The Lake Forest City Planning Commission on Dec. 4 voted to recommend that the City Council adopt a non‑urgency ordinance updating municipal code section 9.1460.05 to align local accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior ADU (JADU) rules with new California law that takes effect Jan. 1, 2026.

Ron Santos, a planning staff member, told the commission the draft ordinance is necessary to ensure the city’s code remains consistent with state requirements and to preserve supplemental local standards only where state law allows. "The draft ordinance aligns with the city's general plan housing element by supporting a range of housing types," Santos said.

Santos summarized relevant state legislation: Assembly Bill 1154 narrows owner‑occupancy requirements for JADUs and prohibits short‑term rentals; Senate Bill 543 clarifies ADU size definitions, fee exemptions, combinations of permitted ADUs and establishes more structured permitting timelines (including 15‑day completeness determinations and appeal rights to the planning commission); and Assembly Bill 462 creates a narrow exception allowing a detached ADU to receive a certificate of occupancy before the primary dwelling in disaster‑related circumstances.

Santos noted the City Council already adopted an urgency ordinance on Dec. 2 that included findings to allow immediate effect; the version before the commission was the non‑urgency draft that follows normal adoption steps and requires Planning Commission and City Council public hearings. Santos said staff recommends adoption of a resolution forwarding a recommendation of approval to the City Council; he added the council will consider the item in January and the ordinance would become effective 30 days after the council's second reading.

Commissioners asked practical questions about retained local requirements and process. One commissioner noted that utilities had previously been required to have independent connections for ADUs; Santos answered the proposed amendments change only what is necessary for consistency with state law and said other local ordinance provisions remain except where preempted by state statute. Commissioners also asked about volume of applications; staff reported the city has seen roughly a dozen ADU/SB 9‑type applications per year, not hundreds as in some nearby jurisdictions.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to forward a recommendation to council; the motion passed with no opposing votes and one commissioner noted absent. The commission’s action was advisory: the council will take final action under the regular ordinance adoption process.