Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you.

Commission for August 26, 2026. Mr. Atkinson, can we have the roll call, please?

Yes. Commissioner Chen? Yes. Commissioner Ollie Sullivan?

Present.

Commissioner Paul?

Here.

Commissioner Reese?

Here.

Commissioner Matthews? Present. Chair Kennedy? Present.

And Commissioner Singh called in, cannot make it tonight, so. Pledge of Allegiance. Commissioner Reese, could you lead us, please? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Now we'll go on to the approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda? There are none. Thank you. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? So moved. Thank you. A second?

I second.

Great. It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Okay, now we're going to go on to the approval of the minutes for June the 10th and July 22nd. Are there any changes to the minutes?

Okay.

Do I have a motion to approve the minutes? And a second?

A second.

Thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes as submitted. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? None. Passes. Thank you.

Who made the motion initially?

We didn't. Commissioner Paul did.

A small point of order, but there are two minutes. Do we need to separately approve them?

So there was a correction, right? On the 10th. On the 10th. So I think it's the updated version of those minutes that are being adopted because there was a previous error. Is that correct, Jonathan? Yeah.

Can we take both minutes in one motion or separate motions?

I believe in the same motion is fine.

Okay, great. Thank you. Okay, now, information on public comments. This is the time for the public to speak on items not on the agenda but within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission. provided that no action may be taken on off-agenda items except as authorized by law. Off-agenda items from the public will be taken into consideration without discussion by the commission and may be referred to staff. Comments will be accepted in person or via Zoom. To speak on an agenda item in person, please complete a speaker's card. Give it to the secretary before the meeting or at least prior to the time for public comments on that item. If you're joining via Zoom, please use the raise your hand feature or press nine on your phone to request to speak. You will be called on by name and you'll have three minutes to speak tonight. I now open public comment period. i have nobody online and no cards we'll close the public comment period now we'll go on to scheduled matters the next item on the agenda scheduled matters for each item there will be a presentation by city staff following the presentation there will be an opportunity for the commission and the public to provide comments. And this item tonight is G1. It's a study session at the request of the City of Fairfield to discuss planned zoning ordinance amendments for accessory dwelling units. Our presenter is Noah Ramboa.

Thank you, Chair. Good afternoon, Planning Commissioners, Chair, and members of the public. My name is Noah Ramballa, Associate Planner with the Planning Division. And the item before you tonight is a study session on the city's proposed ordinance update for accessory dwelling units, or ADUs. So over the past 10 years, the state has adopted various new laws that affect how cities and counties in California can regulate ADUs. And in October of last year, the California Department of Housing and Community Development notified the city that our ADU ordinance is currently outdated. And under state law, if our ordinance doesn't comply with state laws regarding ADUs, our ordinance would be null and void. Additionally, the city's certified housing element, which is a state mandated plan reviewed by HCD, also contains an action, action 5.1, that requires the city to update the ADU ordinance to further incentivize ADU development in Fairfield. So what is an ADU? An ADU is an accessory dwelling unit, which is a complete independent living unit that's located on a lot that already contains a primary residence. ADUs come in many shapes and sizes. They can be detached from the main residence. They can be attached to the main residence through a building addition or some other sort of new construction. They can be a conversion of existing space within the ADU, such as a garage conversion or a bedroom conversion. State law also allows for what are called junior ADUs or JADUs, which are smaller ADUs that meet certain requirements. ADUs also don't have to be located on single family properties. They can also be located on multifamily properties, like lots that have a duplex or an apartment building. And specifically, ADUs are not things that are mobile structures. So they are structures that are compliant with the California building code. So they can't be recreational vehicles or tiny homes that are located on wheels. So in order to facilitate ADU development in the city, the city is proposing to establish three different classes of ADUs that have different regulations depending on the type of state regulation that they're following. Class A ADUs are ADUs that are deemed state exempt. So these are ADUs where the development standards have been established by state law and cities are not allowed to impose additional restrictions on the ADU development. These ADUs must be required in every city and county in California. Class B ADUs are state ADUs, and these are ADUs that are also required under state law. However, the difference between this ADU class and class A ADUs is that cities are allowed to impose a limited set of objective design standards on this class of ADUs. And then lastly, Class C ADUs are proposed as bonus ADUs, and these are required for housing element compliance to fulfill Action 5.1. And this class of ADUs would have more relaxed development and design standards, but they would be required to have a deed restriction requiring the unit to be leased to moderate income households or below. So Class A ADUs, again, are types of ADUs that are required in every city and county in California. The state legislature is the one that sets the development standards, which are the ones shown in the table to the right. And these types of ADUs are only found in two different forms. They can be detached from the primary residence, or they can be a conversion from existing space within the primary residence. The table to the right shows the development standards, and if the commission has any questions, we can come back to these development standards later. But they are also included in the staff report packet. So for example, here's a random lot in Fairfield. Right now, there's just the primary residents on the lot. And so under state law, we have to allow class A ADUs on this lot. So this property owner, if they so desire, they can have one detached ADU up to 800 square feet. And they'd also be allowed to convert existing space within the residence to have another conversion ADU. And so these are the class A ADUs that would be allowed for this lot under state law. State law also allows for junior ADUs or JADUs. These are also required in every city and county in California, but these are only allowed within single family homes. For a junior ADU, it can't be bigger than 500 square feet. State law allows them to have what's called an efficiency kitchen compared to a full kitchen. So this is a kitchen that has an appliance, some food preparation space, and also some counter space. Additionally, if the JADU shares a bathroom with the primary residence, owner occupancy is required for the JADU, unlike for other ADUs where owner occupancy is not required. And also, property owners must record a deed restriction that basically highlights that there is a JADU on the property. So under state law, if we go back to our example site, they are allowed to have one JADU that can be converted within the existing space of the primary residence so they can have that JADU if they so desire. Class B ADUs are another set of ADUs that are required under state law. Like mentioned previously, the state is the one that sets the development standards, but for Class B ADUs, cities and counties are allowed to adopt objective development and design standards as long as they meet the minimums required under state law. And so those standards are shown in the table to the right. Class B ADUs can come in three different forms, unlike class A ADUs. They can be detached from the main structure, they can be attached through new addition or conversion or addition to the main house, or they can be a conversion from existing space within the residence. So Class B ADUs are allowed to have local objective design standards. So staff is proposing that these be the objective design standards for Class B ADUs. Under the city's current ADU ordinance, no minimum parking is required for ADUs, and so staff is proposing to continue that requirement to facilitate that ADU development. Additionally, Class B ADUs would be required to have entry features like a front porch or portico. If the ADU is facing a public street or a park or a paseo, they'd be required to enhance their windows in order to provide better street visual interest, such as through faux window shutters or faux window pot shelves. And then if the ADU happens to be multi-story, which is potentially possible within the maximum height limit, they would be required to incorporate building stepbacks or recesses or changes in material in order to help reduce that building mass. And an example of a building stepback is shown in the picture to the right. Staff is also proposing to limit the number of materials allowed for Class B ADUs to stucco, stone, brick, and siding. These are the four most common materials that we see in new homes built in Fairfield. And then also to limit the colors for Class B ADUs. For attached ADUs, they would have to match the primary dwelling And then for detached ADUs, they would need to be a neutral color, so black, white, gray, or brown. And then we're also exploring requiring that the detached ADU can also be of the same color family of the primary dwelling. So if the primary house is blue, the detached ADU could be a lighter shade or a darker shade of blue. That's something that we're also exploring. So under state law, we're required to allow the full combination of class A and class B ADUs on a lot. So if this property owner wanted to add a class B ADU to their property, they could, and it can be detached, attached, or a conversion. In this case, for this example, let's say they have a detached class B ADU on their lot. Because this lot faces a Laurel Creek trail, they would be required to have additional window enhancements along the front edge, the building elevation that faces Laurel Creek. And then lastly, Class C ADUs are what we call bonus ADUs, and these ADUs are proposed to fulfill Housing Element Action 5.1. And the purpose of this class is to offer greater flexibility in the types of development standards and restrictions in exchange for the property owner deed restricting the ADU for lease to moderate income households or below. And these ADUs can be detached, attached, or converted from existing space. In order to incentivize the construction of that affordable unit, staff is proposing minimum design standards. So this would be, again, no minimum parking requirement, which is what is required under the current ordinance. Additionally, because these types of ADUs have higher maximum height allowances, staff is proposing that additional setbacks and building step backs be required if the ADU exceeds 25 feet tall, which is the minimum required under state law. in order to minimize the impact to existing single-family neighborhoods. And the staff is proposing that certain materials be prohibited while still allowing greater flexibility for the types of exterior finishes for ADUs. And these prohibited materials would be more metallic types of materials. And so under state law, if somebody wanted to build a Class C ADU on their property, they could. In this case, for example law, this person can build a building addition to their existing home, and that could be their Class C ADU. our understanding of state law is that we must allow the full combination of all three classes of ADUs on a single lot. However, this is the maximum potential for a property owner to build ADUs on a lot, Every single site will be specific because each site is individual. They have different constraints, different sizes, different topography limitations. And so this is the maximum potential that somebody could build on a lot, but of course they would still need to fulfill all those development standards and that might limit the number of ADUs that can be actually realistically built on a lot. So just to summarize, for detached single family homes, the number of allowed ADUs under state law is two class A ADUs, one class B ADU, one class C ADU, and then one junior ADU. For multifamily dwellings, it is a little different depending on if the multifamily dwelling is existing or proposed. For both, they're allowed one Class B and one Class C ADU. If the multifamily dwelling is existing, they're allowed up to eight detached Class A ADUs, not to exceed the existing number of existing units on the site. And they're allowed to convert non-livable space within their multifamily dwelling into an ADU. So this can be things like on-site gym facilities for residents, residences, or leasing offices. And the number of those ADUs cannot exceed 25% of the number of existing units on the site. However, if the multifamily dwelling doesn't exist currently and it's just a proposed development, they're just allowed two detached-class ADUs. For all ADUs, there are some certain other requirements that the proposed ADU ordinance would require. First is that all ADUs must be built on permanent foundation, so they can't be on wheels. They must comply with the California building code. Additionally, these ADUs cannot be separately sold from the primary residence, so they have to be leased or rented out to someone. Under state law, the city is not allowed to require owner occupancy, except for certain types of JADUs, as we covered earlier. Additionally, the city is requiring that all ADUs be subject to a 30-day minimum rental term, so ADUs can't be used as a short-term rental like an Airbnb. And lastly, under state law, the city is limited in how we charge impact fees for ADUs, so there would be no impact fees charged for ADUs unless it's over 750 square feet of interior livable space. Under state law, we are also limited in how we review ADUs. So state ADU law prohibits public hearings for any proposed ADU. We have to process them ministerially without discretion. So we look, we go down the checklist of design standards and we check, does it meet the minimum setback requirement? Is it exceeding the maximum height requirement? And that's how we review ADUs. However, currently the ADU ordinance requires a separate planning division ADU permit for ADUs of certain sizes or types. And so in order to help incentivize ADU construction and to fulfill Action 5.1 of the housing element, staff is proposing to just remove that barrier to ADU development. However, all ADUs would still require a building permit, and that's when planning division staff would still review for compliance with our standards. And so for next steps, the 2025-26 legislative session in the state legislature is ending soon. And September 30th is the deadline for the governor to sign any new ADU bills, any changes to ADU law. And so following that date, staff will finalize the ADU ordinance where we will return to the planning commission to present it for adoption, tentatively scheduled for October 28th. And then the city council will review the ordinance and consider adopting it in November and December of this year. And so tonight, staff has a few questions for the commission to see how the commission feels about the proposed design standards. Specifically, staff wants to know whether or not the proposed objective design standards for Class B ADUs align with the commission's vision for ADU development in Fairfield, if there's additional building materials that we want to see allowed for Class B ADUs, and if there's additional architectural enhancements or treatments that should be required if they're facing the public right of way. And so that concludes staff's presentation. Happy to answer any questions or to go back to any of the slides if we want to dig in further into some of those details. Thank you. Great.

