Dec 12, 2024
City of Santa Rosa
100 Santa Rosa Ave
Santa Rosa, CA 95407
By Email: [email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]
CC: [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];
Re: Proposed Changes to the City’s ADU Ordinance
Dear Santa Rosa Planning Commission,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter regarding the proposed amendments to the City’s accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”) ordinance, which are calendared as agenda item 11.1 for the December 12, 2024 Planning Commission meeting.
CalHDF appreciates that the City is amending its ADU ordinance to keep pace with changes in state law. However, the proposed ordinance’s requirements con flict with state law as
discussed below.
Background
The law gives local governments authority to enact zoning ordinances that implement a variety of development standards on ADUs. (Gov. Code, § 66314.) The standards in these local ordinances are limited by state law so as not to overly restrict ADU development. (Seeid.) Separately from local ADU ordinances, Gov. Code, § 66323 prescribes a narrower set of ADU types for which it imposes a ministerial duty on cities to approve. “Notwithstanding Sections 66314 to 66322 ... a local agency shall ministerially approve” these types of ADUs. (Id.at subd. (a).) This means that ADUs that satisfy the minimal requirements of section 66323 must be approved regardless of any contrary provisions of the local ADU ordinance. (Ibid.) SB 1211, effective 1 January 2025, makes this even more explicit: Gov. Code, § 66323, subdivision (b): “A local agency shall not impose any objective development or design 360 Grand Ave #323, Oakland 94610
[email protected]
Attachment 8
standardthatisnotauthorizedbythissectionuponanyaccessorydwellingunitthatmeetstherequirementsofanyofparagraphs(1)to(4),inclusive,ofsubdivision(a).” Inaddition,ADUsthatqualifyfortheprotectionsofGov.Code,§66323,likeotherADUs,mustbeprocessedbylocalgovernmentswithin60daysofacompletepermitapplicationsubmittal.(Gov.Code,§66317,subd.(a).) StatelawalsoprohibitscreatingregulationsonADUdevelopmentnotexplicitlyallowedbystatelaw.GovernmentCodeSection66315states,“Noadditionalstandards,otherthanthoseprovidedinSection66314,shallbeusedorimposed,includinganowner-occupantrequirement,exceptthatalocalagencymayrequirethatthepropertymaybeusedforrentalsofterms30daysorlonger.” ImpermissibleProhibitiononSeparateSales
Citycodesection20-42.130(B)(5) bansallsalesofADUsseparatefromtheprimarydwelling.However,GovernmentCodesection66341establishescertaincircumstancesinwhichthelocalagencymustallowseparatesalesofADUs.TheCityshouldamendtheproposedcodetofacilitateseparatesalesinthesecircumstances.
ImpermissibleRequirementforLandDedication
Citycodesection20-42.130(B)(6)requiresdedicationofpropertyasaconditionofdevelopmentofanADUincertaincircumstances. Asdiscussedabove,statelawprohibitscreatingregulationsonADUdevelopmentnotexplicitlyallowedbystatelaw.GovernmentCodeSection66315states,“Noadditionalstandards,otherthanthoseprovidedinSection66314,shallbeusedorimposed,includinganowner-occupantrequirement,exceptthatalocalagencymayrequirethatthepropertymaybeusedforrentalsofterms30daysorlonger.”ThislanddedicationrequirementisalsoaclearviolationofGovernmentCodesection66323,whichprohibitsanystandardsnotexplicitlyauthorizedinthatsection.
