Planning commission recommends zoning ordinance updates to Board of Supervisors; ADU and residential standards revised

The Tulare County Planning Commission voted 6-0, with one member absent, to recommend the Board of Supervisors adopt CPZC25-008, a comprehensive text amendment to portions of Tulare County Zoning Ordinance No. 352 addressing residential zones and related development standards.

Russell Koshua, the county project planner who presented the item, said the amendment updates definitions and establishes a residential zoning matrix, revises allowed uses across RA, MR, RO, R1, R2 and R3 zones, and aligns accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior ADU (JADU) definitions with state law. "The purpose of the update... is in the 2030 general plan update and the Tulare County housing element guiding principles," Koshua said, describing changes to definitions, the addition of an easy‑to‑read zoning matrix and adjusted setback calculations.

Key changes Koshua described include allowing ADUs and JADUs by right in applicable zones, revising side‑yard setback calculations (moving from a previous half‑front‑yard formula to a flat 10‑foot side setback in many residential zones), updating fence and hedge height limits (3.5 feet in front yard setbacks, 7 feet elsewhere), and removing redundant or confusing language across sections for clarity and consistency. The proposal would also move certain uses formerly listed in separate appendices into the Foothill (F) zone section for ease of reference.

Koshua said the county is proposing to remove minimum lot size requirements for several residential zones (RA, MR, RO, R1, R2, R3) to allow smaller parcels and to align with state rules that encourage ADUs and smaller lot housing in support of housing goals. He emphasized that the change does not affect parcels that remain subject to the Land Area Management Plan (LAMP) or situations where well/septic or animal‑unit requirements still impose minimum acreage.

Commissioners asked procedural questions about timing and county council review; Koshua said the ordinance will be reviewed by county counsel before it goes to the Board and that changes would become effective 30 days after adoption unless otherwise specified. Bill Whitlatch moved the motion to recommend adoption; the commission recorded the vote as 6 yes, 1 absent.

The presentation also noted the county’s decision to allow JADUs in any zone that allows a residence (more permissive than the current state baseline), subject to owner‑occupancy deed restrictions, and to allow the planning director to forward large or complex additional dwelling unit requests to the Planning Commission for review instead of deciding them administratively.

The commission’s recommendation forwards the amendment to the Board of Supervisors for final action; the staff presentation said the draft zoning matrix will be made available online for developers and others to review and that many changes were made to remove redundant text and to consolidate site plan review functions with the Planning Commission following earlier procedural changes.