Alright, good evening the June 4 2026 meeting of the Planning Commission is called to order
Would everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance?
Will the secretary please conduct the roll call?
Yes, our person for the record the following commissioners are present for the meeting at the time of roll call
Chair Duhada vice-chair Mendoza commissioner rich commissioner Solis
Commissioner nay commissioners uber and Commissioner to julu we do have a quorum
Thank You secretary the next item on the agenda is announcements. Mr. Secretary. Are there any announcements this evening? I
Do have one announcement this evening. I'd like to take a moment to introduce Juliette Vaughn
Who's our legal counsel from the city attorney's office this evening?
Juliette is going to be our primary attorney supporting the planning commission moving forward
Alex model many of you have had opportunity to work with for many years is still going to be supporting us in the background
but he's he was he is gonna be transitioning to some other assignments within the city attorney's office, so
Like to welcome Julia to the commission
Hey everyone
Happy to be here and happy to answer any questions you have during the meeting
As Wayland mentioned I work under Alex in the city attorney's office serve as assistant city attorney
And I assist on a lot of the land use and planning projects here
Welcome Julia
The next item on the agenda is the consent calendar
There is one item on the consent calendar this evening the draft minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of May 7th
2026 would any commissioners like to pull the item from the consent calendar for Corrections?
If not, may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar?
commissioner rich
Okay, it has been moved by Commissioner Rich and
Seconded by Commissioner Solis that the consent calendar be approved
Please vote on your screens
the motion passes
Six yeses one abstention and zero knows
The next item on the agenda is staff reports and announcements. Mr. Secretary. Do we have any staff reports or announcements this evening?
There are no additional staff announcements this evening
moving on to public comments
The public is invited to make any comments related to agenda items that are not listed under public hearings or other
Items of public interest at this time if you wish to speak during public comments
Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the administrative assistant and speakers will be invited to speak
Public comments are limited three minutes per person if you wish to comment on an item listed under the public hearings portion
of the agenda. You will have an opportunity to do so when the item is
heard. Please fill out the speaker card and hand it to the administrative
assistant. We are now taking public comments. This is the time when any
person may address the board on matters not listed on this agenda. Seeing no
comments, on to the next item on the agenda which would be presentations. Mr.
Secretary, are there any presentations this evening? There are no
Presentations this evening
tonight's agenda has one public hearing item for consideration by the Planning Commission if
you wish to speak before the Planning Commission, please submit a speaker card and you state your name and
Address for the record meetings of the Planning Commission are recorded and televised. So please speak clearly for the record
the hearing item is agenda item seven dash
z-c-a
26-002
Consideration of a resolution recommending the city council amend San Leandro zone zoning code sections
one dot twelve dot 108 and two dot zero four dot three eight eight to modify
Regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units J ADUs
May we please have the staff report?
Good evening commissioners and the item before you is a proposal to update the city's adu and jay adu ordinance
This city has recognized the benefit of adus and jay adu as a source of affordable housing
a source of income for residents and
the city has even
wave development impact fees for adus we've eliminated parking requirements for adus and
engage in
promotional outreach for ADUs to let people know how to create ADUs and the requirements of the ADUs so that they're
Considered for development in the city
and so
So why are we doing an update now mainly because the state is requiring us to under several legislations?
the last time that we did an update for ADU was in 20 22 and
between 2020 to and now there were several legislation that were enacted, but we were able to just comply with state law, but with the most recent changes, there were legislation that specifically requires all cities to update their ad you ordinance.
The state also updated its ordinance and reorganize it into different sections.
And so the numbers that we reference in the code to the state section also is no longer
applicable with the changes that the state made.
And so with the gaps that existed between the local ADU and the state law, we've been
applying state law in our handouts and in the information that we give out to applicants.
And the local ADU ordinance that's adopted tonight is subject to review by state HTC.
And HTC is also requiring all provisions of state ADU law be addressed in local law.
So you might have seen some provision that may appear to be more related to the fire
code or the building code added to the zoning code as part of the preparation for the ADU
ordinance, we looked at comment letters that the state has provided to other cities and
they were very specific in the language that they wanted the city to include in their local
ordinance. And so that's why there's some of the language that may not typically be
be associated with the zoning code,
included in the zoning code.
And that's also why we didn't include a red line version
of the ordinance that you normally would receive
because we reorganized the whole section
of the ADU's regulation.
