City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
(Pass for Publication) An Interim Ordinance Broadening the Range of Housing Types Permitted within the Single-Unit and Duplex Dwelling Zones (Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance)
File ID: 2024-01504
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: 1) Review a Resolution determining that the interim ordinance broadening the range of housing types permitted by right within the single-unit and duplex dwelling residential zones (Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance) is a subsequent project within the scope of the Master Environmental Impact Report for the 2040 General Plan, that the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance will not result in any additional project-specific significant environmental effects not previously examined in the Master EIR, and that no new mitigation measures or alternatives are required (California Public Resources Code §21157.1; CEQA Guidelines §15177); 2) review the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance; and 3) pass for publication the interim ordinance title per Sacramento City Charter section 32(c) for City Council consideration on September 17, 2024.
Contact: Nguyen Nguyen, Associate Planner, (916) 808-1964, [email protected]; Matt Hertel, AICP, Assistant Director, (916) 808-7158, [email protected]; Community Development Department
Presenter: Nguyen Nguyen, Associate Planner, (916) 808-1964, [email protected], Community Development Department
Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Background
3-Summary of Missing Middle Housing (MMH) Interim Ordinance 4-Resolution for Environmental Determination
5-Missing Middle Housing (MMH) Interim Ordinance
6-Comparison Map: Location of FAR 1 & FAR 2+ Areas
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: On February 27, 2024, the City Council adopted the 2040 General Plan, which includes
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
Policy LUP-6.3 Variety of Housing Types, Implementing Action LUP-A.10 Planning and Development Code Update, and Figure LUP-5 Sliding Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Scale, all of which direct staff to update the Planning & Development Code (Title 17 of the Sacramento City Code) to permit neighborhood-scale multi-unit residential development in the single-unit and duplex dwelling zones (R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2). Please see the ‘Policy Considerations’section for more details on Policy LUP-6.3 and Implementing Action LUP-A.10.
Under the 2040 General Plan, floor area ratio (FAR) has replaced maximum density limits as the standard used to regulate development intensity (General Plan Map LUP-6, see Attachment 3).
Additionally, the Sliding FAR Scale (General Plan Figure LUP-5, see Attachment 3) now allows neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings in the single-unit and duplex dwelling zones (R-1, R-1A, R- 1B, and R-2). Within these zones, the Sliding FAR Scale limits a single-unit dwelling to a maximum FAR of 0.4, or 2,000 square feet of net building area, whichever is greater; and increments of additional building area are granted proportionally to the number of units proposed on a given parcel.
This approach essentially utilizes FAR to regulate building size and development intensity, while also incentivizing the production of smaller, more attainable housing units.
A longer-term effort to comprehensively update Title 17 to bring it into full consistency with the 2040 General Plan is also underway as directed by the 2040 General Plan Implementing Action LUP-A.10 Planning and Development Code Update. As an intermediate step, the Missing Middle Housing (MMH) interim ordinance will broaden the range of housing types allowed by right under Title 17 by removing density limits and allowing neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings in the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2 zones. The interim ordinance will be uncodified and will operate with Title 17 to provide the substantive and procedural requirements for the development of neighborhood-scale multi-unit residential, or commonly referred to as missing middle housing. The comprehensive update to Title 17 is anticipated to be completed by the end of 2025 and will include the integration of the provisions of this interim ordinance into Title 17. The interim ordinance is included as Attachment 5.
In early May 2024, staff published the MMH Study’s final recommendations and shared a draft ordinance framework outlining the various standards and requirements that addressed each of the corresponding key recommendations including tree preservation, open space, attainability and compatibility with the neighborhood scale. The interim ordinance establishes new development and design standards that regulate the building form and scale rather than the number of units in the building, using objective standards related to bulk control, FAR, height, lot dimensions, and setbacks.
Also included are requirements for on-site open space, planting of one or more street-shading trees, and zoning incentives to encourage the preservation of existing mature trees as well as the planting of larger trees that will provide shading for the sidewalk and street. It also establishes a reduced minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet to promote entry-level ownership opportunities.
Based on community input and further analysis conducted by staff, several revisions were made to the framework, most of which focus specifically on sites within a half-mile walking distance of high-
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
frequency transit where the 2040 General Plan allows for increased development intensity (maximum FAR of 2). In mid-June, a revised ordinance framework was published on the project website and shared with members of the public. Modifications were made to the development standards on sites designated with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater by the General Plan including:
· reduced open space;
· reduced street side-, rear-, and front-yard setback requirements; and · an increase in allowed length of dormers on the third story that extend outside of the required bulk control envelope.
Additionally, the maximum lot coverage standard has been replaced by revised setback and open space requirements, which will work together to ensure that adequate open space is provided on- site. A summary of the interim ordinance that highlights these revisions is included as Attachment 3.
Next Steps
A public hearing is currently scheduled on September 17, 2024, for the City Council to consider adopting the MMH interim ordinance. Thirty days after adoption, the ordinance will become effective, and the City will begin accepting planning applications for neighborhood-scale multi-unit development. Please refer to the proposed schedule below:
City Council: Public Hearing and Adoption
of the Interim Ordinance
September 17, 2024
Proposed Effective Date of Interim
Ordinance
October 17, 2024
Following adoption of the interim ordinance, staff will evaluate the implementation of potential longer- term strategies identified in the MMH Study, including:
· Adopting a local bonus program to incentivize deed-restricted MMH units; · Updating driveway requirements to reduce the required driveway width for smaller MMH types;
· Adopting a local ordinance to implement AB 1033 which enables jurisdictions to allow the sale of ADUs separately from primary residences, much like a condominium; · Reviewing and updating the City’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance as directed by 2021-2029 Housing Element Program H35; and
· Expanding the City’s Impact Fee Deferral Program to include projects with 3 or 4 units.
Policy Considerations: The 2040 General Plan was adopted on February 27, 2024, and became effective on March 28, 2024. The 2040 General Plan policy and implementing actions directing this interim ordinance are:
Policy LUP-6.3 Variety of Housing Types. The City shall promote the development of a greater variety of housing types and sizes in all existing and new growth communities to meet
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
the needs of future demographics and changing household sizes, including the following:
single-unit homes on small lots, accessory dwelling units, tiny homes alley-facing units, townhomes, lofts, live-work spaces, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, cottage/bungalow courts, neighborhood-scale multi-unit buildings*, and senior and student housing. (*Note: The 2040 General Plan defines this term to mean a neighborhood-scale residential building type, usually found in the single-unit and duplex dwelling zones, that contain more than one dwelling unit and are similar in scale and form to single-unit dwellings, such as duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and cottage/ bungalow courts.) Implementing Action LUP-A.10 Planning and Development Code Update. The City shall update the Planning and Development Code to implement the 2040 General Plan, including amendments to (the full text contains 10 different amendments, only the most relevant are shown below):
· Remove maximum residential density standards from single-unit, duplex dwelling, multiunit, commercial, and industrial zones and replace them with floor area ratio-based intensity standards and minimum residential density standards. · Broaden the range of housing types allowed by-right within single-unit and duplex dwelling residential zones.
· Update development standards for missing middle housing types, such as accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and bungalow courts.
Community and Stakeholder Outreach: Please refer to Attachment 2 - Background, for a detailed discussion of the extensive community engagement and technical analysis that was completed as part of the MMH Study. General information and past engagement documents can be found on the project website:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning/housing/missing-middle-housing.
Economic Impacts: Allowing a greater array of housing types in existing single-family neighborhoods will increase lower-cost housing options and reduce regulatory barriers to the overall production of housing. It can also support neighborhood development by enabling incremental housing development at the ‘missing middle’ or neighborhood scale that can be taken on by local homeowners and entrepreneurs, which can empower local homeowners and builders to reinvest in our communities and provide much-needed housing. It also provides economic opportunities for homeowners in the city to house inter-generational households or earn passive retirement income.
