Sacramento staff backs 'moderate' missing‑middle rules and local SB 79 procedure, commissioners press for simpler standards

City planning staff recommended on March 26 that the Planning and Design Commission endorse a moderate, citywide approach to missing‑middle housing standards and adopt a local implementing ordinance to align the zoning code with SB 79.

Jamie Mosler, associate planner for long‑range planning, summarized the zoning‑consistency work required under the 2040 General Plan and reviewed three outcomes tied to floor‑area ratio (FAR): house scale (FAR ≈1), midscale (illustrated at 1.5 FAR) and block scale (FAR ≈2). Mosler said 19 projects have been approved under the interim MMH ordinance, with an average FAR of 0.4, an average density of about 18 dwelling units per acre and roughly three units per lot.

"Tonight we're asking PDC to review and comment on high‑level concepts and policies," Mosler said, describing staff's recommendation for a moderate level of change that would create objective standards for both house‑scale and upper missing‑middle housing near transit and allow staff‑level review with a director‑level hearing available for deviations.

Mosler also outlined SB 79, the state law that becomes effective this summer and establishes distance‑based height and FAR allowances near qualifying transit stops (for example, higher heights within 200 feet and scaled allowances to a half‑mile). He said SB 79 requires projects that use those allowances to meet eligibility criteria — minimum unit counts, density thresholds and affordability options — and that the city could choose from several local approaches. Staff favored a local implementing ordinance that would codify SB 79 heights into non‑MMH commercial/mixed‑use zones while continuing to require SB 79 eligibility in MMH zones.

Commissioners and public speakers largely welcomed the direction but pushed staff to simplify standards that currently make three‑story, small‑unit projects infeasible for many small developers. Builders and housing advocates said the interim ordinance's combination of bulk‑control measures, pitched‑roof/dormer rules for a third floor and building‑code transitions to the commercial code have raised costs and discouraged projects larger than duplexes with ADUs.

"We really appreciate the thorough analysis," said Michael Turgeon of House Sacramento, urging the commission to avoid rules that "totally choke off the ability for us to get three‑story residences, which really are the workhorse of missing‑middle housing." Several other speakers and commissioners recommended removing or loosening eave height and dormer requirements and using clear objective standards or preapproved designs to reduce entitlement time and cost.

Staff acknowledged tradeoffs: Bruce Monaghan, urban design manager, said standardizing house‑scale controls aims to preserve neighborhood context but allow an avenue for upper‑MMH where a neighborhood context supports it. Planning Director Greg Sandlin told commissioners there is no state provision to use an in‑lieu fee to meet SB 79 affordability requirements and that SB 79's recorded restrictions would apply when a project selects one of the affordability paths.

The commission pressed staff on review levels and appeals. Staff described a tiered approach: projects meeting objective standards would be reviewed ministerially at staff level; deviations would be heard at a director level with one appeal to the commission. Staff outlined a schedule for further community engagement, a council workshop on April 14 and a return to the commission this summer with proposed zoning changes.

What happens next: Staff will take the commission's direction into community engagement and draft a permanent ordinance. The commission did not vote on an ordinance; the hearing was a workshop to collect feedback.

Provenance: topic intro SEG 254; topic finish SEG 3229.