And so it would appear just like everything
was striked out and rewritten.
And so it was not very helpful to have a red line version
included in the staff report that you've received.
So one of the most recent change that's impactful is the number of ADUs that a property can have.
Under state law, now you can have a JADU, which can be created from converted existing Habro space or an attached garage.
the city. Um you can do a
the main house. For multifamily properties, one of the major changes is for new development,
you can have two ADUs that's detached from the rest of the development. For existing
development, you can have up to eight detached ADUs from the development. And within the
multifamily development up to 25% of the number or I'm sorry any habitable space
any in habitable space that can be converted to number of units they can
have up to 25% of the existing number of units be converted to ADUs so that's
for new development that's two detached ADUs can be added for existing
developed eight detached ADUs. And then depending on the number of units, 25% of the units can
be created using in-habital space that's existing on the property.
Another change that's occurred is the review timeline. The initial review timeline is shortened
from 30 days to 15 days. The 60-day decision period is the same. But there is an appeal
process now for any applications that were denied by the city and we don't actually have
any denied application as far as I know for ADUs yet, but there's a path forward that
people can appeal to the City Council now should their application be denied. Other
reforms including HOA noninterference, meaning that the HOA can't create regulation would
to prohibit people from creating AD use.
And as far as resubmittal goes,
once we provide the comment letter to the applicant,
we can't add additional comments
in the subsequent comment letters.
So the first comment letter needs to be inclusive
of all the items that they are missing
from their application.
And the changes also clarify multifamily definition,
meaning that in order to be considered a multifamily,
a property needs to have two or more units
that are connected to each other.
So if they have multiple single family
dwelling units on the lot,
it's still considered a single family property.
So the units have to be attached to each other.
So if there's two units attached to each other,
such as a duplex,
it's considered multifamily but if there's three units that's not attached on the same lot that's
still considered single family for the purpose of ADU law. So the regulations support our housing
element goals and as far as CEQA regulations go it's considered exempt under guideline
section 15 two eight two H and
For public noticing we sent out the notice to the East Bay time on the it was published on May 22nd
and no comments were received for the item and the recommendation is that the
Commissioners adopt a resolution recommending that City Council so adopt the proposed zoning code amendment
Thank you
Thank you for the presentation. Does the Commission have any questions for staff?
Commissioner nay
Let's see. I may have moved you
Do you mind clicking back into the queue one more time? Sorry
Okay, so it's lighting up as Commissioner nay, okay
Secretary I'm hitting this one just okay. So now we have active speakers
So maybe from the top, I see Commissioner Zuber is yours
Okay, okay
Just a few questions
In section four under setbacks and separation
Item 4c it says ad you shall not occupy a required front yard
is there a definition of required front yard? It's generally the first 20 feet
behind the front property line. Okay so that's pretty standard then. Yes. Okay great.
Then on section five under height it talks about a detached ADU shall not
exceed 16 feet and then then on item B it asks well if it's it says well within
it if it's within one half of one mile walking distance to major transit stop
and it can be 18 feet do you understand why what that has to do why the increase
I don't know why there's an increase but there's force the height there's certain increases that
st. Law allows so for example for multifamily properties if there's a multi-level multi
multi-story multifamily structure the height is able to go higher than if it were just a single
story structure on the property so maybe it's more common that it's a multifamily
within half a mile of transit so they'd be higher is that I don't know I think
expectation is there's developments more intense around our transit stops so
the so the so the height the the additional height is in recognition of
perhaps you're seeing like taller buildings more intense development your
transit we're no transit right okay and then and then an item D it says that
shall not exceed an attached ADU shall not exceed 25 feet in height but is it
allowed to be higher than the primary existing so the primary the primary
house can go above 25 feet. So in theory, the primary house can go higher up to 35
feet. But as an ADU, if you build an attached ADU to an existing house, it can only go up
to 25 feet. Right. But it doesn't, let's say the existing
height the house is 18 feet you can go higher than that yes and this is
mandated by the state it is okay on item is that see sorry apologies maybe
that's 13 third under its item C it says review and approval authority that's
page 17 and then item 1b it says that the city shall not require the
application to include an item that was not included in the list which is great
in my opinion but the city shall determine whether the resubmittal is
complete and provide written notice of the determination no later than 15
business days after receiving the recent middle. So does that so that goes for
15 days from the initial submittal and then they get another 15 days from the
recent middle. Is that? So once an application is submitted they have we
have 15 days to provide a completeness letter to the applicant to let them know
what items are missing.
