Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

I will yep. Are you ready to go? Okay. I'd like to call the planning commission meeting for July 17

Recording in progress.

And we'll call to order at 06:53. Let's see if we can get through the agenda here fairly quickly. We have our roll call for commissioners.

Chair? Here. Vice Chair? Here. Commissioner Timmins? Here.

And absent is Commissioner Golovitz and Lockett. Okay. We next have approval of minutes. We have minutes from the December 17 meeting? December 17? December 19. December Okay. If there's no need for edits, I don't know if any of you have any requests, any edits. If not, I accept a motion to approve as submitted.

Motion to approve.

Second. I don't think we need a roll call for that, do we? Is there any opposition? No. We're done with the minutes.

Minutes approved. I just need a vote.

Three-zero. In favor of approving the minutes? Okay. Next we have the consent calendar. We have one item on the consent calendar which is PLN20Four-one39, a nursing college and trade school conditional use permit for the school to be located in the old Ford Point Building. If there are no questions from anybody on the commission, we can just move this forward on a motion to approve.

I have no objection.

I just have questions since.

Go ahead and answer So

have you guys already discussed this at a meeting I missed? No. We

haven't had a meeting for a

long time. I realize that.

Go ahead.

Have you discussed parking conflicts between the ferry people and the school people?

No. I don't know if that was

part Is of the that an issue?

Separate sites owned by different people. They're separate sites owned by different people. I don't wanna discuss too much of the application unless we're gonna open it up for a public hearing and discussion. Oh okay. But the ferry terminal parking is separate and apart from the four buildings parking behind them.

The ferry people, they have their built

That lot. So that's what I was assuming but I just wanted to verify

And that parking for this would be behind it.

In the other section back. Okay. Alright. I have no objection.

Okay, do we have a motion

One moment. Do need to ask if there's any members of the public correct that would like to remove this item from the consent calendar. You can either come forward to the dais or if you are online please inform us by raising your hand and we can call on you. We do have one gentleman who would like to request to speak.

I'd like you to open the public hearing then.

For consent item number one, Mr. Rubin?

Let me open the public hearing so that this gentleman can, speak.

Thank you.

Is that online?

He is here in

person. Please.

Correct. This is consent item number one PLN 20 4139, the new nursing college and trade school conditional use permit at 1414 Harbor Way.

So if you wish to speak, you would come up to this podium here and you have to push a button on the microphone so something turns red and then we're let's go. Okay. Thank you.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Ruben Galvan. I am a proud representative of the Norco Carver's Union Local one fifty two that covers West Contecostal County. I am here to talk about the importance of labor standards and on the proposed project. Whether it's new construction or tenant improvements, every phase of development in Richmond should uphold fair wages, quality health benefits, and real career pathways through state accredited apprenticeship programs.

When projects move forward with our labor standards, we often see a race to the bottom, lower wages, no benefits, and workers brought in with little or no training. That compromises both safety and quality. Even worse, it opens the door for bad actors to commit wage theft, misclassified workers, engage in tax fraud, and completely ignore labor laws and compliance standards. That's not the Richmond we're building. When owners, developers, and contractors commit to strong labor standards, we ensure that workers are paid fairly, receive health care benefits, and that apprentices including young people, veterans, and those transitioning into the workforce have the opportunity to gain real hands on experience and a pathway to lifelong career in construction.

These standards aren't just good for workers. They're good for a city. They promote safety, stability, and community investment. And so I urge you to always, you know, look out for the workers. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to speak on this item, the item one, the trade school. I see no one here. Is there anyone online?

There's no one online, chair.

Okay. Then I'll close the public hearing. And what's the pleasure of this commission? Do have a motion to approve?

I can make a motion to approve. Should I read it? Motion to approve new item PLN 20 four-one 139, Nursing College and Trade School Conditional Use Permit.

Is there a second?

I second.

Okay. If there's no further discussion up from the commission, let's have a roll call vote on that. Yes.

Vice chair Burr Baker.

Yes.

And, secretary Simmons.

Yes.

Okay. The motion carries three zero. Is there an appeal period on this one I need to announce?

