Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thousand Oaks planning commission recommends updating ADU rules to match state law
Summary
The commission voted 4-0 to recommend City Council adopt MCA-2025-7003, an update to Article 45 of the Thousand Oaks Municipal Code to align local ADU and JADU rules with recent state legislation; staff said the changes clarify application timelines, owner-occupancy rules for JADUs and definitions such as "interior livable space."
The Thousand Oaks Planning Commission on Jan. 26 voted 4-0 to recommend that City Council adopt a municipal code amendment updating the city's accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior ADU (JADU) rules to conform with recent state law.
Community development staff presented the ordinance amendment (MCA-2025-7003), telling the commission the code revisions reorganize Article 45 for clarity, update size and occupancy language and implement new application timelines and appeal procedures required by the state. Presenter Matthew Mateo said staff now must "determine whether an application is complete within 15 days of submittal and within 15 days of any resubmittal," and that the ordinance provides a written appeal process and time frames for final determinations.
The proposed amendment updates references to unit size to use the term "interior livable space," consolidates JADU development standards into one section, and moves requirements that apply to all ADU types (parking, utilities, sprinklers, occupancy) to an earlier portion of the article to improve readability, staff said. Mateo told commissioners the city submitted its prior ordinance to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and that HCD returned findings prompting clarifications.
A commissioner who spoke in support said the state's housing measures aim to expand housing opportunities but warned that frequent state updates create recurring local codework and that the new appeal timing "seems, in my opinion, very unreasonable in terms of the timing, on both the staff and also the applicant." Staff replied that no additional local code changes were necessary to address the concerns contained in a packet letter and that the item will likely return for review regularly.
The motion to find the amendment exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (citing Public Resources Code section 21080.17) and to recommend City Council adoption carried unanimously among members present: Commissioners Buss, Lanson and McMahon and Vice Chair Kettlehut voted yes; Chair Farris was absent. The commission recorded no public comments on the item.
The recommendation will be forwarded to City Council for final action; commissioners were told there is no appeal period at the Planning Commission stage because the item proceeds directly to council.
Background: Staff said the city last updated its ADU ordinance in February 2025 and later submitted it to HCD for review. The proposed changes, as presented, are intended to align local code language with state requirements for application processing timelines, appeals, unit-size measurement and JADU owner-occupancy rules. The ordinance text and supplemental packet were posted ahead of the hearing for review.
