All right, good evening.

Uh the June 4, 2026 meeting of the Planning Commission is called to order.

Would everyone please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge of allegiance, but it's applying the United States of America.

Will the Secretary please conduct the roll call?

Yes, Chair Person.

For the record, the following commissioners are present for the meeting at the time of roll call.

Chair Dejada, Vice Chair Mendoza, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner Salis, Commissioner Nay, Commissioner Zuber, and Commissioner Tajulu.

We do have a quorum.

Thank you, Secretary.

The next item on the agenda is announcements.

Mr.

Secretary, are there any announcements this evening?

I do have one announcement this evening.

I'd like to take a moment to introduce Juliet Vaughn, who is our legal counsel from the city attorney's office this evening.

Juliet is going to be our primary attorney supporting the planning commission moving forward.

Alex Mog, who many of you have uh had opportunity to work with for many years, is still going to be supporting us in the background, but uh he's he was he is gonna be transitioning to some other assignments within the city attorney's office.

So I'd like to welcome Juliet to the commission.

Hi everyone, I'm happy to be here and happy to answer any questions you have during the meeting.

Um as Waylon mentioned, I work under Alex in the City Attorney's Office, serve as assistant city attorney, and I assist on a lot of the um land use and planning projects here.

Welcome, Julia.

The next item on the agenda is the consent calendar.

There is one item on the consent calendar this evening, the draft minutes for the planning commission meeting of May 7th, 2026.

Would any commissioners like to pull the item from the consent calendar for corrections?

If not, may I have a motion to approve the consent calendar?

Commissioner Rich.

Sorry.

Okay.

It has been moved by Commissioner Rich and seconded by Commissioner Solis that the consent calendar be approved.

Please vote on your screens.

The motion passes.

Yeses, one abstention, and zero no's.

The next item on the agenda is staff reports and announcements.

Mr.

Secretary, do we have any staff reports or announcements this evening?

There are no additional staff announcements this evening.

Moving on to public comments.

The public is invited to make any comments related to agenda items that are not listed under public hearings or other items of public interest at this time.

If you wish to speak during public comments, please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the administrative assistant and speakers will be invited to speak.

Public comments are limited to three minutes per person.

If you wish to comment on an item listed under the public hearings portion of the agenda, you will have an opportunity to do so when the item is heard.

Please fill out the speaker card and hand it to the administrative assistant.

We are now taking public comments.

This is the time when any person may address the board on matters not listed on this agenda.

Seeing no comments, on to the next item on the agenda, which would be presentations.

Mr.

Secretary, are there any presentations this evening?

There are no presentations this evening.

Tonight's agenda has one public hearing item for consideration by the planning commission.

If you wish to speak before the planning commission, please submit a speaker card and you state your name and address for the record.

Meetings of the planning commission are recorded and televised, so please speak clearly for the record.

The hearing item is agenda item seven-ZA26-002 consideration of a resolution recommending the city council amend San Leandro's zoning code sections 1.12.108 and 2.04.388 to modify regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units J ADUs.

May we please have the staff report.

Good evening, commissioners.

The item before you is a proposal to update the city's ADU and JADU ordinance.

And the city has even waived development impact fees for ADUs.

We've eliminated parking requirements for ADUs and engage in promotional outreach for ADUs to let people know how to create ADUs and the requirements of the ADUs so that they're um consider for development in the city.

And so why are we doing an update now?

Mainly because the state is requiring us to under several legislations.

The last time that we did an update for ADU was in 2022, and um between 2022 and now there were several legislation that were enacted, but we were able to just comply with state law.

But with the most recent um changes, um, there were legislation that specifically requires all cities to update their ADU ordinance.

Um the state also updated its ordinance and reorganize it into different sections, and so the numbers that we referenced in the um code to the state section also is no longer applicable with the changes that the state made.

And so um with the gaps that existed between the local ADU and the state law, we've been applying state law um in our handouts and um in the information that we give out to uh applicants, um, and the local ADU ordinance that's adopted tonight is subject to review by state HTC, and HCC is also requiring all provisions of state ADU law be addressed in local law.

So you might have seen some provision that may appear to be more um related to the fire code or the um building code added to the zoning code.

Um as part of the preparation for the ADU ordinance.

We looked at comment letters that the state has provided to other cities, and they were very specific in the language that they wanted to um this that this they wanted the city to include in their local ordinance, and so that's why there's some of the language that may not typically be associated with the zoning code included in the zoning code.

Um that's also why we didn't um include a red line version of the um ordinance that you normally would receive because we reorganized the whole section of the ADU's regulation, and so um it would appear just like everything was striked out and rewritten.

