Code Section: 156 (h)

Subject: Temporary parking lots in C-3 Districts

Effective Date: 4/91

Interpretation:

   This Section prohibits permanent parking lots in the C-3-O, C-3-R, and C-3-G Districts but authorizes the approval of temporary parking lots as a conditional use for a period not to exceed two years from the date of approval [emphasis added]. The portion of this Section underlined above does not prohibit the Commission from considering a conditional use authorization for a new two-year authorization for the lot, in effect, extending the life of the parking lot. The Commission may review the merits of the new conditional use. However, the intent of the Code is to limit the time parking lots may remain in operation and discourage parking from becoming a permanent use, thus delaying conversion to more productive land uses. Further, the time period for the first authorization begins from the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy.

Code Section: 159 (a)

Subject: Required parking not on same lot

Effective Date: 9/90

Interpretation:

   This Section allows, under certain circumstances, for required off-street parking to be provided on a different lot than the use it serves. This paragraph, however, states that required parking for one- or two-unit dwellings shall be located only on the lot it serves or in a community garage. Since the Zoning Administrator has allowed required parking for one- and two-family dwellings to be located on abutting lots under some circumstances, the question arose as to whether their required parking could be provided by leasing surplus parking directly across the street. It was explained that those circumstances where required parking was provided on an adjoining lot was to allow splitting a lot which contained a one- or two-family dwelling with no parking in the structure itself but rather in a separate garage on the portion to be split off. In those cases, in order to preserve the parking for the existing house and in order to preserve the existing house itself where adding parking inside the structure itself was infeasible, the lot split was approved with an easement granting use of the parking stall on the newly-created lot to the existing house. This Section still would not allow required parking for a one- or two-family dwelling across the street.

Code Section: 159 (b)

Subject: Required off-street parking not on same site

Effective Date: 6/90

Interpretation:

   This Section states that required off-street parking for all dwelling units other than one- and two-family houses may be located off site but within 600 feet walking distance. Paragraph (c) of this Section allows required parking for all uses other than dwellings to be located within 800 feet walking distance. A dwelling, by Code definition, must contain dwelling units; the Code definition of "dwelling unit" is a room or group of rooms occupied by a family and group housing does not fall within the Code definition of "family." Therefore, for purposes of this Section, group housing is not a dwelling and therefore its required parking may be located within 800 feet walking distance subject to the conditions of this Section.

Code Section: 159 (c)

Subject: Parking not on the subject lot

Effective Date: 1/86

Interpretation:

   Parking provided pursuant to Section 159 (parking provided off site) does not require a conditional use pursuant to Section 209.7 (community garage in R Districts) IF the parking provided per Section 159 is REQUIRED parking. Any parking provided per Section 159 is, by definition, required parking.

Code Section: 159 (e)

Subject: Parking not on the subject lot

Effective Date: 2/86

Interpretation:

Duration of lease: This Section requires the property containing the off-street parking which is accessory to a use located on another lot to be tied to the property containing the principal use by means of a lease which runs for the lifetime of the principal use. In practice, leases must contain a specific termination date. Therefore the question was, how long in specific years must the lease be in effect? The City Attorney has indicated that the time period must be at least 90 years. The lease may be terminated earlier with approval of the Zoning Administrator if the arrangement is no longer required to conform to the parking requirements.

Code Section: 161 (a)

Subject: Criteria for topographic inaccessibility

Effective Date: 5/96

Interpretation:

   This Section states that no off-street parking need be provided for a one- or two-family dwelling where the lot on which such dwelling is located is entirely inaccessible by automobile because of topographic conditions. This exemption is NOT applicable for a normal case of a sloping lot with a developed street in front. It is necessary to determine what constitutes inaccessibility on a case-by-case basis but the following determinations may serve as guidelines. This is an automatic exemption that affects only one- or two-family houses. The variance procedure is available to consider the merits of all other situations.

The exemption APPLIED to the following cases:

(see pages 810 and 811 of former edition.)

Code Section: 161 (d)

Subject: Parking in Washington-Broadway SUD, gross floor area

Effective Date: 

Interpretation:

   This Section states that, except for residential use, parking is not required in the Washington-Broadway Special Use District (SUD). When parking is voluntarily provided in this SUD and falls within the limits of Section 204.5 forparking as an accessory use, it does not count as part of gross floor area under the definition of "Floor area, gross" in the Section 102 series.

Code Section: 170 , 171

Subject: Applicability of Code

Effective Date: 

Interpretation:

   See "Redevelopment Plan" in the Interpretations - Alphabetical

Code Section: 170

Subject: Applicability of Code versus Redevelopment Plan

Effective Date: 3/88

Interpretation:

   This Section states that if this Code is more restrictive than some other law, this Code governs. An exception to this rule is the agreement made between the Planning Commission and the Redevelopment Agency to the effect that the Planning Code does not control property in Redevelopment Areas approved by the Planning Commission in regards to those issues covered by the Redevelopment Plan. Issues not addressed by the Redevelopment Plan remain under the jurisdiction of the Planning Code. However, jurisdiction reverts back to the Planning Code when the Redevelopment Agency "closes out" a Redevelopment Area after a Redevelopment Area Plan is completed.