City · California

ADU rules in Inglewood

5 sources

These are the primary sources for accessory dwelling unit regulations in Inglewood: the city's own zoning code, planning department pages, and permit guides. Start here before talking to anyone: the rules below are what your permit reviewer will apply.

Rules at a glance

Detached (backyard) ADU
Allowed

Article 35 (Ord. 24-02) applies 'within all residential and mixed-use zones' (§ 12-146(a)) and says 'An Accessory Dwelling Unit is permitted in any zone that allows residential units' (§ 12-149(a)); the permitted-use lists of R-1, R-1Z, R-1½, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-M, the mixed-use zones, C-N and P-1 each list 'Accessory dwelling units subject to the requirements of Article 35' (for example § 12-18(10)). A detached unit must sit behind the house ('the front facade is farther from the front Property line than the primary dwelling'), keep a 4-ft rear yard and side yards of 10 percent of lot width (3 to 5 ft; the city's 2024 standards apply 4 ft side and rear), stay one story and 16 ft tall, and match the house's roof pitch, window casing, color and finish (§ 12-149(a)-(d)); a new detached ADU also goes through staff Site Plan Review (§ 12-147(a)). The local count is one ADU plus one JADU on a single-family lot and at most two detached ADUs on a lot with an existing multifamily building, but Gov. Code 66323(a) requires ministerial approval of any combination of a conversion ADU, a detached new-construction ADU of up to 800 sq ft with 4-ft side and rear setbacks and a JADU, and of up to eight detached ADUs (never more than the existing units) beside an existing multifamily building; HCD's 5-12-2025 findings 1 and 10 told the city to codify these, and state law controls (66325(a)). A 2004 clause still codified at § 12-16.3 makes it unlawful to build 'a second dwelling unit' on R-1, R-1Z or R-1½ property, but the later Article 35 and the zone use lists allow ADUs there and state law forbids such a ban, so it is a dead letter (see caveats).

IMC §§ 12-146(a), 12-147(a), 12-149(a)-(d), 12-18(10), 12-18.11, 12-19, 12-16.3; Gov. Code §§ 66314(d)(2)-(3), (7), 66323(a)(2), (a)(4), 66325(a)
Attached or internal ADU
Allowed

Attached ADUs (additions) and ADUs carved from the existing home, an attached or detached garage or another accessory structure are allowed on the same lots as detached units: § 12-149(a) lets ADUs include 'portions of dwelling structures that are not used as livable space', naming storage rooms, attics, basements and garages, conversions that add no floor area and expansions of an existing detached structure skip Site Plan Review (§ 12-147(b)-(d)), and § 12-40.1 excepts a 'conversion of a garage into an accessory dwelling unit' from its garage-conversion ban. An attached ADU may rise to the height allowed for the main dwelling (§ 12-149(c)(2)) and must match its roof pitch, window casing, color and finish (§ 12-149(d)). On existing multifamily buildings, ADUs in non-livable space are allowed up to 25 percent of the existing units, at least one (§ 12-149(a); Gov. Code 66323(a)(3)). One JADU of 150 to 500 sq ft with an efficiency kitchen is allowed in an existing single-family home (§ 12-150); the code says 'within the walls of an existing or proposed single family dwelling', while the city's 2024 standards and Gov. Code 66333(d) (HCD finding 16) also count an attached garage.

IMC §§ 12-147(b)-(d), 12-149(a), (c)(2), (d), 12-150(a)-(c), 12-40.1; Gov. Code §§ 66314(d)(3), 66323(a)(1), (a)(3), 66333(d)
Maximum size
Detached 1,000 sq ft, or the home's size if smaller (never below 850 sq ft, or 1,000 with 2+ bedrooms); attached 850 sq ft or 50% of the home (the city applies whichever is greater; the code text says whichever is less); 800 sq ft state-exempt detached unit always allowed; conversions uncapped; JADU 500 sq ft; detached 16 ft and one story (state floor 18 ft near major transit)