And so it was not very helpful to have a redline version included in the um staff report that you've received.

So what with one of the most um recent changes that's impactful is the number of ADUs that a property can have.

Um under state law.

Now you can have a JADU, which can be created from converted uh which can be created from converted existing habitospace or an attached garage.

Um you can do a conversion of an AD converted conversion ADU, which means existing habitat space that's converted to an ADU, and then you can also do a detached ADU.

Um, and in addition to that, you can create an ADU using the standard ADU regulation that the city has.

So on you can have four units that's comprise of ADUs and JADUs in addition to the main house.

For multifamily properties, one of the major changes is for new development.

For existing development, you can have up to eight detached ADUs from the development.

And within the multifamily development, up to 25% of the number, or I'm sorry, any habitable space, any inhabitable space that can be converted to number of units, they can have up to 25% of the existing number of units be converted to ADUs.

So that's uh for new development.

That's uh two detached ADUs can be added.

Um for existing development, eight detached ADUs, and then depending on the number of units, 25% of the units can be created using habital space, inhabitable space that's existing on the property.

Another change that's um occurred is the review timeline.

The um initial review timeline is shortened from 30 days to 15 days.

The uh 60 day decision period is the same, but there is an appeal process now for um any applications that were denied by the city, and um we don't actually have any um denied application as far as I know for ADUs yet, but there's a path forward that people can appeal to the city council now, should their application be denied.

Um, other reforms including um HOA non-interference, uh meaning that the HOA can't create regulation that would prohibit people from um creating ADUs, and um as far as uh resubmittal goes, once we provide a comment letter to um the applicant, um we can't add additional comments in the subsequent comment letters so the first comment letter needs to be inclusive of all the items that they are missing from their application, and um the changes also clarify multi-family definition, meaning that um in order to be considered a multi-family, a property needs to have two or more units that are connected to each other.

So if they have multiple single family dwelling units on the lot, it's still considered a multi- single family property.

So the units have to be attached to each other.

So if there's two units attached to each other, such as a duplex, then it's considered a multifamily.

But if there's three units that's not attached on the same lot, that's still considered single family for the purpose of ADU law.

So the um regulations support our housing element goals, um, and as far as CQ regulations go, it's considered exempt under guideline uh section 5 15 282 H.

And for public noticing, we sent out uh the notice to the East Bay Time on the it was published on May 22nd, and no comments were received for the item.

And the recommendation is that the commissioners adopt a resolution recommending that city council adopt the proposed zoning code amendment.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Does the commission have any questions for staff?

Commissioner Nay.

Let's see.

I may have moved to.

Do you mind clicking back into the queue one more time?

I'm sorry.

Yeah, okay, so it's lighting up as Commissioner Nay.

Okay.

And we like secretary.

I'm hitting this one.

Just the slide mark up, I guess.

That's good.

Okay, so now we have active speakers.

So maybe from the top, um, I see Commissioner Zuber.

There it goes.

Okay.

Okay.

It's live.

Great.

Um just a few questions.

Um in section four under setbacks and separation.

Um item four C it says the ADU shall not occupy a required front yard.

Is there a definition of required front yard?

It's generally the first 20 feet behind the front property line.

Okay, so that's pretty standard then.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Um, then um, uh section five under height, it talks about a detached ADU shall not exceed 16 feet.

And then on item B, it it asks, well, if it's it says well, within it, if it's within one half of one mile walking distance to major transit stop, then it can be 18 feet.

Do you understand why what that has to do with why the increase?

I don't know why there's an increase, but um there's uh for the height there's certain increases that state law allows.

So for example, for multifamily properties, um, if there's a multi-level multi-a multi-story multi-family structure, the height is able to go higher than um if it were just a single story structure on the property.

So maybe it's more common that it's a multi-family within half a mile of transit, so they'd be higher.

Is that I don't know.

I think the expectation is there's developments more intense around our meter transit stop.

So the um so the um so the height, the the the additional height is in recognition of perhaps you're seeing like taller buildings, more intense development near transit.

Near transit, right?

Okay, and then um, and then an item D, um it says it shall not exceed an attached ADU shall not exceed 25 feet in height, um but is it allowed to be higher than the primary existing?

Um so the primary the primary house can go above 25 feet, so in theory, um the primary house can go higher up to 35 feet, um but as an ADU if you built an A-tached ADU to an existing house, it can only go up to 25 feet.

Right, but it doesn't it um let's say the existing height of the house is um 18 feet, then the ADU can go higher than that.

Yes, and this is mandated by the state.

It is okay.

Um item, is that C?

Sorry, apologies.

Maybe that's 13.

Third under it's item C, it says review and approval authority.

