Planning Commission - Special Meeting

Okay. Well, we'll get going. He can You can leave. We got three. You always have a choice in life. All right. We will call this special meeting of the Ripen City Council September 26th to order. Is there any um public discussion on items that are not on the agenda? No, we don't have any um online. So, with that, we will go into item number one, discussions on accessory dwelling units. Ken, give us the details.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Fellow council members, go ahead and got a short PowerPoint and I also gave you guys a handout. Um should be in front of you there to follow through. Follow that if you'd like. All right, there we go. Um, essentially the city of Ripons local control has been significantly reduced since the state started preempting um, local zoning ordinances in 2016 um, for accessory dwelling units. Um, in 2016, the state of California passed uh, Assembly Bill 2299 and Senate Bill uh, 1069 with the intent of increasing California's housing supply by making it easier for property owners to build ADUs on on their lots. Um, in short, the legislative intent was to promote housing diversity and affordability by removing local obstacles ensure and ensuring the ADU's uh construction would be easier, faster, and more widely permitted across the state. Um, prior to 2016, uh, the city didn't see many ADUs developed in town. Um however since 2016 to current there have been um 56 ADU applications uh approved through the planning department 56 56 yeah um since 2016 California has passed uh new laws almost every year essentially eroding local control little by little each year. Uh the purpose behind California passing new laws almost every year has been to attempt to address the state's severe housing shortage by removing barriers, streamlining approvals, and expanding opportunities for homeowners and developers to build ADUs. Thus, in the state's opinion, increases affordable

and flexible housing stock uh statewide. The state's ultimate goal is to maximize ADU construction as one of California's most practical solutions for increasing affordable housing and meeting growing housing demands. Um, in 2016, uh, there were three bills that were passed uh that took effect in January of 2017. Uh, the passage of these laws is often viewed as the launching of the ADU revolution in California. Uh this 2017 reform package is cracked is what cracked open the door for the ADU boom that has currently been happening uh because it eliminated eliminated the most common local roadblocks and force cities to comply. Uh the key requirements of those two bills were uh they required amending local ordinances. There was a requirement that the from the state that cities and counties adopt ordinances to be in line with state ADU law. Um if a local jurisdiction did not amend their ordinance to be consistent with the law, then the state law itself governed. Uh min and they also required ministerial approval. Uh required local governments to approve ADUs uh ministerally um at that time 120 days with no public hearings and no discretionary review. So that had to be done at staff level. Um also with that bill, those bills uh parking reforms were ushered in. Um, it limited parking to no more than one space per unit or or bedroom, whichever was less, and prohibited parking requirements if the ADU uh met certain requirements such as half mile of a public transit stop, um, designated historic districts, um, part of an existing primary residence or existing structure accessory structure, or where on street parking permits are required but not offered to the ADU occupant. Um if you look at the city's current map

of of our transit stops, there's not a whole lot of areas of Ripen that don't do not fall within this half mile um distance of a public transit stop. So pretty much is inclusive of of all almost all of Ripen city and city limits of where they would be exempt from uh having any requirement parking requirements for ADUs. Um, furthermore, the the law prohibited local agencies from requiring a new utility connection or capacity charge for ADUs uh created within an existing residence or an accessory structure like a garage conversion. Um, and it did allow connection or capacity fees for detached new construction ADUs, but they had to be um reasonable and proportionate. Um, for example, if an ADU is is detached or attached to the primary unit and is under 750 square ft, um, the city can only charge connection and capacity fees that are proportionate to the primary unit. Um, if it was being converted and it was under 750 ft, uh, the city cannot charge any connection or capacity fees. And then ADUs above 750 square feet were subject to all the impact fees for the city of Ripen, but they they do have to be proportion proportionate to the main dwelling on the lot. Um basically there were some setback rules for conversion um ADUs at that time. They prohibited lo local agencies from requiring setbacks for ADUs created within existing structures. So, if there was a garage unit um per say in the in the old part of town that was on the property line, we did have to allow that to be converted without requiring the the required 4ft setback for a new ADU construction. Um they did have some size and development standards. They confirmed that local agencies could still impose standards at that time in 2016 such as height setbacks, parking, but those standards could not

