CITY COUNCIL
Darrell Steinberg, Mayor
Angelique Ashby, Vice Mayor, District 1
Sean Loloee, District 2
Jeff Harris, District 3
Katie Valenzuela, District 4
Jay Schenirer, District 5
Eric Guerra, Mayor Pro Tem, District 6
Rick Jennings, II, District 7
Mai Vang, District 8
CHARTER OFFICERS
Mindy Cuppy, City Clerk
Susana Alcala Wood, City Attorney
Jorge Oseguera, City Auditor
Howard Chan, City Manager
John Colville, City Treasurer
City Council
Financing Authority
Housing Authority
Public Financing Authority
Redevelopment Agency
Successor Agency
City Hall-Council Chamber
915 I Street, 1st Floor
Published by the Office of the City Clerk
(916) 808-5163
CORRESPONDENCE
Description of Attached: Correspondence received after publishing the Agenda.
For the Meeting of: Tuesday, May 10, 2022, at 5:00 p.m.
Agenda Item: Consent Item 17
17. 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report
File ID: 2022-00933
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Receive and file the 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report.
Contact: Greta Soos, Associate Planner, (916) 808-2027, [email protected]; Matt Hertel, AICP, Long Range Planning Manager, (916) 808-7158, [email protected]; Community Development Department
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Rick Jennings; Mayor Steinberg
Cc: [email protected]; Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:18:23 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Jill Bowers
[email protected]
6549 Fordham Way
Sacramento,California 95831
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Jeff S. Harris; Mayor Steinberg
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; Ann Broderick
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:23:12 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Ann Broderick
[email protected]
609 33rd Street
Sacto. CA 95816
From: Marie Carvidi
To: Mayor Steinberg; Angelique Ashby; Sean Loloee; Jeff S. Harris; Katie Valenzuela (City); Jay Schenirer; Eric Guerra; Rick Jennings; District8
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Karina Talamantes; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Allison Joe; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; [email protected]
Subject: Save Our Neighborhoods
Date: Saturday, May 7, 2022 9:20:26 AM
The Sacramento City Council must change its short term rental and ADUs ordinances to stop allowing whole homes or ADUs to be short term rentals because:
- Sacramento needs permanent housing NOT more hotel rooms scattered through residential neighborhoods
- The city is promoting ADUs on the basis that they can provide “affordable” housing.
This questionable claim is blatantly false when the city allows ADUs to be short term rental (aka hotel rooms) instead of permanent housing.
Forever Blessed
From: Elmhurst Neighborhood Assoc
To: Eric Guerra
Cc: KaSandra Soto; Madeline Grigsby; Alejandro Cabrera; Public Comment Subject: ADUs should not be short term rentals
Date: Friday, May 6, 2022 1:22:11 PM
Dear Councilmember Guerra-
It is our understanding that the City council will be updated on the Housing Element on May 10 with the same or a similar report given to the Planning and Design Commission on April 28.
This report to the Planning and Design Commission did not address the contradiction of allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be used as short term rentals. There is no justification for promoting ADUs if they are not for permanent housing.
Sacramento has a shortage of affordable housing NOT a shortage of hotel rooms, which is what short-term rentals are.
As we have discussed with you, the city needs to change its short-term rental ordinance to NOT allow: 1) any whole house short term rentals for homes that do not have a permanent resident or 2) any ADUs to be used as short term rentals.
Sincerely,
Elmhurst Neighborhood Association Board
--
Elmhurst Neighborhood Association
(If you do not receive a prompt reply, please email: [email protected] )
From: Elmhurst Neighborhood Assoc
To: Mayor Steinberg; Angelique Ashby; Sean Loloee; Jeff S. Harris; Katie Valenzuela (City); Jay Schenirer; Rick Jennings; District8
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Karina Talamantes; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Allison Joe; Dennis M. Rogers; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; [email protected]
Subject: ADUs should not be short term rentals
Date: Friday, May 6, 2022 1:25:40 PM
It is our understanding that the City council will be updated on the Housing Element on May 10 with the same or a similar report given to the Planning and Design Commission on April 28.