Um that's page 17, and then item one B, it says that the city shall not require the application to include an item that was not included in the list, which is great in my opinion.

But the city shall determine whether the resubmittal is complete and provide written notice of the determination no later than 15 business days after receiving the resubmittal.

So does that so that goes for 15 days from the initial submittal and then and they get another 15 days from the resubmittal?

Is that um so once an application is submitted, they have we have 15 days to provide a completeness letter to the applicant to let them know what items are missing?

Um but the applicant can take uh longer than 15 days to get back to us.

Um but our review time is limited to um the first review is 15 days, and but the total review is no more than 60 days.

No more than 60 days, okay.

And then um, and then you can't make a comment that you didn't make before, no new comments, right?

But if they change something when they resubmit to you, then you can make a new comment.

Since Jenny mean if if they change the design when they resubmit it to you, then a new comment would be allowed pertaining to this.

Okay, okay, and then my last question, sorry.

Um page 21 of the submitted document under multifamily dwellings-detached accessory dwelling units, item four E.

Um it says if an existing multifamily dwelling has a rear or side setback of less than four feet, um, no modifications of the existing multifamily dwelling shall be required, but I I'm trying to figure out um if the minimum is four feet for an ADU, but the existing house has less than four feet.

Are you saying that the ADU can also have less than four feet?

Is that what that's saying?

Um wait, if um, let me know if this is correct, but if um there's an existing multifamily that a multifamily ADU that does not meet the require setback, but it's existing, um, then we would not require them to make the additional setback, and we would accept what's existing.

Uh so a new ADU can be built up to four, like as close as four feet from um from property lines.

I think what this provision is saying that is if there's a if this is on multifamily property with a condition that um is uh is the the multifamily dwelling is is less than four feet, then then that that condition doesn't need to be corrected as part of the it doesn't need to be corrected, but it doesn't change that the ADU still has to be four feet.

That's right.

Okay, okay, great.

Thank you.

Okay, moving on to chairman vice chairman does it.

Okay, so so I see that one of the benefits is to allow homeowners to generate uh rental income.

Are there any regulations or restrictions on um turning these uh AD ADUs into Airbnbs, for example?

ADUs are not.

ADUs are not allowed to be used for Airbnb or short-term rental.

Um they're required to be rented out for more than 30 days at a time.

Over to Commissioner Ney.

Um, so I saw in there that there's no like you're not gonna require a parking space for the ADU, but do we ever take into consideration the amount of cars, all the additional ADUs on the property we now need?

I mean, I will say my street alone has a lot of ADUs and there's no parking.

Um so I'm just wondering how we account for that.

Um under state law, we cannot require um additional parking for ADUs, and if an um parking space was demolished, um in the creation of an ADU, we are also not uh allowed to require it to be replaced.

Okay.

I would add that it's a balancing act between objectives of the state.

So um I think that in the state's judgment they made the decision to be more um uh have more allowance for um for um ADUs in exchange and kind of at the same time uh uh value can the value of the um ADUs in this case, um the importance of the ADUs over having the importance of um uh of um parking in in neighborhoods.

Having places to park the vehicles for the people residing in the ADUs?

Yeah, so there's so there's trade-offs.

Um recognize the value of ADUs.

Yeah, and I guess like I'm hearing you say like I understand the multi-generational, I understand the kids, I understand the bringing in income, but you're saying that we're trading that off for the fact that there's nowhere to park the vehicles for the people living in those homes, right?

Kind of.

Right.

So the so the law so the C laws are adopted specifically say that um that's restrict the ability of cities to mandate parking and associated with ADUs.

Understood.

Okay, Commissioner Tabjula.

Uh thank you for the presentation.

Uh going back to the topic of the setbacks.

Uh so if you have like a detached existing garage which will be demolished and build a new ADU on there, so would the setback requirements if the garage was like on the property line, do they still have to leave the four feet setback?

Um you are able to rebuild if the garage was uh less than four feet away from the property line.

Um you can build the uh ADU to where the footprint of the garage was.

Um based on the property line, so you can start at the property line?

Um it's possible, yes.

Um if it's an existing structure and it was um converted to an ADU or being um rebuilt as an ADU, then it can uh have a setback of less than four feet if the previous structure was uh set back less than four feet.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from the commissioners?

Um I had a few questions.

Uh just in terms of like the difference between standard ADU versus detached ADU.

Is it safe to say that standard ADU is attached to the primary dwelling?

Is that the main difference between the two?

Not necessarily.

The standard ADU is the ADU that um the state has allowed cities to create regulations for.

So it's one of the categories of ADUs that can be created.

And um how that different from the other category is um for the city.

