DATE:
March 22, 2022
CATEGORY:
Public Hearing
DEPT.:
Community Development
TITLE: California Senate Bill 9—Text
Amendments to Chapter 28
(Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of
the City Code and Other Minor Text
Amendments
RECOMMENDATION
1. Find the proposed ordinances implementing Senate Bill 9 to be statutorily exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Government Code Sections 65852.21(j) and 66411.7(n), and the minor text amendments to be exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) as clarifications to existing code requirements and procedures.
2. Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Amending Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code to Establish Procedures and Standards Related to Dual Urban Opportunity (DUO) Developments and Urban Lot Splits in Compliance with Senate Bill 9 and to Make Other Minor Amendments Related to Inactive Permit Applic ations, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for April 12, 2022 (Attachment 1 to the Council report).
3. Introduce an Ordinance of the City of Mountain View Repealing Mountain View City Code Chapter 28, Subdivisions, in its Entirety and Replacing it with a New Chapter 28 of the Mountain View City Code to Reorganize and Renumber the Chapter and to Include Procedures and Standards Related to Urban Lot Splits in Compliance with Senate Bill 9, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for April 12, 2022 (Attachment 2 to the Council report).
4. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Mountain View Amending the City of Mountain View Master Fee Schedule to Establish a Permit Fee for Preliminary Parcel Maps for Urban Lot Splits , to be read in title only, further reading waived (Attachment 3 to the Council report).
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
BACKGROUND
California Senate Bill 9 Overview
California Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) requires ministerial approval of certain housing development projects and lot splits on an R1 (Single -Family Residential) zoned property. SB 9 was passed by the California Legislature on September 1, 2021, signed into law by Governor Newsom on September 16, 2021, and took effect January 1, 2022.
SB 9 requires approval of the following:
• Two-unit housing development. Two homes on an eligible R1 lot (whether the proposal adds two new housing units or adds one new unit to one existing unit).
• Urban lot split. A one-time subdivision of an eligible R1 lot into two lots. This would allow up to four units (two units on each lot).
These provisions must be used in concert with existing Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (JADU) regulations, which is discussed in detail later in this report. SB 9 also outlines how jurisdictions must review and approve SB 9 projects: jurisdictions must review SB 9 projects without discretionary review or public hearing; may only apply objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards; and these standards may not preclude the construction of up to two units of at least 800 square feet each on each lot.
This law is similar to recent State ADU legislation in that it allows j urisdictions to apply local objective standards, as long as they do not prevent the development of new small homes.
Preliminary market analysis , prepared by the Terner Center for Housing Innovation , predicts SB 9’s primary impact will result from the spli tting and sale of lots by homeowners and lead to modest increases in additional units because homeowners already have similar development potential under ADU law. Their analysis concluded that of Mountain View’s approximately 9,100 parcels that are zoned single-family residential, it would be economically viable to add new units under SB 9 to a total of approximately 700 parcels. To date, the City has received two applications for urban lot splits possible under SB 9.
Environmental Planning Commission Public Hearing
On February 16, 2022, the Environmental Planning Commission (EPC) held a public hearing to review and provide a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed code amendments (see Attachment 4—Environmental Planning Commission Staff Report—February 16, 2022). The EPC voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the proposed code amendments to the City Council.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Five people spoke at the hearing and four written comments were received (Attachment 5 — Written Comments to the EPC). The EPC discussed and a majority of the EPC requested the following topics be forwarded to Council:
• Second-Story Decks —The proposed amendments would prohibit the construction of second-story decks on newly constructed unit s of dual urban opportunity (DUO) developments. The proposed prohibition aims to account for privacy concerns resulting from the State-mandated 4’ side and rear setbacks for this development type. The EPC expressed interest in exploring ways to potentially allow for second-story decks in a manner that would not raise new privacy impacts to adjacent properties. Staff has evaluated this request, and an alternative is provided later in this report.
