2023 HCD
Correspondence
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
March 24, 2023
Tom Cole, Director
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clarita
23920 W. Valencia Blvd. Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Tom Cole:
RE: Review of Santa Clarita’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance under State ADU Law (Gov. Code, § 65852.2)
Thank you for submitting the City of Santa Clarita’s (City) accessory dwelling unit (ADU) Ordinance No. 21-1 (Ordinance), adopted January 26, 2021, to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD has reviewed the Ordinance and submits these written findings pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (h). HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 in the manner noted below. Under that statute, the City has up to 30 days to respond to these findings. Accordingly, the City must provide a written response to these findings no later than April 21, 2023.
The Ordinance addresses many statutory requirements; however, HCD finds that the Ordinance does not comply with State ADU Law in the following respects:
• 17.42.010 – Parking Exemptions – The Ordinance lists the parking exemptions for ADUs in the Residential Use Types table under “Parking”.
However, this list omits one condition as stated in Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (d)(1)(B): a local agency shall not impose parking standards for an ADU when “[t]he accessory dwelling unit is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.” The City should amend this section to address the omission.
• 17.51.030 (C)(6)(a)(vii) – Landscape Standards for ADUs – The Ordinance states that one (1) twenty-four (24) inch box tree shall be planted in the front or corner yard setback of a unit if it is located along a street frontage.
However, local development standards provided by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (a) through (d), cannot preclude ADUs created under Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e). While the City may award voluntary tree planting by providing incentives,
Tom Cole, Director
it may not make it a requirement. The City might consider creating or modifying incentive programs to encourage tree planting. Accordingly, the City must either remove the tree planting requirement from the Ordinance or clarify its incentives.
• 17.57.040 (L)(1)(a) – Locations of ADUs in Zones – The Ordinance states that ADUs may be permitted only on parcels that are zoned to allow single- family or multifamily dwelling residential use and that include a proposed or existing residential unit and provides for zones allowing ADUs. Chapter 17.34 of the City’s municipal code defines the Community Commercial (CC) and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) Zones which allow for multifamily dwellings.
However, the Ordinance did not include these zones in Section 17.42.010 when identifying zones permitting ADUs. Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (a), permits ADUs in all areas zoned to allow single-family and multifamily dwelling use. Hence, ADUs may be allowed in zones, such as agricultural, commercial, or mixed-use zones wherever residential uses are allowed. Therefore, the City must revise and include these zones to permit ADUs and should state in the language that ADUs are permitted in any zone that allows residential or mixed use.
• 17.57.040 (L)(1)(b) – ADUs in High Fire Hazard Severity Zone – The Ordinance states that where a lot or any portion is located in a high fire hazard severity zone (HFHSZ), an ADU shall be prohibited on the lot unless it either fronts a highway and vehicles enter directly from the highway, or it has two means of direct vehicular access to a highway that meets certain requirements. The requirements listed under this section of the Ordinance should be removed as they go beyond the scope of State ADU Law. Although the Ordinance does not cite the statute, the City seems to be relying on Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A), which states that a local agency may adopt an ordinance that designates areas where ADUs may be permitted “based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety.” Any limitations, by local ordinance, on where ADUs may be permitted must be based only on these narrow factors and should be accompanied by detailed findings of fact explaining why ADU limitations are required on the basis of these factors.
Further, even if the City would provide adequate justification for this restriction on ADUs under this subdivision, the City may not restrict ADUs that fall under subdivision (e), as local development standards (such as an area restriction based on high fire hazard severity designation) provided by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (a) through (d), cannot preclude ADUs created under Government Code section 65852.2, Tom Cole, Director
subdivision (e). Therefore, the City must ministerially permit units created pursuant to subdivision (e).
Finally, please note that the fire hazard severity zone maps prepared by California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) 1 were not
intended to serve as a development moratorium. Rather, these maps and corresponding hazard severity zones are intended to be used for planning purposes and mitigation measures. Specifically, development projects located in HFHSZs are required to conform with the stricter building standards set forth in Chapter 7A of the California Building Code.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(c) – Setbacks – The Ordinance states that ADUs shall comply with corner and reverse corner setbacks unless it can be demonstrated that a four-foot side setback does not create a safety hazard.
However, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(D)(vii), states: “a setback of no more than four feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.” However, side lot line setbacks, established in statute, apply to the street sides of a corner lot.
Further, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(1)(C), states that a local agency may not impose “Any requirement for...front setbacks that would not permit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four- foot side and rear yard setbacks to be constructed in compliance with all other local development standards.” Therefore, the City must remove this section or clarify that the provision applies to front setbacks only.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(D) – Height – The Ordinance requires an “Adjustment Permit” for any ADU in excess of 16 feet in height. This permit is not described in this Ordinance; it appears to be a non-ministerial process.
Moreover, be advised that height limits increased as of January 1, 2023, with the passage of Senate Bill 897 (Chapter 664, Statues of 2022), codified in Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(D)(ii). As such, lot-wide height minimum allowances are 18 feet and attached ADUs in most cases may be up to 25 feet. The City must amend the Ordinance accordingly.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(h) – Rear Yard Coverage – The Ordinance states that ADUs shall count as buildings for the purposes of calculating rear yard coverage.
The City may impose development standards such as the rear yard coverage; however, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(C), states
1 For more information, please visit Cal FIRE's website: https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community- wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/wildland-hazards-building-codes/fire-hazard-severity-zones- maps/.
Tom Cole, Director
that the City must still accommodate for an ADU of up to at least 800 square feet with four-foot rear and side yard setbacks. If this is the only allowable space, the City must allow for the ADU to be built in the minimum required distance area. The Ordinance must be revised to include “where feasible,” which will give more flexibility in language to accommodate an ADU of at least 800 square feet.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(k) – Distance Between Structures – The Ordinance states that a detached ADU shall be located at least six (6) feet away from the exterior wall of the primary dwelling unit. In addition, the Ordinance states that if detached ADUs share a common roof structure (e.g., a breezeway, service porch, covered patio, etc.), the breezeway or patio shall be at least six feet wide for safety purposes. The City may impose development standards such as the distance between structures; however, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(C), states that the City must still accommodate for a detached ADU of up to at least 800 square feet, and with four-foot rear and side yard setbacks to be built in the minimum required distance area if this is the only allowable space. The Ordinance must be revised to include “where feasible,” which will give more flexibility in language to accommodate an ADU of at least 800 square feet.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(n)(ii) – Residency Requirements – The Ordinance states that in accordance with Government Code section 65852.22, owner-occupancy is always required where a lot includes a Junior ADU (JADU). However, Government Code section 65852.22, subdivision (a)(2), states that owner- occupancy in the single-family residence in which the JADU will be permitted shall not be required if the owner is another government agency, land trust, or housing organization. The ordinance must be revised to align with Government Code section 65852.22, subdivision (a)(2).
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(o) – Open Space Requirement – The Ordinance states that should construction of an ADU result in the loss of required open space, the property owner shall provide equivalent replacement open space on site.
However, per Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(C), the City must allow for an ADU of up to at least 800 square feet, and with four- foot rear and side yard setbacks to be built in the minimum required distance area if this is the only allowable space. Also, local development standards provided by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (a) through (d), cannot preclude ADUs created under subdivision (e). The City should clarify this requirement and add the clause, “However, no local design standard, such as the open space requirement, shall preclude an accessory dwelling unit of at least 800 square feet with a height limit of 18 feet and four-foot setbacks from being constructed.”
Tom Cole, Director
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(p) – Oak Trees – The Ordinance states that the Oak Tree Preservation Ordinance (Section 17.51.040) shall apply to the construction of ADUs or conversion of structures to ADUs. However, Government Code Section 65852.2, subdivision (a)(7), states that no other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision. A broad application of the Oak Tree Preservation ordinance could conflict and limit ADU creation and violate State ADU Law. Furthermore, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(C), requires that local design standards cannot preclude the creation of an 800 square foot ADU with four-foot side and rear setbacks. Therefore, the City must remove this section.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(q) – Significant Ecological Areas – The Ordinance states that the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Overlay Zone (Section 17.38.080) shall apply to ADUs. Section 17.38.080 of the City’s municipal code states that the SEA overlay zone applies to areas identified on the adopted SEA map on file in the City, and any development including, but not limited to, grading permits, building permits and land use entitlements, in an area as indicated on the SEA map is subject to an SEA conformance review by the approving authority. However, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(A), states “the designation of areas [where ADUs are permitted] may be based on the adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of accessory dwelling units on traffic flow and public safety.” Any designation of an area where ADUs are not permitted may not be made on an ad-hoc basis, but rather must be designated and should be supported by the City’s findings.