Thank you, Noah. Reminder, we're not taking any action on this item tonight, but we're asked to provide some direction. So now it's time to ask questions for staff. Do any members of the commission have questions? Commissioner Alley-Sullivan.

Thank you for the presentation. I have questions and some comments as well. I think the first thing, just to level set, I don't know about my fellow commissioners, but I am somewhat confused between the distinction of A, B, and C. How do you define A versus B versus C? I read through the entire 80-page packet. The 40-plus pages of a separate pamphlet does not reference A, B, and C. It references different types of ADUs. I am thoroughly confused between the difference of A, B, and C. So if we could start there, and then I have a few other questions. Yeah, thank you for that.

What makes something an A versus a B versus a C? Yeah, thank you for that question. So we are proposing to establish a class, class A, B, and C in order to make it simpler for residents rather than members of the public having to dig through state law and figure out does their unit fall under Government Code section six six three two three or six six three one four that can get confusing So what we're proposing is the ordinance will establish three different tables and depending on the type of ad use someone wants to build they would decide do they want to follow the standards for class a Class B or Class C and this table here out gives a summary of what those standards would look like and so depending on what The person as a homeowner wants to do, they would choose, okay, do I want an ADU that meets 800 square feet and has very minimal requirements, or do I want a bigger ADU, but then I'm subject to design requirements, or do I want a bigger ADU, even bigger ADU, but I want to do, like, affordable housing. The property owner or the applicant individually gets to decide which class they want to choose, which development standards they want to follow.

Okay, so anything... up to 800 square feet can be class a that's correct but it could also be class b or class c if i so chose that's correct okay which there's no incentive for me to choose that because why would i choose that having requirements placed on me versus no requirements okay anything over 800 square feet can either be b or c that's correct so what is my incentive to come to you with Class B versus Class C, because Class C seems to have very limited requirements and Class B seems to have more standards around it.

So if you're a prospective individual who wants to build an ADU, you can do Class B if that works for you. However, you will be subject to those objective design standards, which will require additional enhancements and treatments to the ADU. But if you don't want to do those standards, you can instead propose, OK, I will record a deed restriction, and this ADU will only be leased to households that make moderate income or below.