unreasonably burden the construction of ADUs. Um, and then they had the establishment of Jedus uh created within the footprint of an existing single family home. A Jed is a junior accessory dwelling unit, so it has to be 500 square feet or less. Um, it had to be established within the walls of the existing single family home. Um, it had a requirement for a kitchen, but it could be an efficiency kitchen. So, it didn't have to be an oven or anything like that. Could be like a hot pad or something like that that they could cook food with, microwave. Um, they did have some bathroom options there. You could either have their own bathroom or they could share a bathroom with the main dwelling unit with the junior accessory dwelling unit. And they had an owner occupancy requirement. Um so if you had a junior accessory dwelling unit, the owner had to live on the property either in the unit or the primary park or the primary uh dwelling itself. And then uh the parking you couldn't we could not require any additional parking for Jed use or we could not um charge any connection or capacity fees for JADUs. Um along in 2016 they also came up with what is called a stateex exempt ADU. So a stateex exempt ADU had certain requirements couldn't be over 800 square feet, height set back, height limit of 16 feet, uh side and rear setbacks of 4 feet. Um and then local jurisdictions cannot impose certain development standards such as minimum lot sizes or open space requirements um that would prevent the construction of a stateex exempt ADU. a lot of laws that were in 2016. 2017 rolls along and uh two more bills were passed that took effect in January of that of 2018. Um the key requirements of those were special districts. Uh they were also subject to restrictions on utility connections or capacity charges. Doesn't affect RIP per se, but uh these

are this is part of those bills. um specified that ADUs can be built in conjunction with proposed single family homes um not only added later. So prior to that, a lot of jurisdictions would not let you put an ADU up until the single family home was completed. Um however, this bill ushered in that you could build them at the same time. Um MAX uh established a a 12 a,200 foot maximum size for attached ADUs. So, an attached ADU could not exceed 1,200 square feet if it was attached to the main house. Um, and then also had some further parking clarifications. It further limited local government's ability to require parking. It had more waiverss allowed such as tandem parking. So, um, you could park in front of or behind cars for the main unit. And it also allowed parking in setback areas. So like in the front yard area where some of the front yard could be, you could actually resurface some of that area and have um an area for parking uh for the ADU. Um and then ADU zones, it ensured that ADUs are allowed within all zones that permitted single family residential uses. though instead of just being single family or residential zone properties um in 2017 they ushered in that they had to be allowed where where the cities allowed houses even if it was by a use permit. So if you go to our downtown district or our mixeduse districts they allow housing with a use permit. Um so if there was a single family home allowed in those properties we had to we had to allow uh ADUs within those zones as well if they had a single family home. um 2018 um they actually the state relaxed a little bit. Didn't have any new laws they introduced at that time but in um 2019 uh they were back at it. Um 2019 they introduced uh four bills

that were passed in that time um that took effect in January of 2020. Uh these bills these set of bills created a new category um or added restrictions to the new category for stateex exempt units. Um, these laws were designed to streamline ADU approval, um, expand eligibility and limit local barriers. Um, AB68 passed that was passed that year and it legalized junior junior accessory dwelling units up to 500 square f feet. Uh, basically created entirely within the home. Permitted two ADUs per lot, one detached and one JADU. uh reduced uh oh allowed conversion of existing structures in ADUs with no setbacks required for the structures being converted. Reduced ministerial approval from 120 days to 60 days. So when an application is received by the planning department, we had 60 days to respond um and review those applications instead of the previous 120 days. Um it prohibited minimum lot sizes. uh local jurisdictions. I apparently were imposing minimum lot sizes where ADUs could be built. Um it it basically removed those requirements um making it easier for homeowners to build on on smaller lots. And it set a maximum size limit um 850 ft for onebedroom and thousand 1,000 square feet for multi-bus. Um it allowed multiple ADUs on multifamily lots. So if there was a multif family project, you could add multiple ADUs. And it uh clarified that ADUs were not subject to density limits. So a lot of our residential areas, we have density requirements. Um they cannot exceed lot coverages. Um ADUs do not count towards those. uh AB uh SB13 also uh enacted that year uh further limited impact fees for ADUs

under 750 square feet and provided a 5-year window to legalize unpermitted ADUs. And assembly bill 881 was introduced as well. It prohibited minimum square footage requirements. Um so ADUs had to meet um they couldn't put minimum size requirements on it. So adus have to meet what the state calls an efficiency unit. Efficiency unit at this time is 150 square feet. That's the minimum size they um believe that housing unit should be. And so that's uh kind of the minimum set by the state. Um a city could not adopt something uh in contrary to that. um it cla clarified that garages can be converted into ADUs uh without the requirement for replacement parking and it eliminated the owner occupancy requirement. So uh prior to 2016 um the prior to the city adopting the latest ordinance that the ADU requirements or the ordinance uh for the city of Ripen required that the owner live on the property um neither the ADU or the primary dwelling unit. uh 2019 Assembly Bill 881 prohibited that or eliminated that owner occupancy requirement um for time period of January 1st 2020 to January 1st 2025. So any ADUs built in that time frame uh did not have to have owner occupancy requirements which opened the door for um developers and and other owners to buy properties and add an ADU and have um two rentals in on that property. 2021 uh two more bills were passed taken in effect in January uh January 1st of 2022. It allowed local agencies to permit the separate sale of ADUs if they desired. Um RIP to this date has not um