This report to the Planning and Design Commission did not address the contradiction of allowing Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to be used as short term rentals. There is no justification for promoting ADUs if they are not for permanent housing.
Sacramento has a shortage of affordable housing NOT a shortage of hotel rooms, which is what short-term rentals are.
The city needs to change its short-term rental ordinance to NOT allow: 1) any whole house short term rentals for homes that do not have a permanent resident or 2) any ADUs to be used as short term rentals.
Sincerely,
Elmhurst Neighborhood Association Board
--
Elmhurst Neighborhood Association
(If you do not receive a prompt reply, please email: [email protected] )
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Jeff S. Harris
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:00:18 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Debbie Grutzmacher
[email protected]
1049 44th Street
Sacramento 95819
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Jeff S. Harris; Mayor Steinberg
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; r Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:48:34 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Read and Zoe Harrison
[email protected]
1116 55th Street, Sacramento, CA 95819
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Jeff S. Harris
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:10:11 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Whitney Leeman
[email protected]
1040 45th Street, Sacramento, CA 95819
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Rick Jennings
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:07:09 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Heather Petersen
[email protected]
1418 Weller Way
Sacramento CA 95818
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Eric Guerra
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 6:52:05 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Sarah Phillips
[email protected]
4234 52nd Street,95820
From: Francesca Reitano
To: Public Comment; Mayor Steinberg; Angelique Ashby; Sean Loloee; Jeff S. Harris; Katie Valenzuela (City); Jay Schenirer; Eric Guerra; Rick Jennings; District8
Cc: Greta Soos; Matt Hertel; Mary Lynne Vellinga; Karina Talamantes; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Allison Joe; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R.
Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods Subject: Agenda Item 17, May 10, 2022 City Council Meeting - Public Comment Date: Sunday, May 8, 2022 7:39:50 PM
Attachments: Item 17_5-10-2022 Short-term rentals-fr.pdf I have attached my public comment for Agenda Item 17, May 10, 2022 Meeting:
2021 Annual Housing Element Annual Progress Report
Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Francesca Reitano
Elmhurst
May 8, 2022
To: Mayor Steinberg and City Councilmembers
Re: 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report
May 10, 2022, City Council Meeting- Agenda Item 17
File ID: 2022-00933
The 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress report provided to the Planning and Design Commission on April 28 and to the City Council on May 10 is problematic in several aspects:
• It equates ADU production with housing production when ADUs are being approved for short-term rentals. Short-term rentals are de facto hotel rooms; they are NOT permanent housing. The report states that “ADU production increased 123% from 2020 (76 units) to 2021 (170 units)” but it does not say how many of many of these 246 units produced in 2020 and 2021 are now being used as short-term rentals. Nor does it give the number of ADUs that are short-term rentals built in prior years (2013-2019). • Because short-term rentals do not provide permanent housing, allowing ADUs to be short- term rentals is contrary to the city’s stated policy goals, including a policy goal not included in this report to City Council, but included in the version of this report presented to the Planning Commission on April 28, 2022 (File ID: 2022-00565): “Equity Considerations: The 2021-2029 Housing Element advances housing options for all income levels and includes various policies and programs addressing equity, inclusion, and anti-displacement.” Short-term Rentals: no progress toward housing policy goals
“ADU production increased 123% from 2020 (76 units) to 2021 (170 units).”
Toolkit,” “H.5. ADU Outreach Plan,” and “H.6. Permit-Ready ADU plans.” The city is certainly putting a lot of effort (and taxpayer dollars) into its ADU program. But where is the gain in affordable housing?
Question: How many of the 246 units produced in 2020 and 2021 are now being used as short- term rentals? Or for the prior years (2013-2019)? How many of all the city’s ADUs are now short-term rentals?