Um our ADUs can go up to 1200 square feet if it meets certain um provisions.

So for the uh those ADUs that are created under the state provision, um, they may not need to meet the four foot setback if it's not possible to meet the four foot setback, for example.

Okay.

So the standard ADUs are to the state standards?

Um to the city standard.

To the city standards, okay?

All right.

And then I guess in terms of uh, I'm looking at page two of the proposed zoning code amendments.

Uh there's a portion there that talks about maximum square footage, 1,000 square feet, regardless of bedroom size, 1,000 square feet, um, and then it gives a threshold of not to exceed if over 1,000 feet, then 50% of the total floor area from the primary dwelling not to exceed 1200 square feet.

Does that account for a potential where the primary dwelling has a JADU contained within?

Does that square footage of the JADU make up the total primary dwelling on this factor?

Um for the JADU, yes, the square footage of the JADU would be added to the square footage of the rest of the structure because it's considered um one structure.

Um but if it were an ADU, you create it um under another provision, then we wouldn't be able to account the square footage into that fact uh into the calculation.

Okay, so primary dwelling, if there's hypothetical a bonus room within a primary dwelling that's 500 square feet, does that 500 square feet draw down from the 1200 or is it inclusive to the 1200?

I'm sorry, can you repeat that?

So primary dwelling, and you have a bonus room as a converted J ADU and it's recognized by the city, the city's acknowledged it as a J ADU, the square footage of that bonus room is 500 square feet.

Does the 500 square feet draw down against the max threshold here of 1200 square feet, or is it isolated and separate?

Uh for the purpose of this, it would be isolated and separate.

Um, so for the 1200 square feet um for this section, it's um if you wanted to have an ADU that's uh over a thousand square feet, the main house has to be over um at least two thousand square feet.

Uh so if you wanted a 1200 square feet ADU, um the main house has to be at least 2400 square feet.

If that 2400 square feet contains a J ADU, that numbers find uh to be added to be included, but if it contains an ADU, then that number is excluded from the calculation because ADUs are not um considered part of the main house.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

And then looking at page six of the zoning package, um, there's a section there that goes on to talk about unpermitted ADUs.

Um, trying to make sense of this paragraph that's contained here, but it reads as though the city shall not deny a building permit application to legalize an unpermitted ADU or JADU that was constructed before January 1st, 2020.

Um, but then it goes on at the tail end to say unless the chief building official makes a finding that correcting the violation is necessary to comply with XYZ standards.

Um, I'm just trying to kind of understand how this would work.

So are we saying if there's an unpermitted ADU or J ADU that was built prior to 2020, and that property owner wants to make right by having it officially permitted, they bring it to the city.

Can you maybe walk me through like how the city would ultimately review that application and what this section is detailing or intending to intending to get across?

I can explain what the section is intending to get across.

I can explain what the general process is like, but it's a building permit procedure.

And so I'm not too familiar with the whole process itself.

But essentially, the um section is telling cities um if there's an illegal ADU, you must approve it, um, unless the building official can make a um finding that um it's not approvable.

Um, I think the the chief building officials decision point is basically is this is this gonna be a health and safety concern that that's um where it would pose a threat to the kind of the safety of the occupants in the community by permitting that's that's basically what it would say.

So it's not as though there would be like a retroactive inspection that occurs by the city of the unpermitted JADU or ADU to verify like there's no workmanship issues, there's no craftsmanship issues, none of that would occur.

It's more so the chief buildings um finding a facts if it's a health or safety code in terms of denying or approving.

My understanding is there may be like an inspection associated with that determination.

Okay.

So that's kind of where the concern is coming from.

Uh I'm all for trying to streamline the process.

But also, I mean, if it was kind of like a shoddy construction effort to begin with, wanting to see if there's some sort of checks and balances to make sure that uh it doesn't continue down that path.

No, and then my last question is on page eight for JADUs.

It gives the criteria one through seven.

The last one is efficiency kitchen.

Um, and then it gives some like broad base definitions of what the efficiency kitchen is, uh a cooking facility with appliances, and then a food preparation counter.

Um, I mean, are we looking what what would pass the test in terms of an efficiency kitchen?

Are we looking at like the plug-in stovetop electric burners as being a cooking facility?

Uh a mobile countertop as uh a countertop for storage, like what ultimately would qualify for for fitting the bill in this category?

Um historically, we've looked at the application the plan set to make sure that there's um a surface where food can be cooked on.

Um there should be a surface where food can be prepared on.

So we looked at this um very liberally.

Um the building code I don't think has specific requirements or definitions for um an efficiency kitchen.

So it could just be a two-burner top, um, next to a sink, and um that may qualify.

Okay, so it could be an electric stovetop that you purchase from Target, a two-burner electric stovetop that you can plug in and it sits on a countertop, and that would qualify as being an efficiency kitchen.

Um there needs to be counter space.

Um, that's equivalent, you know, proportional to the size of the unit, but um yes.

Okay.

This is interesting.

So you're not looking for dedicated hookups and connections, either gas or dedicated electric for um, you know, a four-burner or bigger sort of um electric stove top.

That's that's not the intent here.

That's not yeah, no, okay.

Okay, those are all my questions.

All right, perfect.

Thank you for the presentation.

Uh is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on this item?

Do we have any speaker cards?

No speaker cards.

Okay.

Moving on to discussion and deliberation.

Do any commissioners wish to discuss the item?

Commissioner Rich.

Uh, thank you.

Great report.

Um, very clear.

Uh the stuff is confusing to me.

It's like a tongue twister with ADUs and JDUs and standard ADUs and attached and detached.

My understanding of what's before us tonight is uh cleanup, the state's requirements to do this.

Um a lot of education tonight about what the state is requiring, what that means.

Um personally, I would be supporting this even if the state didn't require it.

Um looking at some of these uh the development pipeline, the ADUs have been pretty much the only game in town lately.

That's where we're getting new units, is from ADUs.

Uh so I'm wondering if we can't do more.

I know other jurisdictions have uh pre-approved standardized plans.

Wondering if that's something that San Lander might look into.

Um, but uh I support this and thank you for the presentation.

As far as the um pre-approved ADU, we have a process for it.

We just haven't had any applications yet.

Do any other commissioners wish to discuss the item?

Do I hear a motion to adopt a resolution?

Commissioner Solis.

I'd like to make a motion that the planning commission adopt a resolution recommending the city council to amend the San Land or zoning codes sections 1.12.108 and 2.04.388 to modify the regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units.

Do we have a second?

Commissioner Zuber?

I'll second.

It has been moved by Commissioner Solis and seconded by Commissioner Zuber to adopt a resolution recommending the city council amend the San Leandro zoning code sections 1.12.108 and 2.04.388 to modify regulations pertaining to accessory dwelling units ADUs and junior accessory dwelling units JADUs.

Please cast your vote.

And the motion passes unanimously.

Six or seven, seven yeses.

The next item on the agenda is commission reports and announcements.

Does staff have any updates under this item?

Thanks, Sharperson.

I do have one update uh under this item.

At the commission's request at the last meeting.

Um I'd like just to provide a brief update on the city's housing element annual progress report for calendar year 2025.

Uh staff recently submitted the annual progress report to uh state HCD.

Uh and the purpose of the APR is to document the city's progress in implementing its housing, its housing element.

And so for your reference, uh a copy of a table from the APR is was provided to the commission before the meeting at the at your desk.

And it summarizes the city's permit issuance by income category during over the uh first three years of the housing element uh planning period.

Um and also um there's printout provided of the city's housing element implementation dash implementation dashboard, which is a web page that staff was created to as a better way to communicate um the city's progress and meeting its housing element goals.

As you can see through the with the in the information provided, the uh city has a goal of 3,855 units over an eight-year period to meet its housing, meet its housing needs.

Uh three years into the eight-year cycle, the city has permitted 398 units, and that represents about 10% of the overall overall goal of 3,855 units.

There's a separate goal in the housing element to uh produce 256 units, uh 256 ADUs during the planning period, and so the city um has successfully produced uh over two-thirds of that um of that target uh so far in this housing cycle.

And uh, commission um maybe I'll see in our our webpage the city's doing a lot to support housing production, including uh the state the city earnings pro housing designation with a score of 64 points, more than double HCD's minimum threshold.

Um and other items, including creating a rent registry program, restructuring park impact fees, and other substantive um programs to encourage housing development.

With that being said, the city and recognizing the city's doing a lot to support housing.

There is clearly a lot of work to be done to meet our production uh production goals, which is clearly what the um what that table demonstrates.

Uh the good news is that there is a significant number of units in the in the housing pipeline.

I've also included um the most recent edition of the city's um development activity map and table, and that shows more than 4,000 units in the pipeline in terms of uh units that are under review or approved or under construction, which um will uh which will hopefully help the city to meet its uh goals during this planning period.

Uh that concludes my brief report.

Um happy to answer any questions that the commission may have or welcoming comments from the commission.

Thank you for that update.

Uh any questions from the commissioners for the secretary?

No.

Are there any announcements that members of the commission would like to make?

No.

Okay, hearing none, the time is now 7 45.

This meeting is adjourned.