The appeal period would be ten days from today's date.

Approximately, if anyone wishes to challenge our approval, they need to take an appeal to the city council by about July 27, I would say.

Twenty eighth would be the last day as it rolls into Monday. Okay. 5PM.

Alright. On to the next item. Next item is new business number two, planning PLN twenty five nineteen. Really? Oh, did I forget that part?

Public comment not on the agenda.

Oh, forgot that. I'm sorry. We'll go back. Do we have anyone wishing to address the commission on item not on the agenda? Go We have Cordell.

Yeah. So good evening, chair Harrison, commissioners. For the record, I am Cordell Hiller. I am a very proud Richmond resident. So I wanna thank the the planning commission for your your proposal on turning down this the office building on 30 Seventh and the old the building itself.

So because the neighborhood council and I, we have talked about that and we said that we wanted to thank from the South Side, we wanted to thank you all for turning down this proposed plan plan for to offer emergency housing. Thank you. Because it has been a complete eyesore to our community. And as the previous speakers have came up for it, it was it's gonna bring more problems. I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm all about affordable housing, but not in our community. It's like it has brought it will bring more problems into the area. So as far as, like, business is concerned, they all say say, thank you, planning commission, for turning down the project. Thank you. Oh, did I get my three minutes? I was like, it just went down.

My apologies, Cordell. I did not start the timer.

Can I repeat it? Can I go back to what I said or do I just I just have to

It recorded? It was recorded. Yep.

Okay. So you get the idea. So now we can go to the the ordinance.

Thank you. Okay. My apologies. Anybody else wishing to address the commission on an item not on the agenda? I see none. And there's No no one online. Okay. Now we'll go back to item, new item two, the accessory dwelling unit ordinance amendment. And this is a public hearing to consider a recommendation to the city council concerning the zoning text amendments related to accessory buildings. Is there a staff report on this item?

There is, and I would like to take this moment to introduce you all to Michelle Morris, our new senior planner who started with us in early January. Michelle came to us from the city of Oakland with

ten years with Oakland

and six to be gone. Number of other years at other local organizations. Michelle is focused primarily on long range and advanced planning, so there's Inquiry's ordinance writing. She is also the lead staff person for the Hilltop Horizon specific plan. So you'll continue to see more of Michelle in the upcoming months as we bring items back to you for study sessions and things of that nature. But I just wanted to give her a warm welcome.

Welcome. Nice to meet you.

Thank you very much. I'm glad to be here. So I'll go ahead and start my presentation for the Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance Amendment. Everybody can see the okay good. Good evening Chair Harrison and Planning Commissioners. I'm Michelle Morris, senior planner concentrating on long range planning for Richmond. I'm presenting an overview of the amendments proposed to the city's accessory dwelling unit ordinance. The staff report contains one typo. It should be labeled as item two, not item one. Also, please note that we've updated and corrected Exhibit A, which is the ordinance.

We've passed out hard copies to the commission, and copies are available to the attending public. And the updated ordinance in the red line version are also posted online. The red line version shows changes to the current code. It's pretty self explanatory and color coded. We've also updated, like I said, to the web page, the Planning Commission's web page.

So it's available online. Sorry about that. I'm getting used to the controls here. So the purpose of the amendments to the city's accessory dwelling unit regulations is to update the municipal code to comply with the many, many, many changes to the accessory dwelling units law here in California. You'll see that I have the purpose here directly from the staff report.

And there's numerous sections of Richmond's Municipal Code that are affected when making changes to the code. And today, the recommended actions for you is to hold the public hearing and then adopt a resolution recommending the approval of the zoning text amendments to Richmond Municipal Code related to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units. So the background for this item starts with California Housing and Community Development Department. They completed their review of Richmond's last or previous changes to ADU regulations. And they sent us a letter in October 2024 telling us the various changes we need to do to the code to come up to compliance with state law.

And there's a snapshot there of the letter that they sent us and it's also an attachment to the staff report. I'd like to begin with basically having a basic definition here for accessory dwelling units. So you see it there with illustrations of the different types of ADUs. An attached or detached residential dwelling unit would provide complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on the same lot as a proposed or existing single family dwelling or multifamily dwelling. It includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel that the single family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated.

