Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Clemente planning commission delays rewrite of ADU rules after state and public comments
Summary
City staff asked for more time to reconcile informal feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development and a renter‑advocacy letter on a comprehensive rewrite of San Clemente's accessory dwelling unit (ADU) code; the commission voted to continue the item to April 22 to allow staff and legal counsel to prepare findings.
The San Clemente Planning Commission on March 4 agreed to continue a planned overhaul of the city's accessory dwelling unit rules after staff reported informal feedback from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and a public comment letter from a renter‑advocacy group.
Staff presenter Araceli Arcello told the commission the draft is a near‑complete rewrite meant to bring the municipal code into alignment with successive state ADU laws and to remove confusing or inconsistent provisions. Arcello said staff met with HCD the same day and received informal comments that overlap with concerns raised in a written public comment. "We had a meeting with HCD today," Arcello said, noting HCD flagged how two different state code sections affect local regulation and that some local limits may be more restrictive than state law allows.
Chair Cosgrove and several commissioners emphasized the need for clear, defensible findings to show the city can retain objective design and public‑safety standards while complying with state law. "We did this work in good faith to preserve our Spanish Village by the Sea character," Chair Cosgrove said, urging staff to craft legal findings that explain why particular objective standards are necessary.
Commissioners pointed to specific state code cross‑references in staff materials and recent state bills that have changed ADU rules repeatedly since 2019. Arcello summarized the key technical changes in the draft, including owner‑occupancy and junior‑ADU clarifications, unit size thresholds tied to impact‑fee exemptions, and an objective‑standards focus for architectural review.
Given the new input from HCD and the advocacy letter, staff recommended continuing the public hearing so the city can evaluate suggested clarifications and prepare any necessary legal findings. Commissioners agreed and voted to continue the ADU zoning amendment public hearing to the April 22 Planning Commission meeting so staff and the city attorney can provide a more complete recommendation.
Next steps: staff will work with the city attorney and, if needed, reach back to HCD and commenters to reconcile the draft with state law and to prepare the administrative record for the commission's April 22 meeting.