Allowing ADUs to become short-term rentals defeats the city’s policy goals of:
Equity Considerations: The 2021-2029 Housing Element advances housing options for all income levels and includes various policies and programs addressing equity, inclusion, and anti-displacement. (2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report, presented to the Planning Commission, April 28, 2022, at p. 2.) Economic Impacts: Access to affordable housing improves community members’ ability to improve their economic status, reduces poverty and homelessness, and promotes social integration. A strong and affordable housing environment is critical to the economic well-being and growth of Sacramento and its residents. (Report for Agenda Item 17, at p. 2.)
May 10, 2022 Meeting 1 Agenda Item #17
Sustainability: A sustainable community includes housing for current and future households of all income levels. The City’s Housing Element establishes goals, policies, and programs to encourage housing opportunities for all residents. (Report for Agenda Item 17, at p. 3.)
Short-term rentals: Detriment to the environment with no advancement of housing goals ADUs used as short-term rentals are not furthering any of the above policy goals; additionally, they create an impact on the environment - building materials, hard surfaces that contribute to increased heat, loss of tree canopy and trees’ environmental benefits (air quality, cooling, carbon sequestration, water quality) without any benefit to the community’s housing goals.
Short-term rentals are a revenue source for the builder, the property owner/investor and the city (12% transit occupancy tax plus permits, except for units operating that are not permitted, in which case the city does not profit). The city appears to be so desperate to pump up its RHNA numbers and make some cash on the side that it is allowing housing in name only - which is disingenuous.
State-mandated ADUs are prohibited from being short-term rentals The State of California and the City of Sacramento claim we are in a “housing crisis.” It is really an affordability crisis. Short-term rentals reduce housing stock and are counterproductive.
It was mentioned several times at the April 28, 2022, Planning Commission meeting that ADUs are being promoted by the state, and that Sacramento wants to ramp up its ADU production.
What was not said is that the state-mandated ADUs - similar to the state mandated SB 9 duplexes - are prohibited from being used as short-term rentals.
ADUs mandated by state law cannot be used as short-term rentals pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e)(4). However, the city created allowable options for ADUs in addition to the state mandate, and will be adding three permit-ready ADU types in the future.
The issue is that the city allows its additional options to be short-term rentals, and appears to have done so intentionally: Government Code section 65852.2(a)(6) allows the city to prohibit ADUs from being used as short-term rentals.
Will the city allow its proposed missing-middle housing to be used as short-term rentals? The city has promoted ADUs as one of its affordable housing solutions. The city has repeatedly said that it seeks to expand R-1 zoning to allow more housing types, especially in higher- resource neighborhoods that were formerly redlined through racist CC&Rs and racist mortgage lending practices (not, I might add, through zoning). Yet the city is ensuring that a current option - ADUs - can be used as short-term rentals and not as a more affordable option for Sacramentans desiring to live in higher-resource neighborhoods.
Is the city also going to propose missing-middle duplexes that can be used as short-term rentals, so that developers have choices that are not limited by the short-term rental prohibition of SB 9? What about its proposed missing-middle housing? Lack of consideration for environmental effects of increasing density Although it is laudable that the Climate Action Plan and other aspects of the General Plan such as the Urban Forest Master Plan are being worked on separately and intensively, the process appears to be creating a disconnect. There is no consideration in the Housing Element for the negative climate effects of clustering, or massing of projects - ADUs, missing-middle housing, etc. - that would create holes in our residential tree canopy, forming dangerous heat islands.
How will this be prevented? SB 9 is already problematic in that the only restriction in state law is that the same developer can’t build on adjoining parcels; nothing is preventing another developer from doing so. Since 80% of our tree canopy is on private property, much of it in our May 10, 2022 Meeting 2 Agenda Item #17
front and backyards, clustering of ADUs, missing-middle housing, and SB 9 housing will have a serious adverse impact as our environment continues to get hotter, and our city continues to get denser.
Conclusion
The city simply must prohibit ADUs and other housing types, including entire homes that are not primary residences, from being used as short-term rentals. Home-sharing, i.e. sharing the actual home or unit you inhabit should be the only form of short-term rental allowed if we wish to increase our housing stock.