By promoting the creation of a greater variety of housing types, MMH can foster a more diverse and dynamic community with benefits for both residents and local businesses.
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
Environmental Considerations: The city has prepared an Initial Study for the MMH interim ordinance (project) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has concluded that the project would not result in any additional significant environmental effects not previously analyzed in the Master Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the 2040 General Plan, certified by the City on February 27, 2024. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21157.1 and CEQA Guidelines section 15177, the City has determined that the project is a subsequent project within the scope of the 2040 Master EIR and no additional environmental review or mitigation measures or alternatives are required. The Initial Study was made available for a 30-day public- review period, as required by CEQA Guidelines section 15087, from August 2, 2024 to September 3, 2024. The Initial Study is available on the City of Sacramento’s website:
https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community-development/planning/environmental/impact-reports.
Sustainability: A sustainable community should include a variety of housing options for all current and future households. Increasing housing production and attainability will assist in creating a sustainable Sacramento and provide a platform for sustainable economic growth. Additionally, by being smaller in design and requiring less energy to heat and cool, MMH is typically more energy efficient than their larger single-family counterparts. MMH has the potential to reduce further sprawling development patterns, reduce dependence on the use of private automobiles and support low-carbon modes of transport, while also possessing the unique ability to blend into the fabric of existing neighborhoods.
Commission/Committee Action: On August 8, 2024, the Planning & Design Commission conducted a public hearing on the MMH interim ordinance. Concerns regarding the potential impact of the bulk control standard on the economic feasibility of larger MMH types of 6+ primary dwelling units were brought up by members of the public and were discussed by the Planning & Design Commission. Planning staff’s position is that the revisions made by staff adequately respond to this concern and staff advised against the removal of the bulk control standard as it is an effective tool that helps ensure the appropriate scale of development in established neighborhoods.
The Planning & Design Commission passed a motion to forward to the City Council a recommendation to approve the resolution for environmental review and the interim ordinance, with a revision to the ordinance so that the bulk control standard in section 7.B would not apply to sites designated with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater by the 2040 General Plan.
On August 20, 2024, the Law and Legislation Committee reviewed staff’s recommended MMH interim ordinance that maintains the bulk control standard regardless of FAR designation and passed a motion forwarding the ordinance to City Council for consideration.
Rationale for Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council review the Resolution for environmental determination and the MMH interim ordinance, and pass the MMH interim ordinance title for publication per Sacramento City Charter Section 32(c) for City Council consideration on
File ID: 2024-01504 9/10/2024 Consent Item 11.
September 17, 2024.
City Council has adopted the 2040 General Plan, which directs staff to update the Planning and Development Code to permit neighborhood-scale multi-unit residential development in the single-unit and duplex dwelling zones. The City continues to look at ways of reducing regulatory barriers and costs for building more housing, while pursuing new sources of local, state and federal affordable housing funding. These combined efforts will increase the availability of housing for more residents at various income levels.
Financial Considerations: Not applicable.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.
Attachment 2 – Background
Synopsis of the MMH Study
As one of the 2040 General Plan Update’s key strategies, the Missing Middle Housing (MMH) strategy has been the subject of an intensive 2-year effort to study and engage with the Sacramento community on this concept. Funded by a state housing planning grant, the MMH Study was initiated in 2022 with the main goal of developing technical recommendations on how the City could thoughtfully “permit a greater array of housing types such as duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes in existing single-unit neighborhoods.” By the end of 2022, staff released an Informational Report on MMH (report 1 of 4) and completed the first round of community engagement, providing staff with community input on potential implementation challenges and concluding the first phase of the Study (Phase 1: Information Sharing and Gathering). A concise overview of key information that was covered in Phase 1 is available as MMH Factsheets and can be found on the project website: https://www.cityofsacramento.gov/community- development/planning/housing/missing-middle-housing/resources.
Based on this community input as well as findings from technical analysis, the project team spent the following year developing a set of “preliminary recommendations” consisting of zoning and design solutions that addressed many of the challenges and questions raised by residents. The findings of the technical analysis are discussed in the MMH Attainability & Livability Analysis (report 2 of 4). The second phase of the Study (Phase 2: Solutions and Recommendations) was shaped by the community, which emphasized the importance of open space, trees, neighborhood compatibility, housing attainability, and addressing displacement risk. These considerations shaped the Study’s “preliminary recommendations” that were shared with the community in October 2023 and can be viewed on sacramentommh.konveio.com:
1. What could MMH look like in Sacramento?
2. Will it be lower-cost and attainable?
3. How can the City promote home-ownership and address potential displacement through MMH?
Over the course of Phase 2’s engagement period, input from the community and the Planning & Design Commission as well as direction received from the City Council shaped the specific details for many of these recommendations. The “preliminary recommendations” were presented to the Planning & Design Commission on October 12, 2023, and City Council on October 24, 2023, for review and comment. On November 28, 2023, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a revised MMH approach that regulates the building form and scale rather than the number of units in the building. The Study concluded in May 2024 with the completion of the Displacement Assessment Toolkit (report 3 of 4) and the MMH Zoning, Design, and Policy Recommendations (report 4 of 4), both of which can be found on the project website.
Community Engagement
During Phase 1, the focus was on sharing information about MMH with the community and learning from residents about potential challenges or concerns they might have.
Outreach conducted in this phase included:
Interviews with the Mayor’s and Councilmembers’ offices, and City leadership (May 2022)
Neighborhood Small Group Meetings (in-person and virtual) with neighborhood leaders, housing advocates, business leaders, representatives from community- based organizations (CBOs), and community partners, for a total of 32 hours of engagement (June 2022)
Open House series that consisted of 2 full-day, in-person events (October 12/13) and 2 half-day virtual events, including a Saturday session, for a total of 24 public meeting hours (October 2022)
Online questionnaires with self-guided workshop content that was circulated and promoted for 3 weeks (October/November 2022)
Over the course of the open house series and the following three weeks of promotion, the project team received and recorded input from approximately 490 respondents. The project team also engaged with neighborhood groups, community partners, and community-based organizations (CBOs) to encourage participation from under- represented communities. A highlight video of the in-person open house events can be viewed here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVFssH07HgY. A summary of Phase 1 outreach findings can be found on the project website.
During Phase 2, a Self-Guided Online Workshop (sacramentommh.konveio.com) was launched in October 2023 to gather community input on the Study’s preliminary recommendations. To encourage community input, staff held an in-person event on October 4 and hosted two webinars on October 5 & 19, providing opportunities for community members to chat with the project team about the recommendations. The Online Workshop was available until November 2023 and received approximately 300 comments.
Additional Background Information
The following questions and responses help to provide additional background and context to the Missing Middle Housing Study.
What is Missing Middle Housing (MMH)?
For the purpose of this Study, the term Missing Middle Housing refers to house-scale buildings that contain more than one home such as duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and bungalow courts, usually built to the same scale as surrounding single-unit homes. These house-scale buildings are “middle” in form and scale, between single- family and multi-family buildings. They also can deliver homes at a price point that is more attainable for “middle”-income households, including both rental and entry-level home ownership opportunities. The reason why they are “missing” is because due to many barriers, including zoning barriers, these housing types have not been produced by the market for many decades. Historically, these types of housing were once common in early cities across America, in fact, over 3,500 duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes exist already throughout Sacramento’s single-unit neighborhoods.
Why is this strategy being considered?