Additionally,theFifthAmendmentoftheConstitutionprohibitsgovernmentsfromtakingprivatepropertywithoutjustcompensation.TheFifthAmendmenthasbeeninterpretedbytheU.S.SupremeCourttoprohibitzoningandlanduseregulationsthateffectivelydepriveanownerofprotectedpropertyrights.(SeePennCentralTransportationCo.v.NewYorkCity(1978)438U.S.104.)Perhapsthemostclearcutregulatorytakingoccurswhenalanduseregulationallowsforapermanentphysicaloccupationofprivateproperty.(Lorettov.TeleprompterManhattanCatvCorp.(1982)458U.S.419.)ThereisperhapsnomoreobviousexampleofaviolationoftheregulatorytakingdoctrinethanthepolicyenactedbytheCityhere.TheCityrequires,throughzoningregulation,thatpropertyownersdeedtheirprivatepropertyovertotheCitywithoutjustcompensation,forpublicuseasstreetright-of-way.AndthisisforapprovalofanADU,notforasubdivision. 2of8
Thefactthatthisdedicationisonlyrequiredasaconditionofapprovalforresidentialdevelopmentdoesnotallowittoescapeconstitutionalscrutiny.TheSupremeCourthaslongheldthatregulatoryconditionsondevelopmentapprovalsthatwouldotherwiseconstitutetakingsmustbereasonablyrelatedtomitigatingimpactsofthatdevelopment,androughlyproportionaltothoseimpacts.(Nollanv.CaliforniaCoastalComm'n(1987)483U.S.825(Nollan);Dolanv.CityofTigard(1994)512U.S.374(Dolan).)TheCityhasestablishednosuchrelationshipbecauseitcannot,andadesireforawiderright-of-wayiswildlyoutofproportiontoanypurportedimpactofanADU.TheCityisfreetowidenitsstreetbyacquiringpropertyontheprivatemarket,orbyuseofeminentdomainpowersprovidingjustcompensationtopropertyowners,butitcannotsimplyenactaregulationrequiringthathomeowners givelandtotheCitywithoutjustcompensation.
AndtheCityshouldbeawarethatthestatelegislaturehasrecentlycurtaileditsabilitytorequirehousingdevelopmentprojectstodonatelandtothecity.AssemblyBillNo.3177,effectiveJanuary1,2025,statesthat“AlocalagencyshallnotimposealanddedicationrequirementonahousingdevelopmentpursuanttoSection66001towidenaroadwayifthelanddedicationrequirementisforthepurposeofmitigatingvehiculartrafficimpacts,achievinganadoptedtrafficlevelofservicerelatedtovehiculartraffic,orachievingadesiredroadwaywidth.”(Gov.Code,§66005.1,subd.(c)(1).) StateLawForbidsRequiringADUApplicationsinCertainCircumstances Citycodesection20-42.130(D)(1)requiresADUapplicationsforallproposedADUs.However,GovernmentCodesection66323,subdivision(a)requirestheCitytoapprovebuildingpermitapplicationsforADUsthatfitcertaincriteriaanddoesnotallowforaseparateADUapplicationinaddition.
ImpermissibleDeedRestrictionRequirements
Citycodesection15-4E-2(E)requiresarestrictivecovenanttobeplacedonthepropertypriortotheissuanceofacertificateofoccupancyforanADU.ThisisaclearviolationofGovernmentCodesection66323,whichprohibitsanystandardsnotexplicitlyauthorizedinthatsection.DeedrestrictionsarealsonotpermittedbyGovernmentCodesection66315,whichforbidsstandardsnotlistedinsection66314,anditisunclearwhytheCitywouldwantapplicantstogothroughthetroubleoffilingsuchadeedrestriction,otherthantodiscourageADUdevelopmentbyincreasingdevelopmentcost.
TheCaliforniaDepartmentofHousingandCommunityDevelopment(“HCD”)hascommunicatedthatsuchdeedrestrictionsareunlawfulinitsreviewofothercities’ADUordinances.See,forexample,theattachedAugust26,2024HCDreviewofSanMarino’sADUordinance,inwhichHCDinstructstheCityofSanMarinotoremoveitsdeedrestrictionrequirement. 3of8
Separately,Citycodesection15-4E-2(F)requirescertaindeedrestrictions,requiredbytheCityanddeclaringaccessorystructuresasnon-inhabitable,tobeliftedpriortoissuanceofabuildingpermitforanADU.ThisisalsoaclearviolationofGovernmentCodesection66323,whichprohibitsanystandardsnotexplicitlyauthorizedinthatsection.OwneroccupancystandardsarealsonotpermittedbyGovernmentCodesection66315,whichforbidsstandardsnotlistedinsection66314.
