Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arroyo Grande introduces housing code changes to implement SB 9 and recent ADU laws
Summary
Council introduced ordinances updating city code to comply with recent state laws (SB 450, AB 1061, SB 543 and ADU bills), changing SB 9 design limitations, narrowing historic-resource exclusions, and updating ADU/JADU allowances and processing timelines; council and residents debated village character and enforcement limits.
The Arroyo Grande City Council introduced two ordinances Nov. 25 to align local zoning with recent state housing legislation affecting SB 9 urban lot splits, two-unit developments and accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
Planning Manager Andrew Perez told the council the amendments respond to three new state bills: SB 450 (limits on local design standards for SB 9 projects), AB 1061 (narrows historic-resource protections so only parcels with a designated historic resource remain ineligible for SB 9), and SB 543 (clarifies unit counts and ADU interactions). Perez said the changes remove the city's previously adopted design standards where they are not uniformly applicable citywide and simplify the calculation of allowed units: parcels created by an urban lot split are limited to two units each, while non-split parcels are limited to five units under state rules when ADU provisions also apply.
On ADUs, Perez explained AB 462, AB 1154 and SB 543 adjust owner-occupancy rules, allow certain ADU certificates of occupancy to be issued before a primary unit is occupied in declared state emergencies, prohibit JADUs as short-term rentals, and establish statutorily required processing timelines. The city also revised language after a Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) review that found a prior visibility standard to be an impermissible subjective requirement; that standard was removed.
Council and residents raised questions about who benefits (investors vs. local homeowners), whether the measures will produce affordable housing, and how village character will be preserved when SB 9 makes more parcels eligible (especially in the historic-character overlay, i.e., the village). Perez said the city must comply with state law but that adopting a local ordinance allows the city to retain as much local control as permitted under statute and to implement objective standards where allowable.
Councilmember Marvaglia moved to introduce the SB 9 ordinance amending sections 16.20.180 and 16.32.060; the motion passed by roll call. Council later introduced the ADU ordinance updating section 16.52.150 to reflect state changes, remove subjective visibility criteria, and set statutorily required timelines; that motion also passed on roll call.