it does the ordinance does not allow for this provision. Um but there are certain jurisdictions that do um offer that for for ADUs where they can be sold separately uh than the primary dwelling. And uh those bills also does not allow HOAs or CCNRs to restrict the creation of ADUs within their developments. Let's see, we're getting closer to the end here of all the bills that were introduced. 2022, uh two more bills were introduced taking effect in January 2023. Um uh Senate Bill 897 basically uh basically required us local agencies to impose only objective standards on ADUs which involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official. So for design guidelines or criteria uh they had to be very subjective uh or objective standards um not subjective standards um on the design criteria. Um, they did adjust some of the height limits. Uh, 16 foot still remains as as the the main height limit for accessory dwelling units, but they did allow some provisions. Uh, they allowed up to 18t height limit for ADUs within a half mile of a public transit stop and or if the property already has a two-story multifamily dwelling on it. And additionally, they uh allowed for a 25 foot height limit for ADUs if it was attached to the primary dwelling um subject to the underlying zone. So, if the uh for instance, our our um residential zoning districts uh cap height limitations at uh 35 ft for twotory homes. So obviously this uh if it was a little bit more restrictive um that would come into play on this, but uh the 25 ft height limit for ADUs being attached applies in this instance since our code is a little bit higher.

And then uh they still were tweaking a little bit with parking standards. prohibited local agencies from imposing parking standards on an ADU that included that was included in an application to create a new single family dwelling or a new multif family dwelling on the same lot. Um we couldn't require uh park additional parking off streetet parking requirements for new ADUs being built with uh new single family homes. uh and assembly bill 2221 um established that a city cannot preclude the construction of an ADU with front setbacks aiming the red aiming to reduce arbitrary decisions at the local level that blocked ADUs. So if a property um if a property uh is restricted from having at least an 800 square foot stateex exempt ADU on the property because of a front setback or even a a streetside setback would preclude that. U we have to wave uh some of those or reduce some of those setback requirements so they can at least fit a stateex exempt ADU on the property. Um, it also prohibited local agencies from denying AD ADU applications due to non-conforming zoning dis zoning conditions, uh, building code violations or unpermitted structures that do not pose a safety risk. And then, uh, they did re they just did some more um clarification on the time frame for approvals, reaffirming the 60-day time frame. uh 2023, a couple more bills were passed that took effect January of 2024. Um at that time, the assembly bill permanently removed the owner occupancy requirement for properties with ADUs. So that sunset clause of uh January 1st, 2025 um is is no longer in place. So ADUs on properties uh can be on any property now and there's no owner occupancy requirement.

Um and then AB 1033 just reinforce the allowance for local agencies to permit the separate sale. Um and it required cities and counties to develop programs by January 1st, 2025 to post pre-approved ADU plans on their website, further streamlining the approval process for homeowners. And then lastly, this last year, um there was quite a few uh looks like uh what do we got here? seven different uh bills that were passed uh aiming to take effect January of 2025. Um some of this covered the mandated that all California cities must have that pre-approved ADU plan scheme in place. Um increase the number of ADUs allowed on multif family properties from from two up to eight units depending on the number of ex existing multifamily units. um prohibits local governments from requiring the replacement of uh parking surface parking spaces when existing is repurposed for ADUs. This is on multif family properties. Um it expanded the amnesty program for legalizing unpermitted ADUs. um basically uh providing an easier upgrade process um and just focusing more on uh health and safety requirements in unpermitted uh ADUs and and reducing or eliminating penalties or fines. Um it did require the cities have a an amnesty program in place for these unpermitted ADUs. Um, see, they also improved the ADU permitting process in the coastal zones, which is not anything to do with us, but uh, apparently there was a lot of long delays in some of these coastal areas, so they they passed some legislation to help that process. Um, they did they did also pass a bill that eliminated the owner occupancy for