Through several years of outreach for the 2040 General Plan Update, several priorities have risen to the top: climate change, equity, inclusive economic development and, of course, housing availability and affordability. Faced with steep increases in both rent and home prices caused by a severe housing shortage as well as limited housing options available, residents have expressed that they want a city where people of all backgrounds and income levels can afford to live
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Flsg_mzG-M). Sacramento needs a lot more housing, particularly, housing that is lower in cost and more attainable for our residents (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOjj3wdDcaY). For us to meet this tremendous need, we must build more attainable housing types that do not require subsidy, such as accessory dwelling units, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and sixplexes.
These Missing Middle Housing types are not regulated affordable housing, but by being lower cost than their single-family counterparts, MMH can help to house many of our middle-income residents and add to the City’s overall supply of housing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQGQU0T6NBc). Not only can MMH provide more attainable rental options but could also provide opportunities for entry-level homeownership. The majority of the City’s neighborhoods are currently zoned for single-unit homes, the most expensive housing type to own or rent. Because of this lack of options, if you want to live in most of the City’s residential neighborhoods, you are largely limited to buying or renting the most expensive housing type on the market.
Additionally, by restricting the majority of the City’s neighborhoods to one housing type, existing zoning rules reinforce housing and social disparities among our communities (https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/06/17/exclusionary-zoning-its- effect-on-racial-discrimination-in-the-housing-market/). This strategy will not solve these disparities on its own but would signify a big step towards equity and inclusivity, or at least, remove a significant barrier. This proposal can also help to create a more sustainable city by providing housing closer to employment, transit, and amenities, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. In addition, research have shown that smaller homes carry a smaller carbon footprint than their larger counterparts (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-16/america-s-supersized-homes- are-making-us-less-energy-efficient).
Does Missing Middle Housing have the potential to help combat the climate crisis? How?
Research finds that residential energy use accounts for roughly 20% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the United States, and that in addition to decarbonizing our energy consumption and increasing the energy efficiency of our homes, fundamental changes to the built form of our communities are necessary to meet global GHG reduction goals (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1922205117). These changes include incentivizing smaller homes that have reduced energy demands per capita compared with their larger single-family counterparts (https://ideas.ted.com/how-to-reduce-home- energy-electricity-consumption-and-emissions/). Missing Middle types are smaller by design and require less energy to heat and cool, making them more energy efficient. By being the “Goldilocks” in terms of scale and size, MMH has the potential to reduce further sprawling development patterns and support low-carbon modes of transport, while also blending into the fabric of existing neighborhoods (https://www.ted.com/talks/vishaan_chakrabarti_a_vision_of_sustainable_housing_for_ all_of_humanity/transcript?language=en).
Attachment 3
Summary of Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance
The interim ordinance will update the City’s Planning & Development Code to broaden the range of housing types allowed by right within the single-unit and duplex dwelling residential zones (R-1, R-1A, R- 1B, and R-2) by allowing neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings and small single-unit dwellings on significantly reduced lot sizes. The interim ordinance will regulate the building form and scale rather than the number of units in the building using objective standards related to bulk control, FAR, height, lot dimensions, and setbacks. Also included are requirements for on-site open space, planting of street- shading trees, and zoning incentives to encourage the preservation of existing mature trees as well as the planting of larger trees along the public right-of-way. It also establishes a reduced minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet.
Based on community input and further analysis conducted by staff, several revisions were made to the framework that was presented at the May 9, 2024, Planning & Design Commission meeting, most of which focus specifically on sites within a half-mile walking distance of high-frequency transit where the 2040 General Plan allows for increased development intensity (maximum FAR of 2). Additionally, the maximum lot coverage standard has been replaced by revised setback and open space requirements.
These revisions are highlighted in red text. Minor clarification edits were also made to this summary.
Objectives:
The interim ordinance will contain a set of unique development standards and requirements, directly informed by the final recommendations of the MMH Study, that are intended to— • Address zoning barriers to multi-unit development within the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2 zones. • Increase entry-level ownership opportunities by allowing single-unit dwellings on significantly reduced lot sizes.
• Ensure compatible form and scale with existing neighborhoods by promoting human-scale building design.
• Incentivize shared open space areas designed with tree shading for residents to recreate in. • Require new tree planting along the public right-of-way to provide shade for the sidewalk/street. • Encourage the preservation of existing mature trees as well as the planting of large shade trees.
Where and when the interim ordinance applies:
• The interim ordinance will apply to all sites zoned R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2, except for sites located within an area regulated by an Airport Land Use Plan that restricts the number of units. • The minimum lot size within these four zones will be 1,200 square feet. • Duplex and multi-unit dwellings will be allowed by-right. • Development of duplex and multi-unit dwellings on lots of any size within these four zones must comply with the new development standards, except for duplex dwellings approved under SB9. • Development of single-unit dwellings on lots between 1,200 and 2,899 square feet must comply with the new development standards.
• Development of single-unit dwellings on lots of 2,900 square feet or more may elect to follow the new development standards.
Attachment 3
Built Form Standards
Below is a summary of the built form standards that will help to ensure compatible neighborhood scale.
1. Height: The current limit is 35 feet and will remain the same.
2. Density: No maximum density limit, however, minimum density is established by Map LUP-8 in the 2040 General Plan.
3. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): No minimum FAR requirement. The maximum FAR is established by Map LUP-6 and Figure LUP-5 (Sliding FAR Scale) in the 2040 General Plan. See page 7-8 for an excerpt of the 2040 General Plan showing Map LUP-6, Figure LUP-5 and related policies.
4. Lot coverage: No maximum lot coverage. The setback and open space requirements will ensure adequate open space is provided on-site.
5. Street side-yard setback: The current requirement of 12.5 feet will remain the same, except:
a. In the Central City Special Planning District, where the minimum will be 3 feet, and b. On sites designated in the General Plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater (and not located in the Central City Special Planning District), where the minimum will be 5 feet.
6. Interior side-yard setback: If the project is proposed adjacent to an existing detached single-unit dwelling, then the current requirement of 5 feet (or 3 feet if the lot width is less than 52 feet) will remain the same; otherwise, there is no minimum requirement.
7. Rear-yard setback: The current requirement of 15 feet will remain the same, except:
a. When the parcel is less than 2,900 square feet or when abutting a public alley, then a setback of 4 feet will apply, or
b. On sites designated in the General Plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, where the minimum will be 10 feet.
8. Front-yard setback:
a. On sites designated by the General Plan with a maximum FAR of less than 2:
i. The current requirement is to match the setback of existing adjacent buildings, which will remain the same. If no adjacent buildings exist, a minimum of 12.5 feet will apply.
b. On sites designated in the General Plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, the setback is equal to the least of the following:
i. Match the setback of existing adjacent buildings, or ii. 12.5 feet, or
iii. 8 feet, if located in the Central City Special Planning District.
9. Allowed projections into front-yard setback (and street-side setback for corner lots): If the building contains a front porch measuring at least 6 feet in depth and 8 feet in width, free from any posts, columns, railings, door landings, platforms, and door swings:
a. Interior lot: The first and second floor of the building may project into the front-yard setback up to 40% of the required setback depth, or 5 feet, whichever is greater; the width of the projection may be up to 50% of the width of the building’s front façade.
Attachment 3
b. Corner lot: The same requirements apply, but the projection is allowed in both the front- yard and street-side setbacks.
c. Additional requirements on the building projection:
i. Each street-facing wall of the projection must contain at least one opening (e.g. window or door) per floor.
ii. Must be covered by a roof.
iii. Must not contain a garage or carport.
iv. Must not encroach into any easement held by a public agency. v. Note: The front porch does not necessarily have to be provided as part of the projection.