Lastly, local development standards or location constraints cannot preclude an ADU built subject to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e).
The City must remove this section or revise its language to only prohibit units where the adequacy of water and sewer services are insufficient and the impact of ADUs on traffic flow and public safety can be supported by findings.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(r) – Separate Sale – The Ordinance prohibits separate sale of an ADU from its primary dwelling. However, Government Code section 65852.26 creates a narrow exception to allow separate conveyance of an ADU to a qualified buyer if the property was built or developed by a qualified nonprofit corporation, among other things. The City must revise the Ordinance to allow for such an exception.
• 17.57.040 (L)(2)(t) – Exception Clause – The Ordinance creates a section that exempts an 800 square foot unit with a height limit of 16 feet and four- foot setbacks. However, this does not conform to the current text of Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (c)(2)(D), which permits a height limit on such units of up to 18, 20 or 25 feet as provided in the subdivision. The Ordinance must add language which prohibits jurisdictions from applying “any Tom Cole, Director
requirement for a zoning clearance or separate zoning review or any other minimum or maximum size for an accessory dwelling unit, size based upon a percentage of the proposed or existing primary dwelling, or limits on lot coverage, floor area ratio, open space, front setbacks, and minimum lot size, for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four-foot side and rear yard setbacks to be constructed in compliance with all other local development standards” (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subd. (c)(2)(C)).
• 17.57.040 (L)(3)(a) – Number – The Ordinance allows for one JADU in combination with an ADU on a lot zoned for single-family residences. However, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e)(1), states that a local agency shall ministerially approve an application to create any of the following ADUs listed from subdivision (e)(1)(A) through (D). As further explained in the most recent ADU Handbook
2 of July 2022 on page 20, local jurisdictions must
allow these unit types in combination with one another. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to allow for a JADU, an ADU converted from space within a proposed or existing primary dwelling or accessory structure and a detached ADU of at least 800 square feet and four-foot side and rear setbacks.
• 17.57.040 (L)(3)(b)(i) – ADUs On Lots with Multifamily Dwellings – The Ordinance states that in the event the construction of an ADU results in the loss of the amenity required by ordinance or condition of approval, the amenity shall be replaced prior to occupancy of the first ADU. However, the Ordinance should clarify and define what “amenities” include. Local development standards like amenity replacement required by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (a) through (d), cannot preclude ADUs created under Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e). In addition, no other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subd. (a)(7)). Therefore, this section of the Ordinance must be removed or revised.
• 17.57.040 (L)(3)(b)(i) and (L)(3)(b)(ii) – Unit Combination – The Ordinance states that, for multifamily buildings, “...one of the two following categories of accessory dwelling units are permitted” and “Attached accessory dwelling units are not permitted on a lot that includes one or more detached accessory dwelling units.” This appears to prohibit the combination of units build subject to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (e)(1)(C), which refers to conversions of existing space within the multifamily dwelling, and (e)(1)(D) which allows for two detached ADUs. Government Code section 65852.2,
2 HCD ADU Handbook can be found here: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022- 07/ADUHandbookUpdate.pdf.
Tom Cole, Director
subdivision (e)(1), states that a local agency shall ministerially approve an application to create any of the following ADUs listed from subdivision (e)(1)(A) through (D). As further explained in the most recent ADU Handbook of July 2022 on page 20, local jurisdictions must allow these unit types in combination with one another. Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to allow for a combination of ADUs for multifamily dwellings.
• 17.57.040 (L)(3)(b)(ii) – Parking Requirements – The Ordinance states that required parking, open space, or other amenities or site improvements required by the condition of approval that are demolished to construct these ADUs shall be replaced on site prior to occupancy of the first ADU. However, the Ordinance should clarify and define amenities, and shall not require that off street parking spaces be replaced when a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or converted to an ADU (Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (a)(1)(D)(xi)). Lastly, local development standards like amenity replacement required by the Ordinance pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivisions (a) through (d), cannot preclude ADUs created under Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e). Therefore, the ADU ordinance must be revised to remove the replacement requirements,
• 17.57.040 (L)(5) – Impact Fees – The Ordinance states that impact fees imposed on ADUs shall be established by City Council resolution. However, Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (f)(3)(A), states that any impact fees charged for an ADU of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.