So that's the distinction between C and B. That's correct. Yes. The trade-off is design standards versus a deed restriction. That's correct. Okay. I appreciate the clarification. It wasn't initially clear to me. Okay. Now my particular questions for you. I appreciate the presentation that you shared. I have asked staff in the past if these presentations can be shared with commissioners beforehand for us to review because it's very informative for me to see. My first question was on page 12, trying to understand how many units can you put on a single lot? Your visual was very clear. You can put up to five units on a lot. More commentary here. I'm all for ADUs. I think it's great. I don't know if the intention was to be able to go from single family houses to having lots with five units on them. I find that personally a little challenging to swallow, but it's wanted to clarify your interpretation of state law is that you can have up to five units on a single lot. Is that correct?

So I do have one comment. So legal is reviewing the ordinance, and there is a question around whether class B and class C would both be allowed. It would be versus in lieu, like C as opposed to B. Yeah. So we're currently reviewing that. And from our perspective, we're not settled on that yet. So we're currently reviewing that. It's great.

Okay, it seems excessive, and I think it may seem scary to people to see that my neighbor could put five additional units on their lot, and there's absolutely no recourse for anyone to question or to have a say in that process. Okay. I don't know if we have time for questions. Let's see. The last two very short questions. Have you considered, again, that hypothesis of putting five or that example of putting five units on a lot, what the impacts to and requirements around garbage? Clearly we're not considering parking. The utility load, sewer, water impacts, what that would look like for the rest of the neighborhood, for the city as well? Has that been contemplated in the standards or in the approval process? IF NOT, MAYBE IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

FOR SURE. AS FAR AS THE SOLID WASTE PICKUP, DEFINITELY SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. AS FAR AS SEWER CONNECTION, ADU APPLICATIONS ARE REVIEWED BY NOT JUST THE PLANNING DIVISION, BUT ALSO BUILDING SAFETY AND PUBLIC WORK. SO THEY DO LOOK AT THE IMPACT ON UTILITIES AS WELL. AS WELL AS THE CONNECTIONS.

OKAY. And then my last two, getting granular here, in class C, I'm curious why you are removing steel. The reason I ask, I know there's some housing developments that use, for example, court and steel on exteriors. It's actually relatively visually appealing. Presumably that wouldn't be allowed under this. And then in class B, why are we getting very specific about what colors can or can't be used? It seems a little bit excessive to me. So those are my initial thoughts.

definitely appreciate the feedback. Those were proposed to try to create some level of harmony between the existing neighborhood. But what I will say is part of the study session is getting feedback from the commissioner. So if the commission would like for us to consider additional materials or even like scale back on the level of objective design standards, we're definitely taking that feedback as we work towards coming back to you with an ordinance for a formal recommendation. Thank you, Chair.

Great, thank you. Commissioner Chen, do you have any questions?

I'm definitely still processing. I think some of the questions that came up for me, but maybe it's not for this session, but like just for feedback, just really thinking about assessment costs for the properties and then how would that be ongoing or like what department would oversee that as like all of these changes or like ADUs start coming up. And FOR THE DEED RESTRICTED ON AFFORDABLE OR KEEPING THE ADUS AFFORDABLE UNDER CLASS C, IS THAT ONLY UNDER THAT OWNER AND THEN DOES THAT CHANGE OR HOW LONG IS THAT DEED RESTRICTION? typically deed restrictions they like for affordability they typically have like a set amount of time usually you see like like 50 years 45 years and they a deed restriction would convey from one owner to the other okay great because i think i was thinking about it is it like a land trust or is it going to be a little bit different so i think that would be important to know or under or have people understand as they decide what class of adu they would want to invest in

Thank you. Commissioner Paul.

Yes, it's a nice presentation, but I do have a couple questions. And like you said, next legislative session on 25-26 is ending on end of next month. If there be any changes, then we're going to have another session. If there are no changes, so it's going to be first and final session for the study session.

So we will return on October 28th tentatively to present any final changes to the ADE ordinance. The commission, of course, is the recommending body for this ordinance amendment. So if you have recommendations that you would like changed between now and then, you're welcome to share that feedback today or at the October 28th meeting. And we will try to incorporate those changes when the ordinance is presented to council in November, December.

Okay, I got it. And then my second question is, I think I heard you saying that garage conversion is part of the ADU, right?

Did you say that. Yes, so an ad that's created through a conversion can include a garage conversion.

So if we do do the grad grad conversion so don't we have the parking problem for the already. People living in the memory does this and then we have additional any you feel their family members going to be then live if say I have a garage and 2 car garage. I can work it to 80 you I don't have PARKING FOR MYSELF SO I CAN PROVIDE MORE PARKING FOR MY PARKING FOR MY TENANTS IF I HAVE AN ADU IN THE TENANTS IF I HAVE AN ADU IN THE BACKYARD.

BACKYARD. UNDER STATE LAW, FOR ANY UNDER STATE LAW, FOR ANY GARAGE CONVERSIONS THAT CREATE GARAGE CONVERSIONS THAT CREATE AN ADU, THE CITY CAN'T REQUIRE AN ADU, THE CITY CAN'T REQUIRE REPLACEMENT PARKING FOR THE REPLACEMENT PARKING FOR THE GARAGE.

GARAGE. IT USED TO, YOU WOULD HAVE TO IT USED TO, YOU WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE ONE EXTRA SPOT IN YOUR PROVIDE ONE EXTRA SPOT IN YOUR FRONT AREA, BUT THE STATE LAW FRONT AREA, BUT THE STATE LAW CHANGED THAT. CHANG things we've seen lately where the parking, you can't require extra parking if it's within so many feet of a bus stop. Remember those type of things?

Basically, it's going to be street parking for everybody.

Yeah. The example they showed in the back of a cul-de-sac, and that's where I live, yeah, there's going to be a shortage of parking. But The governor and the state legislature said it can't be a barrier. I don't know if I'm stepping on your toes, but not at all.

Okay, then one more question. And I was going through the material. And they say ADU can't be made Airbnb, right? So the minimum rental is for 30 days. So it can be converted into Airbnb. That's correct. So I just want to know what's the logic behind that? Why can't it be made A, B, and B? When you are renting for a day or 30 days, why there is a limit? It has to be minimum 30 days rental.

As far as the 30 days goes, that would account for someone that may be on a month to month lease arrangement. BUT THE CITY'S POSITION AS IT COMES TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS IS COMES TO SHORT-TERM RENTALS IS ANYTHING LESS THAN 30 DAYS. ANYTHING LESS THAN 30 DAYS. SO THAT'S ALSO WHAT THE STATE IS SO THAT'S ALSO WHAT THE STATE IS ACKNOWLEDGING WITH THE ADU ACKNOWLEDGING WITH THE ADU ORDINANCE CHANGES.

ORDINANCE CHANGES. YOU CAN'T RENT YOUR PROPERTY YOU CAN'T RENT YOUR PROPERTY LESS THAN A MONTH, IF I'M RIGHT. LESS THAN A MONTH, IF I'M RIGHT.

THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S CORRECT. ESSENTIALLY YOU FALL UNDER A ESSENTIALLY YOU FALL UNDER A DIFFERENT LAND USE CLASSIFICATION IF DIFFERENT LAND USE CLASSIFICATION IF YOU YOU FALL UNDER HOTEL MOTEL OR HOTEL MOTEL EXTENDED DAY YOU FALL UNDER HOTEL MOTEL OR HOTEL MOTEL EXTENDED DAY POTENTIALLY. POTENTIALLY. BUT THAT'S HOW THE CITY VIEWS BUT THAT'S HOW THE CITY VIEWS SHORT-TERM VERSUS LONG-TERM SHORT-TERM VERSUS LONG-TERM RENTALS. RENTALS. OKAY. OKAY.