• Payment of Below -Market-Rate (BMR) In -Lieu Fees—The City’s existing BMR Ordinance and guidelines require payment of BMR in -lieu fees for the net new dwelling units in the R1 District and only exempts accessory dwelling units from the requirement. Staff is not proposing amendments to the existing BMR Ordinance or guidelines as part of the SB 9 implementing code amendments , which are focused on implementing state law that is already in effect . Some members of the EPC expressed concern that the in -lieu fee may contribute to the infeasibility of SB 9 proj ects, while others believed that the BMR in -lieu fee would account for only a small portion of the overall budget of an SB 9 project , and it was premature to assume this may be a prohibitive factor before implementation.
Ultimately, the EPC requested that staff relay this information to the City Council for consideration with a future BMR Ordinance amendment.
ANALYSIS
The following is a summary of the proposed City Code amendments to align Mountain View’s regulations with what is required under State law . Staff is recommending to align the requirements with t he minimum requirements of SB 9, but the City could be more permissive than what State law requires.
Urban Lot Splits
The R1 Zoning District currently allows for a two -lot subdivision through discretionary approval of a preliminary parcel map by the City’s Subdivision Committee and subsequent recordation of a parcel map. Pursuant to SB 9, eligible R1-zoned lots may be subdivided into two lots through a ministerial process or a process which does not require discretionary review or public hearing.
This type of subdivision is defined in the proposed City Code amendments as an “urban lot split.”
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Staff is proposing amendme nts to Chapters 36 (Zoning) and 28 (Subdivisions) to establish standards and procedures for urban lot splits as follows.
Urban Lot Split Eligibility Criteria
SB 9 and the City -proposed regulations have the following eligibility criteria for lots which se ek to do an urban lot split:
a. Size. The lot to be split shall contain a minimum of 2,400 square feet. The resulting lots shall each contain a minimum of 1,200 square feet. Each of the resulting lots shall be between 60% and 40% of the original lot area.
b. Historic. The lot to be subdivided shall not contain a historic resource or be located within a historic district;
c. Withdrawal from rental market. At no time in the past 15 years may the lot to be subdivided have contained a dwelling unit that was withdrawn from the market for re ntal or lease under the Ellis Act.
d. Demolition or alteration of protected units. The urban lot split shall not result in the demolition or structural modification of any portion of an existing dwelling unit that:
1. Is protected by a recorded covenant , ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate-, low-, or very-low income;
2. Is protected under the City of Mountain View Community Stabilization and Fair Rent Act (CSFRA); or
3. Has been occupied by a tenant within the three years prior to the submittal of an application for an urban lot split.
e. Lot location. The lot to be subdivided shall not be located on a site that is any of the following:
1. Prime farmland, farmland of Statewide importance, o r land that is zoned or designated for agricultural protection or preservation by the voters;
2. Wetland;
3. Within a very -high fire hazard severity zone, unless the site complies with all fire-hazard mitigation measures required by existing building standards; California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
4. A hazardous waste site that has not been cleared for residential use;
5. Within a delineated earthquake fault zone, unless all development on the site complies with applicable seismic protection Building Code standards;
6. Within a 100-year flood hazard area, unless the site has either been subject to a Letter of Map Revision prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and issued to the local jurisdiction, or meets FE MA requirements necessary to meet minimum floodplain management criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program;
7. Within a regulatory floodway, unless all development on the site has received a no-rise certification;
8. Land identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan, habitat conservation plan, or other adopted natural resource protection plan;
9. Habitat for protected species; or
10. Land under a conservation easement.
f. No prior lot split. The lot to be subdivided shall not be a lot that was established through a prior urban lot split.
g. Subdivision of adjacent parcels. The lot to be subdivided shall not abut any lot that was previously subdivided through an urban lot split by the owner of the lot propose d to be subdivided or any party acting in concert with the owner. For the purpose of this section, any party acting in concert with the owner shall include any individual with a familial relation to the property owner (including, but not limited to, parents, children, siblings, and spouses) or any business entity in which the property owner has more than 10% ownership.
Urban Lot Split Requirements
An eligible R1 -zoned property can only be subdivided into two roughly proportional lots. To ensure rough proportionality, SB 9 specifies one lot cannot be less than 40% the size of the original lot to be subdivided and a minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet. Additionally, the following restrictions and requirements apply to urban lot split applications:
• Cannot require dedication of right -of-way or construction of off -site improvements (such as installation of new street improvements);
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
• May require that lots have direct access to a public right-of-way;
• May require easements for public services and facilities (e.g., utilities); and
• Must require the applicant to sign an affidavit acknowledging the applicant intends to reside in one of the properties as their primary residence for at least three years after the date of the subdivision.