And an accessory dwelling unit may be within the same structure as the primary dwelling, in an attached structure, or in a separate detached structure on the same lot. Okay. So I have some examples of just some of the changes to the ordinance that are going to be happening. The proposed ordinance brings the city up to compliance with state law. And like I said, this is just a snapshot of some of the changes.

For instance, junior accessory dwelling units can be located within attached garages. The height limitations for ADUs, detached ADUs, ranges from 16 feet all the way up to 25 feet, depending on the conditions of what we're talking about. It's a little complicated. Another example is the city is prohibited from requiring replacement parking when covered parking is demolished or converted in conjunction with the construction of an ADU unit. Further amendments to the ADU ordinance, an example is an accessory or a junior accessory dwelling unit may not be rented for fewer than thirty days.

Properties containing a JADU must be owner occupied unless the owner is another government agency, land trust, or housing organization. And an attached ADU to be constructed on a lot that's listed on the California Register of Historic Resources must comply with the objective standards imposed by the Secretary of Interior. And those standards shall not include requirements on minimum lot size. There's also some requirements that we've changed in objective standards regarding where you can place an ADU on the lot for historic resource. So also we can skip on down to legal framework.

When I said that there's been many changes to ADU law over the last few years, this is just a snapshot of what recently has happened. They've moved all the ADU regulations in state law to one section in the government code, which is really helpful when you're trying to figure it all out. That's Senate Bill four seventy seven. And then Assembly Bill 2,533 and Senate Bill twelve eleven made changes to state ADU law, not limited to, but they talk about livable space and they give a good definition of it, which does come up at the counter more often than you would think. And then uncovered parking specifies that uncovered off street parking spaces demolished in conjunction with construction of an ADU need not be replaced, which should make things a little easier for people as well.

And there are also proposed changes to how we process ADU applications. The process is still ministerial and the approval or disapproval of an application must be made within sixty days. And also you need to tell people why you're not approving that as well. Applications that use preapproved detached ADU plans that meet the requirements of government code section sixty five thousand eight fifty two point two seven must be approved within thirty days that the city has received a completed application. And on that note, the city has put together preapproved plans for two bedroom detached ADUs.

And here's a little snapshot of what that looks like. We at the Community Development Department have put together an ADU guidebook and preapproved plans. This is a little snapshot of what's inside the guidebook. It's available online. The easiest way to find anything ADU related at the City of Richmond is to put into our search box at the city's website accessory dwelling units.

And that's your gateway to all things ADU. And we're really proud of this guidebook. There's a few more tweaks that we'll probably do but right now it's usable for most people and I encourage everybody to take a look and dive right in. And here's just a snapshot of the front side, just the front facade of our preapproved plans that are available online. The beauty of having preapproved plans and being mandated to create them by the state is that you can use this to bypass planning's initial review and go straight to building permit.

And then before building permit issuance, planning will do another plan check to make sure everything's Okay as well in terms of planning code and state law. So this is available to take a look at as well. If you search the website and go to the ADU page, you'll see them all listed. And this brings us to the end of my presentation. The recommended actions I'm asking of you today is, of course, to hold the public hearing and then adopt the resolution that's attached to the staff report excuse me, the agenda report recommending approval of Zoning Tech's amendments to sections 15.04.104.020, 15.04.201.03, 15.04.201.050, and 15.04.610.20 of the Richmond Municipal Code related to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units and that's in Exhibit A.

And the updated version of Exhibit A you should see online and as well as front of you in paper. And if you have any questions, I'm available to answer any questions you might have. Thank you very much.

Great. Thank you. That is a great your guidebook really is gonna be helpful for those who are

going to move forward on

the ADUs. Does anybody have any questions for staff?

I do. Great. First of all, I don't think you mentioned or maybe you did mention, but just to confirm, there's no CEQA required for this ex exempt, right, from CEQA, the ordinance amendment?

I believe it's exempt from CEQA, but I'm not exactly sure what the exemption code would be. I'm gonna ask Mr.