For clarity, the Ordinance must be revised to include the exemption of ADUs less than 750 square feet from impact fees.
In response to the findings in this letter, and pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (h)(2)(B), the City must either amend the Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law or adopt the Ordinance without changes. Should the City choose to adopt the Ordinance without the changes specified by HCD, the City must include findings in its resolution that explain the reasons the City finds that the Ordinance complies with State ADU Law despite the findings made by HCD.
Accordingly, the City’s response should provide a plan and timeline to bring the Ordinance into compliance.
Please note that, pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (h)(3)(A), if the City fails to take either course of action and bring the ordinance into compliance with State ADU Law, HCD may notify the City and the California Office of the Attorney General that the City is in violation of State ADU Law.
Tom Cole, Director
HCD appreciates the City’s efforts provided in the preparation and adoption of the Ordinance and welcomes the opportunity to assist the City in fully complying with State ADU Law. Please feel free to contact Molivann Phlong, of our staff, at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Shannan West
Housing Accountability Unit Chief
2025 HCD
Correspondence
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / F AX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
December 10, 2025
Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
P
lanning Department
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd.,
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear
Jason Crawford:
R
E: Review of Santa Clarita’s Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance under State ADU Law (Gov. Code, §§ 66310 - 66342) and SB9 Ordinance under State SB9 Law (Gov. Code, §§ 65852.21, 66411.7)
Thank
you for submitting the City of Santa Clarita (City) ADU Ordinance (Ordinance) No. 25-1 and the SB 9 Ordinance No. 22-2, adopted May 27, 2025, to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD has reviewed the Ordinance consistency with State ADU Law and Senate Bill (SB) 9 Law. The Department submits these written findings pursuant to Government Code section 66326, subdivision (a) and Government Code section 65585, subdivision (j).
HC
D finds that the Ordinance fails to comply with State ADU Law and SB 9 in the manner noted below. Pursuant to state law, the City has up to 30 days to respond to these findings. Accordingly, the City must provide a written response to these findings no later than January 9, 2025.
SB9
Findings
1. Sec
tion 17.57.025 B. – Single SB9 Development – The Ordinance states, “For purposes of [SB9 Unit Approvals] a two (2) unit residential development contains two (2) residential units if the development proposes two (2) new units or if it proposes to add one (1) new unit to one (1) existing unit.” This suggests that only the second primary dwelling constructed on a lot would be considered an SB9 unit and thus eligible for review under SB 9. However, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (a) states that, “A proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential zone shall be considered ministerially, if the proposed housing development meets all of the following requirements...”. Therefore, SB 9 is applicable in a scenario where construction results in either one or two primary
Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
dwel
ling units on a lot. Both the first and the second primary dwelling unit constructed on a lot are eligible for SB 9. The Ordinance must be modified to clarify that both first and second primary dwelling units, or up to two primary dwelling units, are eligible for SB 9 processes and applicable development standards.
2. Section 17.57.025 B.1 – 25% Existing Walls – The Ordinance states, “No more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing exterior structural walls shall be demolished to create the two (2) unit residential development…” This requirement reflects outdated SB9 Law; with the adoption of SB 450 (Chapter 286, Statutes of 2024) the 25% demolition restriction has been removed. The City must remove this stipulation from the Ordinance to become consistent with SB 9.
3. Sec
tion 17.57.025 B.1, B.2 and 16.28.050 C - Maximum Size – The Ordinance restricts duplex units and units on split lots to 800 square feet. However, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) states “A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone.” There does not appear to be a size restriction on residential development in the underlying zone, and therefore the size restriction for SB 9 units must be removed.
4. Sec
tion 17.57.025 B.4. – ADUs and Duplexes – The Ordinance states, “Neither Accessory Dwelling Units nor junior accessory dwelling units shall be permitted on a parcel if a two (2) unit development is proposed or has been approved.” However, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) states, “A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone.” A restriction on ADUs specific to duplexes created under SB9 is inconsistent with this section and is a reduction in the intensity of land use per Government Code section 66300, subdivision (b)(1)(A). The City must remove this section.