How much of our currently-existing housing stock (ADUs and entire homes) is not available to homebuyers or renters due to short-term rentals?
Finally, although I often take an oppose position to many of the city’s housing policies, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the tireless work of the city’s planning staff. They have answered many questions over the past several years, and have been gracious, respectful, and usually timely. To name a few: Greg Sandlund, Evan Compton, Matt Hertel, Greta Soos, and Garrett Norman.
Best,
Francesca Reitano
Elmhurst, Sacramento
May 10, 2022 Meeting 3 Agenda Item #17
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Jeff S. Harris
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:14:21 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Raeanne Sarti
[email protected]
215 San Antonio Way
Sacramento, 95819
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Angelique Ashby; Sean Loloee; Jeff S. Harris; Katie Valenzuela (City); Jay Schenirer; Eric Guerra; Rick Jennings; District8
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Karina Talamantes; Veronica Smith; David Gonsalves; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Allison Joe; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment Subject: No short term ADUs: Comments on 5/10/22 item 17, Housing Element Update Date: Tuesday, May 10, 2022 8:01:09 AM
We concur with the comments submitted below by Francesca Reitano regarding the 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report, May 10, 2022, City Council Meeting- Agenda Item
17. Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
The 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress report provided to the Planning and Design Commission on April 28 and to the City Council on May 10 is problematic in several aspects:
•
It equates ADU production with housing production when ADUs are being approved for short-term rentals. Short-term rentals are de facto hotel rooms; they are NOT permanent housing.
The report states that “ADU production increased 123% from 2020 (76 units) to 2021 (170 units)” but it does not say how many of many of these 246 units produced in 2020 and 2021 are now being used as short-term rentals. Nor does it give the number of ADUs that are short-term rentals built in prior years (2013-2019).
•
Because short-term rentals do not provide permanent housing, allowing ADUs to be short- term rentals is contrary to the city’s stated policy goals, including a policy goal not included in this report to City Council, but included in the version of this report presented to the Planning Commission on April 28, 2022 (File ID: 2022-00565): “Equity Considerations: The 2021-2029 Housing Element advances housing options for all income levels and includes various policies and programs addressing equity, inclusion, and anti-displacement.”
Short-term Rentals: no progress toward housing policy goals
“ADU production increased 123% from 2020 (76 units) to 2021 (170 units).”
Toolkit,” “H.5. ADU Outreach Plan,” and “H.6. Permit-Ready ADU plans.” The city is certainly putting a lot of effort (and taxpayer dollars) into its ADU program. But where is the gain in affordable housing?
Question: How many of the 246 units produced in 2020 and 2021 are now being used as short-term rentals? Or for the prior years (2013-2019)? How many of all the city’s ADUs are now short-term rentals?
Allowing ADUs to become short-term rentals defeats the city’s policy goals of:
Equity Considerations: The 2021-2029 Housing Element advances housing options for all income levels and includes various policies and programs addressing equity, inclusion, and anti-displacement. (2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report, presented to the Planning Commission, April 28, 2022, at p. 2.)
Economic Impacts: Access to affordable housing improves community members ’ability to improve their economic status, reduces poverty and homelessness, and promotes social integration. A strong and affordable housing environment is critical to the economic well- being and growth of Sacramento and its residents. (Report for Agenda Item 17, at p. 2.)
Sustainability: A sustainable community includes housing for current and future households of all income levels. The City’s Housing Element establishes goals, policies, and programs to encourage housing opportunities for all residents. (Report for Agenda Item 17, at p. 3.)
Short-term rentals: Detriment to the environment with no advancement of housing goals ADUs used as short-term rentals are not furthering any of the above policy goals; additionally, they create an impact on the environment - building materials, hard surfaces that contribute to increased heat, loss of tree canopy and trees’ environmental benefits (air quality, cooling, carbon sequestration, water quality) without any benefit to the community’s housing goals. Short-term rentals are a revenue source for the builder, the property owner/investor and the city (12% transit occupancy tax plus permits, except for units operating that are not permitted, in which case the city does not profit).