I GOT IT. I GOT IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER REESE. COMMISSIONER REESE.

THANK YOU FOR THE THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. PRESENTATION. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AND I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. COMMENTS. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A JADU AND

Yeah, so a Class A conversion and a junior ADU are very similar. The key characteristics of what makes an ADU a junior ADU is that it's under 500 square feet. They only need to have the efficiency kitchen. They can choose to do a full kitchen if the applicant so desires, but the minimum requirement is an efficiency kitchen. And then if it does share a bathroom with the primary residence They would need to have interior entry to the primary residence and owner occupancy would be required so the property owner would be required to live either in the JDU or the primary residence and Then for the JDU the property owner is required to record a deed restriction on the property affirming that there is a JD on the site that it can't be sold separately from the main house and and a number of other requirements as well. So if an applicant is identifying their proposed ADU as a junior ADU, they would have to comply with those requirements.

Okay, thank you and For so for the class a conversion they have to put a full kitchen they can't do an efficiency kitchen.

That's correct.

Okay There's a lot of words in here if you in the draft that we received like there's a lot of permissive words Like if you turn to page I think it's one, two, three, page three. There's words used. It says, like, maximum building height may be increased to 18 feet. I just think for, like, number two and number three, to comply with the law, I think you should consider changing the words. Maybe shall be allowed. because may is permissive and that's giving like someone you know someone reads this later they can say that they don't have to they don't have to do it it's permissive and that's a that's throughout this document a comment related to the affordable housing I'm curious to know what else will this say, because the way that it's written, it limits the occupants to individuals who are 120% of the area median income, but that doesn't stop the owner from renting at market value. So I'm just curious, what else is going to go into that de-restriction to really make it affordable? Another comment that I have is, I don't know if it's because it's the Class C, the bonus, but I feel like even the letter, the attachment 3 said we can't put DEET restrictions on ADUs. So can someone clarify that for me? Like there is a letter attached from Yeah, from the state housing agency saying that pursuant to government code section 66315, it prohibits DEET restrictions on ADUs. So is it because that's a bonus one we get to do it or?

So again, like we're looking into this, but I believe it can't be required. But if the applicant agreed to it in exchange, you know, in lieu of you know, taking a deed restriction, but also having a larger ADU. So basically, I believe it comes down to it's not required, but if they agree to it. We're also like in our legal review are going to clarify that, but I was talking to my colleague about that actually. So I believe that that's the distinction, that it can't be required of the ADU, yeah.

Another thing that I noticed, and I'm pretty sure the law was just, they probably made a mistake, but they say that the ADUs cannot be rented, they have to be rented for more than 30 days. So that means we have to change the dates to 31, I feel, if you read it per the law. I'm sure they might have intended to mean that, but the way that it's written, it says it has to be, they have to be rented for more than 30 days. I just wanted to, that's what the law says, the statute.

We will make sure that's clarified in the ordinance. It comes back to the commission.

For class B ADUs, there is materials for light fixtures. I think that is not necessary, but that's just my opinion. And then there's words that you use like, I think there's words where it says, I'm trying to think which one it is. Maybe it's class B has to, the roofing material match the roofing material of the primary dwelling. No, not that one. Gosh, it was another one. It said something like match the pitch or, sorry, I'm trying to find it. no i think it's just the wording so i'll i'll read through it and come back you know get back to it but i just think some of the wording is unclear and i think later it will make the standards not objective standards the way that it's written so those are my comments so far thank you commissioner matthews

First of all, Noah, I believe this is your first presentation to us, and so welcome and very professional job. Thank you. I just want to echo some of the comments that have already been made. I would not be supportive of someone being able to do five units in a single family residential home area. And I want to be clear, is that a state mandate? to have that number of units?

So under California government code and per the HCD ADU handbook, it does state that we are required to permit the full combination of ADUs on a single lot. Of course, as we're CONTINUING TO FINALIZE THE ORDINANCE, OUR LEGAL TEAM IS REVIEWING TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE IS COMPLIANT WITH STATE LAW OR IS FULFILLING THOSE REQUIREMENTS IN STATE LAW. BUT OUR CURRENT UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE HAVE TO REQUIRE THE FULL COMBINATION AND THAT'S ALSO BASED ON REVIEWING THE LETTERS THAT HCDS SENT TO OTHER CITIES AND REVIEWING THEIR ORDINANCES.

I SEE. TO THE EXTENT THAT WE DO HAVE ANY FLEXIBILITY, MY PERSONAL FEEDBACK WOULD BE TO LIMIT IT. I assume that the state mandate is covering the parking issue, and that's been brought up a couple of times, but can you just re-clarify that per state law, we cannot restrict the number of parking spaces?

So state law provides limitations on how much parking and when cities can require parking for ADUs. Generally, a city can require one parking space for an ADU, but it does make various numbers of exceptions, such as if it's within half a mile of any bus stop or if it's a garage conversion. So those things do limit when cities can require parking for ADUs.

Okay, so my feedback would be that the city, to the extent possible under state law, we include parking restrictions as appropriate except for the exceptions that you just mentioned. And in my view, that would be a way to restrict the number of units that could be put in. And I would just also like to give my feedback that I echo within, I get that you want to have some objective standards and some control over exterior elements, but I would lean towards the greatest flexibility on those materials rather than a very restrictive approach. A REQUIREMENT THERE. SO THAT COMPLETES MY FEEDBACK.

I THOUGHT THAT.

OKAY. SHE HAD HER HAND UP FIRST.

COMMISSIONER RICE, THEN I'LL GO TO COMMISSIONER ALLIE SULLIVAN.

SO I HAVE A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS. ON PAGE IT'S ON THE PAGE THAT DISCUSSES THE ENCROACHMENT For Classy ADUs, can you explain that to me? It's in the notes. For Classy ADUs, an ADU may partially or fully encroach into the required front or street side setback if an 800 square feet ADU cannot be built in compliance with all other development standards. I'm just trying to envision what that means.

Yeah, thank you. Do you want to go ahead? Just a quick clarifying question. Could you identify the page number by chance?

You know, they don't have page numbers on the form. Let me put it. It's like the second to last, actually. The second to last page.

Noah just confirmed it was page 25.

OK. Yeah, thank you for the question. So for both Class B and Class C ADUs, per the guidance in the HCD handbook, if an ADU cannot be built to up to 800 square feet within the existing development standards that are being applied by the city, then the city has to allow the ADU to encroach into the front or street side setback is what we call it. So like if it's a corner lot into that street side setback. Currently, ADU law only defines the required side and rear setback as four feet. For Class B and C ADUs, it leaves it up to the cities as to what those setbacks can be, but it does state if you cannot build an 800 square foot ADU within those development standards, then we have to allow lower setbacks so that way they can build at least an 800 square foot ADU.

And... ONE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE IS, I'M SO SORRY, I KEEP FLIPPING THROUGH PAGES AND I LOST IT AGAIN. SORRY, GUYS. I'LL QUIT FOR NOW.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER ELLIE SULLIVAN.

