Commission backs new ‘granny flat’ rules for Hermosa Beach

Hermosa Beach City Hall. File photo

Hermosa Beach City Hall. File photo

The Hermosa Beach Planning Commission unanimously supported a slate of rules for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) at its Monday night meeting, bringing the city closer to compliance with a state law meant to alleviate the California housing crisis, while exposing ongoing friction with the state legislature over local control of land-use decisions.

Commissioners were confronting the issue for the second time in two months. In May, they sent back staff’s first try at an ordinance out of concern that it created the potential for the city to be inundated with ADUs, which are units built on land already containing a single-family residence, and are commonly called “granny flats” or “in-law units.” Monday’s ordinance contains several new attempts to curb some of the effects of the added density that ADUs could create.

Former City Councilmember Jim Rosenberger addressed the commission and pointed to zoning changes enacted while he was on the council, such as increasing parking requirements and reducing the height limit, that prevented further increases in Hermosa’s population density. The proliferation of ADUs, he said, is the kind of change that would threaten the benefits those reforms created.

“Property values certainly haven’t gone down since then,” Rosenberger said.

Backers of accessory dwelling units contend that they are one of several ways California can meet pent-up demand for housing in the state. Resident Stephanie Solomon said that the units, which are smaller than primary residences, could be especially useful for populations who have a hard time affording a place to live in Hermosa.

“I was very disappointed that no one mentioned that this can help seniors and the disabled,” Solomon said of last month’s discussion.

Bills passed by the state legislature in 2016 and 2017 voided existing municipal ordinances on ADUs throughout California. Hermosa’s previous ordinance on the subject, passed in 1992, limited the units to lots over 8,000 square feet, of which there are few in the city. It was able to do so under a now-repealed state law that allowed cities to limit ADUs by making findings that additional density could negatively impact city services and infrastructure.

Although commissioners unanimously endorsed the new rules, they were less than thrilled at the prospect of passing them. They equated the ADU requirements to SB 827, a controversial state bill that would have eroded local zoning power over certain developments. SB 827 died earlier this year, but commissioners were at a loss to understand how other bills reducing local control of land use issues had performed so well in Sacramento; all the ADU-related laws have passed by wide margins.

“I was appalled with the steamroller approach. I felt overpowered by this,” Flaherty said.

Starting Jan. 1 of this year, cities have had to rely on the framework developed by the state legislature until passing their own ordinances. (According to city staff, Hermosa has received three applications for ADUs since then, and has approved one “junior ADU,” a unit walled off within an existing structure.) In designing the ordinance, Hermosa relied in part on guidelines form the state Department of Housing and Community Development, which is responsible for overseeing implementation of the new ADU rules. While the department does not have the power to give up-or-down approval to cities’ ordinances, that is one of several changes contemplated by a new ADU bill now pending before the legislature. Another would give enforcement power over municipal compliance to the state Attorney General’s office.

A preview of a what a spat with regulators might look like is unfolding in El Segundo, Hermosa staff said, which has already adopted its own ADU ordinance. That ordinance prohibits garage conversions and has generated complaints from residents interested in adding a unit, as well as unwanted attention from the state.
Despite the example, Commissioner Rob Saemann was ready to include a ban on garage conversions in Hermosa’s proposed ordinance. And while other commissioners were sympathetic to the intent of limiting new units, they were hesitant to pick a fight that could “expose the city to liability,” and the idea was scrapped.

As with the version presented in May, the ordinance endorsed Monday allows ADUs on residentially zoned lots greater than 4,000 square feet containing only a single-family home. (According to city staff, there are 1,589 such lots in the city.) Instead of reducing the number of potential lots, the recommended ordinance attempts to address effects ADUs could have, especially on parking.

The new state laws prohibit cities from imposing parking requirements on ADUs in five cases, including that the unit is “located within one-half mile of public transit.” “Public transit” is not defined in the statute, and staff’s May ordinance concluded that, because the entirety of Hermosa’s 1.4 square-mile land area is within half a mile of at least one bus line, no parking could be required for ADUs. In the interim staff looked at an ADU law passed by the City of Carlsbad, which produced a more restrictive definition of “public transit” by referring to another code section of state law. That section defines “major transit stop” as including an area where two bus lines intersect with peak a peak frequency of less than 15 minutes. Because there are arguably no such locations in Hermosa, the latest version would allow the city to impose parking requirements on all ADUs. The law would require the applicant to provide one parking space per bedroom added.

The ordinance now heads to the City Council for a public hearing at a future meeting, but it’s not clear that this approach on parking requirements will pass muster with the state. Greg Nickless, a housing policy analyst with the state Housing and Community Development Department, said that the exemption was created out of recognition that requiring parking makes building ADUs more complicated and more expensive, and less likely to be built at all. Relying on a definition from a different code section — the ADU rules are in the state Government Code, and the definition in the latest ordinance comes from the Public Resources Code — probably drifts from the law’s intent, he said, especially if doing so resulted in a drastic increase in the share of potential units subject to parking requirements. Nickless also noted that another ADU bill currently pending in the legislature, SB 831, explicitly defines “public transit.” That bill was introduced by Bob Wieckowski, author of the bill that created the original parking requirements exemption. His definition is broad enough to cover any bus stop.

Commissioners did not address the issue Monday night, but Assistant City Attorney Lauren Langer acknowledged that ongoing state interest in the issue, including SB 831, was making it challenging to craft an ordinance specific to Hermosa. 

“This is something that the legislature continues to tinker with. And it’s really difficult having a moving target as we try to craft an ordinance for our community,” Langer said.

 

Comments:

comments so far. Comments posted to EasyReaderNews.com may be reprinted in the Easy Reader print edition, which is published each Thursday.