Additionally,suchdeedrestrictionsimposedonADUs(oronotheraccessorystructures)areunenforceable.ThisisduetotheabsenceofhorizontalprivitybetweentheCityandtheapplicant.Inotherwords,sincetheCitydoesnotowntheapplicant’spropertyatthetimeoftheapplication,anddoesnotownaneighboringpropertytowhosebenefittheproposedrestriction(s)redound,blackletterpropertylawbarstherestrictionsfrombindingfuturepropertyowners.(See,e.g.,Scaringev.J.C.C.Enters(1988)205Cal.App.3d1536[describingthetypesofprivityrelationshipbetweencovenantingpartiesthatallowenforcementofadeedrestriction];seealsoCiv.Code§§1460etseq.) ImpermissibleGeneralPlanRequirements
Citycodesection§20-42.130(B)(2)requiresADUstobeconsistentwiththeGeneralPlantextanddiagrams.ThistypeofblanketimpositionofGeneralPlanstandardsisnotallowedbystatelaw.
Asdiscussedabove,statelawgiveslocalgovernmentsauthoritytoenactzoningordinancesthatimplementavarietyofdevelopmentstandardsonADUs.(Gov.Code,§66314.)ThestandardsintheselocalordinancesarelimitedbystatelawsoasnottooverlyrestrictADUdevelopment.(Seeid.)AndstatelawforbidscitiesfromimposingotherstandardsonADUsbeyondwhatarespecificallylistedinGovernmentCode,section66314.(Gov.Code,§66315.) SeparatelyfromlocalADUordinances,Gov.Code,§66323prescribesanarrowersetofADUtypesforwhichitimposesaministerialdutyoncitiestoapprove.TheCitymustapprovebuildingpermitsforADUsthatmeetspecificheight,size,andsetbackcriteria.TheCitycannotthereforeimposetheunderlyingGeneralPlantextanddiagramrequirementsonsuchADUs.
ImpermissibleHistoricPreservationRequirements
Citycodesection20-42.130(B)(3)prohibitsADUdevelopmentonpropertiesoradjacenttopropertieslistedontheCaliforniaRegisterofHistoricResources.Additionally,Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(14)imposesavarietyofdesignrequirementsandahistoricresourcessurveyrequirementonADUsdevelopedwithintheHistoric(-H)CombiningDistrict.
However,nosuchstandardsmaybeimposedonADUsthatmeettherequirementsofGovernmentCodeSection66323,subd.(a),asdiscussedabove. 4of8
ImpermissibleSetbackRequirements(General)
Citycodesections20-42.130(E)(2)(a)(1)and20-42.130(E)(2)(b)(1)mandatesthatnewdetachedADUsmustprovideaside-cornersetbackofeightfeetandalsoconformtothesetbackrequirementsthattheunderlyingzoningdistrictimposesonprimarydwellings.Thefrontsetbackrequirementisonlyrelaxedifitisotherwiseimpossibletodevelopan800squarefootADUontheproperty,andthecodeonlyallowsthisforsinglefamilyproperties.
AndCitycodesection20-42.130(E)(2)(d)requiresADUstobasefrontsetbacksontheprojectedfuturestreetwidthofpublicstreets,notthecurrentfrontpropertyline.
However,GovernmentCodesection66323,subdivision(a)doespermitanyapplicationoffrontsetbackrequirementstoADUsthatqualifyforitsprotections,regardlessofwhetherornotanADUisdevelopableelsewhereontheproperty.Therearemanypolicyreasonsforthis.Forinstance,ahomeownermayprefertopreserveaprivatebackyardspacewhileredevelopingthelessusefulfrontyard.Whilechildrenmayplayinthebackyard,thefrontyardisclosertothestreetandlesssafeforavarietyofactivities.TheCitythereforemustallowfrontyardADUsthatcomplywiththestandardsinGovernmentCodesection66323,subdivision(a)bothonsinglefamilyandonmultifamilyproperties,withouthavingtodemonstrateanyhardship.
