The current requirement is that these units be built on single-family home properties sitting on streets that are at least 20-feet wide.

In an effort to limit congestion on streets, so that emergency vehicles can pass, City Councilwoman Jean Quan (District 4) has proposed that the street-width requirement be increased to 24 feet.

Quan's proposal is an amendment to a zoning ordinance change approved by the council in June, resulting from a new state law that allows homeowners to build second units without much red tape. The law became effective July 1. It requires cities to allow the development of such units without public hearings and special permits.

According to a city staff report, narrow streets are more common in the hills -- where fire risks and longer response times from fire personnel are more prevalent than in the flatlands.

The addition of second units on these narrow streets could result in further congestion or gridlock during emergencies, such as large fires, the report states. With more residents, the report assumes, the number of parked cars -- and hence congestion -- should increase.

There have been incidents in which firefighters have had to ask residents to move cars when responding to an emergency call, the report said.

According to the study, about 19 percent of streets in the hills are less than 20-feet wide, and about 43 percent are less than 24-feet wide.

Mike Petouhoff, president of the Shepherd Canyon Homeowners Association, said the issue of emergency access in the hills was debated after the disastrous 1991 Oakland-Berkeley hills firestorm. The issue of parked cars on hills' streets continues to be a source of concern, he said.

"For us, it's a fundamental issue of safety," Petouhoff said. "Because of the difficulty of building roads on steep hills, many of the roads in the hills are not 30 feet wide. And 24 feet is the absolute minimum to ensure that emergency vehicles can pass through to get access to fires or other emergencies."

As for parking in the hills, Petouhoff said it has always been a "historical issue." He hopes the proposal brings attention, once again, to the hills parking problem.

"(The amendment) doesn't improve the current parking situation, it only prevents it from getting worse," he said.

Aside from considering to increase the road width requirement for secondary units to 24-feet, the council will also take a look at three other options at Tuesday's council meeting. One is to keep the existing 20-foot minimum street width requirement.

Another option is to keep the 20-foot minimum width requirement, but only for streets that do not allow any on-street parking, and to increase the requirement to 24-feet in all other cases. The third option is to increase the width requirement to 24-feet, but to allow a 20-foot road width with a conditional-use permit.

Supporters of secondary units say these small income-earning apartments, not only provide homeowners with extra money to pay mortgages, but also provide affordable housing that is much-needed as a result of a state-wide housing shortage.

At a Montclair community meeting last week, Quan said that people may think her street width requirement proposal is "anti-development," but for hills residents the issue is a "matter of life and death."

"I'll probably lose votes for this, but in the hills, it is way too dangerous to leave it at 20- feet," Quan said.

Nick Vigilante of the Montclair Safety and Improvement Council agrees.

"There are many residents that support the amendment, and many of them have had to evacuate their homes during fires..." Vigilante said.

One such hills resident is John Carroll, who spoke at a City Council meeting last month about an Oct. 13, 1995, fire on Asilomar Drive that destroyed three homes. Carroll said he had to evacuate his home on a street adjacent to Asilomar Drive

"Twice in the last 12 years, helicopters have hovered over my home, ordering us to evacuate because of severe fire danger...," Carroll said.

During the Asilomar Drive fire, "the fire department responded promptly," he said, "but the ladder companies had difficulty getting positioned on the scene to try to save adjoining houses. Very quickly, there was confused mess of fire engines and ambulances.

The point is that the ladder companies should be able to get there before the TV news trucks," Carroll explained. "We need a minimum of 24-feet street width. We cannot predict, and post a street with signs saying, 'No parking, an emergency will happen today."

"The streets (in the hills) were never designed for the amount of parking and traffic we have now," he stressed.