Planning commission backs codifying ADU/JADU urgency ordinance, flags height and landscaping trade-offs

The Pleasant Hill City Planning Commission voted Feb. 24 to recommend that the City Council formally codify emergency ordinance amendments to Title 18 that implement recent 2025 state changes to ADU and JADU law.

Planning staff summarized the state-driven changes the city incorporated under an urgency ordinance, citing AB464, AB115, SB9 and SB543. Staff explained key points including a new measurement standard—"interior livable space"—for ADU size, clearer allowances to combine class-one ADU types (allowing a converted ADU, a JADU and a detached ADU on a single-family lot for a total of three accessory units), and that some JADU owner-occupancy requirements were relaxed when the JADU has separate sanitary facilities. "ADU and JDU sizes are now calculated using a new term which is defined in the ADU law: interior livable space," staff said.

The commission unanimously supported forwarding the codification to the City Council but used the discussion to flag two items for future council consideration: whether to create a targeted exception to the current 16-foot height limit for detached ADUs on very small, constrained lots (potentially allowing a second story in limited circumstances), and how to handle the previously required landscape screening (the urgency ordinance removed a requirement that one 15-gallon evergreen tree be provided per linear wall length for certain ADUs). Commissioners noted trade-offs: increasing detached-ADU height could help space-constrained owners build usable two-story units but could create neighbor impacts when a taller structure sits four feet from adjacent property lines; removing the tree-screen option preserves emergency access but reduces a tool for adding drought-tolerant landscaping to neighborhoods.

Commissioners asked staff whether the height concern could be handled through variances or use permits and whether any constraints (lot-size thresholds, siting rules, design standards) should accompany a height change to minimize impacts. Staff said the state law sets many ADU parameters but that cities retain limited authority to adopt certain standards; because the urgency ordinance was already adopted, the commission's recommendation was limited to codification and advisory input on height and landscaping.

A motion to recommend codification passed on a unanimous 5-0 roll-call vote: Commissioners Chiang, Culin/Coffin, Mascaro and Vaverick and Chair Field all voted yes. The commission noted it would provide more detailed policy suggestions to council if the council wishes to revisit ADU height limits or landscaping requirements.

What happens next: the recommendation will be transmitted to the City Council for formal ordinance adoption and any further policy direction on ADU height and landscaping.