Schnitzer. Oh I don't need the exemption number. It's just I just wanted to confirm it.

Yeah. The code itself, the amendment to the extending code in compliance with state law is exempt from CEQA review as it doesn't have any impact on the environment at this point in time. And subsequently, the ADUs themselves are considered small structures which are also exempt from CEQA review.

Great. Thanks. I had a question about the heights. It's a complex set of standards for height, and I was wondering whether that is a, is that a Richmond standard or is that a state standard that's being copied and pasted? Do you know?

Because it goes sixteen, eighteen, and then maybe even two more feet. Sorry.

Commissioner Brubeck, I can read to you what the actual code changes will be, and it is straight out of the state code.

It's right out of state code. Yeah. So they say that 16 feet is it's probably a, they probably say that's a minimum Absolutely. Height limit.

Yeah, so a height of 16 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit. And then for an 18 foot, it's 18 feet for a detached ADU on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that's within onetwo mile of excuse me onetwo of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop. So if you want a higher height maximum, you have to be within a major transit stop or a high quality transit corridor. And there's a definition for that in the Public Resources Code, section 21,155 of the state Public Resources Code. We could also allow for an additional two feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the ADU that's aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit.

So if you want to go to a height of 18 feet, it reads a height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multi family, multi story dwelling. So then you move to a different type of residence. And then lastly, the 25 foot maximum talks about says a height of 25 feet or the height limitation of the local zoning ordinance that applies to the primary dwelling, whichever is lower for an ADU unit that's attached to the primary dwelling unit. So we're talking about when you're adding on to the house, you're bound by the zoning district's height restrictions, whichever is lower. So 25 feet would be the highest.

So yeah, that's why I said it was kind It of

seems to me that those are minimum heights coming from the state. Richmond could actually increase the height limits if desired. I guess there was no desire to do anything other than what the state allows. The reason I ask is that it's for a 16 foot height limit, which is most cases, you're close to transit or attaching it to a building, 16 feet means you really, it's very difficult to do a two story ADU in that height. And I'm not sure how the state came up with these as minimums, but it seems like Richmond just decided to default to the state on that.

Do you know what the height limit was before this change?

I do believe the height limit was around 16 feet.

So it's been 16 feet for probably the last five years. That's always been the established minimum for state exempt ADUs, a maximum height of 16 feet, no more than 800 square feet, four foot side and rear yard setbacks, and six feet from the primary dwelling. You can tell I've said that a lot of times, but we the consistent minimum is that it aligns with the states considered exempt ADU. Above that 16 feet is where certain types of ADU fall into different objective standards and just not necessarily discretion, but different standards that can apply.

Right. So it was very similar to this height limit. It's just that the state has these additional conditions that allow it to go slightly higher, and you've now made the code comply with that. Correct. Okay, I understand.

Curious, this is not about the actual ordinance, but I'm wondering if anybody has moved forward with pre approved plan submittals yet. Do you know?

We have received a number of interested architects who have actually submitted plans for review and consideration. So in addition to the assembly bill that required preapproved plans, it also required that municipal cities and counties be able to accept pre approved plans, review them through the traditional building permit process, and then make them available on their website to residents. So if I had someone, I think, you know, was just asking about someone who wanted to, what do we do? How do I submit one? You submit one just to the building permit, to our new IMS system.

You just indicate that it's a request for preapproved plans. The plans will just be void of a site plan, and they'll have everything else, title 24 green. Everything will be there. And then once that's approved by the building department and you've signed a little form that indicates that you're comfortable and okay with us posting your plans and your work on our website, you get added to the preapproved plan set, and any resident of Richmond would be able to download those plans, potentially hire that architect or hire a different individual to finish the last site plan, and then submit that to the building department for review, saving you, you know, somewhere between 20 and $30,000 in having an architect put together a full set of plans for you. And it's construction drawings all the way down to foundation.

Right. The city has preapproved plans already. We saw the image, right? So those are already done, ready.

Correct. Those

are I was wondering whether anybody's actually inquired about using those.

Many people have inquired about using them, and they just got all of their final stamps from building about two or three weeks ago. So it's part

of kind of a new?