junior accessory dwelling units if they meet certain criteria. So now junior accessory dwelling units um does doesn't have to have owner occupancy on the property if they meet certain requirements or restrictions. Um and uh and they ushered in some new streamlining inspection processes to speed up um kind of the the approval process and also the inspection process for ADUs uh with the intent of of getting more housing in place quicker. And then um they did pass a bill prohibiting uh HOA fees for ADUs. A lot of HOAs would charge uh like design review fees and fees for ADUs to be built within projects that had HOAs. Uh they prohibited those fees from being charged. And then lastly, they eliminated the provision of local architectural review for stateex exempt ADUs. So, in the past, we were always able to make sure that the ADU being built was complimentary or or matched the existing house that was on the parcel as far as material, roof type, roof material, and everything. Um, if it meets the state exempt requirement, we we can't look at any of the architectural design or compatibility of these units. Um, so moving forward, uh, the last AD ordinance for the city of Ripen was adopted in May of 2021. Since that time, the state has passed uh numerous additional bills, 13 to be exact essentially every year, making it difficult to keep the city's ordinance and staff processing up to date uh to meet these new everchanging state requirements. Um ADU ordinances are required by law to be compliant with state law. Um if a local juris local jurisdictions ADU is out of compliance with state law, it is considered null and void and state ADU law uh trump uh state ADU law is much more lenient and

encourages development of ADUs and JDUs to a greater extent than does RIP's ADU ordinance. Uh therefore, it's imperative that the city adopt their own ADU or ordinance um in an effort to maintain as much local control over the development of these units as possible within the city of Ripen. Um while it seems to that every year the state continues to erode local control regarding ADUs, uh there are still some areas that staff believes can um can assist the city of Ripen in maintaining the quality and character of our existing residential neighborhoods. Um the difference has really come down to uh what the is stateex exempt what the state is uh is um defining as stateex exempt ADUs uh which are heavily mandated and controlled by state law and non-exempt ADUs which local jurisdictions still uh retain local discretion. Uh local jurisdictions in California can adopt different standards for non-exempt ADUs as long as they do not conflict with state law uh for stateex exempt ADUs. Uh so some of the areas that staff is looking a little bit uh for some direction from city council would be the following here. Um setbacks for non-exempt ADUs. Um staff belief should align with the city's detached accessory structures standards uh for setback requirements. Um so if you were to build a detached garage on your property or a workshop, um there would be a minimum of 10 feet uh rear property line set back and five feet from the side property line. um for non-exempt uh for non-exempt uh units, this staff is recommending that we would adopt um those same setbacks for a non-exempt ADU. Um height restrictions for non-exempt ADUs we believe should also align with the city's requirement for detach accessory structures. Uh the

state as you see allows up to 16 feet uh pretty much across the board, 18 feet in some uh instances and also up to 25 ft in others. Um if we followed our accessory dwelling or accessory structure standards, uh that would limit the overall height to no taller than 12 feet. um design guidelines uh for non-exempt ADUs should have design guidelines requiring the ADU to match or complement the primary residence in roof pitch, sighting, colors, materials, um etc. on those. So, we believe that the non-exempt units should have to follow those guidelines. And then also lot coverages. Um, just like a somebody building a detached garage or a shop or pool house on their lot, we believe non-exempt ADUs should have to count towards uh lot coverage requirements for each of the each of the zoning districts. Um, parking requirements, non-exempt ADUs um are non-exempt are not exempt from parking requirements. If an ADU converts required covered parking um for a residential property, the requirement for covered parking shall be replaced somewhere else on the property and the non-exempt ADU shall be required to provide at least one off- streetet parking space. Um so we believe that if they are going to build a non-exempt ADU, they they should have to meet the parking requirements and or replace the parking that they took away from the primary residence if it's a non-exempt ADU, state ADU. Um, and regardless of new construction or conversion, um, non non-exempt ADU shall pel pay development impact fees proportionate to the main unit on the property. And lastly, non-exempt ADUs, uh, shall require owner occupancy on the property. So, these are all kind of staff's thoughts and u and, uh, suggestions for non-exempt ADUs. I believe that's kind of one of the only

areas that we still have a little bit of local control. Um, so with that, that's all I've got. I know there's a lot of information there, but be happy to answer any questions. Yes. Uh, can you um, you explained this to me yesterday, but I didn't quite understand it. Can you describe again uh how one is allowed to build an exempt stateex exempt ADU versus a non-exempt ADU?

So state ADU law mandates that a single family property has the ability ability to build a stateex exempt ADU. So we cannot have restrictions or requirements in place that would prevent that. A stateex exempt ADU is something that's a detached ADU that is 800 square ft or less on the property has to maintain a 4ft side and rear property um setback. Uh there's also some front setbacks that we've required in our code that it meets the primary unit. But if a if if a property is has not have the ability to build a 800 foot ADU, we have to um reduce setback requirements and such to be able to allow at least an 800 foot ADU on the property.