10. Bulk and building massing control: To help maintain the neighborhood scale or “house-scale” appearance, the bulk control standards require that the building must be contained within a “base building envelope,” a 3-dimensional air space that is defined by imagined, invisible front and side planes that rise vertically from the ground to a specified height before angling inward at a 45-degree angle until they intersect one another or reach a height of 35 feet, whichever is shorter. Developments with 3 or more primary dwelling units on a lot must be contained within the following planes:
a. The side planes of the envelope begin at each of the side property lines and rise vertically to a height of 16 feet, at which point, the planes continue inwards from each side at a 45-degree angle to form the roofline planes. No side planes are established along zero lot line walls or common walls built on the side property line. b. The front plane of the envelope begins at a line equal to the primary front façade of the building and rises vertically to a height of 20 feet, at which point the plane continues inwards at 45-degree angle.
c. Dormers and other extensions outside of the roofline planes are allowed on each side of a building, subject to the following requirements:
i. The aggregate length of all dormers and other extensions that extend beyond a roofline plane must not exceed 60% of the width of the building façade below that roofline plane. On sites designated in the General Plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, there is no restriction on the aggregate length of dormers and other extensions.
ii. Each side wall of a dormer or other extension must be set back at least 4 feet from the edge of the building’s nearest main wall below that runs parallel to that side wall.
iii. The face of the dormers and other extensions must be set back at least one foot from the building’s main wall below.
iv. The roof pitch of dormers and other extensions must be at a 3:12 pitch minimum.
v. The aggregate area of all windows, including trim, on a dormer or other extension must be at least 50% of the area of the front wall of the dormer or other extension.
Attachment 3
d. Additionally, for a street-facing building, no part of the building located within 40 feet of the front property line may be wider than the greatest width of the buildings on the adjacent lots, or 55 feet, whichever is greater.
Provisions Related to Trees and Open Space
Please note that the existing city code provisions regarding private protected trees will continue to be enforced. Any potential updates to the city’s tree ordinances will occur as a subsequent action of the Urban Forest Plan. The provisions below are intended to facilitate new tree plantings, incentivize the preservation of existing trees, and encourage functional open space areas for residents to enjoy.
1. Tree planting requirement: At a minimum, one 15-gallon city-approved tree must be planted in the front-yard setback, and on corner lots, an additional 15-gallon city-approved tree must be planted in the street-side setback. Several exemptions are provided as summarized below, however, outside of these exemptions, a director-level public hearing would be required to approve a deviation request.
a. Existing private protected trees, as defined in section 12.56.020 of the city code, in the front and/or street-side setbacks may count towards this requirement. b. One new or existing tree planted for every 40 feet of street frontage in an adjacent street planter may count towards this requirement.
c. The property is accessible only from an alley and does not abut a sidewalk or other public right-of-way, other than the alley that provides access. d. One or more existing private protected trees located in the rear-yard or interior side- yard setback is being preserved.
e. The city determines that the sidewalk and street adjacent to the lot are adequately shaded by existing city street trees.
2. Allowed building encroachment into setback related to tree preservation: If the preservation and long-term survival of one or more existing private protected trees, as defined in section
12.56.020 of the city code, can be facilitated by allowing the building to encroach into the rear- yard, front-yard, or street-side setbacks:
a. The building may encroach up to 5 feet.
b. If the tree has a diameter at standard height of 32 inches or more, as defined by section
12.56.020 of the city code, the building may encroach up to 10 feet.
3. Allowed building encroachment into rear-yard setback related to increasing urban tree canopy: If the development proposal includes planting a large city-approved tree that provides shading of the sidewalk and street, the building may be allowed to encroach into the rear-yard setback:
a. The building may encroach up to 5 feet if the tree has a mature canopy diameter of 40 feet or greater.
b. The building may encroach up to 10 feet if the tree has a mature canopy diameter of 45 feet or greater.
Attachment 3
4. Open space requirement and an incentive for functional, shared open space areas with tree shading:
a. Developments with two or more primary dwelling units on a lot must provide common open space as follows:
i. In the Central City Special Planning District, according to the ratios found in Section 17.444.050.B.
ii. On lots with a designated General Plan maximum FAR of less than 2: Common open space shall be provided at a ratio of 125 square feet per dwelling unit, or 400 square feet, whichever results in the greater amount of open space. iii. On lots with a designated General Plan maximum FAR of 2 or greater (and not located in the Central City Special Planning District): Common open space shall be provided at a ratio of 75 square feet per dwelling unit, or 400 square feet, whichever results in the greater amount of open space.
b. Common open space shall not be located within any of the required setback areas, unless the open space area meets the following criteria:
i. The common open space area measures at least 15 feet in width and 15 feet in length;
ii. Shading is provided by at least one new or existing city-approved tree; iii. Connects with a pedestrian walkway to an entrance of one or more dwellings; iv. Visible from the entrances and windows of adjacent dwellings; v. Improved with seating and drought-tolerant and climate-appropriate trees, shrubs, or living ground cover; and
vi. Located outdoors and open to the sky, though small shade structures may be provided.
Provisions that Encourage Attainability, Promote Ownership Opportunities, and Address Potential Displacement
Analysis shows that Missing Middle Housing types are more attainable when compared to the their single-family counterparts. However, increasing housing supply may also increase development pressure in the most vulnerable communities. The City has a number of strategies already in place to protect tenants and preserve both subsidized and naturally occurring affordable housing, which are generally older housing stock often owned by local residents. The provisions below are intended to preserve existing affordable housing, increase entry-level ownership opportunities, encourage attainability, and incentivize deed-restricted affordable units.
1. Additional required findings for project approval to help preserve existing affordable housing and protect vulnerable residents: The development must not result in any of the following:
a. Fewer dwelling units than existed on the site prior to project approval; Attachment 3
b. The demolition of one or more existing dwelling units subject to a rental agreement or lease effective within the prior 365 days; and
c. The demolition of one or more dwelling units that is subject to an affordable housing regulatory agreement.
2. Reduced lot dimensional requirements to increase entry-level ownership opportunities:
Currently, the minimum lot size is 5,200 square feet in the R-1 and R-2 zones; 2,900 square feet in R-1A; and 3,200 square feet in R-1B. The minimum lot size will be significantly reduced to 1,200 square feet. Currently in the R-1 zone, the minimum interior lot width is 52 feet, and the minimum corner lot width is 62 feet. Under this ordinance, the minimum corner lot width will be 31 feet; the minimum interior lot width will be 16 feet but will increase by 4 feet on each side that abuts a detached single-unit dwelling.
3. Sliding Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Scale (see page 7): The Sliding FAR Scale ties the size of a lot to the amount of building area or building size allowed, with additional floor area, or FAR, granted for each housing unit that is proposed on the lot. This approach essentially utilizes FAR to regulate building size and development intensity without limiting the number of units allowed, while also incentivizing the production of smaller, more attainable housing units.
GOAL AND POLICIES
Goal-3: Flex ible development standards to
promote revitalization in corridors and
centers.
LUP-3.1 Maxi
mum FAR. The City shall regulate
maximum building intensity using floor area
ratio (FAR) standards consistent with Map
LUP-6 and Figure LUP-5, which applies to
residential uses in the single-unit and duplex
zones. Maximum FAR standards shown in
Map LUP-6 apply to both residential and
non-residential uses.
LUP-3.2
Slidin
g Floor Area Ratio Scale. Additional
building area may increase proportionally
to the number of units proposed on a lot,
consistent with Figure LUP-5, up to the
maximum FAR established by Map LUP-6.
LUP-3.3
Allo
wed Net Building Area. The City
shall permit up to 2,000 square feet of
net building area per lot or the maximum
allowed by the Sliding FAR Scale (Figure
LUP-5), whichever is greater.
LUP-3.4
Exemp
tion from Sliding Floor Area
Ratio Scale for Remodels and Additions.
