CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA (MPG) - At the December 9 meeting, the Citrus Heights City Council considered whether to adopt an Urgency Ordinance to put guidelines in place for new residential housing developments under Senate Bill (SB) 9: California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (HOME) Act. To address California’s housing crisis and encourage development of more affordable housing, Governor Newsom signed SB 9 into law in September, and it goes into effect on January 1, 2022. The new law requires the approval of urban lot splits and the development of two residential units on one lot.

SB 9 applies to properties zoned as single-family, generally RD 1 – RD 5, which are parcels that have between one and five houses per acre.  Under the law, any single-family-zoned property (except those within conservation easements, floodways, or historic sites) can be split into two roughly equal parcels, and each parcel can have two residential units. The parcels must be at least 1,200 square feet and each residence must be at least 800 square feet.

Both sections of SB 1 can be applied, so one single-family property could be subdivided into two parcels, and then two housing units could be built on each parcel—creating a total of four housing units on the original lot. The units can’t be used as short-term rentals, and existing homes on these lots can’t be demolished unless there hasn’t been tenant in the last three years. Properties can only be split once, and if a lot is split, then the owner must live on one of the parcels as a primary residence for at least three years.

Because the goal is to increase housing, SB 9 implements less restrictive development standards. For example, the law decreases side and rear setbacks from the property lines to just four feet. It also states that no more than one parking space can be required per unit, and it allows for an exception to that requirement if the unit is within walking distance of reliable transit. It also specifies that new developments do not have to meet requirements for lighting, sidewalk, and street improvements.

If a proposed lot split or development meets SB 9 guidelines, it must be considered ministerially and approved without any discretionary review or public hearings. Proposals can only be denied if there is overwhelming evidence that it would cause specific adverse impacts.

But the law does allow local jurisdictions to impose their own objective standards, so City staff recommend ensuring parcels have easements for public services and facilities as well as direct access to public streets, either by direct access or a 20-foot recorded easement. Other standards the City wants to include are parking space minimum sizes and creekside setbacks. However, SB 9 states that objective standards cannot be applied if they would preclude the development of two 800-square-foot units on the property.

Councilmember Steve Miller expressed concern about adding more units onto residential properties: “We’re quadrupling what goes on our land sites: water, sewer, power, gas. We’re going to be producing four times as much garbage out of these lot splits, and so that has a financial impact on us.” He also took issue with the lack of public hearings on these developments, pointing out that the first you would know of your neighbor building right next to your fence would be when the construction starts. “I don’t know if I can support this,” he said.

Councilmember Jeannie Bruins pointed out that SB 9 would be “foisted on us anyway,” so “having an ordinance in place puts us in a stronger position,” because the objective standards will “put a little bit of sense into a law that I think is going be potentially harmful to Citrus Heights.” She said, “I don’t think any of us like this, but if we don’t take action, it will be worse.” Councilmember Bruins also added that property owners need to be advised that these splits and developments would lead to higher property taxes on their parcels.

Councilmember Bret Daniels called the new law “disgusting.” He said, “I don’t know if I’ve ever reacted to anything the way I’m reacting to this tonight and seeing what this is going to do to our communities, our neighborhoods, our city. We’re already the most densely populated area in the Sacramento region. … This is going to destroy neighborhoods.” Daniels foresees fights and fires in the future, with so many people packed into small areas: “All I see is problems; I don’t see solutions at all.” He suggested imposing high development fees to discourage the development of these units.

The Urgency Ordinance was approved by a 4-5 vote, with Councilmember Miller dissenting.

The Council also heard a report from the Citrus Heights Police Department about the possibility of a future ballot measure to reinstate the Regional Sacramento Abandoned Vehicle Service Authority (SAVSA) fee. The $1 fee is added to vehicle registrations, and the collected funds are distributed throughout the region to help with the cost of vehicle abatement programs Citrus Heights receives approximately $50-$60K annually from the fund. But the fee will end on April 30, 2022, because under current legislation it is considered a tax.

To be reinstated, the SAVSA fee must be approved by 2/3 voter support, and Sacramento Transit Authority wants to put the measure on the next ballot. Earlier this year, the estimated cost to the City to include this measure on the ballot was $62,000, so at that time the Council did not support it. But recently, other jurisdictions in the region have signed on as well, and the estimated cost to Citrus Heights would be just $12,000. The City now intends to support the measure.

If the measure passes, those funds will continue helping the CHPD recoup the costs of towing abandoned and non-operational vehicles off of public streets in Citrus Heights.