The Buelton City Planning Commission voted to recommend that the City Council adopt updates to Title 19 of the Buelton Municipal Code governing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior ADUs (JADUs), including a recommended 1,200-square-foot maximum for standalone detached ADUs, a 25-foot maximum height for single ADUs and an 18-foot cap where multiple ADUs would be combined on one lot.

Planning staff described the proposed package as a technical and policy update to align local rules with ongoing changes in state law and with a Housing Element adopted in 2023. "Accessory dwelling units are complete independent residences with their own kitchen and bathroom," planning staff member Kara said while summarizing the changes and examples. The Planning Commission motion recommended that the council consider the staff draft (Resolution 25-6) and the specific options discussed at the hearing.

The ordinance changes discussed by staff would: update definitions to match state law; limit owner-occupancy and deed-restriction requirements to JADUs only; prohibit unreasonable HOA bans consistent with state statutes; require ministerial approval of ADUs in zones that permit single- or multifamily residential uses (including multifamily components of mixed‑use projects); and apply only state-law objective standards to "exempt" ADUs (attached ADUs, JADUs and detached ADUs under 800 square feet). Staff also explained that local requirements such as front-setback, lot-coverage and open-space rules cannot block an ADU up to 800 square feet and 16 feet tall if the unit otherwise meets the state exemptions.

On parking, staff said local governments may require parking only in narrowly defined circumstances; for most parcels Buelton cannot impose parking requirements on ADUs. "In a vast majority of the city, we really can't require parking for ADUs," Kara said, adding that restricted areas in the 2020 ordinance that formerly required parking or disallowed ADUs were recommended for removal because the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) rejected the city's earlier traffic-based justification in its review.

Commission discussion focused on three decision points staff asked the commission to recommend to council: size limits, height limits, and whether to preserve a citywide objective design standard requiring fencing for primary dwellings (so it could also apply to ADUs). Commissioners generally favored allowing flexibility on unit size while endorsing more restrictive rules when multiple units were proposed on one lot. Commissioners cited local entitlement experience: staff said the average entitled ADU size in Buelton is about 570 square feet for studios/one‑bedroom units and about 884 square feet for two‑bedroom-plus units; the largest ADU entitled to date was 1,200 square feet.

On size, the commission settled on recommending a 1,200-square-foot maximum for standalone detached ADUs (i.e., the state’s broad maximum), with staff and commissioners noting that most local ADUs are significantly smaller. On height, the commission supported staff's recommendation of a 25-foot maximum for an attached or single ADU to allow two-story additions (for example, living space over a garage), while recommending a more restrictive 18-foot cap for additional detached ADUs when multiple accessory units would be proposed on the same property.

The commission did not reach a firm recommendation on fencing requirements. Staff noted HCD's guidance that a fencing requirement could only be applied to ADUs if the city has an objective residential design standard applied to all comparable residential development; commissioners expressed no strong consensus and suggested deferring the final decision to council, with several members suggesting hedgerow plantings be allowed in lieu of fences.

Staff also told the commission that adoption of the ADU ordinance amendments is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental review is required for the ordinance adoption itself.

After discussion, a motion to forward the resolution and the commission's recommendations to City Council carried unanimously. The motion passed with recorded ayes from Commissioner Campbell, Commissioner Cobb, Vice Chair Sarkia and Chair Reese. The commission's recommendation packet asked council to consider: (1) the 1,200-square-foot maximum for standalone detached ADUs; (2) a 25-foot height limit for single ADUs and attached ADUs; (3) an 18-foot height cap where multiple ADUs/JADUs are proposed; and (4) whether to adopt or defer a citywide objective design standard for fencing (with hedging as an alternative). The commission’s action was a recommendation only; final adoption requires a council ordinance.

Next steps: staff will transmit the Planning Commission recommendation to City Council along with the draft ordinance and HCD review notes. Council action, not taken at this meeting, will determine whether the draft amendments become local law.