Remodels and additions to existing single-
unit, duplex, and neighborhood-scale multi-
unit dwellings are exempt from the limits
established by the Sliding Floor Area Ratio
Scale (Figure LUP-5).
LUP-3.5 Flexibility for Multi-Parcel Developments.
Wher
e a developer proposes a development
project on multiple parcels and some or all
of the parcels have different General Plan
residential densities or floor area ratios
(FARs), the City may, at the discretion of the
Community Development Director, calculate
the net General Plan density or FAR range
and apply that net density or FAR range to
the net developable area of the entire project
site. Some individual parcels may be zoned
for densities/FARs that exceed the maximum
allowed FAR under this policy, provided that
the net density/FAR of the project as a whole
is within the allowed range.
LUP-3.6
Minimu
m FAR. The City shall regulate
minimum building intensity using floor area
ratio (FAR) standards consistent with Map
LUP-7. Minimum FAR standards apply to new
mixed-use and non-residential development.
LUP-3.7
Minimu
m Density. City shall regulate
minimum density standards using Map LUP-
8. Minimum density standards apply to new
standalone residential development.
LUP-3.8
Deve
lopment Intensity at Less than the
Minimum FAR. A development with a floor
area ratio (FAR) at less than the required
minimum may be deemed consistent with
the General Plan if the City finds any of the
following:
1. The use involves no building or by its
nature normally conducts a substantial
amount of its operations outdoors;
LUP-3
Figure LUP-5
Sliding FAR Scale
SACRAMENTO 2040 GENERAL PLAN
Land Use and Placemaking Element | 3-25
Attachment 3
Trib
uteRd
Land
ParkDr
Raley Blvd
Grand Ave
CollegeTown Dr
Capitol Ave
Fair Oaks Blvd
N
orthboroughDr
8Th Ave
Jackson Rd
Elk Grove Florin Rd
Leisure Ln
N
16ThSt
Del Paso Blvd
NorthgateBlvd
21St Ave
N St
Sutterville Rd
Arden Way
Seamas Ave
StocktonBlvd
Rush River Dr
35Th Ave
59Th
St
E Levee Rd
Q St
K St
Broadway
El Camino Ave
Richards Blvd
Calvine Rd
Riverside Blvd
Folsom Blvd
PowerLineRd
Elder Creek Rd
Club Center Dr
Rio Linda Blvd
Windbridge Dr
Valley Hi Dr
24ThSt
Alta Arden Expy
Marconi Ave
HavensideDr
AzevedoDr
39Th
St
Mckinley Blvd
Don Julio Blvd
Bond Rd
21St St
LongviewDr
Freeport Blvd
Fulton Ave
Powe
r InnRd
Norwood Ave
SWattAve
Center Pkwy
Y St
Danbrook D r
19Th St
W
attAve
65ThSt
16Th St
10Th St
9Th St
14Th St
18Th St
17Th St
12Th St
G
reenhaven Dr
Alhambra Blvd
8Th St 29Th St
26Th St
15Th St
7Th
St
30Th St
Florin Rd
H St
Hovnanian Dr
Hillsdale Blvd
48ThSt
MarysvilleBlvd
Ethan Way
A St
WindingWay
E St
G St
Roseville Rd
Brookfield Dr
La Riviera Dr
Regency ParkCir
W El Camino Ave
Edison Ave
Engle Rd
47Th Ave
Hurley Way
Cottage Way W
alnutAve
VallejoWay
13Th St
Pocket Rd
Silver Eagle Rd
43RdAve
Eastern Ave
J St
Bell Ave
L St
La Sierra Dr
Fruitridge Rd
Auburn Blvd
T St
Mission
Ave
N 7Th St
French Rd
D St
V St
N B St
R St
C St
I St
P StS St
X St
W St
F St
Main Ave
5ThSt
3Rd St
Bridgecross Dr
N Park Dr
Northrop Ave
University Ave
37Th St
14Th Ave
E
CommerceWay
Exposition Blvd
Sims Rd
Bercut Dr
Elsie Ave
Laguna Blvd
Sheldon Rd
G
atewayOaksDr
Gloria Dr
Cosumnes River Blvd
El Centro Rd
Railyards Blvd
Redding Ave
U St
W Elkhorn Blvd
24Th Ave
N 12Th St
Day
ton
St
Kern St
IvySt
Truxel Rd
Dry Creek Rd
Pinell St
Del Paso Rd
Elvas Ave
Madison Ave
6Th Ave
46Th St
NatomasCentral Dr
W StocktonBlvd
American River Dr
Kiefer Blvd
N Market Blvd
N 10Th St
KarbetW
ay
San Juan Rd
SLand ParkD
r
Garden Hwy
Orange Grove Ave
40Th St42Nd St
45Th St
Tri Stations Rd
Gerber Rd
Florin
PerkinsRd
Mack Rd
55Th St
47Th St
VineSt
Macon Dr
BrucevilleRd
Pasadena
Ave
HoweAve
53Rd Ave
Elkhorn Blvd
Westlake Pkwy
FrontSt
57Th St
Airbase Dr
Big Horn Blvd
7Th Ave
Arena Blvd
Claire AveNatomasBlvd
DwightRd
Meadowview Rd
Arden Garden
Franklin Blvd
CucamongaAve
6ThSt
49Th
St
88Th St71St St
DuckhornDr
Bayou Rd
HeritageLn
65Th
StreetExpy
Harvard
St
34Th Ave
Lym
an Cir
Fee Dr
NBend Dr
Lone Tree Rd
Cedr o
Cir
Ascot Ave
Vinci Ave
Jibboom
St
Terracina Dr
PellDr
W
aterman
Rd
Sorento
Rd
Hedge Ave
Maximum Allowed FAR
1.0 2.0
4.0 5.0
6.0 8.0
10.0 15.0
N/A FAR
Light Rail Station: Existing
Light Rail Station: Proposed
Light Rail Transit: Existing
Light Rail Transit: Proposed
Sacramento City Limit
Sphere of Influence
Water
Map LUP-6
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
All Development
/0¦2
I½!"c$
Ad
Source: City of Sacramento, 2020; Dyett & Bhatia, 2023
J:\GISData\563_Sacramento\GIS\Projects\General Plan Maps\Map LUP-6 Maximum Floor Area Ratio FAR – All Development.mxd A½
I½
!"^$
!"c$
/0¦2
AÎ
!"^$
A½
!"c$
0 1 2½ Miles
Map LUP-6
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) – All
Development
Attachment 3
Attachment 4
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-
Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
[Date Adopted]
APPROVING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FOR
MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING INTERIM ORDINANCE AS A SUBSEQUENT PROJECT UNDER THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN MASTER EIR (MISSING
MIDDLE HOUSING INTERIM ORDINANCE)
BACKGROUND
A. On August 8, 2024, the City Planning and Design Commission conducted a public hearing and upon conclusion passed a motion forwarding to the City Council a recommendation to approve: 1) a resolution regarding environmental review of the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance; and 2) the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance.
B. On September 17, 2024, the City Council conducted a public hearing, for which notice was given pursuant Sacramento City Code Section
17.812.030.B.1 and received and considered evidence concerning the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance.
BASED ON THE FACTS SET FORTH IN THE BACKGROUND, THE CITY COUNCIL RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City Council finds that the Master Environmental Impact Report for the 2040 General Plan (Master EIR) was certified on February 27, 2024, and the 2040 General Plan was adopted on that date.
Section 2. The City of Sacramento was the Lead Agency for the Master EIR.
Section 3. An initial study has been prepared for the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance and concluded that the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance was described in the Master EIR as a
subsequent project and that the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance would not cause any additional significant environmental effects that were not examined in the Master EIR. No new additional mitigation measures or alternatives are required, and the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance is within the scope of the Master EIR.
