Planning commission backs code changes to implement statelaws on urban lot splits and two-unit developments

The Planning Commission voted unanimously Tuesday to recommend that City Council adopt changes to the municipal code to implement state laws on urban lot splits and two-unit developments, and to find the amendments exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Andrew Perez, the city's planning manager, told commissioners the proposed amendments respond to Senate Bill 9 (SB 9) and a 2025 follow-up bill he referenced as SB 450. "These types of developments are related to Senate Bill 9, which became effective on 01/01/2022," Perez said, and SB 450 "amends state law as it applies to urban lot splits and two-unit developments."

The changes before the commission would repeal objective local design standards that Perez said do not apply uniformly across single-family zones, clarify that cities may regulate only lot dimensions and access for urban lot splits, and reflect a 60-day "shot clock" for ministerial approval of a complete SB 9 application. Perez summarized: "SB 450 prohibits imposing design standards that are not uniformly applicable to single family development" and "establishes a 60 day shot clock for the city to act on a complete application."

Why it matters: The amendments narrow the range of local review the city can apply to SB 9 projects, while preserving existing uniform zoning standards to the extent they do not prevent a property owner from building the minimum units allowed under state law.

Key provisions discussed by staff and commissioners included state-mandated minimum lot and unit sizes, owner-occupancy and anti-displacement rules, and how SB 9 interacts with accessory dwelling unit (ADU) rules. Perez said state law requires newly created lots from an urban lot split to be at least 40% of the original parcel and sets a minimum lot size of 1,200 square feet; SB 9 also requires that two-unit developments provide units of at least 800 square feet. He noted SB 9 contains anti-displacement measures that "prohibit demolition of affordable housing or any housing units that have been used as rentals within the past 3 years, starting with the date of the application."

Perez described differences between SB 9 developments and ADUs: "ADUs are exempt from parking, whereas SB 9 projects need to provide 1 parking space per unit," and a junior ADU is capped at 500 square feet while SB 9's two-unit minimum is 800 square feet. He also said SB 9 developments are subject to the underlying zone's height limits (generally 30 feet or two stories), while ADU height allowances vary depending on configuration.

Commissioners asked for geographic clarifications about areas ineligible for SB 9 development because of a local Historic Character Overlay District. Vice Chair Martin asked whether the historic district covered residential areas southeast of the village core; Perez pointed to the map and said parcels within the Historic Character Overlay District "are ineligible for SB 9." Perez identified the district roughly as the village core along Branch Street and neighboring blocks east of the freeway.

Other technical clarifications offered by staff: the minimum width for the stem of a flag lot is generally 12 feet; owner-occupancy is required for three years on subdividing property under SB 9; cities may require public improvements for SB 9 projects but not for ADUs; and an application may be denied only where "the project will result in specific adverse impact on public health and safety as defined in the Government Code," a standard Perez described as narrow and requiring substantial evidence.

After questions and no public comment, a commissioner moved to adopt a resolution recommending City Council adopt amendments to Municipal Code sections 16.20.180 and 16.32.060 and to find the adoption exempt from CEQA under the cited CEQA guidelines. The roll call vote recorded Commissioners Worthen, Buchanan, Vice Chair Martin and Chair Roof voting yes; the motion carried.

Next steps: The commission's recommendation will go to City Council for introduction; if council supports the changes at introduction, staff said the ordinance would return for adoption and become effective 30 days after adoption.