Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends broad residential zoning changes to Board of Supervisors
Summary
Tulare County planning commissioners voted to recommend a text amendment to the county zoning ordinance that updates residential definitions, accessory dwelling rules, setbacks, manufactured‑home standards and removes several redundant provisions; the motion passed 6-1.
The Tulare County Planning Commission voted to recommend to the Board of Supervisors a text amendment to the county zoning ordinance (CPZC25-008) that updates residential definitions, the residential zoning matrix, accessory dwelling rules and multiple development standards across several zones. Commissioners recorded a recommendation vote of 6 yes, 1 absent.
Russell Koshua, identified as a project planner with the Resource Management Agency, presented the proposed changes. The update covers section 2 (definitions), and residential zones including RA (rural residential), MR (mountain residential), RO (single‑family estate), R1, R2, R3, the mobile‑home overlay (M), planned development (PD), the foothill combining zone (F, sec. 18.7), and procedural sections 15 and 16 on general provisions, variances and special use permits.
Key changes Koshua summarized include: replacing older accessory dwelling language with state‑aligned ADU and JADU definitions and regulations; adding a zoning matrix and setback matrix to simplify user access; allowing Junior ADUs in any zone that allows a residence (subject to owner‑occupancy deed restrictions); adding ADU/JADU by‑right where consistent with state law; consolidating and renumbering allowed uses to reduce redundancy; simplifying side‑yard setback calculations (moving from 12.5 feet derived rules to a flat 10‑foot standard in many zones); clarifying fence and wall height rules (3.5 feet in front yard setback, 7 feet elsewhere); and replacing a hard 10‑year manufactured‑home age rule with a standard reviewed by the chief building official.
The proposal would also remove the separate M overlay by folding its benefits into the F (foothill) zone and would, for several residential zones, remove minimum lot size requirements to allow smaller lots and increased housing flexibility. Koshua said the removal of minimum lot size would not affect parcels subject to the county's Land Area Management Plan (LAMP) or parcels relying on well‑and‑septic that still require at least one acre.
The update additionally consolidates uses and site‑review processes, transferring authorities previously held by an abolished site plan review committee to the planning commission and making administrative special use permits available for additional dwelling units while allowing the planning director to refer large projects to the planning commission.
Commissioners asked procedural and timing questions about how the zoning matrix would appear and when changes would be effective; Koshua said the matrix would be updated immediately upon adoption and that the ordinance would be reviewed by county counsel before the Board of Supervisors hearing. The motion to recommend the text amendment to the Board passed 6-1; Bill Whitlatch seconded and a roll call recorded 6 yes, 1 absent.
The commission’s recommendation will go to county counsel review and then to the Board of Supervisors for final action. If adopted by the board, the ordinance text amendment would take effect according to state and county rules for ordinance adoption and noticed timelines.