YEAH, THANK YOU, CHAIR. 15 of your packet. It states that for separate sale or conveyance that the cities may choose, and your proposal here is to not allow for the sale or conveyance of a unit. Can you explain why? The reason I ask, I've seen that there are some cities that are allowing this, and that could be a means to homeownership and some economic benefits for owners and potentially for the city. So I'm curious if you can talk about the rationale behind Now we're at our next meeting, just to sort of understand that one a little bit.

I'm not aware of a strong rationale for prohibiting the cell. Typically, if you were to sell an ADU, you essentially would have to do almost like a condominium map, where you have shared land between the the parcel and the home and the ADU. And then the ADU essentially is sitting on its own parcel. So we, that was kind of just a general basis, but if the commission, I WOULD LIKE FOR THE ORDINANTS TO ALLOW FOR THE SEPARATE CELL AND CONVENIENCE. WE WILL DEFINITELY TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AS WE DRAFT THE FORMAL ORDINANTS FOR RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK MY THOUGHT, SENATOR, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT. I DO KNOW THERE IS AT LEAST ONE CITY IN THE BAY AREA THAT has started allowing that sale. So there is a mechanism to allow it to happen. I don't know what my guidance would be, but I was curious if there was a reason why you said not allowed. And if you're saying that it is sort of, well, by default you chose not allowed, then it might be something to look into the ease that an owner may be able to sell. And if it is something that there is a clear path to, perhaps we should contemplate it as part of this proposal.

I have a question on that, though. So say we have an ADU, we're going to sell the ADU for the rest of the property. You're sharing the same sewer and water connections. So by selling, who's going to control the sewer and water connection? And trust me, there's a problem. And, oh, this is on your side from the city meter. Now you're responsible for this $6,000 fee. Who's going to pay for it? It's not a good neighbor fence type situation. I think that's probably why some of this is because The utilities that are coming in, you're not paying, and that's what the whole ADU process is about, is being able to share those so you don't have those extra hookup fees and all that, right?

Well, some utilities can be separated, some can't, and it depends on the lots.

And how much you want to spend, because it's like about $45,000. Agreed.

You raise very good questions. I don't have an answer for it, but I think they're, There have been cases where ADUs have been sold, so there is some mechanism for it. And I'm saying that it's something that perhaps staff can look into and contemplate. And then the last thing I'll mention, that picture, again, just go back to the picture of like six additional, five additional units. Again, I'm very supportive of ADUs. I think it solves a very needed problem. I really question whether that was the intention of these laws to allow single family housing developments to go to six or five additional units on a single lot. I'm curious to find out what your research yields, if that is indeed the case. If it is the case, again, I think it's a situation of unintended consequences because I really don't think that was the, I hope that was not the legislative intent with these laws. I think it's meant to address housing shortages, but to go from single family homes to being allowed to put that many units with basically no restrictions is somewhat alarming to me. So thank you.

I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I COULD DEFINITELY TELL YOU THAT THE STATE IS PUSHING VERY HARD ON ADDITIONAL HOUSING BEING BUILT. AT SOME POINT IN TIME CITIES USED TO REQUIRE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR ADOs AND WE'VE SWUNG IN A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT DIRECTION. BUT THESE QUESTIONS WILL BE FIRMED UP WHEN WE COME BACK.

So a few months ago in San Diego, you could probably Google it, there was a huge uproar in the neighborhood because a guy was put in ADU with four units in the back, and the neighborhood was just in an uproar over it. And because of the state law, he was 100% within. And that's why the B and C has come into effect here. But yeah, so it is out there. And the city's like, the state law says you can do this. And the neighbors are like, just in an uproar. Because no parking, none of those things. So anyway, any other questions before I ask my questions? All right, I got a bunch. Building impact fees. So there's no building impact fees for an A. What are the building impact fees and what is the additional cost in those fees? Because if there's no set number and you just arbitrarily come up with it or it's so Is it being done intentionally to prohibit somebody from doing a B, which I think is against what the state law is intended? Sorry, if you could ask the last part of that question again. So sorry. The building impact fees. Yes. Difference between the A and the B. A doesn't have any, B does. What are those fees as in dollar amount, and what are those building impact fees for, for only an extra 200 square feet?

WE DO HAVE A HANDOUT FROM OUR BUILDING SAFETY DIVISION THAT DOES DO HAVE A HANDOUT FROM OUR BUILDING SAFETY DIVISION THAT DOES SHOW A BREAKDOWN OF THE BUILDING SHOW A BREAKDOWN OF THE BUILDING IMPACT FEES. IMPACT FEES. I THINK WHAT WOULD BE MORE I THINK WHAT WOULD BE MORE FRUITFUL FOR IF YOU WANT A FRUITFUL FOR IF YOU WANT A COST BREAKDOWN IS WE COULD COME COST BREAKDOWN IS WE COULD COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION WHEN WE DO BACK TO THE COMMISSION WHEN WE DO THE FORMAL ORDINANCE. THE FORMAL ORDINANCE. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. WE CAN GIVE YOU SOME REAL WE CAN GIVE YOU SOME REAL EXAMPLES. EXAMPLES. WE

If I remember the last one, you could build a – depending on the size of your house, you could build a 1,200-square-foot ADU in the backyard if it had two bedrooms. So now we're splitting this up into an 800 and go up to 1,000. So we're going down 200 feet. on these A and B. My concern is to make sure that we're following the spirit of the law, which is, yeah, you can add another bedroom, but are the fees going to be so great that, no, we're not going to do that. And we're just not going to do an ADU because It's no fees for 750 to 800 square feet, but you want to do 1,000, yeah, we're going to charge you $20,000. And that's an issue that I have a problem with because we don't have any guidance yet on that. So if we can get that question answered, that'd be great. Building permits. Since 2025, how many building permits have we issued for ADUs in the city? Approximately.

Yeah. So staff has collected the number of permits that we've had applied for since 2023 and also the number of ADUs that have been finaled since that time. Of course, it does take time to build an ADU. So the numbers for final ADUs does drag a little bit. But this year alone, we've seen 13 applications for ADUs and so far five ADUs have been finaled.

So we're not doing and I'm just I don't I'm not pointing fingers, but We go 32 to 18 from what was an application to what people finally decided. And then 29 to eight, 13 to five, 13, and now we're only halfway through the year, so.

Just to clarify, ADU that's finaled means an ADU that has finished construction and is ready for occupancy.

Okay, but so in 2024, Okay, say one of those 29 moved into 2025, so that would have been one of the 18, correct? Potentially, yes. Okay. So we're still like at a 50% success rate after somebody applies and for some reason they pull back through financing, building impact fees or whatever. So I just want to... clarify that because I mean the spirit of the law is we're trying to solve this millions of homes that California is behind building the governor's pushed this to the extremes to get additional housing built for people and for in-law units and stuff like that so thank you for that you answered how many locations so the goal for the A, B, and C, is the city has planning, come up with goals, you know, what percentage do we expect for A's and B's and C's? Because I would imagine B's and C's will be the lowest and A's will be the highest just because of the fee structure, but.

We don't have like a, as far as like goals of like, we want X number of like, you know, B's and C's. It's not like arena numbers. I mean, they count, but. They count for arena, but we don't have any internal. I mean, I will say that for, I mean, the city, is definitely we have a pro-housing designation as as the commission may know so we we definitely want to see adus built we have rena numbers that do talk about affordability so yeah we would definitely like to see some class c's built that do have you know affordable deed restricted units okay I don't have a quantitative number, but I would say the city wants to see higher numbers than this. Absolutely. Okay.