5. Sec
tion 17.57.025 D.4 and 16.28.050 L. – Height – The Ordinance restricts SB 9 units to, “no more than one (1) story and shall not exceed sixteen (16) feet in height… a second unit shall not be constructed as a second story on top of an existing unit.” However, the underlying height allowance is two stories and 35 feet [per 17.57.020 (C).] Therefore, this section is inconsistent with Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) and section 66300, subdivision (b)(1)(A) and must be removed from the Ordinance.
6. Sec
tion 17.57.025 D.8. – Owner Occupancy – The Ordinance states, “one (1) of the dwellings on the lot must be the bona fide principal residence of at least one (1) legal owner of the lot containing the dwelling, as evidenced at the time of approval of the two (2) unit residential development… prior to issuance of a Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
buil
ding permit, the applicant shall provide evidence that… a covenant has been recorded…” However, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) states, “A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone.” Owner occupancy does not appear to be required in the underlying residential zoning, and therefore, the City must remove this section.
7. Section 17.57.025 D.17. – Affordability Requirement – The Ordinance states, “At least one (1) unit in a two (2) unit residential development shall be income restricted for a period of fifty-five (55) years to provide for lower income households…” As income restriction does not appear to be required in the underlying residential zoning, the requirement is inconsistent with Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) and City must remove this section.
8. Sec
tion 17.57.025 H. – Deed Restriction/Covenant – The Ordinance requires that, “…the property owner shall record a two (2) unit residential development covenant with the County Recorder’s Office…” However, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(3) states, “A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the zone a requirement that would constrain future unit development.” Therefore, deed restrictions and affordability covenants are inconsistent with SB 9 and must be removed from the Ordinance.
9. Sec
tion 17.57.025 E. – Objective Design Standards – The Ordinance states, “Any construction of a two (2) unit residential development shall comply with the adopted two (2) unit residential development design standards.” This appears to refer to Section 17.57.020 and thereby applies underlying zoning standards.
However, the underlying zoning standards contain subjective standards (e.g.
Section 17.57.020 F, “shall reflect the character of surrounding homes”) which are inconsistent with the objective standards required by Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(1) and (j)(2). The City must amend the Ordinance to require only objective standards in the consideration of an SB 9 application.
10. Mul
tiple Sections – Underlying Zoning Standard Inquiries – The Ordinance applies the standards below to SB 9 unit development. However, Government Code 65852.21 states that, “A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone.” These standards do not appear to apply to the underlying zone and therefore must be removed from the Ordinance:
Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
i. Sec
tion 17.57.025 C.5. – Fire Hazard Restrictions – “Where a lot or any portion thereof is located in a high fire hazard severity zone, as defined by the Los Angeles County Fire Department, a two (2) unit residential development shall be prohibited on the lot unless it either fronts a highway and vehicles enter directly from the highway (as defined in Table C-2 of the General Plan Circulation Element), or it has two (2) means of direct vehicular access to a highway that meet the following requirements.”
ii. Section 17.57.025 D.5. – Outdoor Space – “A minimum of six hundred fifty (650) square feet of outdoor yard space shall be provided for each unit in a two (2) unit residential development. Land required for front yard setbacks, or occupied by buildings, driveways, or parking spaces may not be counted in satisfying this outdoor space requirement.” iii. Section 17.57.025 D.12. – Sprinklers – “Two (2) unit residential developments shall be required to provide fire sprinklers.” iv. Section 17.57.025 D.13. – Trash Collection – “Each unit in a two (2) unit residential development shall be required to provide space for three (3) ninety (90) gallon trash carts. Trash carts must be stored out of public view from the street and may not be located within the required front yard setback.”
ADU Findi
ngs
1. St
atutory Numbering - The Ordinance contains several references to code sections that were deleted by SB 477, effective March 25, 2024. These include Government Code sections 65852.2, 65852.22 and 65852.26. The contents of these sections were relocated to Government Code, Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 13 (sections 66310-66342, see Enclosure). The City must amend the Ordinance to refer to the correct Government Code sections.