Can they do multiple or just one single? Uh just one detached. Um there can also be one uh according to state law one attached uh state exempt ADU which is limited to 50% of the main unit or 1,200 square f feet. So if you take a single family residence meets those requirements and turn it into basically a three family. Yeah. Three three unit property. Okay. Okay. And then also for my benefit describe uh what would be the uh rules around building a nonexempt ADU.

Well, and that's what we're trying to flush out a little bit here, what the council's desires are on that. Um if if non-exempt ADU is is something that would be larger than the 800 square f feet. Um right now the way our code is written uh currently written it would still meet the 4oot side and rear setbacks. Uh we're proposing that if it it's considered a non-exempt, they meet a little bit stricter requirements like we have for our our detached accessory structures is what I've been um kind of proposed at the end there to see if that's what council would like to move forward with.

Okay. Okay. So to simplify it for me, if it's under 800 square feet, it is going to be an exempt ADU. Is that correct? Yeah. State exempt. Yep. And just to to be very clear on that is most of our ADUs out of the 50some that we've seen developed here in town, I'd say 99% of them would qualify as stateex exempt. Uh most of them are under the um 750 foot requirement because that that eliminates the imposition of all the development fees on a proportionate share versus um just like a connection or capacity fee.

Every single one I mean you can put development standards all you want which I think we should have make it is I mean I guess I look at it as this town is special. It's unique. We have development standards for a reason and the state is insane in taking all of the control. And just because the state allows you to do these things doesn't mean you should. Particularly in this town and it gets very frustrating when state just continues to erode control. You can build whatever the heck you want, however it looks, wherever you want. We build utilities that serve these things. Why do we even have standards? The state can build whatever you want, wherever you want. Doesn't matter. It's so frustrating. But I don't know. I would, you know, there's nothing we can do. You want to build 800 square foot or less, go do it.

So, I don't disagree with that. But I have a question. So, that was a lot of information. I I'm trying to picture in my mind all this stuff you're trying to tell us. What are the setbacks? The the minimum required set.

So, minimum required setback. It's kind of a a slippery slope here for that. Um, uh, normally 4 ft off the side property line, 4T off the rear property line. You could build the detached accessory dwelling unit or even an attached dwelling unit that could be within 4T of the side and rear property lines. Um if the rest if the imposition of those setbacks or a front yard setback or a sideyard setback would not allow it someone to build at least an 800 foot ADU then we would have to relax or reduce those setbacks so they can they could build at least an 800 foot ADU on the property. So much for telling somebody back single family lot. They only had enough room to build a 600 square foot, but they wanted to build an 800 foot. They could build up to the lot line basically if that's what was required to make it happen,

right? Um there's not a lot of lots here in town at this point that would be that small where you couldn't fit an 800 foot ADU, at least meeting the 4ft side and rear setbacks, right? Um here's why I'm asking. because I bought several properties side by side that I still own and the fence was too close to the property. The insurance company wasn't going to insure the property because it was I had to move the fence over to make enough room and I'm wonder people realize if they do this they may have some insurance issues. Yeah. I don't know what the state law is on insurance on any of that. Um what's the insurance companies? Is that Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. And that would that would just be the responsibility of the property owner. I mean, no, I get that. But but they need to know what they're getting into. I'm just that's all I'm saying. Of course. Maybe they'll stop building if Yeah. I think what you said earlier was you could build one exempt detached and one exempt attached. Is that the limit? Um that's stuff that we're still kind of working through in our ordinance. Um I believe that is the limit. Um, I'll defer to

Yeah, that it's Yeah, we would have that fleshed out and obviously in the ordinance as we would update it, but my my interpretation is that that in the scenario that you're calling out, the attached unit would be called a junior accessory dwelling unit. And the law is pretty clear, not 100% clear, but it's pretty clear that you are allowed one ADU and one junior ADU or JADU, what um per lot. And so that attached unit would be considered a junior unit because it's attached. Okay, now I'm confused. I apologize. No, I know this is this is very technical. So

I thought that he said that on a lot you could have one exempt detached which would be 800 square foot or less and one attached exempt which could be 1,200 square feet. So, is that if I had, let's say I have a lot and it's big enough and I have a 2500 foot house, I could attach 1,200 square ft of living space to that 2500 foot house and build an 8 799 foot detached unit and that would all be okay. That's where Tommy and I have been trying to um basically as we get this thing in front of the planning commission and city council. That's kind of one of our final points that we're still trying to clarify on um going through state law on that. But okay,

my interpretation of it or reading through it. That's kind of what I got out of it. But I think our discussions Tommy and I need to kind of go through that a little bit more. Um okay, then I got a now I got the real question I was going to ask. I got all that done. I got room for another 800 square foot detached unit. Can I do that? No. So, I'm limited to those two additions. That's correct. Okay. But if you've got a in a single family lot, multifamilies are a different story, but we're talking about single family in this discussion. Yeah, I understand. Okay.