Yeah. And do we have any... renderings or architectural renderings or photos of some of these uh adus that have been built that we can kind of see some of it because uh two of the commissioners and myself want to see the exterior choices um enlarged to the point that we're not And especially if we've got architectural metal siding out there in single-family houses in the city now, why are we saying, okay, your house has a metal siding, but, oh, no, you're 80, you can't. But even though it does say it can match the existing, I got that. But just as an example that if it's allowed and it can get somebody – a more reasonable price and it's an architectural siding as opposed to galvanized roof siding right so

definitely fair comment and right now I will say that yeah if somebody wanted to have you know corrugated metal on like a custom single-family home we we would allow that like the right there's nothing that in our code that would stop that from happening um what I will say is if the it sounds to me from hearing comments from the the commission that there is a desire to to pull back on some of the restrictions around the design is that a fair I think assessment that's pretty fair by everybody yes Is there any material that the commission would not want to see that we should keep in mind, or is it more just pull back completely? for class B?

I would say pull back a little bit more and just add, you know, like the architectural corrugated type siding. I don't know that there's, I mean, there's just not a lot of housing. It's Fairfield. I mean, I call it Oatmeal Village sometimes because there's just so much stucco with a little bit of brick on them. But we just want to make sure that, and I'm just speaking for myself right now, but we want to make sure that city guidelines are not the roadblock to people building an adu the goal of this if we're wanting to meet the goals of the state and everybody we we want to be welcoming um you know not uh restrictive to to uh to people to say oh fairfield's so impossible to deal with um so i i just think the more welcoming we are with the with the design choices that um we're all better off so I understand some of the paint colors because you don't want a bright blue house if you've got an ADU and you've got a gray or a white house. We've all seen those in neighborhoods. But that was my main thing. Do we have, now, because we don't have any ABs or Cs, these are all, do we have anything, any structures in place now that are going through the process that would, in future, would be considered a B or a C? Or is this even new, a B and C? I mean...

I understand the question. I would say that this is fairly new. This started with, you know, we were notified by the state that, hey, we noticed your ADU ordinance is not kept up with the frequency of state law changes. So this, more or less, this approach would be new to Fairfield.

Got it. And was the 1,000 square foot for a two-bedroom arbitrary to go down from, I think at one time it was 1,200 square feet. Was that just arbitrary, or was that based on the state as well?

so 1200 is the requirement if the city doesn't have an adu ordinance but if we do have one we are allowed to limit it to one thousand so at this time staff is proposing one thousand in order to reflect that state law requirement if somebody wants to go over one thousand they're welcome to apply for a class c unit under the current draft standards but of course staff is open to feedback on that as well yeah i'd rather see it stay where it's at which is 1200 up for a two bedroom just

If somebody wants to do that and they've got the money to do that for something like that, that's my thought. We know the state one's more quicker. Some of the things I don't get on the windows because most of the state law, if you've got a bedroom, you have to have a window anyway because you have to have a secondary access egress in case of a fire, right? So I think a lot of that will be somewhat... just off the building codes that the state has, but that's all I have. Any other questions, since I've made so many? Okay, Commissioner Paul.

Yeah, I may have missed or maybe overlooked, say, I have 4,000 square feet, my primary residence, and my backyard is like 800 square feet. So what percentage of my backyard can I build the ADU? Can I build the whole thing, or is there any setback limits for the front yard or the backyard?

So at this time, there are no proposed rear yard lot coverages. The only thing that you would have to comply with are setback requirements. So that's the forefoot side and rear setbacks, and that applies for all three classes of ADUs.

So along the fence, I can leave 4 feet and then I can build the rest, say, 700 feet, 750 feet, I can build the ADU, right?

That's correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Commissioner Matthews? There's no percentage. We just go by the 4 feet all around the back fence, right?

Yes, there's no proposed rear yard coverage requirements.

Commissioner Chen?

Just a question. I attended the Solano County Board of Supervisors meeting this week and they also had a very similar presentation on ADUs. And so my question is, are cities talking to each other? Are we talking to the county about what's happening in the unincorporated parts of the county to kind of match up and keep policies aligned? Or is this just solely being developed within the city of Fairfield?

So the state affords each jurisdiction the ability to craft an ADU ordinance. I could say at the county level, the cities do convene pretty regularly. And the topic of ADUs has been frequently discussed amongst the seven cities of Solano County, including the county as well. but the the state does allow the you know our ordinances to to vary to to a degree so um you know what we adopt may be different than what you know the city of dixon for example may have um and their ordinance and then to add on to the um planning division or

planning division manager's comments, staff has looked at other ADU ordinances as well that have been blessed by HCD, including our neighboring cities in Vacaville. We've reached out to Solano County staff as well to see their draft ADU ordinance. And a lot of those other cities and their best practices did influence the structure of our current ADU ordinance, or our proposed ADU ordinance.

Great thank you and then the other question that came to mind for me and again this this is my second meeting so I'm learning a lot as I go but I'm thinking a lot about newer developments and how they have the already in-law units that are being constructed are those considered adus as well or is it only after like there is a property single or multi-family property there and then like something new is going to be added or converted Or do developers have to also apply for permits or in a certain way if that's going to be used, you know, going to be rented out or anything like that?

Yeah, so to your question or to your point, there are some instances where new development does include a second unit, or sorry, an accessory dwelling unit. So yeah, we would, if we were to get a proposal like that, there actually is a neighborhood in the Green Valley area. It slips my mind which neighborhood, but they have- It's behind, it's right next to Nelda Mundy School.

So I think they're even built by Pulte Homes. So they have a garage, and then above they have the second unit, sorry.

thank you thank you for that additional information so we we would consider that an existing ADO like the the unit in addition to to the single-family home there are some neighborhoods that are being built or recently built outside of Fairfield that have included yeah you know ADUs as well I think it just depends on the developer and you know their their desire for their their product

Yeah, and I'm just thinking about how if this is a law by the state that's really looking to increase housing units, I'm a little bit unclear of how we're going to track that. Like how many new units there are, how many developments there are, if people are kind of doing it in silos or if, you know, like my family lives in a neighborhood with the ADUs there and the new development. Some of them are being rented, some not. But then it's like how do you track all of that development? for data purposes. I'm just putting it out there as I'm thinking about it.

To answer the tracking question, we do, yes, we definitely track the number of units that are being built. I believe each year we report to the state of California the number of new units that have been built as well as permitted.

To be rented?

Oh, as far as rentals go?

Yeah.

We do have data on owner occupied. I don't have hard numbers in front of me, but there is a way to track that. But it's a little more tedious, of course.

I will add that when the home builder does apply for building permits to build their new homes, if it does include an ADU, the permit will reflect that it has an ADU included with the unit or with the dwelling. So we do see from that permit data that that house actually does contain an ADU and that's how we also track for when we report to HCD.

Any other questions?

I have a question. What about for properties, and I assume there's not that many in the city, that have mobile homes on permanent foundations and a single-family dwelling. Would those be counted as an ADU?

If it's on a permanent foundation, then we wouldn't view it as a mobile home or an RV.

What I'm asking is, would that manufactured home be considered as one of the ADU options?