But the applicant can take longer than 15 days
to get back to us.
But our review time is limited to the first review is 15 days,
but the total review is no more than 60 days.
No more than 60 days.
OK.
And then you can't make a comment
that you didn't make before.
No new comments, right?
But if they change something when they resubmit to you,
then you can make a new comment.
Since, Jim, I mean, if they change the design
when they resubmit it to you,
then a new comment would be allowed pertaining to this.
Okay.
Okay, and then my last question, sorry.
On page 21 of the submitted document
under multifamily dwellings,
dash detached accessory dwelling units item four E.
It says if an existing multifamily dwelling
has a rear or side setback of less than four feet,
no modifications of the existing multifamily dwelling
shall be required.
But I'm trying to figure out if the minimum is four feet
for an ADU, but the existing house has less than four feet.
Are you saying that the ADU can also have less than four feet?
Is that what that's saying?
Let me know if this is correct,
but if there's an existing multifamily that,
a multifamily ADU that does not meet,
does require setback, but it's existing,
then we would not require them to make the additional setback
and we would accept what's existing.
So a new ADU can be built up to four,
as close as four feet from property lines.
I think what this provision is saying that is if there's,
if this is on multifamily property with a condition that
is the multifamily dwelling is less than four feet,
then that condition doesn't need to be corrected
as part of the.
It doesn't need to be corrected,
but it doesn't change that the ADU
still has to be four feet.
That's right.
Okay, okay, great.
Thank you.
Okay, moving on to Vice Chairman Doza.
Okay, so I see that one of the benefits
is to allow homeowners to generate rental income.
Are there any regulations or restrictions on turning these ADUs into Airbnb, for example?
ADUs are not allowed to be used for Airbnb or short-term rental.
They're required to be rented out for more than 30 days at a time.
Thanks.
Over to Commissioner Nain.
So I saw in there that there's no, like, you're not going to require a parking space for the
but do we ever take into consideration the amount of cars,
all the additional ADUs on the property we now need?
I mean, I will say my street alone has a lot of ADUs
and there's no parking.
So I'm just wondering how we account for that.
Under state law,
we cannot require additional parking for ADUs.
And if a parking space was demolished
in the creation of an ADU,
we are also not allowed to require it to be replaced.
I would add that it's a balancing act
between objectives of the state.
So I think in the state's judgment,
they made the decision to be more,
have more allowance for ADUs in exchange,
and at the same time,
can value the ADUs in this case, the importance of the ADUs
over having the importance of parking in neighborhoods.
Having places to park the vehicles for the people
residing in the ADUs.
So there's trade-offs recognizing the value of ADUs.
Yeah, and I guess, I'm hearing you say,
I understand the multi-generational.
I understand the kids.
I understand the bringing in income.
but you're saying that we're trading that off
for the fact that there's nowhere to park the vehicles
for the people living in those homes, right?
Kind of.
Right, so the laws that were adopted specifically say
that restrict the ability of cities
to mandate parking associated with ADUs.
Understood, okay.
Commissioner Tagiulo.
Thank you for the presentation.
Going back to the topic of the setbacks.
So if you have like a detached existing garage,
which will be demolished and build a new ADU on there.
So with the setback requirements,
if the garage was like on the property line,
do they still have to leave the four feet setback?
You are able to rebuild.
If the garage was less than four feet away
from the property line, you can build the ADU
to where the footprint of the garage was.
So it's on the property line so that you
can start at the property line?
It's possible, yes.
If it's an existing structure and it was converted to an ADU
and being rebuilt as an ADU, then it
can have a setback of less than four feet
if the previous structure was set back less than four feet.
OK, thank you.
Any other questions from the commissioners?
I had a few questions.
Just in terms of the difference between standard ADU
versus detached ADU, is it safe to say
that standard ADU is attached to the primary dwelling?
Is that the main difference between the two?
Not necessarily.
The standard ADU is the ADU that the state has allowed cities
to create regulations for.
So it's one of the categories of ADUs that can be created.
And how that different from the other category
is for the city, our ADUs can go up to 1200 square feet
if it meets certain provisions.
The state guarantees an 800 square foot ADU.
So for those ADUs that are created
under the state provision,
they may not need to meet the four foot setback
if it's not possible to meet the four foot setback,
for example.