Additionally,theCitymustallowADUsproposedwithinaprimarydwellingexpansionsofupto150squarefeetforthepurposesoffacilitatingingressandegress.(Gov.Code,§66323,subd.(a)(1)(A).)TheCitymustallowsuchexpansionsnotwithstandingunderlyingsetbackrequirements.
ImpermissibleSetbackRequirements(HillsideandCreekside)
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(13)imposes15-footsideandrearsetbacksonADUsthatexceedcertainheightsorexceed800squarefeetinfloorareaandarealsolocatedincertainhillsideareas.AndCitycodesection20-42.130(E)(15)imposesspecificsetbackrequirementsonADUsthatexceed16feetinheightorexceed800squarefeetinfloorareaandarealsolocatednearwaterways.
However,GovernmentCodesection66323,subdivision(a)doespermitanyapplicationofsetbackrequirementsonADUsthataredevelopedbyconversionofaportionoftheprimarydwellingorbyconversionofanexistingaccessorystructure.Additionally,theCitymustallowADUsproposedwithinaprimarydwellingoraccessorystructureexpansionsofupto150squarefeetforthepurposesoffacilitatingingressandegressandcannotrequiresuchsetbacksforthese150squarefootexpansions.(Gov.Code,§66323,subd.(a)(1)(A).) 5of8
AndGovernmentCodesection66323,subdivisions(a)(2)and(a)(4)allowforADUsupto18feetinheightinsomecircumstances,not16feet,andtheCitymaynotimposeanysetbackrequirementsonsuchADUsotherthanfourfootsideandrearsetbacks.
ImpermissibleSprinkleringRequirements
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(3)(a)(1)imposesasprinklerrequirementonstructuresthatexceed1,200squarefeetoftotalfloorarea.AndCitycodesections20-42.130(E)(3)(b)(1)and20-42.130(E)(3)(c)(1)bothimposeasprinklerrequirementon“allbuildingsthatundergoanycombinationofsubstantialremodel,additionorboththatexceed50percentoftheexistingtotalfloorarea.” AlltheserequirementsviolateGovernmentCodesection66314,subdivision(d)(12):“Accessorydwellingunitsshallnotberequiredtoprovidefiresprinklersiftheyarenotrequiredfortheprimaryresidence.Theconstructionofanaccessorydwellingunitshallnottriggerarequirementforfiresprinklerstobeinstalledintheexistingprimarydwelling.”ThisalsoviolatesGovernmentcodesection66323,subdivision(c):“Theinstallationoffiresprinklersshallnotberequiredinanaccessorydwellingunitifsprinklersarenotrequiredfortheprimaryresidence.Theconstructionofanaccessorydwellingunitshallnottriggerarequirementforfiresprinklerstobeinstalledintheexistingmultifamilydwelling.” Iftheexistingprimarydwellingisnotrequiredtoprovidesprinklers,thenaconversionADUoradetachednewconstructionADUisalsonotrequiredtoprovidesprinklers,regardlessofitssizeandregardlessofhowmuchremodelingisdone.
Also,theaforementionedsprinkleringrequirementsconflictwithCitycodesection20-42.130(E)(16).
ImpermissibleFloorAreaLimitations
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(3)(c)forbidsADUswithinaprimarydwellingtobemorethan45%ofthecombined floorareaofthetwodwellings,anditalsolimitsbothinternalconversionADUsand detachedconversionADUsto1,200squarefeet.
However,neitheroftheserestrictionsarenotpermittedforADUsthatqualifyfortheprotectionsofGovernmentCodesection66323,subdivision(a)(1),asthestatelawforbidsapplicationsofregulationsotherthanthoselistedinthatsection.
