SB 9 - The California H.O.M.E. Act - Housing Opportunity More Efficiency

What Does Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) Allow?

One of the best ways to understand SB 9 is to look at the first application made to do a combination SB 9 lot subdivision and SB 9 two home per lot construction in Palo Alto CA. The parcel is at 940 Matadero Ave.

The lot is 408.8 feet long and 106.2 feet wide. Putting a 15' driveway down one side of the property would leave enough room for four lots, each 91' x 102' which is larger than the typical lot that has been created in the past by subdivisions in Palo Alto.

So if the four lots are going to be relatively large, why is the architect applying for an SB 9 subdivision? I haven't had a chance to talk to the architect Randy Popp about Matadero Ave but he has been involved in the construction of a new hotel next door to JLee Realty. The hotel would be located among other hotels on El Camino Real, with an already existing large condominium complex behind it. The property transfered ownership in 2019 but demolition of the restaurant, that was already on the property, didn't happen until late 2021. As of April 2022, construction of the hotel has not begun. I attended one of the Architectural Review Board meetings that reviewed the hotel's plans. The Palo Alto Architectural Review Board (ARB) was hesitant to allow a stairway to be visible through large windows near the guest unloading driveway. The ARB was expending considerable time deciding non-measurable "aesthetic choices" which they impose on the owner and architects of the hotel. SB 9 prohibits arbitrary, non-measurable, unwritten reasons for denying a permit.

SB 9 Streamlines The Process

Quoting from focus.senate.ca.gov/sb9:

"Senate Bill 9 – the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act streamlines the process for a homeowner to create a duplex or subdivide an existing lot."

Quoting from leginfo.legislature.ca.gov:

"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..."

"Notwithstanding any other provision of this division and any local law, a local agency shall ministerially approve, as set forth in this section, a parcel map for an urban lot split only if the local agency determines that the parcel map for the urban lot split meets all the following requirements..."

A simple summary is that SB 9 removes local agency personal and subjective criteria from the process and requires that denials be based on objective standards that are uniformly verifiable. Limiting the height of a house is a criteria that is uniformly verifiable. Probably lot coverage limits will also be retained. I've seen no claim that they couldn't or wouldn't be allowed.

Some SB 9 Details

There are changes imposed by SB 9 which will probably lead to slightly higher density. SB 9 specifies that setbacks in the side and back yard can not be required to be more than 4 feet.

SB 9 requires that an existing structure that is currently non-conforming to zoning laws does not have to be brought into conformance in order to qualify for an SB 9 based permit.

SB 9 prohibits requirements for off site improvements.

SB 9 appears to allow homes as small as 800 sq.ft.

Subdivided lots can be as small as 1,200 sq.ft. BUT each of the two parcels created by the subdivision must be at least 40% of the original parcel.

The owners must sign an affidavit that they will live in one of the units created by an SB 9 subdivision as their primary residence for at least 3 years.

Will SB 9 Be A Positive Step Forward (personal opinion)

Two interactions with the Palo Alto ARB immediately come to mind.

Most recent interaction:

The JLee Realty office building needs numerous repairs. When planning the repairs we looked at the surrounding area including looking a Google Map aerial view.

The white roofs are flat and not visible from street level. So what color of roof is most common on El Camino Real? It looks like red or terra cotta is most commonly seen. The large Crown Plaza Hotel right next door to JLee Realty has a red roof. I proposed a roof the same red color and using the same shingles as the nearby "Americas Best Value Inn Sky Ranch" (the 4th property northwest of JLee Realty). An ARB member said red wasn't compatible with the neighborhood. The ARB member also said that the red roof on the hotel next door didn't count because the hotel had a large parking lot in front of it. The ARB would never say what color was appropriate during the 2 years they were reviewing my repair plans. The JLee Realty office building now has the only light grey roof in the neighborhood. Can you figure out what compatible with the neighborhood means?

Earlier planning department interaction:

I proposed building a new house in the downtown neighborhood of Palo Alto on the narrow end of a block. There are three houses on my street, another house at a corner facing the cross street that has a garage facing my street, a large apartment complex with under-unit parking and a large driveway and garage gate at the front facing my street, and a large condominium complex with a wide driveway leading down to a gated garage under the units. There are no houses on the opposite side of the street.

All three houses facing my street are on 50' wide lots vs. the more typical 60' wide lot. The two houses on either side of mine don't have garages. They park in their short narrow driveway, near the street. I proposed having a garage facing the street. The planning department said that my garage had to be at the back of my house. They said a garage at the front wasn't typical. The garage facing my street, two doors away, doesn't count because the house faces the cross street. Apparently, the fact that the only other two houses facing my street DO NOT HAVE GARAGES is a sufficient reason to require that my garage has to be at the back. About 12 feet of my 50 foot wide lot had to be taken up by a driveway leading past the front of my house to what is essentially a large patio in front of my garage. This downtown neighborhood has limited parking and a permit is required to park on the street for other than a short time. My visitors often have to park in my driveway. At least one visitor broke her mirror trying to back-up from in front of my garage. My two person family has two cars parked on the street. However the "ARBitrary" decision forced me to have a long narrow driveway that is most often used as a very nice large patio and occasional guest parking!

I think disallowing personal subjective requirements made by an un-elected city employee is a step in the right direction.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB9
https://focus.senate.ca.gov/sb9

City Impacts as of April 2022 By SB 9

• The single SB 9 application submitted in Palo Alto has been withdrawn.
• Cupertino hasn't received any SB 9 applications yet.
• Portola Valley has not had any SB 9 applications.
• In Redwood City not a single lot-splitting application has been submitted.
• In San Jose, planners haven't had any requests to split lots.
• Woodside hasn't received any SB 9 applications

City Government Imposed Limits

Los Altos Hills, Portola Valley, and Woodside have all imposed maximum size limits of 800 sq.ft. on new units. These limits, because of the cost of construction, eliminates any financial incentive to build a new unit.