Yeah. And you know, the in addition to, you know, existing home and more than likely the exterior is going to look the same. It's going to look like an add-on to a house. I mean, that's that's probably not as big a deal. But when you have a no requirements, it can look like whatever you want and you just go slap it in there and make it as cheap and simple as you can build. It doesn't match the, you know, the look of the neighborhood and we work hard to make a nice neighborhood and someone goes and slaps them up everywhere. Just makes no sense. But there's nothing you can do about it. But there's less than 800 square foot. So, but you get a dump. Yeah. You turn the town into a dump. And Leo, your lot's big enough to put an apartment building on. So you're

turn.

No, this is u the these these ADU laws that the the multitude that have been passed. Um there is essentially zero consideration for particularly for towns like ours. Uh these are going to change the character of the neighborhood. Without a doubt, one of the things that we all know is um it's not a onetoone correlation, but it's a very close uh correlation to that, which is when the street is filled with cars parked on the street, that neighborhood uh it it loses value. those homes lose value. It's a parking lot out there and then people start parking in their front yards. I mean, it's you add 2,000 square feet to uh your 2500 square foot home as Leo described, what do you got? Another three cars

at least.

At least no architectural um review of these. Well, Gary, you're familiar with Powalt and it being like Powo Alto where on garbage day they actually don't let you park on the street so the garbage trucks can pick up the parking. You see people out there scrambling around moving their car, moving it back. So that created a different issue. And I and just to just to clarify, so this there's been a distinction that's been made between exempt ADUs and non-exempt ADUs. Those are specific categories that the state has made with specific criteria that the you know the applicant would have to meet. Um but the state has given us very limited discretion to still regulate those non-exempt ADUs. And so that's that would be the crux of what we would be working through. And then the the stateex exempt adus would be something that would be obviously processed ministerially and wouldn't really have much discretion. So there's still remnants of control, but it's very little. As the mayor pointed out, 99% of these things are going to be in the exempt category. So

building a 900 foot one about it. Yeah. Why would you do that? So I make the rules as that said, good as you can.

Every category that you described. Uh I appreciate and I think all of those uh should be part of uh our city ordinances around these non-exempt adus. different different one of the um how should I put it controlling factors that you mentioned was if it's a single family lot or a multifamily lot. Do we have any multif family lots in this town?

Uh we do. Um, you're talking I think multif family is defined as triplex or two or more. Yeah, it's been uh we do have multif family lots though in town. Okay. Is that determined when the development occurs? That well obviously

I had my lot. Can I come into you and say I want to convert my single family lot to a multif family lot? um you could come in and try to convert a single family lot into a triplex or a duplex. That would be a discretionary uh approval process that goes in front of the planning commission. Um so you could if you had success in in reszoning your single family property to a multifamily property, then it opens up a door for you to um you know put a few more of these units on the uh multif family property.

But the city has the ability to decide yay or nay in that instance. in that instance when you're actually trying to convert from a single family to a multif family lot. But once it's to a multif family lot, then you just fall back to the standards for ADU law that that ADUs would have to Okay. How about like an apartment complex has some extra rooms sitting around parking, they can go build whatever they want there, too. They can. There's some limitations on it. Um I'm not uh 100% up to speed on those. We don't have a ton of multif family lots looking to do this. Um Yeah. that if someone was to come in and buy an apartment complex and say, "Hey, we got all this extra parking or we'll build eight more lots on this thing because we can,

right?" And and there's also some provisions in some of these laws that have passed where they can even take up parking spaces and use those for ADUs in these multif family lots that we don't have build over top of the parking discretion on that. So, what are the setbacks from the street? Well, that's a good discussion point. um we've in our ordinance have kept it at the same setback as the primary unit. However, if it's going to prohibit an ADU, stateex exempt ADU from being placed on a property because of size or or constraints or limitations, then we would have to relax those um so they could fit it. To what distance? Do you have any idea what the state

whatever would whatever would allow an 800 foot unit. So, zero. Could be zero. I mean, these things sitting on the sidewalk almost. could be if if that's the only spot you could actually fit one an 800 foot unit. Um yeah, we would have to relax those requirements.