§ 12-149(a)(2) caps a detached ADU at 'one thousand square feet or one hundred percent of the primary dwelling unit size, whichever is less', with an 850 sq ft cap where the house is under 850 sq ft, and (a)(3) caps an attached ADU at 'eight hundred fifty square feet or fifty percent of the primary dwelling unit size, whichever is less'; the city's May 2024 development standards print the attached cap as 'whichever is greater' and measure square footage by exterior dimensions. State law sets floors the local caps cannot undercut: no maximum below 850 sq ft of interior livable space, or 1,000 sq ft with more than one bedroom, and no percentage, front-setback or similar limit that blocks an 800 sq ft unit with 4-ft side and rear setbacks (Gov. Code 66321(b)(2)-(3)); a state-exempt detached unit may be held to 800 sq ft, and conversions of existing space are capped only by the existing space plus a 150 sq ft ingress expansion (66323(a)(1)-(2)). The code's 500 sq ft ADU minimum (§ 12-149(a)(1)) and the 500 and 700 sq ft dwelling minimums of § 12-6 it incorporates (§ 12-149(a)(4)) yield to the efficiency-unit rule (66321(b)(1); 150 sq ft under Health and Safety Code 17958.1), which the city's standards already apply; JADUs run from 150 sq ft to the lesser of 500 sq ft or half the house (§ 12-150(c)). Detached ADUs are limited to 'one story or sixteen feet to the top of the roof pitch' (§ 12-149(c)(1)) against state floors of 18 ft (plus 2 ft for a matching roof pitch) within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor or on a lot with a multistory multifamily building, and 25 ft or the main-house limit for attached ADUs (66321(b)(4)); HCD's finding 15 also called the one-story limit impermissible, and ZCA25-00001, which would have raised the local figure to 20 ft, was introduced 9-9-2025 and never adopted. If Ord. 24-02 is void under Gov. Code 66316 or 66326(d) (see caveats), the state default applies instead: detached ADUs up to 1,200 sq ft and attached ADUs up to 50 percent of the existing home, subject to the same floors (66314(d)(4)-(5)).

IMC §§ 12-149(a)(1)-(4), (c), 12-150(c), 12-6(b)-(c); Gov. Code §§ 66314(d)(4)-(5), 66321(b)(1)-(4), 66323(a)(1)-(2)
Owner occupancy
Not required

Inglewood imposes no owner-occupancy requirement on ADUs, at application or afterward, and Gov. Code 66315 bars one ('No additional standards ... shall be used or imposed, including an owner-occupant requirement'). For JADUs, § 12-150(g) still says 'The single family residence in which the JADU is permitted must be owner-occupied' (the owner may live in either the house or the JADU; government agencies, land trusts and housing organizations are exempt), and the city's 2024 standards say the recorded covenant will require owner occupancy whenever a property contains a JADU. Since 1-1-2026, Gov. Code 66333(b) as amended by AB 1154 and SB 543 allows a JADU owner-occupancy requirement only where the JADU shares sanitation facilities with the main home, so a JADU with its own bathroom carries none and the universal local clause yields (66325(a)). The covenant that § 12-148(d) requires before the building permit (the city's April 2026 acknowledgment form says before final inspection or the certificate of occupancy) covers the no-separate-sale rule and, per the city's forms, the short-term rental ban, not owner occupancy of an ADU; HCD's finding 8 says any covenant on an ADU is an additional standard 66315 forbids, while a JADU deed restriction stays required (66333(c)).

IMC §§ 12-150(g), 12-148(d); Gov. Code §§ 66315, 66325(a), 66333(b)-(c)
Extra parking
One space per ADU (tandem on the driveway allowed) unless a state exemption applies (half-mile walk to public transit including bus stops, conversions and units inside the home or an accessory structure, car share within a block, permit-parking areas); none for state-exempt units or JADUs; garage spaces lost to an ADU need not be replaced

§ 12-43(I) lists only two ADU rules, 'No off-street parking is required for ADUs when located within a one-half mile of a transit stop' and no replacement of a garage, carport or covered parking structure demolished for or converted to an ADU, and states no ADU requirement as such; the general § 12-43(A) rule of two enclosed spaces per unit on a one- or two-unit lot would exceed the state cap if applied to an ADU, and the city does not apply it. The city's 2024 standards require 'one parking space ... on the driveway in a tandem configuration' unless the ADU is within a half-mile walk of transit or one block of a car-share vehicle, is part of the existing or proposed home or an accessory structure, or sits where on-street permits are required but not offered to its occupant. State law caps ADU parking at one space per unit or per bedroom, whichever is less, allows tandem driveway spaces (Gov. Code 66314(d)(10)), and bars any parking standard in the six 66322(a) cases 'whether or not the local agency has adopted an ordinance', adding the historic-district and concurrent new-home exemptions HCD's finding 4 said the code omits; 'public transit' includes any bus stop (66313(m)). Units approved under 66323 carry no parking requirement (66323(b)), JADUs need none (66334(a)), and garage, carport or parking spaces demolished in conjunction with an ADU or converted to one cannot be required to be replaced (66314(d)(11)), although footnote 3 of the city's standards still asks for replacement of enclosed parking demolished outside the ADU footprint.

