Belmont to revisit secondary unit rules: State legislation prompts another review of just passed regulations

“What’s interesting about this is that the state basically came along and swept up the customized requirements that we had worked through,” he said.

The new rules limit local jurisdictions’ ability to restrict accessory dwelling units, also known as in-law or “granny” units, and essentially allows homeowners with these projects to bypass public review, ease parking restrictions and could potentially reduce associated costs.

Changes included in the council’s fall amendments, such as reducing the maximum size for second units to 800 square feet from 1,200 square feet and increasing the ratio of the second units to the main unit from 30 percent to 40 percent, were designed to keep second units at a size that would stay affordable, yet functional, according to a staff report.

Among the few regulations the city is now able to review are whether to allow short-term rentals, require property owners to live on one of the units and require additional parking for eligible secondary units.

Resident Karen Shane cautioned councilmembers against restricting the ability of property owners to use second units for short-term rentals. She said homeowners have been renting rooms or secondary units in Belmont for years, and that this practice was not a recent phenomenon resulting from short-term rental platforms like Airbnb.

“I believe homeowners should be able to do what they want,” she said.

Mayor Charles Stone said he was eager to discuss whether short-term rentals should be allowed, arguing that if they are, he would encourage city officials to consider taxing them.

“If we’re going to allow people to rent hotel units on their properties then we should be getting our fair share of that just like hotels,” he said.

Kim expressed a concern about how an increase in the area’s density might impact the already limited parking in Belmont neighborhoods.

“There is a real possibility that the parking situation that we’re all sensitive to in our hills will get worse,” he said.

The state laws mandate that no parking space is required for new secondary units that are built within a half mile of public transit, which exempts many Belmont neighborhoods from requiring additional parking.

The council also discussed whether it made sense to create a discretionary review process for attached and detached ADUs exceeding the maximum unit size. Local zoning takes precedent on the maximum size but, without a city regulation, the new state law allows units up to 50 percent of the main home size, with a detached unit being no more than 1,200 square feet. The council ultimately decided not to create an additional review process to consider these projects.

Resident Steve McMahon said he is ready to move on plans for an ADU on his property, but wasn’t sure what steps to take next.

“My question is how quickly the building department is prepared to act on plans for this kind of thing,” he said.

City staff confirmed that the state laws are already in effect and will define what is allowed until the city adopts additional regulations, and that they will help residents understand what is required.

Stone said he hoped the city’s second review of ADU regulations would happen efficiently to provide clarity to residents considering an ADU on their properties.

“Oftentimes when folks need these units, they need them fast,” he said.

Councilman Eric Reed agreed that the city’s review process on any additional regulations should move as quickly as possible.

“My understanding is that we build half a unit a year in ADUs,” he said. “That to me says we should expend an efficient amount of energy getting this reviewed.”

Councilman Warren Lieberman said he thought city officials should still spend time reviewing the regulations, which may be addressing a shifting housing landscape.

“I think it is quite possible that we will see more requests for secondary units within somebody’s envelope than we have in the past,” he said. “I can see that changing.”

The council voted to have the Planning Commission review the regulations over which the city has discretion. After the Planning Commission has provided their recommendations, draft regulations will then come back to the council for review and public hearings.

“It would seem to me that if we sent this back to the commission, that is where we have discussion and where the commission and council have said, ‘this is how we feel about this,’ it’s not a long discussion,” said Kim. “We’re not going to relitigate this discussion.”

anna@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 102