PC 062420 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Balch inquired about the minimum and maximum size allowable for JADUs. Ms. Bonn explained it was a minimum of 150 square feet for an efficiency unit and up to 500 square feet, per State law. Commissioner Balch further clarified anything up to 500 square feet and within the home was a JADU, and the State has determined an ADU ranges from 800 square feet up to 1,200 square feet. Regarding a second story ADU, he mentioned staff's recommendation did not allow for a balcony, however, he inquired about instances where there might be Juliette balconies on the house. He then requested staff reconsider the restriction on balconies, as the ADU might have better symmetry with the house if it also had a Juliette balcony. Ms. Clark agreed to consider the suggestion and clarified the restriction was made while keeping in mind ADUs that would face a neighbor's property. Commissioner Allen asked and confirmed if an ADU was over 800 feet it would fall under standard zoning requirements. She also referenced the height restrictions on page 5 of the agenda report, stating if an ADU was built in the C-C District at the 40-foot maximum height, it could be taller than an existing primary structure. Ms. Bonn confirmed and explained the 40-foot height limit proposed for ADUs is the same as the maximum height for accessory structures in the C-C District, and this approach to mirror maximum ADU height with maximum accessory structure height was what was done when ADUs above detached garages were established. Commissioner Allen questioned whether the standard should be updated for the C-C district to reflect an ADU could be 40 feet high, or as high as the primary structure, whichever was less. She then asked how staff would keep track of ADUs built in multifamily units, as there was a restriction only 25-percent of these units could have ADUs. Ms. Clark stated staff would need to establish a tracking system, similar to how large family daycares were previously tracked, and could potentially be done through the City's Geographic Information System (GIS) to maintain the specific locations. Chair Ritter confirmed the matter would come back to the Planning Commission and its recommendation forwarded to the City Council. He explained the State then approves the City's regulations. Ms. Clark confirmed the Planning Commission would make a recommendation to the Council; the Council would adopt an ordinance, then California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) would review for consistency with State law. Chair Ritter expressed concern the more restrictive regulations might be objected by the State. Ms. Clark stated staff felt the regulations were within the State regulations. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED Staff confirmed there were no speaker cards received on this item. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Discussion Point A: Does the Planning Commission have any questions or comments, in general, with the proposed application and interpretation of state law with respect to ADUs? Commissioner Allen thanked staff for integrating complex information in the clearest way possible. She reiterated her concern about the height of accessory structures in the C-C District and stated it was not her preference to allow all of those who have deed restricted ADUs to be required to change those restrictions under the new law; they came in under Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 9 June 24, 2020 ure. Regarding windows, she confirmed the windows would have to be six feet above the finished floor or have obscured glass. Ms. Clark further noted, it might be reasonable to develop exceptions for existing windows to allow for those windows to be the same size, shape, and height. Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 9 June 24, 2020