San Dimas council tables sweeping single‑family zoning cleanup for study session after members raise policy questions

City staff presented the first phase of a multi‑part municipal code text amendment (MCTA) that would update San Dimas’ Title 18 single‑family zoning rules, codifying decades of policy practice and adding several clarifications. Senior planner Anna Moore told the council the package is intended to “codify existing policies specific to residential zoned properties,” add cleanup items and improve usability for residents, contractors and staff.

Moore said the changes would consolidate numerous policies — on curb cuts, driveway access, fence encroachments, mechanical equipment screening, exterior fireplaces, and underground utilities — into a single residential zones chapter. She also noted several new or clarified provisions: a five‑foot rear yard setback (encouraged in practice but not previously codified), limits on short‑term rentals to aid code compliance complaints related to Airbnb, clarified rules for alley‑loaded lots and a 100‑foot separation requirement from hospitals and school buildings for horse corrals to align with county public‑health guidance.

Council members said they supported the goal of reducing internal conflicts in the code but asked for more history and a clearer explanation of the policy choices. One councilmember said the package mixed two tasks — “cleaning up” conflicting language and proposing substantive policy changes such as a short‑term rental ban — making it hard to review in a single hearing. Concern focused on whether longstanding neighborhood features such as historic carports would be unduly restricted; staff said existing legally built carports would be grandfathered, but new permanent carports would generally not be allowed in downtown unless they met definitions for permitted patio or accessory structures.

Moore also said the planning commission reviewed the amendments and recommended approval by a 5–0 vote. After residents and councilmembers pressed for more background and urged breaking the package into smaller pieces for discussion, the council voted to continue the ordinance to a study session so staff can provide additional context, examples of the policies being codified and clearer language on carports and other ambiguous items.

What happens next: Staff will return with a study‑session presentation that reviews the origin of the codified policies, highlights substantive policy changes versus technical cleanups, and proposes redlined language options for council review. The item was continued by unanimous vote.