Planning commission denies final site-plan conditions for Porterville-area ADUs; staff warns applicant can proceed by right

The Tulare County Planning Commission on June 11 declined to approve a final site plan (PSR 25-003) that would have allowed the county to impose conditions on two accessory dwelling units (ADUs) proposed on a Porterville-area property at 28628 Reservation Road.

Russell Cashewa, project planner for the Resource Management Agency, told the commission the site plan was submitted to resolve an active code-enforcement case (GC2400459) that began after the county found two occupied RVs on the property. Cashewa outlined a record of inspections, the applicant’s interactions with county staff and the Project Review Committee, and said Environmental Health and Fire Department conditions would be attached to the site plan if approved. Cashewa also said the applicant reduced the proposal from three units to two before the hearing and that building permits and inspections would address unpermitted structures discovered during permit review.

Applicant Luis Andrade addressed the commission and said the proposed ADUs were intended for multigenerational family housing and that he had removed the RVs, entered into discussions with county staff, agreed to conditions, and set up a payment plan for code-enforcement fines. Chief Building Official Hector Ramos confirmed the applicant’s payment plan for fines began June 1 and that payments were current.

Neighbor Kony Ann Garen Short opposed the site plan and described long-standing nuisance issues: she said multiple RVs were placed adjacent to her property line, described piles of trash, outdoor cooking, permanent lighting and tarps used to create living spaces, and stated the county’s code-enforcement process had confirmed unpermitted dwellings. Short asked the commission not to grant new entitlements while an open code case remained and requested additional visual screening.

During the hearing staff cited state ADU law in their analysis and described it as limiting the county’s authority to impose additional conditions beyond those allowed by statute. Cashewa quoted provisions of state law as part of the staff response (staff referenced the government code sections as spoken in the record). Commissioners debated whether approval of the site plan would improperly restrict state law protections for ADUs.

Commissioner Gil Aguilar made a motion to approve a Class 3 categorical exemption (CEQA) and conditionally approve final site plan PSR 25-003; the motion failed on a roll call of 2 yes, 4 no, 1 abstain and 1 absent. After the vote staff explained that, regardless of the vote, state ADU law allows the applicant to proceed with permitted ADUs that comply with statutory requirements and that the county could not lawfully impose conditions beyond state limits. Cashewa said the purpose of the site-plan request was to add locally enforceable conditions, but denial means the applicant may still apply for ADU building permits under state law.