The city appears to be so desperate to pump up its RHNA numbers and make some cash on the side that it is allowing housing in name only - which is disingenuous.
State-mandated ADUs are prohibited from being short-term rentals The State of California and the City of Sacramento claim we are in a “housing crisis.” It is really an affordability crisis. Short-term rentals reduce housing stock and are counterproductive.
It was mentioned several times at the April 28, 2022, Planning Commission meeting that ADUs are being promoted by the state, and that Sacramento wants to ramp up its ADU production. What was not said is that the state-mandated ADUs - similar to the state mandated SB 9 duplexes - are
prohibited from being used as short-term rentals.
ADUs mandated by state law cannot be used as short-term rentals pursuant to Government Code section 65852.2, subdivision (e)(4). However, the city created allowable options for ADUs in addition to the state mandate, and will be adding three permit-ready ADU types in the future. The issue is that the city allows its additional options to be short-term rentals, and appears to have done so intentionally: Government Code section 65852.2(a)(6) allows the city to prohibit ADUs from being used as short-term rentals.
Will the city allow its proposed missing-middle housing to be used as short-term rentals? The city has promoted ADUs as one of its affordable housing solutions. The city has repeatedly said that it seeks to expand R-1 zoning to allow more housing types, especially in higher-resource neighborhoods that were formerly redlined through racist CC&Rs and racist mortgage lending practices (not, I might add, through zoning). Yet the city is ensuring that a current option - ADUs - can be used as short-term rentals and not as a more affordable option for Sacramentans desiring to live in higher-resource neighborhoods.
Is the city also going to propose missing-middle duplexes that can be used as short-term rentals, so that developers have choices that are not limited by the short-term rental prohibition of SB 9? What about its proposed missing-middle housing?
Lack of consideration for environmental effects of increasing density Although it is laudable that the Climate Action Plan and other aspects of the General Plan such as the Urban Forest Master Plan are being worked on separately and intensively, the process appears to be creating a disconnect. There is no consideration in the Housing Element for the negative climate effects of clustering, or massing of projects - ADUs, missing-middle housing, etc. - that would create holes in our residential tree canopy, forming dangerous heat islands. How will this be prevented? SB 9 is already problematic in that the only restriction in state law is that the same developer can’t build on adjoining parcels; nothing is preventing another developer from doing so. Since 80% of our tree canopy is on private property, much of it in our front and backyards, clustering of ADUs, missing- middle housing, and SB 9 housing will have a serious adverse impact as our environment continues to get hotter, and our city continues to get denser.
Conclusion
The city simply must prohibit ADUs and other housing types, including entire homes that are not primary residences, from being used as short-term rentals. Home-sharing, i.e. sharing the actual home or unit you inhabit should be the only form of short-term rental allowed if we wish to increase our housing stock.
How much of our currently-existing housing stock (ADUs and entire homes) is not available to homebuyers or renters due to short-term rentals?
Finally, although I often take an oppose position to many of the city’s housing policies, I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the tireless work of the city’s planning staff. They have answered many questions over the past several years, and have been gracious, respectful, and usually timely.
To name a few: Greg Sandlund, Evan Compton, Matt Hertel, Greta Soos, and Garrett Norman.
Best,
Francesca Reitano
Elmhurst, Sacramento
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Rick Jennings; Mayor Steinberg
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:32:14 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Jean Schaffer
[email protected]
3621 17th St., Sacramento, Ca. 95818
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Rick Jennings; Mayor Steinberg
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Katie Valenzuela; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods; [email protected]
Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Sunday, May 1, 2022 7:26:43 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Caroline Twitchell
[email protected]
1795 10th Ave.
Sacramento, 95818
From: Kirk Vyverberg
To: Public Comment; Greta Soos; Jeff S. Harris; Eric Guerra Subject: 10 May Council Meeting - Public Comment - Item#17 Housing Element Status Date: Sunday, May 8, 2022 8:33:45 AM
Request for moving item # 17 File 2022-00933 to Discussion. Requested ADU Ordinance Adjustments effecting Housing Elements H4/H5/H6 Accessory dwelling units eligible for ministerial review should:
Be a maximum height of 16 feet, or less than 35 feet if facing an ally or side street. and,
Provide one off-street parking space per unit if beyond the public transit services provided within the City’s TOD zones.
Justification: During the Legislative & Law Committee Review of the Sacramento ADU Ordinance, Councilmen Harris and Guerra requested of Staff that (1) the Ordinance be aligned in scale and scope with the State mandate, and (2) that off-street parking be required to the extent allowable in the state mandate. Neither of these requests were fully honored by Staff, resulting in ADU development creating the following problems:
Placement of three story ADUs in backyards that violate rights-to-privacy for up to three adjacent homes.
City discouragement of car ownership where no significant public transit or regular car-sharing service is regularly offered.
Zoning confusion and public misunderstanding created by a lack of consistency in the application of parking exemptions across R-1 Zones (see ADU, SB9 Duplex, and TOD Ordinances)
Notes & References:
1. State ADU Mandate:
G. Accessory dwelling units eligible for ministerial review under CaliforniaGovernment Code section 65852.2.
b. One detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed 4-foot side-yard and rear-yard setbacks for a lot with a proposed or existing single- unit dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit may be combined with a junior accessory dwelling unit that meets the requirements set forth in subsection G.1.a, above. The accessory dwelling unit may not exceed a floor area of 800 square feet and a height of 16 feet.
2. State ADU Mandate exempts minimum parking requirements in transportation-rich areas with either regular light rail service, bus service or ride-sharing services. Staff interpreted that to mean GIG Service Areas, even though there are no cars offered on a regular basis.(see the GIG Car Share App for Land Park, South Land Park, Holywood Park as examples only).
Kirk Vyverberg, Land Use Chair
Land Park Community Association
[email protected]
916.212.7693
From: Save Sacramento Neighborhoods
To: Mayor Steinberg; Katie Valenzuela
Cc: Mary Lynne Vellinga; Angelique Ashby; Karina Talamantes; Sean Loloee; Veronica Smith; Jeff S. Harris; David Gonsalves; Michelle Pariset; D4 Constituent Services; Jay Schenirer; Allison Joe; Eric Guerra; KaSandra Soto; Rick Jennings; Dennis M. Rogers; District8; Ryan K. Brown; Jaime R. Cervantes; Howard Chan; Amy Williams; Greg Sandlund; Garrett Norman; Matt Hertel; Greta Soos; Public Comment; Save Sacramento Neighborhoods Subject: Requested changes to the General Plan & public input Date: Wednesday, May 4, 2022 12:36:40 PM
To Sacramento City Council:
As residents and representatives of Sacramento neighborhood associations, we continue to be concerned about our neighborhoods, affordable housing, and the negative impacts of upzoning in the 2040 General Plan as well as in State legislation affecting local land use.
We ask you to take the following actions:
1. Preserve and protect R-1, single family zoning and neighborhoods. The City Council must recognize the value and importance of preserving Sacramento’s diverse existing single family neighborhoods.
Specifically the Council must:
a) Clearly state in the 2040 General Plan that there will be no further upzoning of neighborhoods now zoned for single family, including R-1 beyond what is currently allowed (2 ADUs) and under the recently adopted emergency ordinance (OR2021-0035 ) to implement
state-mandated SB 9.
b) Pass a resolution that it will not implement SB 10, which unlike SB 9 is optional. c) Maintain the existing R-1 restrictions and oppose any simplification of land use designations.
d) Adopt design review standards that require any additional units added to existing single family lots must be in keeping with the with the predominant historic residential architectural styles, height, massing and scale in the neighborhood.
e) Encourage the provision of on-site parking. Onsite parking is critical to reducing street congestion, allow people to park where they live, and to provide for future e-vehicle charging, furthering our sustainability goals.
f) Change the SB 9 ordinance to state that parking provisions can be waived ONLY if there is a car share vehicle that is available at regular intervals throughout the day.
