Dana Point council advances ADU zoning amendments, narrows areas subject to discretionary review

Dana Point city staff presented proposed changes to the city's accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance and the City Council voted to introduce the zoning amendment and adopt a resolution finding the ordinance complies with state law.

The amendments update the zoning code to match state ADU rules, clarify size limits, and remove a requirement staff called the "deep restriction." The changes specify maximum sizes for attached ADUs (up to about 1,800 square feet in some cases), allow up to eight detached ADUs on multifamily properties but not to exceed the existing number of dwelling units, and make clear that ADUs may be attached to single-family and multifamily buildings.

Planning division staff, represented at the hearing by Senior Planner Brenda Wisniewski and planner Matt Sennacori, said the city received two rounds of comments from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and that the planning commission recommended forwarding the amendments to council. The staff presentation said Dana Point has 56 ADUs completed to date, 10 under permit, and 31 applications that were started then expired.

The staff package contains a new, limited site development-permit (SDP) process that applies in six geographic areas where the city determined existing conditions'narrow streets, nonconforming parking, limited sidewalks, or high curb congestion'create public-safety or traffic concerns. City staff emphasized the SDP is intended as an alternative path for situations where the strict ministerial ADU rules would otherwise apply but the city has documented health and safety concerns.

Public comment focused on the legality of the SDP process. Scott Skinner, a property owner with an open ADU permit, told council his application "is prototypical" and that the city's SDP requirement is unlawful. "State law strips the city of discretion for denial of my ADU permit other than building safety sign off on specific plans," Skinner said, and he said he has filed a notice of violation with HCD that he said is not addressed in staff materials.

Council members discussed enforcement, parking studies and an earlier 2019 parking implementation plan. Councilmember Frost said the SDP "is probably my favorite part" because it creates a path for proposals that do not meet the strict ministerial criteria but might be better for neighborhood design. Councilmember Federico moved to adopt staff's recommended actions; the motion passed.

The ordinance language will return as the item is finalized for second reading and adoption. Staff and council said the mapped SDP zones can be amended in the future by council action if other neighborhoods demonstrate the same parking and safety conditions described by staff.

Lede provenance: staff presentation introducing the ADU ordinance, public hearing opened and staff remarks.

Nut graf provenance: planning commission recommendation, HCD letters, SDP mapping and staff's data on existing ADUs.

Ending: Council approved introduction of the zoning text amendment and directed staff to proceed with the ordinance process and resolution of compliance with state law.