Although SB 9 requires applicants to sign an affidavit indicating their intent to occupy one of the units following an urban lot split, the statute only requires that applicants intend to occupy one of the units, not that they will. For this reason, the affidavit will be largely unenforceable for the City, unless the City is able to prove that an applicant knowingly submitted an urban lot split application without intending to reside in one of the resulting units.
Staff is utilizing the affidavit as a tool to tra nsparently state the requirements of SB 9 to ensure applicants’ understanding. Staff will retain the affidavit as an official City document that will be available for members of the public to view, including potential future buyers of the property.
Urban Lot Split Configurations
Table 1, below, compares the existing and new minimum urban lot split subdivision standards.
Table 1: Lot Standards
Lot Standards Existing R1 New Urban Lot Splits
Minimum Size
6,000 square feet (7,000
square feet for corner lots)
40% of the size of the lot being
subdivided, but no less than 1,200
square feet
Minimum Width 60’ (70’ for corner lots) 30’
Minimum Frontage 35’ 16’
When subdividing a lot, the street frontage requirement largely dictates the subdivision configuration. Figure 1 demonstrates two possible ways to subdivide a typical single -family lot into two roughly proportional lots with the minimum lot standards.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Figure 1: Example Urban Lot Split Configurations
Staff recommends any lot created by a lot split shall maintain a minimum frontage with direct access to the public right -of-way of 16’. This recommendation stems from existing City regulations for flag lots in the R1 Zone. The intent of the minimum frontage standard is to ensure that a flag lot will have permanent access to the street and to prevent maintenance issues or disputes that could arise if the access was provided by way of an easement across the property fronting the street.
In order to prevent the creation of irregularly shaped lots, staff recommends a minimum width of 30’ for lots created through an urban lot split. Lastly, to ensure adequate public services and facilities to lots created by urban lot splits, staff recommends requiring utility and public facility easements on an as-needed basis.
City Procedures for Urban Lot Splits
Urban lot split applications must be approved through a ministerial process. Staff proposes to amend Chapter 28 (Subdi visions) of the City Code to establish procedures and submittal requirements for urban lot splits which align with this requirement, includ ing a ministerial Preliminary Parcel Map and subsequent Parcel Map.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Renumbering of Chapter 28 (Subdivisions)
The amendments to Chapter 28 required to implement SB 9 necessitate renumbering of the chapter. Staff is proposing to repeal the chapter in its entirety and replace it with a new Chapter 28 to transition to a numbering convention that will allow for greater flexibility for future City Code amendments. Chapter 28 is shown in its entirety as Exhibit 2. Because Chapter 28 is proposed to be re pealed and replaced in its entirety, the entire chapter is shown in tracked changes. For clarity, staff has shown substantive changes and renumbering as red text, while the remainder of the chapter is shown as grey text.
Permit Fee for Urban Lot Splits
The Fiscal Year 2021-22 Master Fee Schedule includes a permit fee of $1,947 for a preliminary parcel map. This fee, which is based on cost-recovery, accounts for costs associated with a public hearing that would be required for a standard preliminary parcel map.
Because a preliminary parcel map for an urban lot split will be reviewed without a public hearing, staff proposes a reduced fee of $736 for this type of preliminary parcel map. The amended Planning Fee Schedule is included as Exhibit A to Attachment 3 of this Council report.
Dual Urban Opportunity (DUO) Developments
In addition to urban lot split provisions, SB 9 requires local agencies to allow the development of two dwelling units on eligible R1 -zoned lots. In order to allow this development type, staff proposes to create a new land use type, “Dual Urban Opportunity (DUO) development,” as a permitted use in the R1 District, which will appear in the Residential Land Use Table. The DUO development provisions could be used in concert with the urban lo t split standards, resulting in a maximum potential of four primary -dwelling units on a qualifying R1 lot. In other words, if a lot is subdivided by an urban lot split, each resulting lot may contain two primary-dwelling units.
