Fillmore council introduces zoning changes to implement housing element; residents voice density concerns

Fillmore City Council introduced, on first reading, zoning text and map changes to implement the city’s 2021–2029 housing element, adopting an RMH-2 zone and a housing overlay intended to add capacity to meet the city’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) target. Council also adopted objective multifamily design standards and asked staff to add a shadow-study requirement for developments that could affect solar access.

City staff said the rezones target underused parcels between Santa Clara Street and State Route 126 and other sites identified in the housing element. The RMH-2 zone would legalize older single-family homes in one area, allow 15–20 units per acre in some parcels and remove nonconforming status so homeowners could pursue financing and upgrades. The housing overlay would allow up to 24 dwelling units per acre on other underutilized vacant parcels; staff emphasized the overlay does not force higher-density development and that single-family proposals would remain allowed under the underlying zone.

Planning Director Brian McCarthy summarized the zones and development standards. He said the RMH-2 area totals about 9.71 acres and could allow roughly 170 units, and the three mapped overlay areas total about 10.69 acres and could allow about 255 units if developed at the maximum density. Combined, staff said the rezones would help the city approach the RHNA allocation of 415 units.

Residents who live near one overlay parcel on Sespe Avenue and nearby streets told council they fear three-story buildings up to 35 feet would be out of scale and could reduce privacy, increase traffic, and block sunlight, including solar panels. James Mills, a resident of Chaparral Street, asked council to disapprove the rezone affecting the former Hazy orange grove, citing privacy and property-value concerns. Cecilia Barro Gomez, who said she has lived in Fillmore for 40 years, told council the proposed housing density “threatens that fabric” of the neighborhood.

City staff and the planning commission stressed no development proposals have been submitted for the parcels and that any future project would undergo separate entitlement review with public notice and opportunity for comment. Planning staff and the commission also noted objective design standards are meant to limit massing and preserve neighborhood character where possible. Council added a requirement that any higher-density project submit a shadow study quantifying impacts on adjacent solar access.

The council voted to introduce the ordinance on first reading with the amendment to include the shadow-study standard. The measure requires a second reading and adoption at a future council meeting before zoning changes go into effect.