Loading...
Code Section: 207.1(e)
Subject: Density rules
Effective Date: 2/86
Interpretation:
This Subsection states, "Where a lot is divided by a use district boundary line, the dwelling unit density limit for each district shall be applied to the portion of the lot in that district, and none of the dwelling units attributable to the district permitting the greater density shall be located in the district permitting the lesser density." This implies that the dwelling units attributable to the district permitting the lesser density may be located in the district permitting the greater density. Logic would indicate the same. Therefore, when a property zoned for multiple dwellings is joined with the vacated half of a street zoned RH-1, which half could be recorded as a legal lot and developed with a single-family dwelling, the development on the enlarged lot could have an additional unit credited from the RH-1 property without that unit actually being built upon the RH-1 property. This also avoids, without rezoning, the creation of potentially incompatible uses.
Code Section: 207.1(e)
Subject: Density rules
Effective Date:
Interpretation:
See Interpretation 134 for a different application of split zoning rules
Code Section: 207.1(e)
Subject: Dwelling unit density on split-zoned lot
Effective Date: 6/90
Interpretation:
This Section states that when a lot is divided by different zoning districts, "of the dwelling units attributable to the district permitting the greater density shall be located in the district permitting the lesser density." Four lots were under single ownership; three were zoned C-3-G (which allows one unit per 125 square feet of lot area) and one was zoned RC-4 (which allows one unit per 200 square feet of lot area). The owner wanted to develop the combined parcel residentially but place most of the building on the lot zoned RC-4. It appeared that this Section might completely discount the presence of the C-3-G lots if the building were built on the RC-4 portion of the site. It was noted that this dilemma would not exist if the C-3-G lots were down zoned to RC-4. The purpose of the provision was to disallow apartment buildings on portions of lots zoned for houses. In this case, both zoning districts would allow the same style of building with the height and bulk determined by different controls than the land use district. Therefore, the entire site could be counted with the same density ratio as that of the lot with the lower density. The term "attributable" in this Section refers to the incremental difference in density between the two districts.
Code Section: 207.3(e)(2)
Subject: Expansion of Legalized Dwelling Units Over Permitted Density
Effective Date: 03/23
Interpretation:
See Interpretation 181(c)(2)
Subject: Exemptions, mentally handicapped
Effective Date: 9/02
Interpretation:
Sections 207.4(b), 209(m), 151, 135(d). Exemptions applying to persons with physical handicaps shall apply to persons with mental handicaps.
This supersedes a 1992 Interpretation on Section 209(m) that stated, because persons with physical handicaps had difficulty finding housing with suitable design features, there needed to be a financial incentive to build such housing, but because persons with mental handicaps did not need special design features, no such incentive is necessary.
Mental disability shall be included with physical disability in the definition of the term "disability" or "handicap" in the Planning Code, in order to bring the Code into conformance with current state and federal anti-discrimination laws.
The open space and parking reductions described in Section 135(d)(3) and Table 151 of the Code shall also be available to projects designed for and occupied by senior citizens or physically (or mentally) handicapped persons in Neighborhood Commercial Districts (pursuant to Section 207.4(b)) as well as projects in Residential Districts (pursuant to 209.1(m)).
Code Section: 208
Subject: Group housing density when combined with apartments
Effective Date: 7/88
Interpretation:
See Interpretation 209.2
Code Section: 208
Subject: 9/86
Effective Date: Group housing density
Interpretation:
In light of California Supreme Court decision and a City Attorney's opinion regarding the inability for laws to control the number of persons living as a family, the question arose regarding whether the density of group housing could be controlled by the Planning Code. The distinction between group housing and a family was made to the effect that if one pays for a specific room, it is group housing; if one pays into a general pool for the house, one may be part of the definition of "family." This distinction is further elaborated upon in the interpretations under "102above.
Loading...