2. New A
DU Legislation – Please note there is recent ADU Legislation that has passed. The City County should review the changes made to State ADU Law, as a result of this legislation. Assembly and Senate Bills (AB and SB) recently passed affecting State ADU Law include:
• SB 9 (Chapter 510 Statutes of 2025)
• SB 543 (Chapter 520, Statutes of 2025)
• AB 130 (Chapter 22, Statutes of 2025)
• AB 462 (Chapter 491, Statutes of 2025)
• AB 1154 (Chapter 507, Statutes of 2025)
Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
3. Sec
tion 17.57.040 L.2.a.iii. – “Legally Built” – The Ordinance requires no maximum size for converted units created in a “legally built accessory structure”.
However, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (c) states, "A local agency shall not require, as a condition for ministerial approval of a permit application for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions." Therefore, units created in structures that the City does not consider "legally built accessory structures" may not be precluded by a maximum size requirement. The City must amend the Ordinance to exempt all conversions from size requirements.
4. Sec
tion 17.57.040 L.2.c. – Setbacks – The Ordinance states “All other setbacks shall be subject to the underlying zoning. ADUs shall comply with corner and reverse corner setbacks unless it can be demonstrated that a four (4) foot setback does not create a safety hazard.” There are two issues with this section.
Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(3) prohibits “Any requirement for a zoning clearance or separate zoning review [for] front setbacks… for either attached or detached dwellings that does not permit at least an 800 square foot accessory dwelling unit with four-foot side and rear yard setbacks to be constructed in compliance with all other local development standards.” The City must include an exception to front setbacks for units 800 square feet or smaller.
Addi
tionally, Government Code section 66314, subdivision (a)(7) states, “No setback shall be required for an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an accessory dwelling unit or to a portion of an accessory dwelling unit, and a setback of no more than four feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.” These development standards reference only side and rear setbacks; the terms “corner setback” and “reverse corner setback” do not appear in State ADU Law and these terms may not be applied as a development standard. The City must remove these terms from the Ordinance.
5. Sec
tion 17.57.040 L.2.f. – Parking Exception – The Ordinance creates parking exceptions but omits reference to the conditions described in Government Code section 66332, subdivision (a)(6): “[A local agency shall not impose any parking standards for an ADU . . .] When a permit application for an accessory dwelling unit is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the accessory dwelling unit or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this subdivision.” The City must add this exception to become consistent with State ADU Law.
Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
6. S
ection 17.57.040 L.2.f.ii. – JADUs and Replacement Parking – The Municipal Code states “replacement parking is required for the primary unit where a junior accessory dwelling unit is constructed in an attached garage.” However, Government Code section 66334 states “A junior accessory dwelling unit ordinance adopted pursuant to Section 66333 shall not require additional parking as a condition to grant a permit.” Therefore, the City must remove this parking requirement.
7. S
ection 17.57.040 L.2.g. – Subjective Language – The Ordinance states “Architecture of the accessory dwelling unit shall be compatible with that of the primary dwelling unit…” However, Government Code section 66314, subdivision (b) requires “objective standards on accessory dwelling units”, which are defined in section 66313, subdivision (i) as “standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal.” The term “compatible” is subjective, which is inconsistent with State ADU Law. The City must only include subjective standards in this section.
8. S
ection 17.57.040 L.2.l. – Sprinklers – The Ordinance states that ADUs “shall not be required to provide fire sprinklers if fire sprinklers are not required for the primary residence.” Government Code section 66314, subdivision (d)(12) expands on this to state “The construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not trigger a requirement for fire sprinklers to be installed in the existing primary dwelling.” The City must add language to provide for this requirement.
9. Section 17.57.040 L.2.n.i. – Owner Occupancy – The Ordinance states “Any accessory dwelling unit, for which an application is submitted on January 1, 2025, or later, shall be required to be on a lot that is owner-occupied.” However, the owner occupancy allowance that would have become permissible on January 1, 2025, was removed from State ADU Law with the adoption of AB 976 (Chapter 751, Statutes of 2023). Current Government Code section 66315 states “Section 66314 establishes the maximum standards that a local agency shall use to evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that includes a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. No additional standards, other than those provided in Section 66314, shall be used or imposed, including an owner-occupant requirement, except that a local agency may require that the property may be used for rentals of terms 30 days or longer.” Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to remove references to owner occupancy.