IMC § 12-43(A), (I); Gov. Code §§ 66313(m), 66314(d)(10)-(11), 66322(a), 66323(b), 66334(a)
Approval process
Permitted use

A new detached ADU needs Site Plan Review (§ 12-147(a)), a staff approval 'by the Director or designee' with no hearing that precedes the building permit (§§ 12-39.50, 12-39.52), with conditions appealable to the Planning Commission (§ 12-39.56); conversions that add no floor area, conversions of non-livable multifamily space, expansions of an existing detached structure and deed-restricted affordable ADUs are exempt (§ 12-147(b)-(d), (g)), and the zone use lists treat ADUs as permitted uses, so no Special Use Permit applies. § 12-147(e) has the Economic and Community Development Director act on an ADU or JADU application within sixty days of a complete application and calls a JADU filed with a new home 'ministerial without discretionary review or a hearing'. HCD's finding 5 warned that Site Plan Review, whose stated purpose is applying 'optimum rather than minimum design standards, based on the individual needs and circumstances of each proposed development project' (§ 12-39.51), must not operate as a discretionary process, and finding 6 asked the city to replace 'shall act' with 'shall approve or deny'. Gov. Code 66317(a) requires ministerial approval without discretionary review or a hearing, a completeness determination within 15 business days and approval or denial within 60 days of a complete application, after which the application is deemed approved. Lots in the 'D' design overlay need Planning Commission design review before a building permit (§§ 12-35.2, 12-35.4), which 66317 bars for ADUs (see caveats).

IMC §§ 12-147(a)-(g), 12-39.50 to 12-39.56, 12-18(10), 12-35.2, 12-35.4; Gov. Code §§ 66316, 66317(a)
Rental restrictions
Long-term rental allowed; no rentals under 30 days (longer than 30 days for JADUs and state-exempt units); ADUs barred from short-term rentals; no separate sale; Housing Protection registration or an annual exemption claim for rented units

§ 12-148(a)-(b): 'ADUs and JADUs shall not be rented for a period less than thirty days' and 'An ADU shall not be advertised or used as a short-term rental' (repeated in § 12-147(e)(3)); Gov. Code 66315 permits a 30-day minimum for ordinary ADUs, while state law requires terms longer than 30 days for units approved under 66323 (66323(e)) and for JADUs (66333(g)). The short-term rental ordinance (Ord. 22-15, Chapter 8, Article 11) separately provides that 'Accessory dwelling units (ADU) permitted on or after January 1, 2017, may not be used as a short-term rental' (§ 8-139(5)), hosted and unhosted STR permits go only to owner-hosts who have lived in the unit for the prior 365 days, with separate residency tests for vacation rentals (§§ 8-139(10), 8-140), and the city's STR FAQ states that ADUs are ineligible. No ADU or JADU may be sold or conveyed separately from the lot and the main dwelling (§ 12-148(c)), backed by the recorded covenant; Gov. Code 66341 still requires allowing a sale to a qualified buyer through a qualified nonprofit (HCD finding 7), and the city has not opted into 66342 condominium conveyance. A rented ADU is a 'rental unit' under the Housing Protection ordinance (Ord. 21-09): owners register each unit rented for more than 30 days or file an annual claim of exemption (§ 8-126), while units with a certificate of occupancy for new construction within the previous 15 years, and owner-occupied properties renting out a single ADU or JADU with the required written notice, are exempt from the rent caps of § 8-127 and the just-cause rules of § 8-121 (§§ 8-121(b)(4)-(5), 8-125).