Can you would apply to attached unit? I could take my 400 foot garage and convert it into a,200 foot ADA coming out to the sidewalk and all the way back to the back of the lot. um you you we would only have to allow the city would only have to allow up to an 800 foot stateex exempt ADU. So if you wanted to go above and beyond that, obviously you'd have to meet different setback requirements. So you could tell me I can't build an attached ADU. I have to build a detached.

You can do an attached ADU. Um you could do an attached ADU. That's what kind of the gray category of where Tommy and I are trying to work through some of that. He's thinking it's a Jedu, which is 500 square feet. I I'm reading it differently, so we're going to vet that out. Um if if it's going to prevent you from creating a stateex exempt ADU, we do have to relax um some of those requirements if it's going to prevent it. Um, so the state law says if you if you can't build up to an 800 square foot detached ADU meeting certain setback requirements that we have in place like the front and street side per se. The other ones are four feet and four feet. Um, we would have to relax some of those. So like a corner lot in town, you you could possibly build it on the street side area uh which we would require no structures be built. Um, it could be built over there if that's the only place you can do an 800 foot ADU.

Question. I want to build one of the stateex exempt ADUs is a,200 ft attached. Right. What I just heard you say was if my 1,200 square foot attached ADA is ADU is going to create setback problems, you can tell me Leo, you're not going to build that one. We'll let you build the 800. And that and that's the area we're still working through on that. I mean, it talk about

I mean, out of there's 20 bills over the last seven years that have been passed that have been making this moving target. um a little more difficult to muddle through.

Yeah, that and HCD or the H Department of Housing Community Development are are good friends. They, you know, they've published guidelines as well that further complicate this. They have a handbook about that thick that further fleshes out some of these things. And um there's even legal debate amongst city attorneys about whether those uh guidelines that are adopted by non- lawyers are the correct implementation of the law. So this is yeah it's been a moving target. It's very technical and so there's there's been a lot of confusion that's not just unique to the folks up here on the dis. It's statewide. There's a lot of people still working out what this all means.

Leo, we have ordinances that were set by the builder back in you know remember that? They have CCNRs. CCNRs. Yeah. Yeah. Those are out.

You can't have CCNRs or HOAs that would prevent the the construction of an ADU, a stateex exempt ADU, I should say. Um, so after um I'll see getting some direction hopefully from council today on on the direction I guess for the non-exempt so we can kind of maybe polish up and finish up our our ordinance. It would go to planning commission for their review at some point. Um they they would review that, make a recommendation to city council. Obviously, you guys would review it and either u adopt it, amend it, um make some changes if you see fit. Um and then once we do a final adoption on an updated ordinance, we do have to send that into HCD. Uh they review it and so they can send it back and say, "You guys missed the point on these things and and we don't think you are compliant with state or the state law on it." And so we might be back at the table again. So to just kind of put a bow on this thing and wrap it up, I mean we're uh first part of this next year would be probably the soonest we'd be getting through the council process and then we send it to HCD. I don't know how fast they would turn it around, but we could be dealing with this into 2026 trying to get something that's fully compliant. next year

if there is ability to control it, make it as nice as possible.

And I do want to um just uh throw this out for um just just for a point for council, although um we don't have much say over design criteria or any say really over design criteria, anything like that for stateex exempt units. and and most of our units we've seen built here in town are stateex exempt. Um I what we've seen so far in town has been pretty decent looking units that that the developers or homeowners or property owners have been putting in. Um so they do have an ability to kind of cheapen this thing up if they want to, but what we what we've seen so far to date here in town has been actually pretty decent looking units. Um so but like I said it's it's fully out of our control at this point. I think for the most part, people are smart enough to figure out they can devalue their property if they do it wrong.

But if you're just looking for a rental property, okay, here's the other part, though. Mathematically, none of them make any sense unless it's a mother-in-law or family member. I've done the math. I can add a bunch of units on all my properties because this isn't mathematically you never get an ROI out of it. So I, you know, I think it'd be more for a family member, but some people would do it anyway and not get a good ROI, I guess.

And prior to prior to like 20ou 2016 when the state really infused themselves into local ordinances and local planning uh as far as ADUs, that's really what we saw because it had to be owner occupied uh one of the units on the property. So, you know, we were seeing these things for in-law quarters or, you know, um maybe college age kids or family members like that. Um, and so I could literally count on one hand how many ADUs were built prior to 2016 probably and then after that it's it's been a big boom at least here in RIP as well as across the state.