Yes. This is new. This is our our soft launch into our ADU program and the preapproved plans that the city has put together with in conjunction with our consultant, Opticos.

Yeah. Well, they're nice. They're nice units. So I think I hope I hope they get a lot of interest.

Yes. The Designer Eboard spent quite a few meetings discussing and getting to the point where they felt comfortable that they were ready to be final designs and construction plans prepared.

Great, thank you. Those are my questions.

Actually, there was one more thing I wanted to add about the preapproved plans, if it's okay. We're having we're attending a workshop for TCC, the I think it's the Transformative Climate Communities grant, Richmond Rising. That'll be September 3. So that'll be a part of the outreach, and that'll feature the ADU guidebook and the pre approved plans and any questions anybody has at that meeting. So that's the collaborative stakeholder committee meeting.

Where does that meeting take place? Is it a virtual meeting?

I think it's a hybrid meeting and I'm not exactly sure exactly where but it will be advertised on the website and in the community.

Thank you. Any other questions? If not, I'm gonna go ahead and close the public hearing. And what is the wish of the commission?

Did we ask if there were any public? Because we only did questions.

We didn't but I guess I was presuming that since nobody's here, there wouldn't be anybody. Is there anybody online?

There's nobody online, chair.

That was close. Okay. We would have survived. Yeah. Alright. So I guess we're ready for a motion. There's one in the staff report on page two.

You go to those. Okay.

I'll make a motion. I'm getting tired of making motions. So if anybody else wants to do it, I move that we recommend the city council adoption of the item PLN 25 of 19, accessory dwelling unit ordinance amendments.

Yeah. Think we what we need to do is adopt as a commission, we're adopting this resolution 25 double x.

Oh, yeah. Here we go.

It's on page two of the staff report.

Recommended action. I move that the commission adopt resolution number 25 x x recommending approval of zoning text amendments to sections 15 o four, one zero four, zero two o, 15.04, two zero one, zero three zero, 15.4, two zero one, zero five zero, and 15.04, 610.02 of the Richmond Municipal Code related to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units as shown as exhibit a. Is there a second?

I second.

Any further discussion? If not, we can have a roll call vote, please.

Chair Harrison?

Yes.

Vice chair Brubaker? Yes. And commissioner, Timmons?

Yes.

Okay. Motion approved three zero. Let's see. What do we got next is the this agenda doesn't have it

all. Well,

might just have, like, commissioner comments or staff comments, if there are any.

At this time, no. No Planning Commission report. I will, I guess, let you know that we will have a number of other ordinances and things coming forward in the future. You'll be hearing from Michelle shortly. We'll as we bring a study session to you regarding the Hilltop specific plan and a review of the land use plan to make a recommendation to council for further action so that we can begin the environmental studies and analysis behind that plan.

There's also a number of different general plan updates that we will be bringing probably in mid October around the EJ element, the safety and noise element, and compliance with the local hazard mitigation plan. I also have in the hopper an update to the cannabis ordinance to include the equity applicant component and some revisions to its cannabis business permit procedures to help better streamline the review process and internal functions of it. In addition to that, we also have the tobacco moratorium that will be coming back to you shortly with change provisions to better align ourselves with the state and local law that have come into place regarding the prohibition of the sale of flavored tobacco products and a number of other similar things. There are more, but those will be next year.

Great. Sounds like we're gonna be busy.

We're going to be busy.

Not like the last seven months.

Are you expecting that to be in the fall? Many of those things in the fall?

Yes. Many of these things will basically start September and then October and November. We'll have probably one to two meetings a month. Got enough. We got got things coming for you.

Good. Well, let's see if we can encourage the other commissioners to attend. Is that something you guys can kind

of put

a bug in their ear?

Assistant. Yes.

And is there any chance the council will be appointing any additional commissioners?

At this point, no. It has not come to I've not been informed of any additional appointments to two vacancies.

Okay. Thank you. So we should spread the word. Yeah. So if there's nothing else, I guess we can adjourn the meeting at 07:27. Thank you all for coming.

Thank you.

Recording stopped.