Okay, so the standard ADUs are to the state standards.
To the city standards.
To the city standards, okay.
All right, and then I guess in terms of,
I'm looking at page two
of the proposed zoning code amendments,
there's a portion there that talks about
maximum square footage, 1,000 square feet,
regardless of bedroom size, 1,000 square feet,
and then it gives a threshold of not to exceed,
if over 1,000 feet, then 50% of the total floor area
from the primary dwelling, not to exceed 1,200 square feet,
does that account for a potential
where the primary dwelling has a JADU contained within?
Does that square footage of the JADU
make up the total primary dwelling on this factor?
For the J80, yes, the square footage of the J80
would be added to the square footage
of the rest of the structure,
because it's considered one structure.
But if it weren't 80, you created under another provision,
then we wouldn't be able to count the square footage
into the calculation.
Okay, so primary dwelling, if there's hypothetical,
a bonus room within a primary dwelling,
that's 500 square feet.
Does that 500 square feet draw down from the 1200?
Or is it inclusive to the 1200?
I'm sorry, can you repeat that?
So primary dwelling, and you have a bonus room
as a converted JADU, and it's recognized by the city.
The city's acknowledged it as a JADU.
the square footage of that bonus room is 500 square feet.
Does the 500 square feet draw down
against the max threshold here of 1200 square feet,
or is it isolated and separate?
For the purpose of this, it would be isolated and separate.
So for the 1200 square feet, for this section,
it's if you wanted to have an ADU
that's over a thousand square feet,
the main house has to be over at least 2,000 square feet.
So if you wanted a 1200 square feet ADU,
the main house has to be at least 2,400 square feet.
If that 2,400 square feet contains a JADU,
that number is fine to be added to be included,
but if it contains an ADU,
then that number is excluded from the calculation
because ADUs are not considered part of the main house.
Okay, perfect.
Thank you, I appreciate that.
And then, looking at page six of the zoning package,
there's a section there that goes on to talk about
unpermitted ADUs, trying to make sense of this paragraph
that's contained here, but it reads as though
The city shall not deny a building permit application
to legalize an unpermitted ADU or JADU
that was constructed before January 1st, 2020.
But then it goes on at the tail end to say,
unless the chief building official makes a finding
that correcting the violation is necessary
to comply with XYZ standards.
I'm just trying to kind of understand how this would work.
So are we saying if there's an unpermitted ADU or JADU
that was built prior to 2020
and that property owner wants to make right
by having it officially permitted,
they bring it to the city.
Can you maybe walk me through like how the city
would ultimately review that application
and what this section is detailing
or intending to get across?
I can explain what the section is saying intended to get across. I can explain what the general
process is like but it's a building permit procedure and so I'm not too familiar with
the whole process itself. But essentially the section is telling cities if there's an illegal
you must approve it unless the building official can make a finding that it's
not approvable. I think the the chief building officials decision point is
basically is this is gonna be a health and safety concern that that's where it
would pose a threat to the safety of the occupants
and the community by permitting.
That's basically what it's saying.
So it's not as though there would
be a retroactive inspection that occurs
by the city of the unpermitted J80U or ADU
to verify there's no workmanship issues,
there's no craftsmanship issues.
None of that would occur.
It's more so the chief buildings finding
facts if it's a health or safety code in terms of denying or approving my
understanding there may be a like an inspection associated with that
determination okay I ask because there's like a lot of converted garage setups
that have been moved into in-law suites in law flats and even bonus rooms
within primary dwelling so that's kind of where the concern is coming from I'm
all four trying to streamline the process but also I mean if it was kind
like a shoddy construction effort to begin with wanting to see if there's
some sort of checks and balances to make sure that it doesn't continue down that
path. And then my last question is on page eight for JADUs. It gives the
criteria one through seven. The last one is efficiency kitchen and then it gives
some broad-based definitions of what the efficiency kitchen is,
a cooking facility with appliances,
and then a food preparation counter.
I mean, what would pass the test in terms
of an efficiency kitchen?
Are we looking at the plug-in stovetop electric burners
as being a cooking facility, a mobile countertop
as a countertop for storage?
what ultimately would qualify for for fitting the bill in this category.
Historically, we've looked at the applicant plan set to make sure that there's a surface
work food can be cooked on. And there should be a surface where food can be prepared on.
So we looked at this very liberally.