That's not the intent of what the state's doing. The states want you to build more housing for winters. All right. Any further discussion? How much from the public? Sure. Thank you. Um, city council. So, somebody who's actually thought uh Adam Corkkins uh 1588 Van Andell, somebody who's thought a lot about this ordinance, I might cons uh suggest we take a different view on where this the city has control, which is what can you do to incentivize those higher standards? If you simply put too high a standard and burden on the non-exempt category, people are going to go to the exempt category. Uh saying that as somebody who tried to build and now is approved currently from planning and had to go there. I tried to build a garage, a unit above a garage, I tried to use a higher quality material on the roof with the intent of improving the property and those got shot down because they didn't conform with the poor construction of the property I acquired. So I would just encourage think about this ordinance not just as how you can keep people from doing stuff. I think uh chair uh Councilman Nstusio said it right. As an investor, I'm not looking to devalue my property. I'm trying to make Ripen a better place, a place that people would come in. I am thinking as a renter, but I'm also thinking as a dad. I've got five kids that I'd like to be able to have affordable homes in this community rather than go somewhere else. So, I think it's not just investment. It's also how do you create the ladders for people to get where we are now when they're 18 years old and facing the most unaffordable housing market in all of our lifetimes. Right? The amount of money you have to have to make a payment on a purchase is hard. And the way I look at some of these laws is creating a ladder for young kids to actually get into better houses over time. Right? We don't get there in one shot. We get

there over time. So what does that housing stock look like? Where do we want that to be concentrated in our community so that our kids can grow up here and become a part of this community? So, I I would just encourage you guys think about that. And I I absolutely want this to continue to be a beautiful place. I'm not going to put one in my front yard on Van Andell, but there are parts of this town that need to be redeveloped that need investment. And that's where we should be encouraging people to to put money in and build affordable housing for our neighbors. It's not just about check. It can be about our kids and our friends kids who we want to grow up here as well. Good morning, city council. My name is Ryan Vanigan. Um, after hearing the conversation, I um I'm actually an owner that has built uh several ADUs. Um, and I think I'm more towards I know I am part of the 99%. Um, I would just urge you guys to actually go out and look at those ADUs, not just mine, but the 99% because your guys's concerns I believe are very valid, but that is the 1% which um doesn't really make up what's actually being built in my opinion because um it has been um of course talking to neighbors originally, nobody wants them in their in their neighborhood. Um, but once you actually do it and you talk to them, there hasn't been issues. They they appreciate being able to it's a smaller house for either one person, a couple, you know, they don't want to be in an apartment. They want to actually have their own little yard and everything like that. So, um, I I would just urge that I don't think the ADU concept in general is bad. It just needs to be done right. um because it does provide uh definitely citizens of Ripen with uh some additional options when housing costs are what they are and

these ADUs are lower cost than what their other alternative is. So, thank you for your time.

You know, Mr. Mayor, if I can make com that's a good point. Can you give us a list of where not names but just a list of property locations where they're at? We can go take a look at them because I'd be interested in looking at them. I may have been driving by some and never even known I would they were ADUs. I can give you a good one to go look at. So, I mean, if there's 52 of them, there's there's at least one. So, that the math is there's only maybe 98% that are good, not 99%, but you know, I I you know, it's it's great if there's people that care about the community and do a good job. I'm not concerned about the person that goes builds a really nice one. I'm a concerned about the guy that just wants to as an investment to build the cheapest thing you can and turn the neighborhood into a dump, which there's no control over that unfortunately. So, you guys may build fantastic ones and that that's great. Um, but you know, the the concern is the the people who don't care about it so much. Um,

yeah, I think they all feel that way. But if you can give me that location, if you can get us a list, too, I'd like to be able to at least drive by and take a look. So, like maybe 98.4%. Give me the one Give me the one you got, too, cuz I'm sure that's one you want me to look at. Yeah, it is. Kenny, you don't happen to have like a a file of photos of these, do you, by any chance?

No. And we can certainly provide a list to the council of locations of these so you can look at them. Um we have had like 50 some 56 approved. I I would say that not all of them are built or got built. Some people for whatever reason I think when they started doing their due diligence on them u maybe backed off and didn't construct them. So but we do have probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 40ome that we can provide uh addresses for to look at. Like I said, um I think the ones that we have had built, like I said, they all do they all pretty much meet the state exempt requirements where we didn't have much ability for architectural review, which was just actually removed very recently. Um but most of these units that were built or are built out there um um do look pretty nice. So like I said, I will provide that um that list for you guys so you guys can um check some of these out for yourself. No. Okay, we're going to go and close session. So, appreciate you guys coming and uh giving your comments. Thanks.