CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: December 15, 2025
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCE AND ADOPT URGENCY
ORDINANCE NO. __ AMENDING SECTION 18.05.010 OF THE
PLEASANT HILL MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
AND DETERMINING THE ACTION TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA
SYNOPSIS
The proposed Urgency Ordinance will amend Section 18.05.010 of the recently adopted Pleasant Hill Municipal Code to impose new limits on local authority to regulate Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADU). Except as otherwise noted, these new laws take effect on January 1, 2026.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
In recent years, the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, a number of bills that impose new limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs. In late 2025, four new bills were enacted that further amend state ADU law as summarized below.
AB 462 – Coastal Development Permits; Disaster-Affected Areas AB 462 mainly modifies several permitting requirements associated with processing Coastal Development Permits (CDP) for ADUs located in the Coastal Zone. Pleasant Hill is not, however, located within a Coastal Zone. In addition to Coastal Zone modifications AB 462 modifies the rules governing the issuance of a certificate of occupancy (C of O) for an ADU. Historically, state law has prohibited a local agency from issuing a C of O for an ADU before one is issued for the primary dwelling (i.e., the primary dwelling must have a C of O before the ADU can receive one).
AB 462 creates a narrow exception to this prohibition for detached ADUs when all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(1) The Governor has declared a state of emergency for the county on or after February 1, 2025;
(2) The primary dwelling was substantially damaged or destroyed by an event referenced in the state of emergency proclamation; and
(3) The ADU has been issued construction permits and passed all required inspections.
If these conditions are satisfied, the detached ADU can receive a Certificate of Occupancy before the primary dwelling. In all other scenarios, the primary dwelling must receive a C of O before one can be issued for an ADU.
AB 462 was enacted as an urgency measure that took effect immediately when signed by the Governor (on October 10, 2025).
The following three bills were enacted as non-urgency measures and take effect on January 1, 2026 AB 1154 – JADU Owner-Occupancy; Short-Term Rental
When a JADU is developed, existing state law requires a property owner to reside in the JADU or remaining portion of the single-family dwelling. AB 1154 narrows this requirement to now only apply when a JADU shares sanitation facilities (bathroom) with the single-family dwelling. If the JADU has its own bathroom, then the property owner need not reside on the property at all.
AB 1154 also expressly prohibits JADUs from being used as short-term rentals (i.e., rented for a term shorter than 30 days). Most ADU ordinances, including the City of Pleasant Hill’s, already included this prohibition (as well as prohibiting ADUs from being used as short-term rentals). But now this prohibition is required by state law.
SB 9; SB 543 – ADU Ordinance Submittal to HCD; Approval Under existing law, local agencies are required to submit a copy of their ADU ordinance to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) within 60 days of adoption. This year’s SB 9 and SB 543 create a penalty for failing to do so by rendering null and void any local ordinance that is not submitted to HCD within 60 days of adoption. The bills further specify that a local ADU ordinance is null and void if HCD issues findings that the ordinance does not comply with state law and the local agency fails to respond to HCD within 30 days.
SB 543 – ADU Size; Number of ADUs; Impact Fees; Permitting Timeline SB 543 makes numerous changes and clarifications to state ADU law, the most notable of which are summarized below.
Measuring ADU & JADU Size
Existing law limits the maximum size of a JADU to 500 square feet and prohibits local ADU ordinances from imposing certain development standards that would prevent an ADU created under Government Code section 66314 through 66322 from being at least 800 square feet in size.
SB 543 amends state ADU law to specify that allowable square footage of an ADU or JADU refers to square footage of “interior livable space.”
Impact Fees
Existing law exempts ADUs that are 750 square feet or smaller from development impacts fees (DIFs). SB 543 clarifies that DIFs may not be imposed on an ADU that has 750 or fewer square feet of interior livable space and for a JADU with 500 or fewer square feet of interior livable space.
The bill also exempts both ADUs and JADUs with fewer than 500 square feet of interior livable space from school impact fees.