The building code, I don't think, has specific requirements or definitions for an efficiency
kitchen.
So it could just be a two burner top next to a sink, and that may qualify.
Okay.
So it could be an electric stove top that you purchase from Target, a two burner electric
stovetop that you can plug in and it sits on a countertop and that would
qualify as being an efficiency kitchen. There needs to be counter space that's
equivalent you know proportional to the size of the unit but yes okay this is
interesting so you're not looking for dedicated hookups and connections either
gas or dedicated electric for you know a four burner or bigger sort of electric
stovetop that's that's not the intent here okay okay those are all my
questions perfect thank you for the presentation is there anyone from the
public who wishes to speak on this item do we have any speaker cards no speaker
recurrence. Okay moving on to discussion and deliberation. Do any commissioners
wish to discuss the item? Commissioner Rich. Thank you. Great report. Very clear.
This stuff is confusing to me. It's like a tongue twister with ADUs and JDUs and
standard ADUs and attached and detached. My understanding of what's before us
tonight is a cleanup. The state's requiring us to do this. A lot of education
tonight about what the state is requiring and what that means. Personally, I would be supporting
this even if the state didn't require it. Looking at some of these development pipeline that ADUs
have been pretty much the only game in town lately. That's where we're getting new units is from ADUs.
So I'm wondering if we can't do more. I know other jurisdictions have pre-approved standardized
plans wondering if that's something that sand lander might look into but I
support this thank you for the presentation as far as the pre-approved
ADU we have a process for it we just haven't had any applications do any
other commissioners wish to discuss the item do I hear a motion to adopt a
resolution Commissioner Solis motion that the Planning Commission adopt a
resolution recommending the City Council to amend the San Landro zoning code
sections 1.12.108 and 2.04.388 to modify the regulations pertaining to accessory
dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units. Do we have a second?
Commissioner Zuber? I'll second. It has been moved by Commissioner Solis and
seconded by Commissioner Zuber to adopt a resolution recommending the City
Council amend the San Leandro zoning code sections 1.12.108 and 2.04.388 to
modify regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units ADUs and junior
accessory dwelling units JADUs. Please cast your vote and the motion passes
unanimously six or seven seven yeses the next item on the agenda is commissioner
reports and announcements does staff have any updates under this item
thanks Trevor I do have one update under this item at the Commission's request at
the last meeting I like just to provide a brief update on the city's housing
element annual progress report for calendar year 2025 staff recently
submitted the annual progress report to State HCD.
And the purpose of the APR is to document
the city's progress in implementing its housing element.
And so for your reference, a copy of a table from the APR
was provided to the commission
before the meeting at your desk.
And it summarizes the city's permit issuance
by income category during over the first three years
of the housing element planning period.
And also, there is printout provided of the city's housing element implementation dashboard,
which is a webpage that staff has created to as a better way to communicate the city's
progress in meeting its housing element goals.
As you can see, with the information provided, the city has a goal of 3,855 units over a
to meet it's housing needs.
Three years into the eight year cycle,
the city has permitted 398 units
and that represents about 10% of the overall goal
of 3,855 units.
The topic of the public hearing tonight, ADUs,
as Commissioner Rich noted,
has been the most meaningful contributor
with 171 units permitted through calendar year 2025.
There's a separate goal in the housing element
to produce 256 units, 256 ADUs during the planning period.
And so the city has successfully produced over two thirds
of that target so far, this housing cycle.
And the commission, maybe I'll see in our webpage,
the city's doing a lot to support housing production,
including the city earning state pro-housing designation
with a score of 64 points,
more than double HCD's minimum threshold.
And other items including creating a rent registry program,
restructuring park impact fees,
and other substantive programs
to encourage housing development.
With that being said,
in recognizing the city's doing a lot to support housing,
there's clearly a lot of work to be done
to meet our production goals,
which is clearly what that table demonstrates.
The good news is that there is a significant number
of units in the housing pipeline.
I've also included the most recent addition
of the city's development activity map and table,
And that shows more than 4000 units in the pipeline in terms of units that are under review or approved or under construction which will which will hopefully help the city to meet its goals during this planning period.
That concludes my brief report. Happy to answer any questions that the commission may have or welcoming comments from the commission.
Thank you for that update.
Any questions from the commissioners for the secretary are there any announcements that members of the Commission would like to make
Okay, hearing none the time is now 745 this meeting is adjourned