Mandatory Development Standards for DUO Developments
SB 9 includes the following mandatory development standards that all local jurisdictions must implement:
• No more than 4’ side and rear setbacks for new structures; no minimum setbacks for retention of existing structures;
• Minimum unit size of 800 square feet;
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
• No more than one parking space per unit; however, properties within a one -half-mile walking distance of high -quality transit or major transit stops, as defined by State law, or within one block of a car-share vehicle location, do not need to provide parking; and
• Cannot require the correction of existing nonconforming zoning conditions or deny a development due to existing nonconforming conditions.
Aside from these mandatory standards, SB 9 provides some discretion for jurisdictions to adopt objective development standards for the development of units, as long as the standards do not preclude the development of two units meeting the minimum size and maximum setbacks.
Proposed Additional Development Standards for DUO Developments
Although SB 9 allows cities to create objective development standards, SB 330, as amended by SB 8 in 2021 (Housing Crisis Act of 2019), limits the ability for cities to add new standards.
Specifically, the Housing Crisis Act prohibits cities from reducing the intensity of land use within an existing residential zoning district below what was allowed and in effect on January 1, 2018.
Reducing intensity includes, but is not limited to: reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio (FAR); new or increased open space or lot size requirements; new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage; or any standard that would lessen the intensity of housing. For this reason, staff proposes to largely maintain existing R1 development standards for DUO Developments and only adjust those standards where SB 9 establishes either more restrictive standards (e.g., occupancy acknowledgements) or less restrictive standards (e.g., setbacks).
Table 2 compares existing R1 District development standards for new single -family homes with the proposed standards for DUO Developments, identifying differing standards.
Table 2: R1 District Development Standards
Standard Single-Family
(One-Unit) Standards
DUO Development
(Two-Unit) Standards
Floor Area Ratio Ranges from 0.4 to 0.45 based on lot size Same Front Setback 20’ minimum Same
Side Setback
First Story Ranges from 5’ to 7’, based
on lot size 4’ minimum
Second
Story
Ranges from 5’ to 12’,
based on lot size 4’ minimum
Street Side 15’ minimum 4’ minimum
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Standard Single-Family
(One-Unit) Standards
DUO Development
(Two-Unit) Standards
Rear Setback
First Story
20% of lot depth, but at
least 15’ and no more than
40’
4’ minimum
Second
Story
25% of lot depth, but at
least 20’ and no more than
40’
4’ minimum
Height 28’ maximum Same
Required
Landscaping
50% of the required front setback area
shall be permanently landscaped
25% of the required front
setback area shall be
permanently landscaped
Second-Story
Decks
Permitted along front, rear, and street-
side facades up to 150 square feet in
aggregate area
Not permitted on newly-
constructed DUO development
units
Parking Two (2) parking spaces, one of which must
be covered
One (1) covered parking space,
unless certain exceptions are
met
The draft ordinance includes language to specify that if a development standard precludes the construction of an otherwise compliant DUO development consisting of two 800 square foot units with 4’ side and rear setbacks, the development standard will be waived.
Because the side and rear setbacks for DUO developments will be reduced, staff proposes to prohibit the construction of second -story decks , in association with newly constructed units , associated with a DUO development proposal. This prohibition o n second -story decks is consistent with SB 330 requirements as it would not lessen the potential for additional housing units (intensity) on any lot. However, prohibiting second-story decks will reduce potential privacy concerns resulting from the reduced setback requirements for DUO developments.
The EPC expressed interest in exploring ways to potentially allow for second -story decks, which would not raise new privacy impacts to adjacent properties. Staff has evaluated this request and recommends if Council would like to include a provision that allows second-story decks for DUO developments, Council could consider allowing second -story decks along the front facades of units facing the public street and along the street side facades of units on corner lots, up to an aggregate of 150 square feet . Staff recommends that second story decks be subject to the setback requirements of the units. Roof decks and similar features are not recommended by staff due to potential privacy impacts on neighboring properties.
Since SB 9 will allow for smaller lots than what the existing code allows and/or two primary dwellings on one lot, staff proposes to reduce the minimum l andscape coverage requirement California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
within the front setback area from 50% to 25%. This standard will allow for the provision of on-site parking and paved pedestrian access to the units on smaller lots, while ensuring that a portion of the front yard be permanently landscaped.