2. Protect and increase Sacramento’s Tree Canopy. Sacramento’s tree canopy is absolutely essential to environmental quality and ensuring the livability of our city, its protection means that adequate space must be made for trees and existing trees protected.
Specifically the Council must amend the SB 9 ordinance to:
a) State that applications for an SB 9 lot split or additional unit should not be an accepted reason for approval of a tree removal permit.
b) Require that applications for an SB 9 unit include assessment of all existing trees on the proposed lot(s).
c) For any private protected tree removed to build an SB 9 unit, the applicant must be required to comply with the city’s tree replacement plan or pay an in-lieu fee into the city’s tree planting and replacement fund.
d) Require that SB 9 plot plans include setbacks that preserve space for at least one canopy tree, including appropriate permeable surface, as well as a plan for irrigation. e) Prohibit ministerial approval of SB 9 units unless the proposed lot split or units are consistent with the tree canopy goals as established in the Urban Forest Master Plan. f) Require that where lot size cannot accommodate two 800 square foot buildings AND maintain lot coverage requirements, buildings must be smaller or two story.
3. Assure that all neighborhoods have equitable amenities. Specifically, the City Council must adopt policies and take specific actions to ensure that every residential neighborhood in Sacramento has safe streets, good schools, parks, trees, and other quality of life amenities.
Building more market-rate housing in neighborhoods with amenities is not going to rectify the amenity disparities that now exist between neighborhoods.
4. Genuinely provide housing diversity. Upzoning to eliminate single family neighborhoods, including through SB 9 and SB 10, does not provide housing that is affordable to lower and moderate income households. One-size-fits-all upzoning also does not address existing geographic disparities in the location of market-rate and affordable housing. Upzoning can exacerbate the high concentrations of lower income housing in some areas while simply densifying the market rate housing in other areas. Just building more housing units does not make that housing affordable.
Specifically, the City Council must take these and other actions a) Adopt policies that will actually increase the amount of affordable lower and moderate income housing. These policies can include city-wide inclusionary zoning on projects of four or more units and assistance for moderate and lower income renters and first time homebuyers.
b) Assure that NO ADUs will be used for short term rentals as this completely defeats the purpose of adding these additional units to existing neighborhoods. c) Take steps to prevent or curb the purchase of single-family homes by investors, turning these into rentals rather than providing homeownership opportunities. d. Assure that there is equitable geographic distribution of both market rate and affordable housing.
5. Address Homelessness. The City Council must take specific actions to:
a) Prevent individuals who are now housed from becoming homeless including through gentrification.
b) Provide housing and services for the homeless.
c) Provide for temporary shelter, including properly located safe ground areas, that do not have an adverse impact on existing residential neighborhoods.
6. Assure transparency/Public input. The City council and city planners must improve communications with and responsiveness to the public including neighborhood associations and other groups representing neighbors including by:
a) Reinstate public face-to-face City Council meetings so that the public can be present and address the council directly and in person.
b) Significantly increasing public notice of any actions affecting land use. At a minimum, public notification for applications for lot splits or building permits under SB 9 should include routing to area neighborhood associations and readily visible posting at project sites. c) Significantly increasing the time given for public input. End fast tracking for all projects. d) Inform and solicit input from all neighborhood associations of proposed land use changes, including in the General Plan. Do not use surveys with leading questions. e) Unless state law specifically requires ministerial review, disallow ministerial review for any land use changes or projects that potentially affect neighborhoods. f) The City Council must commit to making decisions reflecting all of their constituents, not bending to economic pressures or interests.
7. Address the drought and climate change. The City Council must take into consideration the drought and implications of climate change. Sacramento, like the rest of California, has a carrying capacity based on available water. As water becomes even more scarce, building moratoriums may be needed to assure that there is enough water for people AND the environment including for trees, bird, and wildlife habitat.
Sincerely,
Keith V. Williams
[email protected]
410 19th St.
Sacramento, CA
95811