Attachment 4
Section 4. The City has incorporated all feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives appropriate to the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance as set forth in the Master EIR.
Section 5. Notice of the determination that the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance is a subsequent project under the Master EIR was provided in the manner required by CEQA Guidelines sections 15177(d) and 15087. The Notice of Subsequent Project was posted in the office of the County Clerk/Recorder on August 2, 2024, and published on the Daily Recorder dba Sacramento Bulletin on that date. The Notice was provided to all persons who have requested special notice. The Notice established a thirty-day comment period, beginning on August 2, 2024, and ending on September 3, 2024.
Section 6. The City Council directs that, upon approval of the Missing Middle Housing Interim Ordinance, the City Manager or City Manager’s designee, shall file a notice of determination with the County Clerk of Sacramento County and the State Office of Planning and Research, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA section 21152.
Section 7. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15091(e), the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City Council has based its decision are located in and may be obtained from, the Office of the City Clerk at 915 I Street, Sacramento, California. The City Clerk is the custodian of records for all matters before the City Council.
Attachment 5
ORDINANCE NO.
Adopted by the Sacramento City Council
[Date Adopted]
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE BROADENING THE RANGE OF HOUSING TYPES
PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITHIN THE SINGLE-UNIT AND DUPLEX
DWELLING RESIDENTIAL ZONES (MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING INTERIM
ORDINANCE)
BE IT ENACTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO:
SECTION 1. Background.
The purpose of this ordinance is to allow neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings and encourage small-lot development, commonly referred to as missing-middle housing, in the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2 zones consistent with the 2040 General Plan. The development standards included in this ordinance broaden the range of housing types permitted by right under the Planning and Development Code (title 17 of the Sacramento City Code) within the single-unit and duplex dwelling residential zones, while encouraging human-scale building design, preservation of existing trees, and the provision of urban tree canopy and open space areas to meet climate goals and for residents to recreate.
Permitting a greater array of housing types allows for more efficient use of land, increases housing choice, provides a broader range of accessible and attainable housing options, promotes energy-efficient housing, and can help reduce racial and socio-economic disparities that have been reinforced by single-unit zoning. Additionally, these housing types offer economic opportunities and provide a means for residents— particularly older adults, single- parent households, and multi-generational households— to afford to remain in their homes and neighborhoods.
Under the 2040 General Plan, floor area ratio (FAR) has replaced maximum density limits as the standard used to regulate development intensity. Additionally, the sliding FAR scale (General Plan Figure LUP-5) now allows neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings in the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2 zones. A longer-term effort to comprehensively amend the Planning and Development Code will be needed to update the other zones as directed by 2040 General Plan Implementing Action LUP-A.10. As an intermediate step to ensure general plan consistency and to implement the sliding FAR scale, the city council is adopting this interim ordinance, in accordance with Sacramento City Code section 17.916.030.A, to update the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, and R-2 zones to remove density limits and allow neighborhood-scale multi-unit dwellings.
This ordinance operates with the Planning and Development Code to provide the substantive and procedural requirements for the development of missing-middle housing.
Attachment 5
SECTION 2. Findings.
The city council finds the following:
1. The statements in section 1 are correct.
2. Together with this ordinance, the Planning and Development Code complements, supports, and facilitates the implementation of the goals, policies, and other provisions of the general plan and the city’s specific plans and transit village plans.
3. This ordinance promotes the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of the city.
4. This ordinance is an intermediate step while the city undertakes a longer-term effort to comprehensively amend the Planning and Development Code as directed by 2040 General Plan Implementing Action LUP-A.10.
SECTION 3. Applicability; rules of construction.
A. “Missing-middle housing” means development that meets the following conditions:
1. It involves—
a. Development of a single-unit dwelling on a lot that is between 1,200 and 2,899 square feet;
b. Development of a single-unit dwelling on a lot that is 2,900 or greater square feet, if the applicant elects to proceed under this ordinance; or
c. Development of two or more primary dwelling units on the lot; and
2. It occurs on a site located in the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, or R-2 zone, but not on sites located within:
a. The Clear Zone or Approach-Departure Zone as depicted in the Rio Linda Airport and McClellan Air Force Base Comprehensive Land Use Plans; or
b. The CNEL 60 dB noise zone or Safety Zone 6 as depicted in the Sacramento International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
B. The provisions of this ordinance prevail over any conflicting provision of title 17 and any planned unit development schematic plan or development guidelines, except that the following provisions of title 17 prevail over any conflicting provision in this ordinance:
Attachment 5
1. Chapter 17.312 (Executive Airport Overlay Zone);
2. Chapter 17.322 (Parkway Corridor (PC) Overlay Zone);
3. Chapter 17.412 (McClellan Heights and Parker Homes Special Planning District); and
4. Section 17.444.050 (Central City Special Planning District - open space requirements for multi-unit dwellings).
C. The following provisions of title 17 do not apply to missing-middle housing:
1. Chapter 17.404 (Broadway-Stockton Special Planning District);
2. Chapter 17.428 (Del Paso Nuevo Special Planning District);
3. Section 17.600.110, subsection C (open space in the R-1B zone);
4. Section 17.600.135 (open space for multi-unit dwellings)
5. Section 17.612.020, subsections A and C (paving requirements); and
6. Section 17.860.030 (other infill housing projects).
D. Subject to subsections B and C, above, the provisions of title 17 apply to missing- middle housing.
SECTION 4. Additional permitted uses.
The following uses are permitted by right in the R-1, R-1A, R-1B, or R-2 zones, subject to the requirements of this ordinance:
A. Dwelling, duplex; and
B. Dwelling, multi-unit.
SECTION 5. Review of missing-middle housing.
A. The city will review a missing-middle housing project through site plan and design review.
B. Site plan and design review for a missing-middle housing project is conducted as follows—
Attachment 5
1. If the missing-middle housing project includes a deviation, site plan and design review is conducted at the director level under Sacramento City Code section 17.808.140.
2. If the missing-middle housing project does not include a deviation, site plan and design review is conducted at the staff level under Sacramento City Code section 17.808.150.
C. The decision-maker may approve a site plan and design review permit for a missing-middle housing project if, in addition to making the findings required by Sacramento City Code section 17.808.180, the decision-maker finds that the development will not result in any of the following on the site:
1. Fewer dwelling units than existed at the time the permit is approved;
2. Demolition of a dwelling unit that was covered by a rental or lease agreement that was in effect within 365 days before the permit is approved; or
3. Demolition of one or more dwelling units covered by an affordable- housing regulatory agreement.
D. The decision-maker may approve or require deviations as part of site plan and design review only if—
1. Site plan and design review is conducted at the director level under Sacramento City Code section 17.808.140; and
2. In addition to making the findings required by Sacramento City Code section 17.808.180, the decision-maker makes all of the following findings:
a. The development of the site or lot is impeded by exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions, such as the location, shape, size, topography, orientation, or property encumbrances, that do not generally exist in other properties in the vicinity with the same zoning classification;
b. Due to the exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
that do not generally exist in other properties in the
vicinity with the same zoning classification, the strict enforcement of the regulations of this ordinance would have an unduly harsh result upon the utilization of the site;
Attachment 5
c. The deviation will not result in a special privilege to one individual property owner and that the deviation would be appropriate for any property owner facing similar circumstances; and
d. The deviation will not materially and adversely affect the health and safety of persons residing in the neighborhood and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare of the neighborhood.
SECTION 6. Development standards.
The following development standards apply to missing-middle housing:
A. Lot sizes, width, and depth.
1. Lot size. The minimum lot size is 1,200 square feet.
2. Lot width.
a. Except as provided in subsection A.2.b or c, below, the minimum lot width is 16 feet.
b. The minimum lot width of an interior lot is 16 feet plus an additional 4 feet on each side that abuts a lot containing a detached single-unit dwelling;
c. The minimum lot width of corner lots is 31 feet.
