HomeMy WebLinkAbout08. Conduct a hearing to consider Mr. Wayne Pope's appeal of a staff decision that a Capacity Fee is owed for a proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at 322 South Third Avenue in PachecoPage 1 of 4
Item 8.
POSITION PAPER
iCENTRAL SAN BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 21, 2017
SUBJECT: CONDUCT HEARING TO CONSIDER MR. WAYNE POPE'S APPEAL OF A
STAFF DECISION THAT CAPACITY FEE IS OWED FOR A PROPOSED
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) AT 322 SOUTH THIRD AVENUE IN
PACHECO
SUBMITTED BY:
THOMAS BRI GHTBI LL, SENIOR ENGINEER
INITIATING DEPARTMENT:
ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SERVICES -
PDS -RATES AND FEES
REVIEWED BY:
DANEA GEMMELL, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
MANAGER
J EAN-MARC PETIT, DI RECTOR OF ENGI NEERI NG AND TECHNI CAL
SERVICES
Roger S. Bailey
General Manager
ISSUE
Mr. Wayne Pope submitted plans for the construction of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (AD U) on his parcel
at 322 South Third Avenue, Pacheco. Staff determined that under current District Code, the project
meets the criteria for an Additional Dwelling Unit and therefore a Capacity Fee is owed.
District Code section 1. 16.010 allows that any person may appeal a final staff decision to the Board of
Directors.
BACKGROUND
On August 3, 2017, Mr. Wayne Pope addressed the Board of Directors during the Public Comment
period. Mr. Pope explained that he would like to construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit (AD U) on his
property at 322 South Third Avenue in Pacheco. He pointed out that under current District Code, his
September 21, 2017 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet - Page 51 of 91
Page 2 of 4
project would be subject to a Capacity Fee. Mr. Pope referenced State legislation passed in 2016 which
waived Capacity Fees for certain ADUs. Mr. Pope acknowledged the legislation does not apply to Central
San, but stated that he felt that Central San should comply with the intent of the legislation. Mr. Pope was
informed that District Code allows for an appeal process and that staff would assist him with an appeal
should he desire.
On September 6, 2017, Mr. Pope filled out permit application and submitted awritten request for waiver
of Capacity Fees for conversion of an existing detached structure to an ADU. Mr. Pope's plans show that
the existing structure is approximately 280 square feet.
2016 Accessory Dwelling Unit Legislation
In 2016, the California State Legislature passed three bills dealing with ADUs and JuniorADUs. All three
bills contained restrictions on the collection of capacity fees for water and wastewater. Generally, that
legislation prohibits collection of a capacity fee for conversion of an existing space which is less than
1,200 square feet. Capacity fees for construction of newADUs less than 1,200 square feet are restricted
to be "proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its size or
the number of plumbing fixtures."
All three bills contained language which restricted the legislation to a "city, county, or city and county."
Based on this language, the legislation does not apply to special districts like Central San.
On December 15, 2016, staff brought the issue to the Board of Directors. The board opted to "take no
action with respect to the recent legislation on accessory dwelling units at this time. If and when the
legislation is clarified as to its applicability to special districts, the matter may be revisited."
Senate Bill 229 (2017)
In February 2017, state Senate Bill 229 (SB 229) was introduced. SB 229 specifically expands the 2016
ADU legislation (SB 1069 and AB 2299) to include special districts. Capacity fees for JuniorADUs
would be covered under the expansion of the existing ADU language.
As of September 12, 20171 SB 229 has been through both the Senate and the Assembly and is currently
on the Senate's Special Consent Calendar. The California Association of Sanitation Agencies has the bill
listed as "Neutral, As Amended."
Assuming that Governor Brown signs the bill, it will become effective on January 1, 2018.
Applicability of Pending Legislation to Mr. Pope's Project
If SB 229 is signed into law, Mr. Pope's project would be exempt from Capacity Fees after January 1,
2018.
Other Inquiries and Appeals
Staff has received inquires from a number of property owners regarding Capacity Fee exemptions for
ADUs since Fall 2016. Following receipt of Mr. Pope's appeal letter, staff received an e-mail inquiry from
a property owner citing the likely passage of SB 229 and asking if staff would be able to waive capacity
fees for his proposed project to convert existing space to an AD U.
ALT ERNATIVES/CONSIDERATIONS
The Board of Directors could:
September 21, 2017 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet - Page 52 of 91
Page 3 of 4
1. Grant Mr. Pope's appeal; or
2. Deny Mr. Pope's appeal; or
3. Provide some other direction to staff.
FINANCIAL IM PACTS
If the appeal is approved by the Board of Directors, $5,336 in Capacity Fees would not be collected.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
This item was not reviewed by a Board Committee.
RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION
Hear the appeal.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Mr. Pope's Appeal Letter
September 21, 2017 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet - Page 53 of 91
Wayne PopeWayne Pope
322 Third Avenue South
Pacheco, Ca 94553
September 6, 2017
Thomas Brightbill
Contra Costa Sanitary Ditict
5019 Imhoff P1.
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Thomas Brightbill,
Page 4 of 4
My wife and I wish to convert our existing ADU (shop) into an In-law unit. I received
quote of $7,954.00 on 24%17 for sewer tie -In for this planned living unit. Most of this fee
cost consist of the Capacity fee. I am an owner and builder of the unit and feel that the
capacity fee is unreasonable given that I arra converting an existing 280 sq. ft. unit to a luring
ADU. As per the new laws SB 1069), existing ADU utility fees should be reasonable. I
understand there is a technicality in the new law in that "Districts" were not mentioned.
However, it is the M* tent of the new law to encourage ADUs for reasons too numerous to
mention here. I understand a "'cleanup bili - SB229 with included Districts next year.
However, we have waited several years to this year to build our In-law only to be
discouraged by the high connection fees from CCWD and CCCSD. We are appealing to you
for relief from the high capacity fee which is discouraging our project.
Sincerely,)o e
Y Y.
September 21, 2017 Regular Board Meeting Agenda Packet - Page 54 of 91