Similar to recent ADU law, SB 9 also allows cities to require no more than one parking space per unit. No parking shall be required if:
a. The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in the California Public Resources Code;
b. The parcel is located within one -half mile walking distance of a major transit stop, as defined in the California Public Resources Code; or
c. There is a car-share vehicle parking space located within one block of the lot.
The proposed ordinance includes amendments to the required parking by land use table to establish parking requirements for DUO developments, as well as the parking exemption described above.
DUO Development Eligibility
SB 9 establishes the following eligibility requirements for any DUO development proposal.
Similar to the urban lot split requirements, the intent is to protect historic resources and existing rental housing stock by prohibiting or restricting the following:
a. A historic property may not be developed with a DUO development;
b. A DUO development may not result in the demolition or alteration of any existing residential unit that:
• Is protected by a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate-, low-, or very-low income; or
• Has been occupied by a tenant within three years prior to the application submittal to the City for the DUO development (e.g., building permit).
City Procedures for DUO Developments
DUO developments must be approved through a ministerial process. Staff proposes the review and permitting of DUO developments through issuance of a building permit, similar to the existing review procedures for single-family homes in the R1 District, duplexes in the R2 District, and ADUs/JADUs in all residential zoning districts.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
SB 9 and Accessory Dwelling Units
Current City regulations allow for three units —one primary unit, one ADU , and one JADU —on each single-family (R1) property. The ADU can be at tached or detached and can be up to 1,000 square feet. The JADU must be within the walls of the primary unit and cannot exceed 500 square feet. Neither the ADU nor the JADU can be sold as a separate unit.
The provisions of SB 9 are utilized in concert with existing ADU and JADU regulations but do not require local agencies to allow any R1 lot to be developed with more than four units, inclusive of ADUs and JADUs. Based on staff’s recommendation to strictly comply with SB 9, the following development scenarios will be possible when the existing ADU and JADU provisions are applied with the provisions of SB 9:
a. Primary units—No more than two primary -dwelling units will be permitted on a single existing R1 lot or newly created lot through an urban lot split.
b. Primary/ADU/JADU combinations on R1 lots that are not established through an urban lot split—For existing R1 lots that are not established through an urban lot split, a second primary unit will be allowed. Additionally, accessory -dwelling units will be allowed as follows:
• Two accessory-dwelling units; or
• Two junior accessory-dwelling units; or
• One accessory-dwelling unit and one junior accessory-dwelling unit.
This will bring the total number of allowed units to a maximum of four (inclusive of primary units, accessory-dwelling units, and junior accessory dwelling units).
• Primary/ADU/JADU combination on lots created through an urban lot split —For lots that are established through an urban lot split, in addition to a primary -dwelling unit, a second primary unit, or an accessory -dwelling unit or junior accessory -dwelling unit may also be allowed for a maximum of two units per resulting lot (inclusive of primary units, accessory-dwelling unit, and junior accessory-dwelling unit).
The following graphic demonstrates different ways in which the four units allowed under SB 9 can be achieved.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
Figure 2: SB 9 Maximum Number of Units
Neighboring Cities
In preparing these draft amendments, staff conferred with neighboring cities and reviewed their SB 9 implementation ordinances. Most of the ordinances staff was able to review were urgency ordinances adopted prior to SB 9 taking effect at the beginning of this year and not their final City Code revisions, which are anticipated to occur this quarter.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
In general, our neighboring cities, including San Jose, Sunnyvale, Saratoga, Campbell , and Palo Alto, are limiting the number of units to a maximum of four units per lot (including primary units and ADUs/JADUs), consistent with the minimum requirements of State law and our proposed draft ordinance amendments.
The following table summarizes the maximum numbers of ADUs and JADUs our neighboring cities have permitted within their ordinances. The information in this table could change as cities adopt final code amendments:
Table 3: Neighboring Cities—Maximum Number of Units
Jurisdiction Maximum Number of Units Allowed
Two-unit development
(no Urban lot split).
Urban lot split with one
primary-dwelling unit per lot.
Urban lot split with 2-unit
development proposed
on each resulting lot.