IMC §§ 12-147(e)(3), 12-148(a)-(d), 8-139(5), (10), 8-140, 8-121(b)(4)-(5), 8-125 ('Rental unit' (6)-(7)), 8-126, 8-127; Gov. Code §§ 66315, 66323(e), 66333(g), 66341, 66342
The fine print: 13 caveats that can change the picture
  • Which text governs: IMC Chapter 12, Article 35 (§§ 12-145 to 12-150), enacted by Ord. 24-02 (ZCA 23-00006; Planning Commission Res. 1974 of 11-1-2023; adopted 12-12-2023 on a 4-0 vote, effective 30 days later) and never amended, is the codified text, and the city still administers it: its ADU page links the May 2024 development standards and an April 2026 owner acknowledgment form requiring the recorded covenant. HCD's 5-12-2025 findings letter (case ADU0007607) lists 16 ways the ordinance violates state ADU law with a response due 6-11-2025; HCD's index (current to 7-14-2026) records no city response, the dashboard shows no later Inglewood letter, and no Council or Planning Commission agenda from May 2025 through 10-7-2026 carries an Article 35 rewrite or a Gov. Code 66326(b)(2)(B) resolution. Gov. Code 66316 makes a noncompliant ordinance null and void, and 66326(d) (SB 9, effective 1-1-2026) voids an ordinance whose agency failed to answer HCD's findings within 30 days, though whether 66326(d) reaches a deadline that passed in June 2025 is untested. The values above are the codified rules as overridden by state law on every conflicting point (66325(a)); if the ordinance is void, the state default standards apply instead (detached ADUs to 1,200 sq ft, attached ADUs to 50 percent of the home).
  • Stalled amendment: ZCA25-00001 (Planning Commission Res. 2034 of 7-2-2025; Council hearing and introduction on 9-9-2025) would have raised the detached ADU height in § 12-149(c)(1) from 16 to 20 ft and changed the fence permit and public art rules, but no second reading appears on any Council agenda through 10-1-2026 and the ordinance sequence after it (Ords. 25-14, 25-15 and 26-01 to 26-13) holds no ADU measure. Its staff report did not mention HCD's findings and left 'All other existing ADU regulations' unchanged.
  • Unit-count conflict: § 12-149(a) allows 'No more than one junior accessory dwelling unit and one accessory dwelling unit' on a single-family lot and 'Not more than two detached accessory dwelling units' beside an existing multifamily building, while Gov. Code 66323(a) requires ministerial approval of a conversion ADU plus a detached new-construction ADU of up to 800 sq ft plus a JADU on a single-family lot, and of up to eight detached ADUs (never more than the existing units) beside an existing multifamily building or two beside a proposed one (HCD findings 1 and 10); state law controls. From 1-1-2027, AB 956 (Chapter 791, Statutes of 2026) amends 66323 to allow two detached new-construction ADUs on a single-family lot under the exempt pathway, with no JADU owed where two exist.
  • Legacy ban: § 12-16.3 (Ord. 04-12 of 6-15-2004) still says 'It is unlawful for any person on any R-1, R-1Z or R-1½ zoned property to construct or reconstruct a second dwelling unit as specified in California Government Code Section 65852.2.' Ord. 24-02 did not repeal it, but it added ADUs to the permitted uses of all three zones (§§ 12-18(10), 12-18.11, 12-19) and the city's standards allow ADUs in every zone that allows housing; Gov. Code 66314, 66323 and 66325(a) would override the ban in any event.
  • Size, setback and design conflicts: the 500 sq ft ADU minimum and the § 12-6 dwelling minimums yield to the efficiency-unit rule (66321(b)(1)); the 100 percent and 50 percent caps yield to the 850/1,000 sq ft interior-livable-space floors and the 800 sq ft guarantee (66321(b)(2)-(3)), measured in interior livable space rather than the exterior dimensions the city's standards use; the front-setback rule (25 percent of lot depth up to 25 ft, or the block average) and the rule that an ADU's front facade sit behind the main home cannot block an 800 sq ft unit or a 66323 unit (HCD findings 9, 12, 13 and 14); the one-story, 16-ft detached limit yields to the 18-ft transit and multifamily floors (66321(b)(4)); and the code's side yard of 10 percent of lot width (up to 5 ft) exceeds the 4-ft maximum of 66314(d)(7) on lots wider than 40 ft (the city's standards apply 4 ft). Design matching rules (roof pitch, window casing, color, finish, obscured glazing on two-story units) cannot be applied to units approved under 66323 (66323(b)).
  • Review layers: Site Plan Review for new detached ADUs (§ 12-147(a)) is a staff approval, but its stated purpose of applying 'optimum rather than minimum design standards' (§ 12-39.51) drew HCD's finding 5, and the city's standards say new ADUs and ADUs in the R-3, R-4, R-M and mixed-use zones go through Site Plan Review and its fees. Lots mapped in the 'D' design overlay (§§ 12-35 to 12-35.7, restated by Ord. 25-04 of 1-28-2025) need Planning Commission design review of plans before a building permit. Gov. Code 66317(a)(1) requires ministerial approval without discretionary review or a hearing for every ADU, so neither layer can lawfully add discretion; confirm the overlay status of a lot with the Planning Division.
  • Covenant and sale: § 12-148(d) requires a covenant recorded before the building permit (the April 2026 acknowledgment form says before final inspection or the certificate of occupancy) barring separate sale, and the city's forms add the short-term rental ban; HCD's finding 8 says a covenant on an ADU is an additional standard that 66315 forbids (a JADU deed restriction remains required under 66333(c)), and the code omits the 66341 qualified-nonprofit sale route (finding 7).
  • JADU rules: the universal owner-occupancy clause in § 12-150(g) and the matching covenant language in the city's standards yield to Gov. Code 66333(b), so owner occupancy applies only to a JADU that shares sanitation with the main home; JADUs in attached garages are allowed (66333(d), HCD finding 16); JADU rentals must be longer than 30 days (66333(g)), one day past the local 30-day floor.
  • Impact fees: § 12-147(f) exempts only an ADU 'less than seven hundred fifty square feet', against Gov. Code 66311.5(c)(1), which exempts ADUs with 750 sq ft of interior livable space or less (a one-square-foot conflict at exactly 750 sq ft, plus the exterior-dimension measurement); from 1-1-2027 SB 1117 (Chapter 809, Statutes of 2026) limits impact fees on an ADU over 750 sq ft to the area above 750 sq ft.
  • Unpermitted units: the code has no path for legalizing ADUs and JADUs built before 1-1-2020 (HCD finding 2, AB 2533); Gov. Code 66311.7 (formerly 66332) applies directly.
  • Stale and legacy sources: the city's 'ADU Development Standards - 2024' (DocumentCenter 20355, Last Updated 05/15/2024) cites Gov. Code 65852.2 and 65852.22, prints the one-ADU single-family and two-detached multifamily counts, owner occupancy for every JADU and the 16-ft one-story limit, and asks for replacement of enclosed parking demolished outside the ADU footprint, so it is not curated; Article 35 itself cites the repealed 65852.2 and 65852.22 (HCD finding 3; successors at 66310 to 66342).
  • Short-term rental scope: § 8-139(5) reaches ADUs permitted on or after 1-1-2017, so a second unit permitted earlier is not caught by that clause and would be judged under the general host and vacation-rental eligibility rules (§§ 8-139(10), 8-140); Article 35's own STR bar (§ 12-148(b), ADUs) and 30-day floor (§ 12-148(a), ADUs and JADUs) apply to units built under it.
  • Re-verify by 2027-01-15: the HCD dashboard (case ADU0007607 and any later Inglewood letter), Council and Planning Commission agendas for an Article 35 rewrite or for ZCA25-00001, the eCode360 New Laws bank (five entries on 2026-10-06, none in Chapter 12), and the 1-1-2027 effective date of SB 1117 and AB 956 for the unit-count and fee notes.

Summarized from Inglewood's ordinance text, read October 2026; every row links the code section it came from. Rules often vary by zone and lot, so treat this as orientation, not a permit determination, and confirm with the planning department before you commit to a design.

Compare Inglewood with 119 nearby cities

ADU regulations

Short-term rental rules

Planning to rent your ADU on Airbnb or VRBO? Inglewood regulates short-term rentals separately; check these before counting on nightly rental income.

California statewide law also applies

California sets baseline ADU rights at the state level. Where local rules are stricter than state law allows, state law usually wins, so both are worth reading.

See California statewide rules

Spotted something outdated?

Zoning codes change. If a link is dead or Inglewood has updated its ordinance, report it and we'll verify against the official source.

Report a correction

Ready to build?

Planning an ADU in Inglewood?

Tell us about your project and we'll match you with vetted local designers and builders as we bring them online. No cost, no obligation.