Senate Leader Atkins’ SB 9 Housing Bill Passes Assembly

Senate Bill 9, a bill that will make it easier to build additional units on single-family properties is moving forward, after a 45-16 vote Thursday.

Under the bill, it allows homeowners to divide up their property to add housing. This could be a duplex, fourplex or attached living units. Its estimated the bill could add 700,000 more homes to California.

Earlier this week, Senator Scott Wiener’s (D-San Francisco) legislation, Senate Bill 10, passed the Assembly. SB 10 creates a voluntary, streamlined process for cities to zone for missing middle multi-unit housing. The bill passed with a bipartisan vote of 41-9, and will now be returned to the Senate for final approval before heading to Governor Newsom’s desk.

SB 10 allows cities to upzone non-sprawl areas (areas that are close to transit or in existing urbanized locations, thus reducing vehicle usage and long commutes) up to ten unit buildings, if they choose to. This streamlining tool will be a powerful one for cities to increase density

Here is the press release from Senator Toni Atkins:

SACRAMENTO – Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins (D-San Diego) has released the following statement regarding the Assembly’s 45-19 bipartisan vote to pass Senate Bill 9, the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act:

“This bill is about opening the door for more families to pursue their version of the California Dream—whether that means building a home for an elderly parent to live in, creating a new source of income, buying that first house, or being welcomed into a new neighborhood. It’s about giving parents the chance to pass on wealth to their children and giving neighbors the chance to make our communities more inclusive. In short, this bill is about opportunity, and I’m grateful the Assembly has given it the opportunity to move forward today.

“SB 9 is the product of multiple years of collaboration and hard work. Today’s success was possible in large part due to the partnership and leadership of Speaker Anthony Rendon. I’d also like to thank Assemblymember Robert Rivas, who has been a champion of this bill and helped usher it through the other chamber. Finally, I want to express my deep appreciation for my coauthors, Senators Anna Caballero, Dave Cortese, Lena Gonzalez, Mike McGuire, Susan Rubio, and Scott Wiener, and Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, as well as the members of the Senate Housing Lead Group, which includes Senators María Elena Durazo, Richard Roth, and Nancy Skinner, in addition to my coauthors. Each of these legislators are fervently dedicated to solving California’s housing crisis.”

Toni G. Atkins is President pro Tempore of the California Senate. Having previously served as Speaker of the California Assembly, she began her tenure in the Senate in 2016. As Senator for District 39, she represents the cities of San Diego, Coronado, Del Mar and Solana Beach. Website of President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins: www.senate.ca.gov/Atkins

Editors Note:

The bill was voted on Thursday and passed in a 45-19 vote. There was also 15 Assemblymembers who failed to even cast a vote.

Ayes

Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Berman, Calderon, Carrillo, Cervantes, Chiu, Cooley, Cooper, Megan Dahle, Flora, Fong, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gipson, Lorena Gonzalez, Gray, Grayson, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Mathis, Mayes, Medina, Mullin, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Reyes, Robert Rivas, Rodriguez, Salas, Stone, Ting, Valladares, Villapudua, Ward, Akilah Weber, Wicks, Wood, Rendon

Noes

Bauer-Kahan, Bigelow, Bloom, Boerner Horvath, Daly, Davies, Frazier, Friedman, Gabriel, Irwin, Levine, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, O’Donnell, Petrie-Norris, Seyarto, Smith, Voepel, Waldron

NVR

Bennett, Bryan, Burke, Chau, Chen, Choi, Cunningham, Kiley, Maienschein, McCarty, Nguyen, Patterson, Luz Rivas, Blanca Rubio, Santiago

Here is a look at Senate Bill 9

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

SB 9, as amended, Atkins. Housing development: approvals.

The Planning and Zoning Law provides for the creation of accessory dwelling units by local ordinance, or, if a local agency has not adopted an ordinance, by ministerial approval, in accordance with specified standards and conditions.

This bill, among other things, would require a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.

The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving the construction of 2 residential units, including, but not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of up to 2 units or physically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances.

The Subdivision Map Act vests the authority to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions in the legislative body of a local agency and sets forth procedures governing the local agency’s processing, approval, conditional approval or disapproval, and filing of tentative, final, and parcel maps, and the modification of those maps. Under the Subdivision Map Act, an approved or conditionally approved tentative map expires 24 months after its approval or conditional approval or after any additional period of time as prescribed by local ordinance, not to exceed an additional 12 months, except as provided.

This bill, among other things, would require a local agency to ministerially approve a parcel map for an urban lot split that meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the urban lot split would not require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the parcel is located within a single-family residential zone, and that the parcel is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.

The bill would set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving an urban lot split, including, but not limited to, authorizing a local agency to impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design standards, as defined, unless those standards would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of 2 units, as defined, on either of the resulting parcels or physically precluding either of the 2 units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area, prohibiting the imposition of setback requirements under certain circumstances, and setting maximum setback requirements under all other circumstances. The bill, until January 1, 2027, bill would require an applicant to sign an affidavit stating that they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of 3 years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split, unless the applicant is a community land trust or a qualified nonprofit corporation, as specified. The bill would prohibit a local agency from imposing an any additional owner occupancy requirement on applicants unless specified conditions are met. standards on applicants. By requiring applicants to sign affidavits, thereby expanding the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill would also extend the limit on the additional period that may be provided by ordinance, as described above, from 12 months to 24 months and would make other conforming or nonsubstantive changes.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.

This bill, by establishing the ministerial review processes described above, would thereby exempt the approval of projects subject to those processes from CEQA.

The California Coastal Act of 1976 provides for the planning and regulation of development, under a coastal development permit process, within the coastal zone, as defined, that shall be based on various coastal resources planning and management policies set forth in the act.

This bill would exempt a local agency from being required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit applications for housing developments and urban lot splits pursuant to the above provisions.

By increasing the duties of local agencies with respect to land use regulations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill would include findings that changes proposed by this bill address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.

Digest Key

Vote: MAJORITY Appropriation: NO Fiscal Committee: YES Local Program: YES

3 comments

KJB333 Aug 27, 2021 - 1:37 pm

Oh sure! This is exactly what I want. Two more houses in my neighbor’s yard? Sure need the additional cars taking up street parking, more noise coming from occupants of those units. We need to be squeezed in even more! We’re already being choked with high density. Why not add more to this problem?

Stacey Rollins Aug 28, 2021 - 2:24 pm

Don’t let these bills be signed by Newsom! Notice how quiet he has been about them? More of a reason to recall him! If he does sign before Sept. 14th, then the next governor can veto that signature.

Maria Elena Aug 30, 2021 - 2:07 pm

We are already at high density. Do we need to be squeezed even tighter? There are large lots in our neighborhood of exclusively single-family houses. Street parking is a problem. Do we need even more problems with more people generating noise?

Comments are closed.

Senate Leader Atkins’ SB 9 Housing Bill Passes Assembly

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

Digest Key

California State Assembly Passes Senator Leyva’s “Silenced No More Act”

WTF California: Antioch Police Chief Heads to Idaho While State Lawmakers Continue to Run Amuck

You may also like

3 comments