10. S
ection 17.57.040 L.2.t. – Exempt Unit Height – The Ordinance exempts local development standards from precluding a unit “up to eight hundred (800) square feet that is up to sixteen (16) feet in height.” However, current Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(3), as referenced above, does not address height. Therefore, height allowances for attached ADUs must Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
be t
he lesser of 25 feet or the height of the primary dwelling, as stated in Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(4). The City must amend the Ordinance to provide for the height allowances provided in Government Code section 66321, subdivision (b)(4).
11. Sec
tion 17.57.40 L.3.b.ii. – Unit Mixture – The Ordinance states “Detached accessory dwelling units are not permitted on a lot that includes one (1) or more attached accessory dwelling units.”
How
ever, Government Code section 66323, subdivision (a), states, “Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322, inclusive, a local agency shall ministerially approve an application for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use to create any of the following: (1) One accessory dwelling unit and one junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single- family dwelling…(A) The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure.” Paragraph (2) permits “[o]ne detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four- foot side and rear yard setbacks.” The use of the term “any” followed by a list of permitted ADU types indicates that any of these ADU types can be combined on a lot zoned for single family dwellings.
Thi
s permits a homeowner to create one converted ADU; one detached, new construction ADU; and one JADU. Thus, if the local agency approves an ADU that is created from existing (or proposed) space, and the owner subsequently applies for a detached ADU (or vice versa) that meets the size and setback requirements of this section, the local agency cannot deny the application, nor deny a permit for a JADU under this subdivision. This section also requires the ministerial approval of detached ADUs in combination with units created in portions of multifamily primary dwellings that are not used as habitable space.
Addi
tionally, limiting the number of units to one type described in section 66323 would impermissibly constrain an application for a unit subject to section 66323 if a unit subject to section 66314 already exists on the lot. For example, if a new construction detached unit with a size of 1,000 square feet is approved under section 66314, this provision in the Ordinance would preclude the subsequent ministerial approval of a new construction 800 square foot detached unit subject to section 66323, subdivision (a)(2). Therefore, the City must amend the Ordinance to allow both for all ADU combinations described in section 66323 and for at least one unit subject to section 66314 to be combined, in any order, with any unit subject to Government Code section 66323.
12. Sec
tion 17.57.040 L.3.c. – Zoning Nonconformity – The Ordinance states, “Multiple detached dwelling units (e.g., detached condominiums) on a lot shall be treated as single-family residences for purposes of ADUs and shall be Jason Crawford, Director of Community Development
permi
tted one (1) ADU per lot, as described in this subsection (L)(3). Lots with multiple detached single-family dwellings are not eligible to have JADUs. ”However, multiple single family dwellings on a single lot are considered a zoning nonconformity for the purposes of State ADU Law. Government Code section 66322, section (b) states “The local agency shall not deny an application for a permit to create an accessory dwelling unit due to the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.” As section 66323 describes categories of state-mandated units as being created with either “single family primary dwellings” or “multifamily primary dwellings”, a lot with multiple single family dwellings would be eligible for one converted ADU, one new construction detached ADU up to 800 square feet, and one JADU per lot. The City must amend the Ordinance to remove this restriction.
The City has two options in response to this letter.
1 The City can either amend the
Ordinance to comply with State ADU Law2 or adopt the Ordinance without changes and include findings in its resolution adopting the Ordinance that explain the reasons the City believes that the Ordinance complies with State ADU Law despite HCD’s findings.
3 If the City fails to take either course of action and bring the Ordinance into compliance with State ADU Law, HCD must notify the City and may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the City is in violation of State ADU Law.4
HCD appreciates the City’s efforts in the preparation and adoption of the Ordinance and welcomes the opportunity to assist the City in fully complying with State ADU Law. Please feel free to contact Mike Van Gorder at [email protected] if you have any questions.
Sinc
erely,
Jami
e Candelaria
Section Chief, ADU Policy
Housing Accountability Unit
1 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1).
2 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(A).
3 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (b)(2)(B).
4 Gov. Code, § 66326, subd. (c)(1).