as mine, were stuck with much smaller entitlements. I am grateful for the improvement. My primary happens to be 1134 sq ft, hence I was delighted to be able to build to 600 sq. ft. I am sorry to have missed the meeting, but didn't find out about it until 6 a.m. on Wednesday.My husband and I are preparing to move into our almost complete, just built 600 sq.ft. 2nd unit, built on the rear of our 50x150 ft. parcel near downtown Sebastopol. We are on a short, dead end street - no curbs, gutters, sidewalks. While I would have liked to have been allowed to build more than 600 sq. ft., I understand that a larger unit would attract families. Two bedrooms would allow for up to four residents, which means, unfortunately at this point in the evolution of our culture, more cars and which equals more parking and more traffic. We have one car between us, since my husband no longer drives. I think the ordinance is fine. It does what is was designed to do.
    Last edited by Barry; 01-31-2007 at 08:25 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  7. TopTop #7
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    I want to make it clear that, without an actual EIR, considering traffic and sewer and water and schools, etc., I will vigorously oppose the raising of the granny unit ordinance maximum.

    The "granny unit", which name is only used informally, is a second unit. And if it is desired to build up to 840 sq. ft. homes on an already built lot in town, we must know the consequences.

    Sebastopol's growth management ordinance was adopted for a number of reasons, not the least of which is to ensure that we have enough infrastructure to support it. For infrastructure read: fresh water, sewer capacity, streets and traffic, schools, etc. There are at least two issues here: one is to provide affordable housing, the other to keep Sebastopol a small, sustainable town.

    I have asked the planning department for information on how larger units have worked in other No. California communities, and have been told that information is not yet available.


    If, after an EIR is completed and examined in public hearings and approved, it is still felt that raising the limit is advantageous, we will have an educated guess as to its impacts. We must know what we're getting into.

    Just in case our electeds aren't keeping track of this, I am ccing all of them, including Kenyon, with this message. Thanks. Helen Shane
    Last edited by Helen Shane; 01-31-2007 at 11:15 AM. Reason: typos
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. TopTop #8
    cbauman
     

    Re: Bigger Granny Units in Sebastopol!

    I live on a busy street, Pitt Ave., and it is hard for me to support the increased size in granny units with the inevitable increase in population and cars. It is going to make Sebastopol even more noisy and crowded, bottom line. As it is, in the summer, even with my water feature pond running I can barely spend any quiet time in my garden except early sunday mornings. I even hear traffic noise in my house. It is unrelenting.

    So for those who live on cul-de-sacs, on the outskirts, who want to make more rent money or who can't afford to live here in a big enough but affordable rental the increase in size of a granny unit is attractive and desirable. It frankly fills me with dread and adds one more nail to the coffin of me staying here if there is more congestion. ie. selling and leaving. I wish they would block off Pitt and turn Main St. into a two way street. Course that is another issue...Chris Clay Bauman


    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Peter Schurch:

    The Planning Commission approved the change to the 2nd Unit Ordinance unanimously. Now it goes to the City Council, on the second meeting in February. They will likely approve it too which is great! I think we need smaller units as opposed to the MacMansion developments aound town. However, there are a few items I think need to be changed in the ordinance:

    The size limit should be 840 not 800 square feet. That matches the County limit and the State requirement too. A uniform guideline simplifies the design process. I've talked to 5 architects and they agree. Also, 840 sf. makes two bedrooms much more feasible. A single person with a home office, a couple who each need some private space, a single parent all need two bedrooms. One bedroom can be too tight for many people.

    I live in a 500 sf granny myself and have been happy here for 10 years. I also have a large 400 sf. accessory building to use as a home office and plenty of extra space (garage, gardens and outbuildings). However, my girl friend who wanted to move in could not find enough space here for herself and her two kids.

    I would also like to eliminate the need for extra on-site parking for two bedrooms ( one per bedroom). I think that will make two bedroom units hard to build. Street parking for one car works fine in most neighborhoods. Also, adding more required parking paves over too much yard space and looks ugly.

    If you have any thoughts or questions on this issue, please post them here and write a letter to Sam Pierce. He's the point person on the City Council. [email protected] <[email protected]>


    Thanks---Peter Schurch
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email