San Jose 1 attached ADU or
2 detached ADUs.
No JADUs.
1 ADU or 1 JADU per lot. No ADU or JADU.
Sunnyvale 2 ADUs. 1 ADU or 1 JADU per lot. No ADU or JADU.
Saratoga 1 ADU and 1 JADU. 1 ADU or 1 JADU per lot. No ADU or JADU.
Campbell If primary units are
attached: Two ADUs.
If primary units are
detached: One ADU or
one JADU for each primary
unit.
1 ADU or 1 JADU per lot. No ADU or JADU.
Palo Alto 2 detached ADUs. 1 ADU or 1 JADU per lot. No ADU or JADU.
Other Minor Zoning Code Amendments
Inactive Permit Applications
In addition to amendments to comply with SB 9, staff is proposing a minor amendment within the administration section of the Zoning Code related to the closure of inactive planning permit applications. This section would establish that any formal permit application which has been inactive for three (3) months shall be deemed withdrawn and allow staff to close the application.
The amendment clarifies an application is considered inactive when a formal resubmittal, that is substantially responsive to the City’s completeness/comment letter , has not been submitted.
Once an application is deemed withdrawn, the applicant would be re quired to submit a new application and fees , in compliance with the City’s application submittal requirements. Staff is California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
proposing this amendment in order to ensure the timely processing of planning permits and to ensure projects are designed in compliance with the most recent applicable standards and requirements.
FISCAL IMPACT
In order to implement SB 9, staff is proposing to establish a new Planning permit type, a preliminary parcel map for an urban lot split, with an associated application fee of $736. This fee would be collected for each urban lot split application received by the City. The provision of additional dwelling units and subdivisions under the proposed text amendments to align with SB 9 could result in higher assessed property values and marginal increases in property tax revenue to the City. Additionally, applicants proposing to create net new primary-dwelling units pursuant to the proposed amendments will be required to pay park land dedication in-lieu fees, transportation impact fees, sewer and water capacity fees, and below market-rate housing in-lieu fees on the net new units.
NEXT STEPS
A City webpage pertaining to the City’s implementation of SB 9 is currently available. Following adoption of the propo sed amendments, staff will create informational guides related to urban lot splits and DUO developments for the public, similar to what has been prepared for ADU regulations.
Over the next year, staff will be tracking permits submitted under the provisio ns of SB 9 and evaluating if any minor modifications to the regulations may be prudent to clarify the requirements. Staff will also be tracking any potential referendum that may arise pertaining to SB 9 and would bring recommendations regarding potential City Code revisions or policy changes, as a result of a referendum, to the Council for discussion and recommendation.
CONCLUSION
The EPC recommends that the City Council approve the proposed text amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code to establish procedures and standards related to urban lot splits and dual urban opportunity (DUO) developments in compliance with California Senate Bill 9 and other minor text amendments to Chapter 36 related to inactive permit applications.
California Senate Bill 9—Text Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions) and Chapter 36 (Zoning) of the City Code and Other Minor Text Amendments March 22, 2022
ALTERNATIVES
1. Approve the proposed text amendments to the City Code with modifications.
2. Refer the proposed text amendments back to the EPC for further analysis and reconsideration.
3. Disapprove the proposed text amendments to the City Code.
PUBLIC NOTICING
The City Council’s agenda is advertised on Channel 26, and the agenda and this report appear on the City’s internet website and were posted in accordance with the Brown Act. A notice for the item was also published in the newspaper.
Prepared by:
Brittany Whitehill
Associate Planner
Reviewed by:
Stephanie Williams
Planning Manager/
Zoning Administrator
Approved by:
Aarti Shrivastava
Assistant City Manager/
Community Development Director
Approved by:
Kimbra McCarthy
City Manager
BW/4/CAM
840-03-22-22CR
201625
Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance Amending Chapter 36 (Zoning)
2. Draft Ordinance Amending Chapter 28 (Subdivisions)
3. Resolution Amending the Planning Fee Schedule
4. Environmental Planning Commission Staff Report—February 16, 2022
5. Written Comments to the EPC
6. Summary Table of Amendments to Chapter 36 (Zoning)
7. Summary Table of Amendments to Chapter 28 (Subdivisions)