Thismeansthatanapplicantmayconvertmorethan45%ofaprimarydwellingintoanADU.ThisalsomeansthatanapplicantisfreetoconvertanaccessorybuildingintoanADU,eveniftheaccessorystructureisgreaterthan1,200squarefeet(andtheresultingADUisalsogreaterthan1,200squarefeet). 6of8
ImpermissibleHeightLimitations
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(4)onlyallowsanadditionaltwofeetinroofheighttoaccommodatearoofpitchalignedwiththeprimarydwellinguptoamaximumheightof18feet.However,GovernmentCodesection66321,subdivision(b)(4)(B)plainlyallowsupto20feetinheightforADUswithin½mileofamajortransitstoporahigh-qualitytransitcorridorandaroofthatalignsinpitchwiththatoftheprimarydwelling.
ImpermissibleDesignLimitations
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(6)requiresADUstomatchcertaindesignelementsintheprimarydwelling.However,nosuchstandardsmaybeimposedonADUsthatmeettherequirementsofGovernmentCodeSection66323,subd.(a),asdiscussedabove.
Non-objectivePrivacyRequirements
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(9)requiresthefollowing:“Abalcony,windowordoorofasecondstoryaccessorydwellingunitshallbedesignedtolessenprivacyimpactstoadjacentproperties.Appropriatedesigntechniquesincludeobscuredglazing,windowplacementaboveeyelevel,screeningtreatments,orlocatingbalconies,windowsanddoorstowardtheexistingon-siteresidence.”However,thesearenotobjectivestandards,andtheCitymayonlyimposeobjectivestandardspursuanttoGovernmentCodesection66314,subdivision(b)(1).Itisimpossibleforanapplicanttoknowexantewhatareviewingofficialwillconsideradequatetomitigate“privacyimpacts.” Also,asapolicymatter,itisunclearwhytheonsiteprimaryresidenceislessdeservingofprivacythananeighboringproperty andwhymoreprivacyisneededvisavisADUresidentsthanprimarydwellingresidents.
ImpermissibleLimitationsonADUsConstructedviaSB9
Citycodesections20-42.130(E)(10)(e)and20-42.130(F)(1)(d)forbidthedevelopmentofADUsandJADUs,respectively,inconjunctionwithSB9lotsplitsiftheparceldoesnotmeetthefollowingrequirements:
(1)TheparcelislocatedoutsideoftheCity’sWildlandUrbanInterface(WUI).(2)Thestreettoaccesstheparcelisatleast36feetwide,withparkingprovidedonbothsidesoratleast30feetwide,withparkinglimitedtoonesideofthestreet.
Theserequirementsareforbiddenbystatelaw.GovernmentCode,section65852.21,subdivision(a)establisheseligibilityforparcelsthatmayaddsecondunitsandADUsonparcelssplitpursuanttoSB9,andtheCitymaynotaddadditionalcriteriavialocalcode. 7of8
ImpermissibleParkingRequirements
Citycodesection20-42.130(E)(11)imposesparkingrequirementsonADUslesscertainexceptions.Asdiscussedabove,GovernmentCodesection66323mandatesthattheCityapproveaspecificclassofADUssubjectonlytospecifiedheightandsetbackrequirements,notwithstandinganylocalcoderequirementstothecontrary.ThismeansthattheCitycannotsubjectsuchADUstoparkingrequirements.
Additionally,asnotedabove,SB1211,effective1January2025,makestheprohibitiononparkingrequirements(oranyotherdevelopmentstandardnotauthorizedbysection66323)evenmoreexplicit:Gov.Code,§66323,subdivision(b):“Alocalagencyshallnotimposeanyobjectivedevelopmentordesignstandardthatisnotauthorizedbythissectionuponanyaccessorydwellingunitthatmeetstherequirementsofanyofparagraphs(1)to(4),inclusive,ofsubdivision(a).” ⧫⧫⧫
CalHDFisa501(c)(3)non-profitcorporationwhosemissionincludesadvocatingforincreasedaccesstohousingforCaliforniansatallincomelevels,includinglow-incomehouseholds.YoumaylearnmoreaboutCalHDFatwww.calhdf.org.
Sincerely,
DylanCaseyCalHDFExecutiveDirector
JamesM.LloydCalHDFDirectorofPlanningandInvestigations
8of8