3. Lot depth. The maximum lot depth is 160 feet.
B. Height. The maximum height is 35 feet.
C. Density. The minimum density is established in the general plan. There is no maximum density.
D. Floor area ratio. The minimum and maximum floor area ratios are established in the general plan.
E. Lot coverage. There is no maximum lot coverage.
F. Setbacks.
1. Front-yard setback. The minimum front-yard setback is determined as follows:
a. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of less than 2 and there are at least two other buildings with front-yard setbacks on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot for which the setback is being determined, the front- Attachment 5
yard setback is equal to either of the two nearest buildings’ setbacks or in between the two nearest buildings’ setbacks.
b. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater and there are at least two other buildings with front-yard setbacks on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot for which the setback is being determined, the front-yard setback is equal to—
i. Either of the two nearest buildings’ setbacks or in between the two nearest buildings’ setbacks, or 12.5 feet, whichever is the least; or
ii. Either of the two nearest buildings’ setbacks or in between the two nearest buildings’ setbacks, or 8 feet, whichever is the least, if the lot is located in the Central City Special Planning District.
c. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of less than 2 and there is only one other building with a front-yard setback on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot for which the setback is being determined, the front- yard setback is the front-yard setback of that building.
d. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater and there is only one other building with a front-yard setback on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot for which the setback is being determined, the front- yard setback is the front-yard setback of that building, or 12.5 feet, whichever is less.
e. If there is no other building with a front-yard setback on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot for which the setback is being determined, the front-yard setback is—
i. 12.5 feet; or
ii. 8 feet if the lot is located in the Central City Special Planning District.
2. Projections into front-yard setback (and street side-yard setback for corner lots). The first and second floor of a building may project into the front-yard setback area (and the street side-yard setback area for a corner lot) up to 40% of the required depth of the setback or 5 feet, whichever is greater, if—
a. The building contains a front porch that includes an area measuring at least 6 feet deep and 8 feet wide that is free from any posts, columns, railings, door landings, platforms, and door swings; and
Attachment 5
b. The projection, which may include the front porch, conforms to the following requirements:
i. The projection must not encroach into any easement held by a public agency;
ii. Each street-facing wall of the projection must contain at least one window, door, or other type of opening per floor;
iii. The projection must be covered by a roof;
iv. The projection must not contain a garage or carport;
v. The width of the projection in the front-yard setback must not be more than 50% of the width of the building’s front façade; and
vi. The width of the projection in the street side-yard setback must not be more than 50% of the width of the building’s façade that faces the street side yard.
3. Interior side-yard setback.
a. Except as provided in subsection F.3.b and c, below, no interior side-yard setback is required.
b. If the interior side lot line abuts a lot containing a detached single- unit dwelling, a minimum interior side-yard setback of 5 feet is required unless the lot for which the setback is being determined has a width of less than 52 feet, in which case a minimum interior side-yard setback of 3 feet is required.
c. If the interior side lot line of a corner lot abuts a lot containing a detached single-unit dwelling, a minimum interior side-yard setback of 5 feet is required unless the lot for which the setback is being determined has a width of less than 62 feet, in which case a minimum interior side-yard setback of 3 feet is required.
4. Street side-yard setback.
a. Except as provided in subsections F.4.b or c, below, the minimum street side-yard setback is 12.5 feet.
b. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, the minimum street side-yard setback is 5 feet. c. In the Central City Special Planning District, the minimum street side-yard setback is 3 feet, regardless of the FAR established by the general plan.
Attachment 5
5. Rear-yard setback.
a. Except as provided in subsection F.5.b or c, below, the minimum rear-yard setback is 15 feet.
b. If the lot is less than 2,900 square feet, or if the rear lot line abuts a public alley, the minimum rear-yard setback is 4 feet, regardless of the FAR established by the general plan.
c. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, the minimum rear-yard setback is 10 feet.
6. Levee setback. A minimum 20-foot setback from the landside toe of any flood control levee is required for development less than five acres in size. A minimum 50-foot setback is required from the landside toe of any flood control levee for development five acres or greater in size. No primary or accessory structures may encroach into the levee setback.
G. Tree planting and preservation.
1. Tree-planting requirements.
a. Except as provided in subsection G.1.b, below, the tree-planting requirements are as follows:
i. At least one 15-gallon tree must be planted in the front- yard setback area; on a corner lot, at least one 15-gallon tree must also be planted in the street side-yard setback area.
ii. If approved by the city, one new or existing tree for every 40 feet of street frontage in an adjacent street planter or in the parkway as defined in Sacramento City Code section 15.92.040, may count toward the requirement in subsection G.1.a.i., above.
iii. If approved by the city, existing private protected trees, as defined in Sacramento City Code section 12.56.020, located in the front-yard and street side- yard setback areas may count toward the requirement in subsection G.1.a.i, above. iv. The species and location of new trees planted pursuant to this section must—
(A) Be reviewed and approved by the city during site
plan and design review; and
(B) To the extent possible, maximize the shade
potential of the adjacent sidewalk and public right-of-way. b. The tree-planting requirement does not apply if—
Attachment 5
i. The city determines that the development is accessible only from an alley and does not abut a sidewalk or other public right-of-way, other than the alley that provides access;
ii. The development proposes to preserve at least one
existing private protected tree outside of the front-yard and street side-yard setback areas as a design element of the site plan to the satisfaction of the city; or iii. The city determines that the sidewalk and street adjacent to the lot are adequately shaded by at least one existing city street tree that is in good structural condition and health.
2. Allowed building encroachment into setback related to tree preservation.
a. If the development contains at least one existing tree that will be preserved, the decision-maker may allow a building to encroach up to 5 feet into the rear-yard, front-yard, or street side-yard setbacks based on all of the following findings:
i. The tree is a private protected tree as defined in
Sacramento City Code section 12.56.020;
ii. The encroachment into the setback will assist with the preservation and long-term survival of the tree by reducing or eliminating the need for significant pruning or removal to accommodate the development; and
iii. The building will not encroach into any easement held by a public agency.
b. If the development contains at least one existing tree with a 32- inch or greater diameter at standard height, as defined in Sacramento City Code section
12.56.020, that will be preserved, the decision-maker may allow a building to encroach up to 10 feet into the rear-yard, front-yard, or street side-yard setbacks based on all of the findings in subsection G.2.a, above.
c. Nothing in this subsection G.2 relieves any person from complying with the requirements of chapter 12.56 of the Sacramento City Code.
3. Allowed building encroachment into rear setback related to increasing urban tree canopy.
a. If the development proposal includes planting a large shade tree to satisfy the tree-planting requirement in subsection G.1.a, above, the decision-maker may allow a building to encroach up to 5 feet into the rear-yard setback area based on all of the following findings:
Attachment 5
i. The tree is a city-approved tree species with a mature canopy diameter of 40 feet or greater;
ii. The tree will be planted in the front-yard or street side- yard setback area of the property to maximize the shading potential of the sidewalk and street; and
iii. The building will not encroach into any easement held by a public agency.
b. If the development proposal includes planting a large shade tree to satisfy the tree-planting requirement in subsection G.1.a, above, the decision-maker may allow a building to encroach up to 10 feet into the rear-yard setback area based on all of the following findings:
i. The tree is a city-approved tree species with a mature canopy diameter of 45 feet or greater;
ii. The tree will be planted in the front-yard or street side- yard setback area of the property to maximize the shading potential of the sidewalk and street; and
iii. The building will not encroach into any easement held by a public agency.