Yes, and we actually, quite a few ADUs that we've seen in recent years have been manufactured ADUs. They just arrive on a truck and get craned into the property. Of course, they're still subject to building permit review. But yeah, those are also ADUs that are built as well, yes.

Right, but I'm just saying before the term ADUs became a thing, you know, before we started using it, for people who already have a manufactured home and a single family dwelling, because their home is not in the county records as an ADU. It's as a manufactured home on a permanent foundation. So can they still get all these, can they add five extra ADUs?

Oh, I see what you're asking. You're asking like if an existing situation. We would look at the units that are on the property. Now, one thing that we didn't go into great detail on is there is a whole set of regulations for multifamily properties. So we would evaluate whether it is a multifamily property as defined by the state, or if it truly meets the definition of single family, we would evaluate the existing unit that's on the property to see if it it counts as an ado because we yeah we don't think we could allow a situation where it's If you have two units, one of which is technically considered an ADU, even though it's existing, I don't know if we can just allow in addition to that what the state would allow.

Without it being a class C. OK. And then on the last page, the restrictions for the JADUs, I'm not sure why you guys put if owner occupancy is required, the property owners shall reside in the JADU or the primary residence. Is that in the statute? Or why is that added on there?

So for junior ADUs, if the junior ADU shares a bathroom with the primary residence, then owner occupancy is required. So as part of that deed restriction requirement, that owner occupancy requirement would be reflected in the deed restriction. But that's only if that owner occupancy requirement is triggered.

Okay. Then I think that we should clarify that as well. Thank you.

All right. Thank you. So Commissioner Matthews?

THIS IS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES. WHAT ABOUT A SITUATION WHERE THEIR CONDOMINIUM UNITS ON SIDE-BY-SIDE IN A SIDE-BY-SIDE COMMUNITY? WILL THIS STILL APPLY TO THOSE COMMUNITIES?

DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THE MULTI-FAMILY REQUIREMENTS?

So for example, the community that I live in is about 35 condominium units that are like duplex, triplex, but each individual owns their units in a condominium setting. will this criteria that we've just been discussing be applicable for someone that wants to convert a garage, let's say?

I think that's something we'd have to do a bit more research into, just because depending on the context of what that development looks like and how the condos are allocated, the way that HCD might see the lots can vary. In our correspondence with HCD, they've defined a lot with multiple single family dwellings, even if it's just one property as a single family, even though under our zoning ordinance, that would be considered multifamily. So it can get very case specific. And yeah, depending on how HDD classifies the property, it would either be subject to single family or multifamily ADU standards.

Well, I don't think these would be ever defined as multifamily.

So I actually heard of instances where an HOA, and it's a big lawsuit, a guy's got the approval to do an ADU because the state law supersedes HOA rules. And the HOA then sued to have them stop because the HOA rules say no. But then they said no because state law, because it's a residence, that the state allowed him to do it, convert to a garage, even though the HOA said they couldn't. So there is case law on that, but that's up to Chris to find out.

That was going to be my next question. If it is permitted, then that trumps any HOA requirements. I'm actually asking and seeking clarification. So when you come back, I would just ask that you look at that. I don't know how many communities fit into that classification, but I live in one that does.

Great question. I would say that for a DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS CONDOS, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE ATTACHED UNITS, WE WOULD CONSIDER THAT MULTI-FAMILY. BUT YOU DO RAISE A GREAT QUESTION, THOUGH, WITH ESSENTIALLY A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT'S CONDOED. SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WILL DEFINITELY FACTOR INTO AN ORDINANCE COMING BACK TO YOU.

CLASS D. COMMISSIONER ELLIE SULLIVAN. Yeah, Jonathan, it's the city of San Jose is the city that allows for the sale of ADUs. I was just looking it up. And to clarify, yes, you would need to reclassify as a condominium your property. But I would ask staff to look into that. That could be an opportunity. Assuming there aren't any sort of negative externalities of that, it could be an opportunity to generate property tax and real estate tax from the sale for the city. So I would not instinctively want us to say no to it unless there was a compelling reason to disallow it for the city. If we're doing everything else and if you can put seven units on your property or five units on your property, why would we say you can't sell them? Right.

Thank you.

Okay.

And we'll now open the public hearing, the public comment period. I don't have anybody on line. We did receive some questions from a resident, but that resident is here. Carl, would you like to, do you have any questions?

Is it a speaker card?

Yeah. Carl DeMoss. Yeah. He's got a car. You're opening the public hearing. I just did, yeah. Thank you, sir. Welcome.

Hi.

IS THAT ON? THANKS. I'M A RESIDENT AND I JUST HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS, A LOT OF WHICH HAD BEEN ANSWERED AND DISCUSSED. ACTUALLY, ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT WAS, AND SINCE A LOT OF THE STAFF REPORT FOCUSED ON CATEGORY B, And the questions that are being asked of the commission are under category B. My question is kind of focused around that, which was does the planning commission or staff actually have a vision for what they'd like to see out of category B I mean is there already an existing vision for that because the questions are being being asked and going around I was warning I look through the housing element I look through other things I couldn't find anything with a vision for a to use in general For the city so that's one of the things I was wondering because it the regulations are one thing But if you don't have a vision for it, then what good are the regulations? It's just a way to prohibit something from being done instead of encouraging something to be done. So I'm just trying to get an understanding of that particularly category B because if you want to see more units developed you have to have some consideration for the cost impact to build it as well and so the more restrictions you put on it the less likely you are to get some of those built. Thanks for putting up the stat of how many units have been pulled. Permits have been pulled. But I would encourage you to take it one step further. I'd encourage you to look at those that were pulled that are not finished and see if any of those fit in the B or C category. And perhaps that when those permits were pulled, The restrictions were so strict since they weren't updated that there may be some of those that you can encourage to be finished under the new guidelines that the state has come out with. I built an ADU in 2001. It was part of new construction for residents that I did. And back then you had to have a use permit to have an ADU. I'm very thankful that the state came in and recognized that there's an opportunity there for housing because it makes it so much easier now. But that sort of ties it into the category B and C. If you're going to make it very difficult, you won't get any of these units. It just won't be done. It's easy to do the regulations, but without a vision that says, hey, we want more of these, and looking at where they're built now, I don't know if you've toured the city in terms of where they're being built now and where the Category B most likely to be built in the future. I see the time's up. Thanks. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, one of the I mean, I think everything built in the last 15 years, like 5000 square foot lots where 80 is the only ADU conversions are going to be like garages or, you know, bedroom on the second floor where they could add a staircase on the outside. But some good points. Thank you, Carl. Welcome back into the chambers. all right um i have nobody else online and no other cards we'll go ahead and close the public comment and return to the commission for further discussion and direction i think we gave quite a bit of direction in the first time does anybody else have any further before we go on okay seeing none We'll go to H. You guys have semi-clear direction at least?

Yes.

Thank you. All right, we have no scheduled public hearings tonight. But we will have meetings stacked up now for several months, so that's good. That Mr. Atkinson will, I'm sure, let us know in the director's report. Thank you.