Quantity of ADUs Created Under Government Code Section 66323 Existing state law creates four categories of Class 1 ADUs that must be approved if they comply with the limited standards provided in Government Code section 66323(a)(1)(4). These are:
On a Lot with a Single-Family Dwelling:
(1) A converted ADU and JADU created on a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling;
(2) A detached ADU created on a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling; On a Lot with Multi-Family Dwellings:
(3) Converted ADUs created in an existing multifamily dwelling; and (4) Detached ADUs created on a lot with a proposed or existing multifamily dwelling.
For some time, there has been uncertainty as to whether ADUs created under Government Code section 66323 could be combined. Some practitioners interpreted the statute to not require local agencies to allow combinations. Initially, HCD took the same position, as noted in its 2020 ADU Handbook. But for the last few years, HCD has taken the opposite position, affirming that combinations are permitted.
SB 543 codifies HCD’s most recent interpretation by amending Government Code section 66323 to specifically allow certain combinations. Thus, for a lot with a single-family dwelling, a property owner will be able to combine categories (1) and (2) above, and for lots with multi-family dwellings, a property owner will be able to combine categories (3) and (4) above.
ADU Permitting Process
Existing law requires local agencies to approve or deny an ADU application within 60 days of receiving a complete application. However, state law has been silent with respect to incompleteness determinations, subsequent resubmittals, and appealing local decisions on ADU applications.
SB 543 requires local agencies to now:
(1) Determine whether an ADU application is complete within 15 business days of submittal; (2) If the application is incomplete, within the same 15 days provide the applicant with a list of incomplete items and how to address them;
(3) Review a resubmitted application for completeness within 15 business days; (4) Provide the applicant with a written appeal process for any incompleteness determination or denial (to the Planning Commission or City Council, or both); and (5) Provide a final written determination on the appeal within 60 business days of receiving the appeal.
NEXT STEPS AND RECOMMENDATION
AB 462 took effect immediately when signed into law. The City only needs to follow the new rules for issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, if applicable. The remaining bills take effect on January 1, 2026. For the City’s ADU ordinance to remain valid and enforceable, it must comply with requirements of these bills by January 1, 2026. Noncompliance would mean the City’s entire existing ADU ordinance becomes null and void as a matter of law, and the City would have to allow ADUs with practically no regulation but for the minimal requirements required by state ADU law itself. The approval of ADUs and JADUs based solely on these default statutory standards, without regard for local regulations governing height, setback, landscape, and architectural review, among other development standards, would threaten the character of existing neighborhoods, and negatively impact property values, personal privacy, and fire safety.
Therefore, the proposed ordinance is an urgency measure, which means it will take effect immediately upon adoption. Typically, an ordinance affecting planning and zoning is approved by the Council after a Planning Commission recommendation, a first reading and introduction before the Council, and then a second reading at a regular Council meeting, 30 days after which the ordinance would become law. But here it is necessary for the City Council to adopt this ordinance as an urgency measure because the new ADU laws will take effect on January 1, 2026, before a more typical non-urgency adoption would take effect. The urgency ordinance will be followed at the earliest possible time by a non-urgency ordinance, subject to all normal procedures.
For the above reasons, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed urgency ordinance (Attachment A), which will ensure that the City’s ADU ordinance remains valid on January 1, 2026.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Under California Public Resources Code section 21080.17, CEQA does not apply to the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing the provisions of Chapter 13 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the California Government Code, which is California’s ADU law. Therefore, the adoption of the proposed urgency Ordinance is statutorily exempt from CEQA in that it implements state ADU law.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Adopt an urgency ordinance amending Section 18.05.010 of the Pleasant Hill Municipal Code relating to Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units and determine the ordinance to be exempt from CEQA.
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Do not adopt the ordinance.
2. Adopt the ordinance with amendments.
3. Continue the item to a later date with direction to staff from the City Council.
ATTACHMENT(S)
A. Proposed Urgency Ordinance, including Exhibit A (amendments in underline and strikethrough)
Prepared by: Andrew Shiflet, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Troy Fujimoto, City Planner
Approved by: Ethan Bindernagel, City Manager