4. No private protected tree, as defined in Sacramento City Code section
12.56.020, may be removed without first obtaining a tree-removal permit under Sacramento City Code section 12.56.050.
SECTION 7. Design standards.
A. Missing-middle housing must comply with the Citywide Single-Unit Dwelling and Duplex Dwelling Design Guidelines, as adopted by resolution of the city council.
B. Bulk control.
1. Except as provided in subsection B.2, below, the bulk control guidelines in section 2-11 of the Citywide Single-Unit Dwelling and Duplex Dwelling Design Guidelines, as adopted by the city council, apply to development of single-unit and duplex dwellings.
2. The bulk control requirements in subsection B.3, below, apply to missing- middle housing that is either—
a. A single-unit dwelling with a gross building area of 1,000 square feet or less proposed on a lot between 1,200 and 1,600 square feet in area; or Attachment 5
b. A duplex dwelling proposed on:
i. A lot with an area of less than or equal to 2,600 square feet;
ii. An interior lot with a width less than 52 feet; or
iii. A corner lot with a width less than 62 feet.
3. Except as provided in subsection B.3.c or d, below, when three or more primary dwelling units or missing-middle housing described in subsection B.2., above, is proposed on a lot, all primary dwelling units must be contained within the base building envelope. The base building envelope is the three-dimensional air space contained between the front-yard, side-yard, and rear-yard setbacks of a lot and conforming to the following planes:
a. Side planes and roofline planes.
i. Except as provided in subsection B.3.a.ii, below, the side planes of the envelope begin at the side property lines at the average elevation of the finished lot grade at the front setback line and rise directly vertical and perpendicular to each side property line to a height of 16 feet; at this point, the envelope slopes inward from each side at a 45 degree angle to form the roofline planes that continue inward until the roofline planes intersect or until these planes reach a height of 35 feet, whichever is shorter. ii. A side plane or roofline plane is not established on the side of a property if either—
(A) There is a common wall on the side property line;
or
(B) The side wall of the building is built on the side
property line.
b. Front plane. The front plane of the base building envelope starts at a line equal to the front primary façade of the building closest to the front property line, and rises directly vertical and perpendicular to the front property line to a height of 20 feet; at this point, the envelope slopes towards the rear property line at a 45-degree angle to a height no greater than 35 feet above the average elevation of the finished lot grade at the front setback. c. Extensions beyond the base building envelope.
i. Gable end or wall. The gable end or wall may extend
beyond the vertical plane of the front plane.
Attachment 5
ii. Side dormers and other extensions. Side dormers and extensions may extend beyond the roofline planes as follows:
(A) Except as provided in subsection B.3.c.ii(B), below, the aggregate length of all dormers and other extensions that extend beyond a roofline plane must not exceed 60% of the width of the building façade below that roofline plane. (B) If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, there is no restriction on the aggregate length of dormers and other extensions.
(C) The face of the dormers and other extensions must
be set back at least one foot from the building’s main wall below. (D) The roof pitch of dormers and other extensions
must be at a 3:12 pitch minimum.
(E) The aggregate area of all windows, including trim,
on a dormer or other extension must be at least 50% of the area of the front wall of the dormer or other extension.
(F) Each side wall of a dormer or other extension must
be set back at least 4 feet from the edge of the building’s nearest main wall below that runs parallel to that side wall.
d. If there are no single-unit or duplex dwellings on the same side of the street on the same block as the lot on which missing-middle housing development is proposed, the bulk control requirements in subsection B.3.a - c, above, do not apply. e. For all missing-middle housing that includes a street-facing building, no part of the street-facing building located within 40 feet of the front property line may be wider than the greatest width of the buildings on the adjacent lots, or 55 feet, whichever is greater.
C. Open-space requirements.
1. A development with two or more primary dwelling units on a lot must provide common open space as follows:
a. In the Central City Special Planning District, both duplex dwellings and multi-unit dwellings, according to the ratios in Sacramento City Code section 17.444.050.B.
Attachment 5
b. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of less than 2, at a ratio of 125 square feet per dwelling unit, or 400 square feet, whichever results in the greater amount of open space.
c. If the lot is designated in the general plan with a maximum FAR of 2 or greater, at a ratio of 75 square feet per dwelling unit, or 400 square feet, whichever results in the greater amount of open space.
2. No common open space located in the minimum required front-yard, side-yard, or rear-yard setback areas counts toward satisfying the open space requirements in subsection C.1, above, unless—
a. The common open space area measures at least 15 feet in width and 15 feet in length;
b. The common open space is shaded by either an existing tree in good health or by at least one new city-approved tree that aims to maximize the shade canopy at maturity; and
c. The design of the common open space area complies with the requirements of subsection C.4, below.
3. A tree used to satisfy the requirement in subsection C.2.b, above, may also count toward the tree-planting requirement in section 6.G.1, above, if—
a. The common open space area is located in the front-yard or street side-yard setback area; and
b. The tree meets all the requirements in section 6.G.1, above.
4. Common open space must be—
a. At minimum, 10 feet in width and length;
b. At ground level and cannot include any part of a driveway or other area dedicated to vehicle parking;
c. Adjacent to, and connected with, a pedestrian walkway to an entrance of one or more dwellings to ensure regular foot traffic;
d. Clearly visible from the entrances and windows of the adjacent dwelling units in the development;
Attachment 5
e. Provided in the form of decks, patios, courtyards, or other types of outdoor gathering space;
f. Designed as a functional, visually-appealing, and well-integrated outdoor space that includes amenities that invite use;
g. Improved with drought-tolerant and climate-appropriate trees, shrubs, and living ground cover; seating and other resident-serving amenities; and, if conditioned by the city, pedestrian-oriented lighting;
h. Located outdoors and open to the sky, though accessory structures or other architectural features such as eaves, pergolas, gazebos, arcades, and other shade structures are allowed; and
i. Designed with landscaping and structures arranged to avoid creating areas where a person could hide.
5. Common open space may be located on a lot held in common ownership, provided adequate provisions have been made for the permanent maintenance of the open space areas by a homeowner’s association or similar mechanism approved by the director.
6. Private open space provided on upper floors must not be located within 10 feet of an interior side lot line, unless the side lot line abuts a nonresidential use or approved private street.
7. Private open-space area will count toward the common open space requirement in subsection C.1, above, if—
a. The open-space area is located at the ground level and has a minimum depth of 3 feet;
b. Interior yard fencing is not higher than 4 feet;
c. It does not include any part of a driveway or other area dedicated to vehicle parking; and
d. The open-space area is designed as a functional, visually- appealing, and well-integrated outdoor space that includes amenities that invite use, such as seating, low-water landscaping, and shade.
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R!R!R!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R !R
!R
!R
!R
!R
!R !R!R
!R
!R
!R!R!R
!R!R!R!R!R!R!R!R!R!R!R
!R!R !R !R !R !R !R !R
!R !R
!R
!R
!R
!"#$5
!"#$80
!"#$5
!"#$80
¡¢
SU
50 ¡¢
SU
50 )*+,-80
)*+,-80
|}þ99
|}þ160
|}þ99
MMH Interim Ordinance
Max FAR (R1, R1A, R1B, R2)
1 2 or greater
Airport safety zones
CNEL 60-65 db
Safety Zone 6
Clear and Approach-Departure Zones
Light Rail Lines
Blue Line
Blue/Gold Line
Blue/Gold/Green Line
DNA-Greenline
Gold Line
Bus Route Line
High Frequency Bus Route 51
Street Centerlines
Highways
¯
Created by KMD | 8.12.2024
0 1 2 3 40.5
Miles
Location of FAR 1 vs. FAR 2+ Areas, Zones R1, R1A, R1B, & R2 (MMH Interim Ordinance)
Attachment 6