PC - 2018-07 - Recommending that the City Council Adopt Ordinance No. 979 for the Approval of MCA 18-01 Amending Title 17 to Adopt New Accessory Dwelling UnitsPC RESOLUTION 18-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ORDINANCE NO.
979 FOR THE APPROVAL OF MCA 18-01, AMENDING TITLE 17
(ZONING) OF THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT NEW
REGULATIONS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
WHEREAS, on January 1, 2017, Senate Bill 1069 and Assembly Bill 2299 went
into effect, establishing new regulations pertaining to local agency regulation and
processing of new accessory dwelling unit proposals in single-family and multifamily
residential zones;
WHEREAS, on January 1, 2018, Senate Bill 229 and Assembly Bill 494 provided
further clarification within the State of California Accessory Dwelling Unit laws;
WHEREAS, Section 17.152.060 of the Rosemead Municipal Code provides the
criteria for a Zoning Code Amendment;
WHEREAS, Sections 65854 and 65855 of the California Government Code and
Section 17.152.040 of the Rosemead Municipal Code authorizes the Planning
Commission to review and make recommendations to the City Council regarding
amendments to the City's Zoning Code;
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2018, a notice was published in the Rosemead Reader
and notices were posted in six public locations, specifying the availability of the proposal,
and the date, time, and location of the public hearing for Municipal Code Amendment 18-
01;
WHEREAS, on April 16, 2018, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed and
advertised public hearing to receive oral and written testimony relative to Municipal Code
Amendment 18-01; and
WHEREAS, the Rosemead Planning Commission has sufficiently considered all
testimony presented to them in order to make the following determination.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City
of Rosemead as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 21080.17 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
exempts the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county to implement the provisions of
Section 65852.1 or Section 65852.2 of the Government Code. Accordingly, MCA 18-01
is for the adoption of an ordinance by the City of Rosemead to implement the provisions
of Section 65852.1 and Section 65852.2 of the Government Code.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission HEREBY FINDS AND DETERMINES that
facts do exist to justify approving Municipal Code Amendment 18-01, in accordance with
Section 17.152.060 of the Rosemead Municipal Code as follows:
A. The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and any
applicable specific plan;
FINDING: The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan and
Garvey Avenue Specific Plan, as Government Code Section 65852.2(a)(8), provides that
an accessory dwelling unit that conforms to [the applicable] subdivision shall be deemed
to be an accessory use or an accessory building and shall not be considered to exceed
the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a
residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations
for the lot.
B. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health,
safety, convenience, or welfare of the City; and
FINDING: The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, as accessory dwelling units are
residential accessory uses that were previously permitted in the Zoning Code as "second
dwelling units". According to the new State Accessory Dwelling Unit laws, any local
ordinance adopted prior to January 1, 2017, and not consistent with the new State
Accessory Dwelling Unit laws, are deemed null and void. The City of Rosemead's Second
Dwelling Unit Ordinance is not consistent with the new State Accessory Dwelling Unit
laws. As a result, the City of Rosemead is required to review new Accessory Dwelling
Unit proposals under the minimum State standards or adopt a new Accessory Dwelling
Unit ordinance in compliance with applicable State Accessory Dwelling Unit laws. The
proposed amendments would protect public interest, health, and safety of the City by
regulating accessory dwelling units more consistent with the Zoning Code, instead of
applying to the minimum State standards.
C. The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable
provisions of [the] Zoning Code.
FINDING: The City of Rosemead's Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance is not
consistent with the new State Accessory Dwelling Unit laws, and is therefore, deemed
null and void. Additionally, the new State Accessory Dwelling Unit laws have replaced the
term "second unit", commonly known as "granny flat", with the term "accessory dwelling
unit". The proposed amendment is internally consistent with other applicable provisions
of the Zoning Code, as all sections referencing "second dwelling units" would be revised
to be consistent the State laws pertaining to accessory dwelling units.
SECTION 3. The Planning Commission HEREBY RECOMMENDS City Council
adoption of Ordinance No. 979 for the approval of Municipal Code Amendment 18-01, for
the amendment of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rosemead Municipal Code to adopt new
regulations for accessory dwelling units.
SECTION 4. This resolution is the result of an action taken by the Planning
Commission on April16, 2018, by the following vote:
AYES:
DANG, ENG, HERRERA, LOPEZ, AND TANG
NOES:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
SECTION 5. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this re lution and shall
transmit copies of same to the Rosemead City Clerk.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 16th day Apri
an Dang, Chair
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Rosemead at its regular meeting, held on the 16th day of April
2018, by the following vote:
AYES:
DANG, ENG, HERRERA, LOPEZ, AND TANG
NOES:
NONE
ABSTAIN:
NONE
ABSENT:
NONE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
C s'
Kane Thuyen, Planning Commission Attorney
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP