or; BELLFL
{fl OWGQ m Staft'eport14-G
oROWING roofing-
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
ATTENTION: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
FROM: Elizabeth C. Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services SUBJECT: Consideration and possible action to adopt Resolution No. 25-38 — A Resolution confirming the City Council's plenary authority to interpret the Bellflower General Plan Land Use Element in accordance with the Bellfiower City Charter and applicable California law.
DATE: October 13, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On May 21, 2025, the Director of Planning and Building Services (“Director”) received a letter from the Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) related to the Director’s interpretation and implementation of Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”). SB 9 requires, among other things, cities to ministerially approve proposed housing development containing not more than two residential units within a single-family residential zone or a parcel map for an urban lot split, if the project meets certain requirements. The Director has approved SB 9 projects only if the project is within the Single-Family (“S-F”) zone.
In HCD’s letter, it interprets the City’s General Plan Land Use Element and finds that in addition to the S-F zone, the Agricultural Estate (“A-E”) and Low Density Residential (“R-1”) zones qualify as “single-family” for the purposes of SB 9. Adoption of Resolution No. 25-38 would confirm the City Council’s plenary authority to interpret the Bellfiower General Plan Land Use Element in accordance with the Bellflower City Charter and applicable California law and authorize the Mayor to execute the City’s response letter to HCD’s May 21, 2025 letter.
RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL:
1) Adopt Resolution No. 25-38; or
2) Alternatively, discuss and take other action related to this item.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact with the adoption of this Resolution.
DISCUSSION
SB 9 was passed into law in September 2021 and became effective on January 1, 2022.
SB 9 requires, among other things, cities to ministerially approve applications for a housing development project containing not more than two units or a parcel map for an urban lot split, if the project meets certain requirements.
Staff Report — Resolution No. 25-38 RE: SB 9
October 13, 2025
DISCUSSION — Continued
SB 9 is one bill in a handful of recent housing reforms which are couched in terms of addressing the Statewide housing shortage and mandate that all cities, including charter cities, set aside their land use goals, policies, and regulations, and strictly apply California legislation. Examples of other legislative bills include, without limitation, State mandated density bonuses, the Housing Accountability Act, Housing Crisis Act, accessory dwelling units.
One of the main requirements of SB 9 is that the parcel is located within a single-family residential zone. There is only one single-family residential zone in the City, which is the S-F (Single-Family) Residential zone. Several projects utilizing SB 9 have been approved within the S-F zone. All other zones (e.g. R-1, A-E, R-2, and R-3) in the City are not considered a single-family residential zone and projects utilizing SB 9 have not been approved in those zones.
On May 21, 2025, the Director received a letter from HCD regarding the Director’s interpretation and implementation of City’s General Plan Land Use Element framed as a letter of technical assistance related to SB 9. This resulted from an applicant requesting technical assistance from HCD after pursuing and being denied a project under SB 9 within the Low Density Residential (R—1) zone. Following review of the City’s Municipal Code and Land Use Element of the General Plan, HCD believes that the R-1 (Low Density Residential) and A-E (Agricultural Estate) zones qualify as “single family residential zones” for the purposes of SB 9. HCD demands that the City allow SB 9 development within these zones and that the City provide a response which includes the steps the City will take to resolve this issue. HCD’s letter is included as Attachment B.
The Director does not agree with HCD’s findings. The various Government Code sections use the phrase “single-family residential zone”1 which differs from single-family residential uses. The plain language in the statutes make clear that SB 9 is applicable only to parcels within a single-family residential zone.
HCD acknowledged this distinction in its SB 9 Fact Sheet:
Parcels located in multi- family residential, commercial, agricultural, mixed- use zones, etc., are not subject to SB 9 mandates even if they allow single-family residential uses as a permitted use. While some zones are readily identifiable as single-family residential zones (e.g., R-1 “Single- Family Residential”), others may not be so obvious.2
The only single-family residential zone in the City is the S—F zone, it is the zone where only single-family dwelling units are allowed. ln Bellflower, unlike other jurisdictions, the R-1 zone is not considered a single-family zone, in that it is a “Low Density Residential” zone. it allows for both single-family and multi-family dwellings on parcels zoned R-1. 1 Government Code §§ 65852.21, 66411.7.
2 Cal. Dept. of Housing and Community Development, SB 9 Fact Sheet (Sept. 2024) p. 2.
Staff Report — Resolution No. 25-38 RE: SB 9
October 13, 2025
DISCUSSION -— Continued
Additionally, the A-E zone is also not considered a single-family zone; it is an “Agricultural Estate” zone. It allows single-family homes, multiple units on one lot, the keeping of animals, and nurseries, among other uses. Pursuant to BMC § 1720.010, “this district is intended to provide an area for more rural residential development than in other areas of the City, to retain a rural character, and to maintain and encourage the keeping of horses and farm animals for the enjoyment of area residents.”
While HCD’s letter is framed as technical assistance related to SB 9, it is based entirely on interpretation of the City’s General Plan Land Use Element, rather than the application or interpretation of SB 9. The California Legislature has delegated HCD authority to report violations of cities’ housing elements, or violations of State law, including without limitation, SB 9. However, the Legislature did not confer any authority to HCD to interpret the City’s General Plan Land Use Element which establishes the City's goals and policies with respect to real property within the City’s territorial boundaries. The General Plan Land Use Element is a municipal affair which, in the absence of a Legislative declaration stating otherwise, the City—as a charter city—has absolute control over.
A draft response letter further detailing the Director’s interpretation that the R—1 and A-E zones are not single-family zones for the purposes of SB 9 is included as Attachment C.
Adoption of Resoiution No. 25-38 would confirm the City Council’s plenary authority to interpret the Bellflower Generat Plan Land Use Element in accordance with the Bellflower City Charter and applicable California law and authorize the Mayor to execute the City’s response letter to HCD’s May 21, 2025 letter.
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A: Resolution No. 25-38 ................................................................................ 4 Attachment B: May 21, 2025 HCD Letter ......................................................................... 7 Attachment C: Draft City Response Letter ...................................................................... 10 Attachment D: Government Code Section 65852.21 & 664117......... ............................ 13
CITY OF BELLFLOWER
RESOLUTION NO. 25-38
A RESOLUTION CONFIRMING THE CITY COUNCIL’S PLENARY
AUTHORITY TO INTERPRET THE BELLFLOWER GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE ELEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE BELLFLOWER
CITY CHARTER AND APPLICABLE CALIFORNIA LAW
THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Recitals. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. This Resolution is adopted in accordance with Articles ll, lll(C), and Vlll(B) of the Bellflower City Charter to confirm that the City Council - not unelected officials from the state — is solely responsible for interpreting the land use regulations of the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”).
B. Even if the City were a general law city (which it is not), the City Council’s decisions as to interpreting the BMC are entitled to substantial deference (see, Harrington v. City of Davis (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 420). This is particularly true when the City Council’s interpretation involves expertise and technical knowledge; especially where the text is technical or complex (Yamaha Corp. of Am. v. State Bd. of Equalization (1998) 19 Cal.4th 1; see, Berkeley Hills Watershed Coal. v. City of Berkeley (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 880 [only clearly erroneous or unauthorized decisions may be challenged).
C. Bellflower, however, is a Charter City and its powers are limited by those within the Bellflower City Charter (City of Glendale v Trondsen (1957) 48 Cal.2d 93). Accordingly, the California Constitution authorizes Bellflower to exercise plenary authority over municipal affairs, free from any constraint imposed by the general law and subject only to constitutional limitations (see, Cal. Const. art. Xl § 5(a); Ex Parte Braun (1903) 141 Cal. 204; Bishop v. City of San Jose (1969) 1 Cal. 3d 56; Comm. of Seven Thousand v. Super. Ct. (City of Irvine) (1988) 45 Cal.3d 491 ).
D. Only a court may determine whether a particular activity is a municipal affair or statewide concern and therefore applies to charter cities. Those determinations are made on a case-by-case basis and depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case (see, In Re Hubbard (1964) 62 Cal. 2d 119).
E. The California Legislature began passing Statewide housing laws in the late 19603 and early 19703, and entered a sustained period of major modern reforms beginning in 2017 with Senate Bill 35.
F. Modern housing reforms represent a “one-size fits all” approach to addressing Statewide housing shortages, without regard to cities’ land use goals and policies, and unique characteristics.
City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-38
G. Senate Bill 9 (2021) (“SB 9") amended the Government Code by adding sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 governing the development of two residential units within single-family zones, and urban lot splits.
H. While the California Legislature conferred authority to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD") to review and comment upon certain land use matters, the Legislature has not conferred any authority to HCD to review, comment, or make demands concerning local agencies’ interpretation of its General Plan Land Use Elements. l. HCD has demonstrated a repeated attempt to interfere with the significant autonomy conferred to the City by the California Constitution. Jurisdictions that have already been subjected to such interference from HCD include, without limitation, City of San Diego, Long Beach, Burbank, Dana Point, and Menlo Park.
J. To the City Council’s knowledge, no court decision found that HCD can dictate to a charter city how to interpret its General Plan. There is certainly no court determination that HCD can impose its decision upon the City of Bellfiower as to the interaction between the Bellflower General Plan and BMC.
K. Despite HCD not having any legal authority to take such action, however, the City received a letter from HCD dated May 29, 2025 attempting to take such action. in response, the City Manager prepared a letter attached as Exhibit “A," and incorporated by reference (“Response Letter").
L. The Response Letter correctly sets forth the City Council’s interpretation of the Land Use Element, the BMC, and the City’s response to HCD.
SECTION 2. Action. The City Council declares that the Response Letter correctly interprets and applies the General Plan Land Use Element. Such action is squarely within the City Council’s authority as delegated by the People through the Bellflower City Charter. The Mayor is authorized to execute the Response Letter.
SECTION 3. Reliance On Record. Each and every one of the findings and determinations in this Resolution are based on the competent and substantial evidence, both oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the project. The findings and determinations constitute the independent findings and determinations of the City Council in all respects and are fully and completely supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.
City of Bellflower
Resolution No. 25-38
SECTION 4. Summaries of Information. All summaries of information in the findings, which precede this section, are based on the substantial evidence in the record. The absence of any particular fact from any such summary is not an indication that a particular finding is not based in part on that fact.
SECTION 5. Construction. This Resolution must be broadly construed to achieve the purposes stated in this Resolution . It is the City Council’s intent that the provisions of this Resolution be interpreted or implemented by the City and others in a manner that facilitates the purposes set forth in this Resolution.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any part of this Resolution or its Application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the effectiveness of the remaining provisions or applications and, to this end, the provisions of this Resolution are severable.
SECTION 7. Electronic Signatures. This Resolution may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code §16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
SECTION 8. The Mayor, or presiding officer, is authorized to affix their signature to this Resolution signifying its adoption by the City Council of the City of Bellfiower, and the City Cierk, or its duly appointed deputy, is directed to attest.
SECTION 9. Effective Date. This Resolution will become effective immediately upon adoption and will remain effective unless repealed or superseded.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELLFLOWER THIS 13TH OF OCTOBER 2025.
Ray Dunton, Mayor
ATTEST:
Mayra Ochiqui, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
By: Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney
A
DEPARTM NT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento. CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
May 21, 2025
Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services 16600 Civic Center Drive
Bellflower, CA 90706
Dear Elizabeth Oba:
RE: City of Bellflower — Senate Bill (SB) 9 Eligible Single-Family Residential Zones - Letter of Technical Assistance
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) received a request for technical assistance from an applicant who is interested in pursuing a project under SB 91 within a single-family residential zone that the City of Bellflower (City) does not consider eligible for SB 9. The purpose of this letter is to clarify that the Agricultural Estate (A-E) and Low Density Residential (R—1) zones qualify as “single- family residential zones" for the purposes of SB 9.
Background
SB 9 requires that local agencies ministerialiy process applications for a parcel map for an urban lot split or a housing development project containing no more than two units if the application meets certain requirements. One of the main requirements is that the proposed housing development or parcel be within “a single-family residential zone."2 While some zones are readily identifiable as single-family residential zones, for example by a title (e.g., “Single-Family Residential”), others may not be so obvious. In communities where there may be more than one single-family residential zone, the zone district descriptions in the zoning code and the land use designation descriptions in the Land Use Element of the General Plan can be used to identify zones whose primary purpose is single-family residential uses, and which are therefore subject to SB 9.3 1 Gov. Code, §§ 65852.21, 66411.7 et seq. SB 9 was amended by SB 450 (Chapter 286, Statutes of 2024).
2 Gov. Code, §§ 65852.21, subd. (a); 66411.7, subd. (a)(3)(A). 3 See HCD’s SB 9 Fact Sheet, pg. 2, available at
httgs:// www.hcd.ca.govlsites/default/files/docs/glanning-and-community/sb-Q-fact-sheetpdf .
Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services
Agricultural Estate Zone
The Agricultural Estate (A-E) zoning district constitutes a single-family residential zone for the purpose of SB 9 since the primary purpose is single-family residential uses.
According to the City’s zoning code, the intent and purpose of the A-E zone is “to provide an area for more rural residential development than in other areas of the City, to retain a rural character, and to maintain and encourage the keeping of horses and farm animals for the enjoyment of area residents.”4 In the A-E zone, single-family dwellings are a permitted use and multiple family residential uses do not appear in the list of permitted uses. Similarly, the General Plan land use designation that underlies the A-E zone (Agricultural Residential) is described as “intended for an area of low density single family residential and limited, ancillary, agricultural uses...."5 The A-E zone appears to be agriculturally oriented but also clearly allows for single- family residential and does not allow multi-family residential. Based on the description of the zone and land use designation, the primary purpose of the A-E is single-family residential.
Low Density Residential Zone
The Low Density Residential (R-1) zoning district constitutes a single-family residential zone for the purpose of SB 9 since the primary purpose is single-family residential uses.
According to the City’s zoning code, the R-1 zone is “[t]he most restrictive of residential zones, composed chiefly of individual homes, together with required recreational, religious, educational and other community facilities as the basic elements of a balanced neighborhood.”6 The General Plan land use designation that underlies the R-1 zone, Low Density Residential, is described as being “characterized by single family detached dwellings, but this category will allow for subdivision of lots or creation of condominium or townhome units.”7 The R-1 zone allows single-family and multi-family dwellings as permitted uses. As a point of comparison, the City’s Medium Density Residential Zone (R-2), which also provides that single-family and multi-family dwellings are permitted uses, specifies that that zone is “intended to provide a variety of housing types such as garden apartments, town houses, condominiums, and dwelling groups."8 The R-1 zone intent and purpose together with the General Plan description suggest that the primary purpose of this zone is single-family, particularly when contrasted with the intent and purpose of higher density residential zones, such as R—2. 4 Bellflower Municipal Code § 1720.010
5 Bellflower General Plan, Land Use Element (1997), pg. 1. 6 Bellflower Municipal Code § 1724.010
7 Bellflower General Plan, Land Use Element
8 Bellflower Municipal Code § 1728.010
Elizabeth Oba, Director of Planning and Building Services
While the R-1 zone intent and purpose and General Plan description both suggest that the primary purpose is single-family residential, the zone also allows (as a permitted use) multi-family dwellings. However, the R-1 zoning regulations require a minimum of 5,000 square feet of lot area per unit. Therefore, an R-1 lot containing less than 10,000 square feet can only be developed with one single-family residence. Based on a visual analysis, a substantial portion of R-1 lots appear to contain less than 10,000 square feet; therefore, the ability to develop multi-family is substantially limited in this zone. As a result, the R-1 zone essentially functions as a single-family zone.
While the A-E and R'-1 zones qualify as single-family residential zones for the purpose of SB 9, it should be noted that the City is not required to allow more than two primary dwellings on a lot pursuant to SB 9. For example, if a parcel’s tot area allows it to achieve two dwellings pursuant to the City's municipal code (i.e., the site is 10,000 square feet or more), the site would not be eligible for any additional primary dwellings under SB 9.
Conclusion
HCD finds that the A-E and R-1 zones qualify as single-family for purposes of SB 9. The City must remedy the exclusion of these zones from SB 9. HCD requests a response from the City by June 20, 2025, that includes the steps the City will take to timely resolve this issue.
HCD remains committed to supporting the City in facilitating housing at all income levels and hopes the City finds this clarification helpful. HCD would also like to remind the City that HCD has statutory authority to enforce SB 9, among other state housing laws.9 Accordingly, if HCD finds that a local government's actions do not comply with state law, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General that the local government is in violation of state law. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Mindy Wilcox at [email protected].
Sincerely,
l
David Zisser
Assistant Deputy Director
Local Government Relations and Accountability
9 Gov. Code, § 65585, subd. 0').
The City of Bellflower
gami/Ies. flusthesses. {Zr/ares.
16600 Civic Center Drive, Bellflower, CA 90706 ..
0 Tel 562.304.1424 Fax 562.925.8660 wwwbellflowenorg “mom October 14, 2025
Department of Housing and Community Development
Division of Housing Policy Development
Attn: David Zisser, Assistant Deputy Director
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
RE: HCD Letter dated May 21, 2025
Dear Mr. Zisser:
Thank you for your unsolicited letter dated May 21, 2025 and received by the City on May 21, 2025 (the “Letter’). The City recognizes HCD’s role in implementing the Legislature’s intent to increase housing accessibility in California and supports the goal of increasing housing opportunities. The Letter, however, misses the mark.
While couched as “technical assistance,” the Letter only adds ambiguity by misinterpreting the law and misapplying it to the Bellflower Municipal Code (“BMC”). A plain reading of SB 9 shows that the Legislature distinguished between single-family zones and uses. As noted below, SB 9 does not apply to single family uses, but, rather, applies only to single family zones. In fact, HCD’s position in the Letter appears to contradict its own publications and advice on the matter:
Parcels located in multi- family residential, commercial, agricultural, mixed- use zones, etc., are not subject to SB 9 mandates even if they allow single-family residential uses as a permitted use. While some zones are readily identifiable as single-family residential zones (e.g., R-1 “Single- Family Residential”), others may not be so obvious.1
The City acknowledges that HCD has limited statutory authority to enforce SB 9.
Government Code § 655850), however, does not confer any authority to HCD to interpret the City's General Plan Land Use Element, which remains a municipal affair pursuant to the California Constitution and the City’s Charter. While the City welcomes all communications from HCD, it provides this response letter as a courtesy only—the City’s interpretation of its General Plan Land Use Element controls. 1 Cal. Dept. of Housing and Community Development, SB 9 Fact Sheet (Sept. 2024) p. 2 Ray Danton Sonny R. Santa Ines Dan Keeps Wendi Morse Victor A. Samba Mayer Mayor Pro Tern Council Member Council Member Council Member -10-
City of Bellflower — SB 9
October 14, 2025
__Eage 2 of 3
R-1 (Low Density Residential) Zone
In Bellflower (unlike in otherjurisdictions), the R-1 zone is not a single-family zone; it is a “Low Density Residential” zone. It allows for both single-family m multi-family dwelling units on parcels zoned R-1.
The City’s “single-family” zone, i.e., where only single-family dwelling units are allowed, is designated as “S-F" (for Single Family Residential). The S-F zone is the only single-family residential zone in the City. Differentiating between R-1 zoning and S-F zoning occurred in 1998.
BMC § 17.16.020 provides that the only residential type allowed in the S-F zone is a single family residence. This differs-from BMC § 1724.020 which allows several residential types within the R-1 zone including, without limitation, a single family residence; community apartment; condominium; planned development; stock cooperative; and multiple family dwellings. Based on the residential types permitted within the zones, the S-F zone is obviously the only exclusively single—family residential zone within the City.
As to density, BMC § 17.16.100 (governing S-F lots) provides that the minimum lot area for a single-family home is 7,000 square feet. The “Single Family Residential” category is described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan as a residential category that allows “only one dwelling unit per parcel” and “no subdivision for the creation of multi-family housing is allowed.” In contrast, BMC § 1724.100 (regulating R—1 lots) establishes a minimum lot area per dwelling unit of 5,000 square feet. The “Low Density Residential” category is described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan as a residential category that is “characterized by single family detached dwellings, but this category will allow for subdivision of lots or creation of condominium or townhome units.” As described, the primary purpose of the “Low Density Residential" category is not strictly for single-family residential uses as evident by the multifamily residential types that were listed. While the May 21St letter compares the City's R-1 and R-2 zones, the only valid comparison is the S-F zone to the R-1 zone.
Regrettably, since changing the BMC in 1998 as to R-1 and S-F zoning, the City failed to update some of the text in the BMC. Specifically, the intent and purpose descriptions of the S-F and R-1 zones are almost identical (BMC § 17.16.010 and BMC § 17.24.10). Before the effective date of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (January 1, 2020) this oversight was not an issue. Since then — as evidenced by the Letter - the remnant language now creates ambiguity in the BMC. Given that the City was preoccupied with other matters between (at least) 2020 and 2022 (a global pandemic should be a valid reason for not updating outdated zoning regulations), this matter was not identified as a priority.
Now that the issue is highlighted, the City Council will update the BMC to conform with the Land Use Element of the General Plan. This provides, among other things, that “the Low Density Residential classification . . . allow[s] for subdivision of lots or creation of condominium or townhome units. The density
City of Bellflower — SB 9
October 14, 2025
_Bage3of3
associated with this land use category equates to one dwelling unit per 5,000 square feet of net acreage.”2
A-E (Agricultural Estate) Zone
The May 2‘lSt letter also suggests that the A-E zone constitutes “single-family." A superficial reading of BMC § 1720.010, however, shows that the A-E zone is also not a single-family zone: “this district is intended to provide an area for more rural residential development than in other areas of the City, to retain a rural character, and to maintain and encourage the keeping of horses and farm animals for the enjoyment of area residents” (emphasis added).
Bellflower was originally developed as an agricultural area and was known for its dairy farms and apple orchards. The A-E zone preserves this history. The A-E zone is unique to the City as the larger lot sizes are meant to accommodate agricultural uses such as nurseries, flower orchards and animal keeping. The density requirements and the development standards for the A-E zone ensure that the properties remain rural in character.
The General Plan Land Use Element classifies and characterizes the “Agricultural Residential” category as “large lots (10,000-square foot minimum) designed to promote the rural agricultural heritage of Bellflower.”3 Although single-family residential homes may be built on A—E zoned property, the zoning code also allows for multiple units on one lot. Pursuant to BMC § 1720.040, more than one residential unit is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. The main purpose of the A-E zone is not only low density residential, but also agriculture uses as identified in the BMC and the Land Use Element of the General Plan. In addition, several lots within the A-E zone are already developed with multiple dwelling units.
For reasons stated above, neither the R-1 zone, nor the A-E zone qualify as “single family zones” for purposes of SB 9. The City has an “obvious” and “readily identifiable” single-family zone—the S-F zone codified at BMC Chapter 17.16—where SB 9 development may occur. To avoid unnecessary legal costs, however, the City will allow SB 9 development within its R-1 and SF zone, at least until such time that the General Plan Land Use Element is amended.
if you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at [email protected] or (562) 804-1424 ext. 2018.
Sincerely,
Ray Dunton
Mayor
cc: Ryan Smoot, City Manager
Karl H. Berger, City Attorney
Justin A. Tamayo, Assistant City Attorney
2 Land Use Element of the General Plan — Low Density Residential (0-8.7 DU/net AC) 3 Land Use Element of the General Plan - Agricultural Residential (0-4.4 DU/net AC)
10/2/25, 6:11 PM leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/facesiprintCodeSectionVlfindowsditml?lawCode=GOV&article=2.§ionNum=65852.21.&op_statues=20...
GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNINGAND LAND USE [65000 - 66499.58] ( Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 1. PLANNINGAND ZONING [65000 - 66342] ( Heading of Division 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTERL Zoning Regulations [65800 - 65912] ( Chapter 4 repealed and added by Stats. 1965, Ch. 1880. ) ARTICLE 2. Adoption of Regulatlons [65850 - 65863.13] ( Article 2 added by Stats. 1965, Ch. 1880. ) 55352-21- (a) A proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential zone shall be considered mlnisterially, without discretionary review or a hearing, if the proposed housing development meets all of the following requirements:
(1) The parcel subject to the proposed housing development is located within a city, the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (2) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4, as that section read on September 15, 2021.
(3) Notwithstanding any provision of this section or any local law, the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:
(A) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.
(B) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power. (C) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (4) The parcel subject to the proposed housing development is not a parcel on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner's rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application. (5) The development is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any local law and except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standardsthat do not conflict with this section. (2) (A) The local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to two units or that would physically preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area.
(B) (i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. (ii) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), in all other circumstances not described in clause (i), a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines.
(3) A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards that do not apply uniformly to development within the underlying zone. This subdivision shall not prevent a local agency from adopting or imposing objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards on development authorized by this section If those standards are more permissive than applicable standards within the underlying zone. (c) In addition to any conditions established in accordance with subdivision (b), a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for two residential units as provided for in this section:
(1) Offstreet parking of up to one space per unit, except that a local agency shall not impose parking requirements in either of the following instances:
(A) The parcel is located within one—half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code. (B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (2) For residential units connected to an onsite wastewater treatment system, a percolation test completed within the last 5 years, or, if the percolation test has been recertified, within the last 10 years. (d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny a proposed housing development project if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as httpsziileginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/pn‘ntCodeSeclionWindowxhiml7lawCode=GOV&article=2.§ionNum=65852.21 .&op_statues=2024&op_cha. .. 112 -1 3-
10/2/25, 6: 11 PM leginfo.iegislature.oa .govlfaceslpri ntCodeSectionWindowxhtm I7lawCode=GOV&articie=2.§ionNum=65852.21 .&op_statues=20.. . defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. (e) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit created pursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days. (f) Notwithstanding Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13, a local agency shall not be required to permit an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit on parcels that use both the authority contained within this section and the authority contained in Section 66411.7. (9) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures provided that the structures meet building code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance.
(h) (1) An application for a proposed housing development pursuant to this section shall be considered and approved or denied within 60 days from the date the local agency receives a completed application. If the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved. (2) If a permitting agency denies an application for a proposed housing development pursuant to paragraph (1), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in paragraph (1), return In writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. (i) Local agencies shall include units constructed pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400.
(j) For purposes of this section, all of the following apply:
(1) A housing development contains two residential units if the development proposes no more than two new units or if it proposes to add one new unit to one existing unit.
(2) The terms “objective zoning standards,” “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards" mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowabie by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances. (3) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (k) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (I) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agency shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for a housing development pursuant to this section. (Amended by Stats. 2024, Ch. 286, Sec. 1. (SB 450) Efi‘ective January 1, 2025.) https:/Ileginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faoes/printCodeSectionWindow.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&articie=2.&secfionNum=65852.21 .&op_statues=2024&op_oha. .. 2/2 -14-
10/2/25, 6:09 PM leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/iaoeslprintCodeSectionWindow.xhiml?lawCode=GOV&ariiole=1.&seotionNum=66411.7.&op_statues=202...
Q
GOVERNMENT CODE - GOV
TITLE 7. PLANNING AND LAND USE [65000 - 66499.58] ( Heading of Title 7 amended by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) DIVISION 2. SUBDIVISIONS [66410- 66499.41] ( DIVIsIon 2 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) CHAPTER 1. General Provisions and Definitions [66410 - 66424.6] ( Chapter 1 added by Stats. 1 974, Ch. 1536. ) ARTICLE 1. General Provisions [66410 - 66413.5] (Article 1 added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1536. ) 55411-7- (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division and any local law, a local agency shall mlnlsterlally approve, as set forth in this section, a parcel map for an urban lot split only if the local agency determines that the parcel map for the urban lot split meets all the following requirements:
(1) The parcel map subdivides an existing parcel to create no more than two new parcels of approximately equal lot area provided that one parcel shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision. (2) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), both newly created parcels are no smaller than 1,200 square feet. (B) A local agency may by ordinance adopt a smaller minimum lot size subject to mlnlsterlal approval under this subdivision. (3) The parcel being subdivided meets all the following requirements:
(A) The parcel is located within a single-family residential zone. (B) The parcel subject to the proposed urban lot split ls located within a city, the boundaries of which include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (C) The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4, as that section read on September 16, 2021.
(D) The proposed urban lot split would not require demolition or alteration of any of the following types of housing:
(i) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.
(ll) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity's valid exercise of Its police power. (iii) A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real property has exercised the owner’s rights under Chapter 12.75 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years before the date that the development proponent submits an application.
(iv) Housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. (E) The parcel is not located within a historic district or property included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, as defined in Section 5020.1 of the Public Resources Code, or within a site that Is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance.
(F) The parcel has not been established through prior exercise of an urban lot split as provided for in this section. (G) Neither the owner of the parcel being subdivided nor any person acting in concert with the owner has previously subdivided an adjacent parcel using an urban lot split as provided for in this section. (b) An application for a parcel map for an urban lot split shall be approved in accordance with the following requirements:
(1) (A) A local agency shall approve or deny an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split ministerially without discretionary review. (B) An application for an urban lot split shall be considered and approved or denied within 60 days from the date the local agency receives a completed application. If the local agency has not approved or denied the completed application within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
(C) If a permitting agency denies an application for an urban lot split pursuant to subparagraph (B), the permitting agency shall, within the time period described in subparagraph (B), return in writing a full set of comments to the applicant with a list of items that are defective or deficient and a description of how the application can be remedied by the applicant. (2) A local agency shall approve an urban lot split only if it conforms to all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)), except as othenNise expressly provided in this section. (3) Notwithstanding Section 66411.1, a local agency shall not impose regulations that require dedications of rlghts-of-way or the construction of offsite improvements for the parcels being created as a condition of issuing a parcel map for an urban lot split pursuant to this section. (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), notwithstanding any local law, a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that are related to the design or to Improvements of a parcel, consistent with https:/Ileginfo.legislature.ca.gov/facos/printCodeSectionWindow.xhtmi?lawCode=GOV&article=1 .§ionNum=66411 .7.&op_statuos=2024&op_chapt. .. 1/3 -15-
10/2/25. 6:09 PM leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/printCodeSectionVlfindowad1tml?lawCode=GOV&article=1 .&seclionNum=66411 .7.&op_statues=202.. . paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) and with subdivision (e), and are applicable to a parcel created by an urban lot split that do not conflict with this section.
(2) A local agency shall not impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that would have the effect of physically precludlng the construction of two units on either of the resulting parcels or that would result In a unit size of less than 800 square feet.
(3) (A) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), no setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.
(B) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), in all other circumstances not described in subparagraph (A), a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines.
(d) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a local agency may deny an urban lot split if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. (e) In addition to any conditions established in accordance with this section, a local agency may require any of the following conditions when considering an application for a parcel map for an urban lot split:
(1) Easements required for the provision of public services and facilities. (2) A requirement that the parcels have access to, provide access to, or adjoin the public right-of-way. (3) Offstreet parking of up to one space per unit, except that a local agency shall not Impose parking requirements in either of the following instances:
(A) The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code. (B) There is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. (f) A local agency shall require that the uses allowed on a lot created by this section be limited to residential uses. (9) (1) A local agency shall require an applicant for an urban lot split to sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split. (2) This subdivision shall not apply to an applicant that is a “community land trust," as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or is a “qualified nonprofit corporation” as described In Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
(3) A local agency shall not impose additional owner occupancy standards, other than provided for in this subdivision, on an urban lot split pursuant to this section.
(h) A local agency shall require that a rental of any unit createdpursuant to this section be for a term longer than 30 days. (i) A local agency shall not require, as a condition for ministerial approval of a parcel map application for the creation of an urban lot split, the correction of nonconforming zoning conditions.
(j) (1) Notwithstanding any provision of Section 65852.21, 65915, Article 2 (commencing with Section 66314) or Article 3 (commencing with Section 66333) of Chapter 13 of Division 1, or this section, a local agency shall not be required to permit more than two units on a parcel created through the exercise of the authority contained within this section. (2) For the purposes of this section, “unit" means any dwelling unit, including, but not limited to, a unit or units created pursuant to Section 65852.21, a primary dwelling, an accessory dwelling unit as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 66313, or a junior accessory dwelling unit as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66313.
(k) Notwithstanding paragraph (3) of subdivision (c), an application shall not be rejected solely because it proposes adjacent or connected structures provided that the structures meet building code safety standards and are sufficient to allow separate conveyance. (l) Local agencies shall include the number of applications for parcel maps for urban lot splits pursuant to this section in the annual housing element report as required by subparagraph (I) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400. (m) For purposes of this section, both of the following shall apply:
(1) “Objective zoning standards," “objective subdivision standards,” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a local agency, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances. (2) “Local agency” means a city, county, or city and county, whether general law or chartered. (n) A local agency may adopt an ordinance to Implement the provisions of this section. An ordinance adopted to implement this section shall not be considered a project under Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. httpsdlleginfoJegislabJre.ca.gov/faoes/printCodeSectionWindow.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&arficle=1 .§ionNurn=66411 .7.&op_statues=2024&op_chapt... Z3 -15-
10/2/25, 6:09 PM leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faceslpn'ntCodeSectionWlndow.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&article=1 .§ionNum=66411 .7.&op_statues=202. . . (0) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code), except that the local agency shall not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for urban lot splits pursuant to this section. (Amended by Stats. 2024, Ch. 286, Sec. 2. (SB 450) Effective January 1, 2025.) https:l/leginfo.legislature.ca.govlfaces/prlntCodeSectionWlndow.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&article=‘l .&.sectionNum=66411 .7.&op_statues=2024&op_chapt.. . 3/3 -17-