CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: October 03, 2022
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING AND INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. ___
AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE REGULATIONS FOR URBAN LOT
SPLITS (SECTION 18.20.097) AND TWO-UNIT PROJECTS (SECTION
18.20.105) RELATED TO SENATE BILL 9 (SB 9) AND DETERMINING
THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA
SYNOPSIS
Introduce an ordinance amending the City of Pleasant Hill’s zoning regulations for urban lot splits and two-unit projects on single-family residential lots in response to Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”). The proposed amendments would replace the City’s current urgency ordinance adopted by City Council in December 2021. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance amendment and recommended approval to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council held a public hearing on the item on September 12, 2022, and provided direction to staff on modifications to the ordinance and continued the item to the October 3, 2022 meeting date.
DISCUSSION
Background
On September 12, 2022, the City Council reviewed the draft ordinance, as recommended by the Planning Commission, and expressed general support for the amendments. The Council provided comments to staff on specific sections of the draft ordinance and continued the item to the October 3, 2022 hearing date. The September 12, 2022 staff report can be viewed in Attachment D.
Analysis
The City Council provided specific comments to staff, including the requirement for site access for urban lot split lots, clarity that the required enclosed parking area is not included in the floor area calculations for the primary dwelling units, and concerns regarding the height of units that may need to encroach into the required setbacks. Staff has made modifications in response to each comment. The revised draft ordinance has been included as Attachment A (strikeout version) and Attachment B (clean version). For reference, a copy of the previously proposed draft ordinance, as presented at the September 12, 2022 hearing, has been included as Attachment C (strikeout version).
Unit Size Allowance and Enclosed Parking Requirements: The previously proposed ordinance references the underlying development regulations of the corresponding zone (setbacks, lot coverage, etc.) to determine the maximum size of the dwelling units with certain clarifications.
In response to comments raised by the City Council, Staff has added an additional point of clarification as follows:
Any required enclosed parking space is not calculated as part of the dwelling unit size.
Staff also added clarifying language to the parking section confirming that “If the construction of both a primary dwelling unit measuring 800 square feet or less in floor area and the required enclosed parking space would cause development on the lot to exceed the objective lot coverage requirement of the underlying zone, then the unit’s off-street parking space must be unenclosed.” This would only apply when the primary dwelling unit is 800 square feet or less since the City cannot require a smaller unit in these cases to accommodate additional floor area for the enclosed parking stall.
Urban Lot Splits without Street Frontage: The provisions of SB 9 require that a lot must have access, or be adjacent to the public right-of-way in order to be subdivided as an urban lot split.
At the previous Council hearing, a concern was raised about requiring every urban lot split to provide access to the right-of-way. As originally written, the draft ordinance required that a newly created lot either directly adjoin the public right-of-way, or provide access to it through an access easement. In response to City Council’s comments, staff has inserted language to clarify that all new lots must satisfy the objective standards of the Subdivision Map Act and the County fire and emergency access requirements.
Building Height Limits: The previously proposed draft ordinance relies on the maximum height requirements of the single-family zone (35 feet), but with a two-story maximum. The City Council expressed concerns that the original ordinance language would allow reduced building setbacks for two-story primary dwelling units. City Council asked staff to include language that prohibited primary dwelling units from exceeding 16 feet or one story in height when located within reduced setbacks. In response, Staff added the following language:
c. Height restrictions.
i. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c)(ii) below, no primary dwelling unit that is developed on a resulting lot may exceed one story or 16 feet in height.
ii. If a primary dwelling unit on the lot complies with the setback standards set forth in Section 18.20.030, then the height of a primary dwelling unit may exceed 16 feet, up to the objective height limit that is imposed through the underlying zone (Schedule 18.20.030; Maximum Building Height (feet)).
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no primary dwelling unit may exceed two stories.
This new language clarifies that primary dwelling units are limited to 16 feet in height or one story unless they satisfy the setback standards of the underlying or resulting zone. If they do, then the height of a primary dwelling may exceed 16 feet, up to the objective height limit that is imposed through the underlying or resulting zone.1
Public Comments
All public comment received to date has been included as Attachment G.
CEQA
The City, as the lead agency, has determined that the proposed activity is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the 2022 Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. The City has determined with certainty that the proposed activity will not have a significant effect on the environment as the proposed design and development standards, when applied to relevant projects, will undergo separate CEQA review.
Additionally, under California Government Code sections 65852.21, subdivision (j), and 66411.7, subdivision (n), the adoption of an ordinance by a city or county implementing the provisions of Government Code sections 66411.7 and 65852.21 regulating urban lot splits and two-unit projects is statutorily exempt from the requirements of the CEQA. Therefore, the proposed ordinance is statutorily exempt from CEQA in that the proposed ordinance implements these new laws enacted by SB 9.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff anticipates minimal fiscal impact because applicants remain responsible for the cost of processing the applicable ministerial permits required to create an urban lot split or construct two units on a single-family-zoned property, as well as any impact fees. The City will continue to receive development permit fees, building permit fees, and development impact fees such as park land dedication and traffic mitigation fees for these projects.
PUBLIC CONTACT
Public contact was made through posting of the City Council agenda on the City’s official notice bulletin board, at the Pleasant Hill Senior Center and at the Pleasant Hill Police Department.
Notice of the meeting was also provided in the East Bay Times Newspaper published on August 12, 2022 and September 1, 2022, displayed on an A-Frame at the Police Station, displayed on the City Hall Changeable Message Board Sign, and on the City’s web page. The agenda and staff report are posted on the City’s web page.
RECOMMENDED CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Introduce the ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Introduce the ordinance with modifications;
2. Continue the item to a future date with direction to staff; or
1 Consistent with state law, the City’s objective development standards (including height and setbacks) must yield to the extent that they physically preclude the construction of up to two 800 square units on the lot, except that in no event may any structure be less than four feet from a side or rear property line (Gov. Code, §§ 66411.7(c)(1)-(2), 65852.21(b)(1)-(2)).
3. Do not introduce the ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS
A Proposed Updated Draft Ordinance (strikeout version)
B Proposed Updated Draft Ordinance (clean version)
C Previously Proposed Draft Ordinance from September 12, 2022 Hearing (strikeout version) D September 12, 2022 City Council Staff Report (Attachments can be viewed at the Planning Division)
E Public Comments
Prepared by: Haley Croffoot, AICP, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Ethan Bindernagel, Community Development Director Approved by: June Catalano, City Manager