The State of California is bent on increasing affordable housing statewide, but its push to cut back regulations that could limit the building of auxiliary dwelling units (so-called granny flats) has Malibu policymakers afraid the granny flats will turn into a wave of new vacation rentals. City leaders are rushing to tighten local ordinances as the city’s code changes, especially since the new requirements could mean granny flats can be rubber-stamped without specific input or approval from city planners.
Last week, the Malibu Planning Commission voted on a number of regulations to the auxiliary dwelling units, now called ADUs—most notably, proposing a ban on the use of guest houses for vacation rentals.
“If half of the people in Malibu build an ADU, you’re going to add 2,000 short-term rental potentials,” Commissioner John Mazza warned during the Tuesday, Sept. 4, meeting.
But city staff did not agree.
“This doesn’t change, or increase the potential, or really the attractiveness, very much, of people building an ADU,” Planning Director Bonnie Blue told Mazza. “They can already do that today, so, it’s not opening the floodgates, so to speak.”
Mazza replied that it would be better to propose a ban and have it struck down, rather than leave it and open up the possibility of a flood of new short-term rental units into Malibu.
“If we ban it, they can always turn around and [reverse the ban], but if you’re silent on it or say you can rent ‘em, there it is. It’s an ordinance,” Mazza said.
“I think [the ban] should be in there and they can take it out,” Mazza continued. “We need housing for people who work here and have kids—places like that. We don’t have any anymore, it’s gone. Believe me, it’s gone.”
A granny flat, which can either be built from an existing garage, built out of the side of an existing house or be a new stand-alone structure, must fit several requirements. The proposed wording would cap the size of an ADU to 900 square feet or no more than 50 percent of the living area of the primary residence (whichever is smaller). There is a proposed maximum of one such unit per property, and each unit requires one additional parking space.
It would not require a new garage be built if the existing one is converted into an apartment.
“It’s my understanding, if you’ve got a garage, and all of a sudden it’s a living area—it’s an ADU—does that mean you have to provide three parking spaces outside, or one?” Mazza asked.
“You’ve got to build a new garage,” Commission Vice Chair Steve Uhring replied.
“No, you don’t have to build a new garage. That’s what I’m asking,” Mazza said. “We’d have three parking spaces, but they can just be tandem on the driveway?”
“That is correct; they’d all be on the driveway,” Contract Planner (and former Planning Director) Joyce Parker-Bozylinski replied.
“I’d rather have a new garage, but I don’t know if that flies,” Mazza said.
Both Uhring and Commission Chair Chris Marx agreed that building a new garage may be one requirement too far.
“We’ve got enough restrictions on this thing. This is not going to be an easy process,” Uhring said.
Marx agreed, saying requiring a garage would make it difficult for homeowners to meet the requirements, which are intended to provide additional affordable housing in the community.
According to Parker-Bozylinski, the resolution could return before the planning commission for final approval as early as its next meeting, on Sept. 17.