In a repeat of an initial decision last month, the Pleasanton City Council voted 4-1 on Feb. 16 to support a citywide prohibition on the construction of new two-story accessory dwelling units (ADUs) along with amending the city’s master fee application process.
The city will no longer collect impact fees for ADUs up to 749 square feet, though reduced impact fees for larger ADUs will still be received, as required by state law. Existing ADUs will be grandfathered and are not subject to the amendment, according to staff.
New state law that went into effect on Jan. 1 requires California cities to approve new detached ADUs with only a building permit that does not impose any standards other than a maximum 800 square feet, 16-foot height limit and 4-foot setbacks.
The new legislation also allows local municipalities to decide whether to allow two-story units, which the council voted against in an effort to retain more local control over increasing housing density, with Councilmember Jack Balch as the sole dissenter as the proposed ordinance returned for further council review on Feb. 16.
The ordinance approaches the ban based on height, so it applies to ADUs that are two stories on their own as well as those on the second story of an existing home.
As he did the month before, Balch objected citing the Walnut Hills neighborhood as an example of how the units were previously allowed and wondered why the city now “will not allow them to build an ADU.”
Reminiscent of last month’s council discussion, Mayor Karla Brown said, “I’ve seen many good units over a garage, and I’ve seen some really bad ones,” and countered that allowing second-story ADUs would unfairly impact neighbors.
“If I buy a house, and it’s next to a home that does not have a unit over the garage, and with minimum ministerial approval, all of a sudden, I have something that blocks my view of the mountains, and I have no say about it,” Brown said. “It changes my property values and my enjoyment of my home, so I just can’t support that.”
Balch replied that curtailing a homeowner’s ability to build an ADU on a home with preapproval to build the unit would lower its value. He also took exception with reducing previously allowed units up to 1,200 square feet, based on the number of bedrooms.
The city has allowed one-bedroom ADUs up to 850 square feet and a maximum of 1,200 for two-bedroom ADUs for several decades, but the council reduced that limit to 1,000 square feet.
“For 20 years we’ve had it, and now we’re choosing to dial back,” Balch said, and attempted unsuccessfully that evening to “recommend an unfriendly amendment to include the 1,200 square feet instead of the 850 and 1,000 (square feet)” limit.
Councilmember Valerie Arkin opposed the idea, which would have restricted any design review on the 1,200-square-foot allowance, as well as the height of the unit.
“That’s a reason why I’m against that. 1,200 square feet is quite a bit more,” Arkin said.
While “affordable housing is what we really want to see happen in town,” Arkin said “we start losing some of the affordability piece of it, the bigger we go.”
“There’s a likelihood that we’re not going to have affordability with an ADU that’s 1,200 square feet,” Arkin said. “That’s an additional reason I would not want to support that.”
The council also voted to require owner-occupancy of ADU property after the state-mandated five-year period expires, though Balch said “it’s unknown for sure” what will happen after.
“At this time, it would revert back to what the city’s standard is without legislative action by the state … we don’t know,” Balch said.
A related hearing scheduled for Feb. 16 concerning local density and development was continued to next month. The council was originally set to discuss and possibly vote on a resolution expressing city support for several state legislative frameworks that seek to strengthen local control over local zoning and housing issues, as well as the California Cities for Local Control Coalition’s (CCLC) state-level lobbying efforts.
Dublin teachers strike enters day 3 as union, district remain at odds over negotiationsMarch 10, 2026 11:03 pm