Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission sends ADU ordinance updates to City Council after heated debate, 4–2
Summary
After extended debate over parking, height and square‑foot thresholds, the Planning Commission voted 4–2 to forward staff’s ADU ordinance revisions to City Council with two Commission modifications (clarifying treatment of the 800‑sq‑ft exceedance and select parking exemptions); commissioners split on whether to push bolder local incentives.
The Menlo Park Planning Commission on April 13 voted 4–2 to forward a revised accessory dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance to City Council that aligns local rules with recent state law and adds objective local standards. The motion adopts most staff recommendations while directing staff to allow the 800‑square‑foot floor‑area exceedance to be applied over time and to carry forward a set of parking exemptions for Council consideration.
The issue drew long debate. Associate Planner Matt Pruder outlined the two‑track approach staff proposes: state‑mandated ADUs subject to Government Code §66323 (for example, certain detached ADUs up to 800 sq ft and JADUs with specific rules) and local ADUs subject to §66314, where Menlo Park can adopt additional objective standards. Staff proposed size limits (a proposed local cap of 850 sq ft for one‑bedroom ADUs and 1,000 sq ft for units with more than one bedroom), clarified height and setback rules that track state provisions (including an 18‑foot allowance in defined circumstances), removed a proposed exterior access pathway requirement after legal review, and added a 100‑sq‑ft incentive (bringing the accessibility‑compliant ADU to 900 sq ft).
Why it mattered: commissioners split on philosophy and tactics. Some argued the draft is conservative and urged the city to pursue more aggressive local incentives—higher size limits, fewer parking requirements, and policies to enable sale/condo conversion of ADUs—so ADUs contribute more meaningfully to Menlo Park’s housing goals. Others said staff’s proposal is appropriately balanced, legally mindful and faster to implement, especially given a pending HCD review timeline.
Key clarifications and changes: staff confirmed the 62‑foot Meta discussion was separate, and then explained that the deleted pathway requirement was removed because state law would preempt a local passageway mandate. Staff also said the 800‑sq‑ft exceedance provision is aligned with state practice and can be applied to accommodate detached local ADUs that exceed typical floor‑area limits; based on Commission direction staff will revise the ordinance language so property owners can apply that exceedance across multiple permits or phases (rather than a single one‑time credit), making it easier for owners who add ADU square footage incrementally.
Votes and motions: an initial motion bundling three more aggressive changes (eliminate parking minimums citywide, allow multi‑stage exceedance and raise the two‑plus‑bedroom cap to 1,200 sq ft) failed. A subsequent motion to forward the ordinance with staff’s substantive recommendations (including the 1,000‑sq‑ft cap for multi‑bedroom ADUs), while instructing staff to permit the 800‑sq‑ft exceedance to be applied over time and to carry the requested parking exemptions to Council, carried 4–2 (Commissioners Baruzzi, Doe, Farrick and Schindler in favor; Commissioner Sillen and Vice Chair Silverstein opposed).
What happens next: staff will prepare an amended ordinance and supporting documents for City Council first reading in May; HCD will review the adopted ordinance afterward. The Planning Commission also requested that Council direct staff to study for‑sale/condo‑style ADU subdivisions as a separate work item.
