Specific ADU Wishes Identified by SM Commissioners

In its second look at what will ultimately become San Marino’s ordinance on accessory dwelling units, the Planning Commission has asked for the ordinance to include several specific restrictions and requirements, if possible.
These proposed restrictions are, for the most part, reliant on what is considered a vague and contradictory state statute that is intended to limit cities’ ability to excessively restrict those housing units, commonly called ADUs.
“This is terribly written,” said Commissioner Howard Brody about the statute. “It really is. But that doesn’t mean we should have our hands in the air and do nothing. We have to put our best foot forward with this.”
Brody, with an eye on this month’s meeting, asked for City Attorney Steve Flower to work on adding provisions maintaining a minimum lot size restriction, requiring property owners to live in the main residence, protecting historic trees from ADU placement, imposing a minimum rental time of an ADU of 30 consecutive days, imposing certain accessory restrictions based on setbacks to neighboring properties and requiring the creation of a unique address for the ADU, among others.
“I would like to see some of this language and these changes in the ordinance so we can move forward,” Brody said.
The city is operating with a temporary ordinance on ADUs right now, but it has through the end of the year to either adopt a permanent ordinance or extend the temporary one. The local ordinance takes the place of the generic state statute.
The Planning Commission, because of its purpose, has been discussing what it hopes to see in an ADU ordinance with the goal of making recommendations to the City Council for the permanent ordinance. Planning and Building Director Aldo Cervantes said the Planning Commission would have to finish preparing its recommendation at its July meeting for the City Council to be able to implement its ordinance by the end of the year.
“That assumes just one hearing by the City Council,” Cervantes warned.
Flower, in addressing questions from the April meeting, countered prior claims that cities were not allowed to impose restrictions on lot sizes, among other areas.
“The statute is utterly silent on lot size restrictions,” Flower said, adding there is a consensus among municipal attorneys that the statute often contradicts itself or glosses over pertinent topics. “We’re allowed to limit them in some places in some regard, but beyond that, we really don’t know.
“I do think that a fair reading of this statute would allow for a lot size restriction,” he added.
Brody hoped to continue with the current minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet, which encompasses roughly 48% of the city’s residential properties.
Alternate Commissioner James Okazaki, however, argued in favor of a lower minimum — 11,000 square feet would be 58% of homes and 10,000 square feet would be 68% — because he believed San Marino residents were more likely to want ADUs as a way of housing older relatives (as opposed to the usual home addition).
“That’s what I see as being available on smaller lots,” Okazaki said. “I don’t see people in San Marino renting a room or ADU to make money.”
Cervantes added that other Los Angeles County cities including Pasadena, South Pasadena and Diamond Bar have enacted ordinances levying lot size restrictions and, in communicating with the state, around 35% of California cities with their own ordinances have included lot size restrictions.
Piedmont, the city with which Cervantes said he normally consults for its similarities to San Marino, has notably eschewed lot size restrictions.
“They actually just adopted the model ordinance from the state,” he said.
Public opinion from San Marino residents and officials has varied. Some worry about the added stress to public infrastructure, but others tout the benefit for landlords and local business. Concerns about adding to the San Marino Unified School District student body are countered with support for additional school fees. Many wish to preserve the single family residential community that is San Marino, but some see ADUs as an easy way to address the 17 low- to-moderate-income housing units in the city’s Master Plan Housing Element.
“I would say there is a good mix of people who are excited about this ordinance and people who are concerned by it,” said Assistant City Planner Amanda Merlo, noting that the city did not formally solicit feedback but has received a lot of voluntary correspondence.
Commissioners voted 3-1 to work Brody’s requests into the recommendation being prepared, with Okazaki voting against it. Chairman Marcos Velayos and Commissioner Se-Yao Hsu were absent.
Brody said this issue was possibly the most important item to come before the Planning Commission since he joined in 2002.
“It’s extremely important that we move forward with extreme precision,” he said.
Flower concurred.
“We’ve already put more thought into it tonight than I think Sacramento did,” he said.