Yeah, so as Chair Kennedy mentioned, we are slated to have quite a few items coming before the Planning Commission in the month of September and October and even beyond. So at your next meeting, which is September 9th, we are going to have an appeal. I won't give too much information, but it is an appeal for a small recycling center. It's called Camacho Recycling, and staff issued an approval, and we received an appeal, so that will be coming before you at your next meeting. And we also have a presentation on a topic called the Solano Rail Hub. So that is essentially a collaborative effort between the city of Fairfield, Sassoon City, Solano County, Solano Transportation Authority. We have dubbed the train station, Fairfield-Sassoon Train Station, as the Solano Rail Hub. So there was a study that was put together to evaluate residential and mixed-use feasibility development within a mile radius of the train station. So there will be a presentation and a corresponding report that was prepared. That would be September 23rd. And our assistant city attorney will be also providing a CEQA or California Environmental Quality Act information session similar to the Brown Act presentation that you received at your last meeting. And then, as I mentioned a meeting or two ago, we are preparing to embark on the second phase of the general plan implementation. So the second phase will include the creation of new zoning districts. So given that it's been almost two years since we adopted our general plan, we thought it would be helpful to have a study session FOR THE GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION FOCUSING ON THE AREAS THAT WOULD BE RECEIVING NEW ZONING DISTRICTS. Beyond that, so we had our study session tonight on the ADU regulation. So we'll be returning on October 28 for the formal review. So in this case, the commission would serve as the advisory body to the council and make a formal recommendation. So we definitely appreciate all the questions and all the feedback that we received. So that date would be the formal ordinance for review. And then beyond that, we're looking at a date for a zoning ordinance amendment for the new zoning districts, as I mentioned. Last but not least, we have a handful of development projects that aren't quite ready to come before the commission, but when they are are ready, they do fall under the purview of the Planning Commission. So then I also wanted to note that there has been some interest in receiving updates on development projects that had previously come before the Planning Commission. So I do have a few brief status updates on some projects. I know usually, you know, Commission approves and then it's like probably wondering, hey, what happened to that project we approved years ago? So we have a handful. Home to Suites. So that is the hotel that is currently under construction. uh at 4500 central way so if you're going through the cordelia area on 80 you'll see a hotel that's under construction that is would involve 109 hotel rooms currently under construction and then back in 2023, THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION. I THINK A HANDFUL OF YOU WERE ON THE COMMISSION AT THE TIME OR POSSIBLY JUST TWO OF YOU. THAT IS THE GREEN VALLEY THREE APARTMENTS PROJECT. THAT WAS THE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THAT THE SPANOS CORPORATION BROUGHT TO THE COMMISSION AND 185 UNITS IT'S IN THE BUILDING PERMIT PHASE. THERE'S APPARENTLY NO TIMELINE FOR CONSTRUCTION. HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE SPANOS CORPORATION, SO WE DO HOPE TO SEE THAT PROJECT MOVE FORWARD IN DUE TIME. AND THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, THERE WAS A CHICK-FIL-A THAT CAME BEFORE THE COMMISSION. I BELIEVE IT WAS IN DECEMBER OF 2025. It might have even been a little bit before that. So that project, that would be the second Fairfield location, not to replace the existing over on Gateway at 4560 Central Way. The project is currently in the building permit phase. You might have seen some activity around some of the train cars. There's like two train cars that are still there, the oldest ones, but a handful have been pulled from the side, basically like a general cleanup Before you know any construction takes place so that concludes those updates would be happy to provide additional project updates for the Commission in the future and Chair that concludes my update Great.

Thank you very much Great job there Now we'll go on to Commission reports. We'll start with Commissioner Chen Nothing to report today But you did you went to

I did. I attended the grand opening of the Archer's Den in downtown Fairfield. And it is a really unique space for kids as young as 10, families. They have made great relationships with Pizza Twist. I think that's the restaurant right next door where you can go play and then go eat and really finding ways to revitalize downtown. It was really fun. I'm really looking forward to going back.

Thank you. Commissioner Ali Sullivan. Thank you, Chair. A couple of questions actually for the Planning Director. I did notice online that there were a couple of, I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, car washes that were approved on Texas Street. And I was curious when I saw that, I was very curious as to why those projects didn't come to the Planning Commission. and so it would be helpful perhaps and again pardon my ignorance at a later date if you were able to or follow up directly with the commission just to clarify the threshold for projects that do or don't come what is the distinction between chick-fil-a versus a a new build of a car wash on the main drag right that's the type of project that i would have expected to come to us for some type of input so that's the first thing the second question i had i'm not sure if HOPEFULLY MY FELLOW PLANNING COMMISSIONERS HAVE HEARD OF THIS. I'VE HAD A FEW FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTS COME UP TO ME TO TALK ABOUT THE DATA CENTER. AND I BELIEVE AT THE LAST CITY COUNCIL MEETING THERE WAS DISCUSSION ABOUT A PROPOSED DATA CENTER TO BE PUT AT THE SORT OF NORTHEAST END OF THE CITY OF FAIRFIELD. SO RIGHT UP AT THE CORNER CLOSE TO THE AIR BASE AND Vacaville and I've had residents come up to me they know I'm on the planning commission to question how would that happen what would that look like you know how could we speak out either in favor or against something of that sort what would be helpful for me and maybe this is a question for AC Petrangelo the city mayor the I'm sorry the the city attorney at the last council meeting said that he had absolutely no awareness of a proposed uh data center in the city of Fairfield, yet a developer is shopping around and the newspaper showed visuals of a developer shopping around a site in Fairfield for a data center. And so it would be helpful if we could clarify what is going on with this data center, again, because I have residents asking me, and that project and why it's being marketed in the city of Fairfield. And the other piece of this, and for you, Jonathan, perhaps it would be helpful if you were able to share an update on the broader sort of development plan for that northeast area of Fairfield. I believe that it is currently slated for industrial use. but it would be helpful to understand what the plan is for that area to to realize is this a reality for a data center to be put there or not to clarify i think some of the questions in the community so those are the two two questions from a legal standpoint i i would like to know what communication or or why it's being marketed as a site and then from a planning perspective i would love to get an update as to sort of what the plan is for that land and what the timeline would look like for any type of development

There is no active project that I'm aware of, and that item isn't agendized tonight, so we can't discuss it in any detail right now. And I also don't want to prejudice any potential project that would come up, so I can't really speak anything more to that tonight.

If we can follow up and potentially agendize that, that would be a request I'm making.

And I'll second that.

Thank you, Chair.

COMMISSIONER PAUL. COMMISSIONER REESE. COMMISSIONER MATTHEWS.

TOMORROW NIGHT, NORTH BAY JUBILEE. PLEASE COME IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO. IT'S AT 360 AND CAMAS WINERIES. IT WILL BE A WONDERFUL EVENT.

THANK YOU. TOMORROW, 12 TO 2. Chamber of Commerce lunch mob at Monsoon Burger on Texas Street over by the Army Hill High School. And in regards to the data centers, this commission, several of us, came to us in 2023, and there was never a mention of any data centers. I went through our two hour meeting that night twice and there was never mention, staff had no mention of it. But apparently there's a ministerial approval process possibly that the state puts on these things. But it's one of those things that I have had a ton of questions myself asked about, been accused of. personally approving it. So like I really have that much power. So anyway, I appreciate that. Appreciate the questions and having that agendized for the future, which would be great. We'll probably have a full house that night. So with that, no other comments. I adjourn this meeting until September 9th. Thank you. Y'all have a great night.