In Depth
LB City Hall Submits Letter Opposing AB 2702 (Bill Would Make It Harder For Cities To Stop Second Units on Single Residential Lots); LB State Senator Karnette's Sac'to Office Is Mum As Bill Approaches Committee Vote
(August 11, 2004) -- LB City Manager Jerry Miller has submitted a letter on behalf of the City of Long Beach formally opposing AB 2702, a bill that would restrict the ability of cities to limit second units on single residential lots.
The bill is opposed by over a hundred CA cities as well as the League of CA Cities (in which LB is a member). It passed the Assembly earlier this year with "yes" votes by LB area Assemblymembers Alan Lowenthal (D., LB-SP-PV) and Jenny Oropeza (D., LB-Carson).
In a letter dated August 4, 2004 to the bill's author, Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg (D., Sacramento), LB City Manager Jerry Miller wrote:
...Though we acknowledge your courage fight for affordable housing, we do not believe AB 2702 is the way to come about this change.
Rather than encourage local, balanced, planned patterns of development that respects local land use priorities outlined int he General Plan, AB 2702 simply imposes a one-size-fits-all approach to second unit development on every community in the state.
AB 2702 mandates standards that have proven unacceptable to the residents of single-family housing. AB 2702 will limit local ability to prohibit absentee-landlord duplexes to be created in single-family neighborhoods, create a substantial problem with parking for the residents, dictate irrational miniumuy lot and unit sizes regardless of lot dimensions, and lead to a decrease in property value.
For these reasons, we oppose AB 2702 and strongly urge you to reconsider this bill...
The letter was cc'd to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, State Senator Betty Karnette (D., LB) and State Senator Ed Vincent.
As previously reported by LBReport.com, Ab 2702 is now before the state Senate Appropriations Committee on which LB area State Senator Betty Karnette (D., LB) is a member.
On August 6, the League of CA Cities posted an advisory on its web site, stating in part: "City officials concerned about AB 2702 (Steinberg) are urged to contact members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and urge that the measure be held in the committee."
An August 11 telephone call by LBReport.com to Sen. Karnette's Sacramento office, which left a message with her chief of staff asking if the Senator supports or opposes AB 2702, was not returned.
The bill would establish detailed standards for local second unit ordinances. It also specifies densities that will be allowed on school sites when housing and schools are built on the same site.
In June, the League of CA Cities, the American Planning Association's CA chapter and CA Association of Counties issued a joint communique opposing AB 2702, stating in pertinent part:
This bill mandates standards that have proven unacceptable to the residents of single-family housing. Policies in this bill such as those limiting local ability to prohibit absentee-landlord duplexes to be created in single-family neighborhoods, reducing parking standards, dictating irrational minimum lot and unit sizes regardless of lot dimensions have already provoked a reaction from residents. Aside from the disruption caused to single-family neighborhoods throughout the state, our organizations are not convinced that compelling evidence exists to justify either the one-size-fits-all restrictions on local land use decisions or the expense of once again revising second unit ordinances. Furthermore, the mandated densities for housing on school sites provision in this bill not only usurps local zoning authority, it represents irresponsible planning, with no appreciation or understanding of location, traffic, site conditions, or other local issues.
AB 2702's supporters, listed in a mid-June legislative analysis, included the CA Association of Realtors, the Western Center on Law and Poverty and the CA Rural Legal Assistance Foundation...all three of which are sponsors of the bill. On its web site, the CA Association of Realtors states:
Enacted two-decades ago, the [current CA] second-unit law has not lived up to its potential due, in part, to unreasonable obstacles imposed by local governments. To encourage the development of such units, C.A.R. successfully co-sponsored AB 1866 (Wright) in 2002, which stated that a second-unit building permit must be approved without a hearing if the proposal complies with all of the local government’s development requirements. However, AB 1866 did not address specifically what reasonable standards local governments may apply to second units -- causing local governments to become creative and restrictive with their new "ministerial" guidelines in order to force a hearing for such additions or to effectively prohibit the construction of new second units.
To counteract this problem, this bill will specify that local governments cannot adopt ordinances that have the practical effect of barring second units from a community. The bill is aimed at preventing arbitrary restrictions that are meant to make it exceedingly difficult to put such units on a property. If approved, this legislation will continue to allow communities the flexibility to design guidelines and zoning code requirements that are appropriate for their neighborhoods, while at the same time, and perhaps most importantly, allowing property owners the ability to build units that are sufficient in size for
their needs and aesthetically pleasing -- without encroaching on the privacy of other property owners.
On August 4, the Senate Appropriations Committee sent AB 2702 to its "Suspense File," a legislative pit stop reserved for bills with anticipated state costs of over $150,000. A state Senate legislative analysis indicated the bill could cost state taxpayers between $5 and $10 million for reimbursable state mandates to local government.
The League said on its web site that "[s]ince most significant bills cost the state money, this is a way for the Legislature to decide what its real priorities are and impose some fiscal discipline upon itself. The decisions about which bills get off the Suspense File are typically based upon backroom negotiations and the bills are often reported out with amendments designed to reduce the costs to the state."
The League also noted that "Despite these projected costs, Suspense File bills are often decided based upon politics rather than facts, and the committee could let the bill out next week saying that it does not create costs to the state. Many of those involved in the decision will be out of office when the matter is decided either by the State Mandates Commission or a Court years from now, so they won't be around when the costs come due."
The League added, "It remains unclear whether this measure [AB 2702], which is opposed by over 100 cities, will be reported out of committee to the Senate Floor later next week, or remain in the committee and be dead for the remainder of this legislative session."
On August 6, the League of CA Cities posted an advisory on its web site, stating in part: "City officials concerned about AB 2702 (Steinberg) are urged to contact members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and urge that the measure be held in the committee."
If passed by the legislature and not vetoed by the Governor, AB 2702 would effectively supercede inconsistent parts of LB's "granny flat" ordinance, making it easier to build second units on single family lots and thereby increase residential density.
Density in LB is a sore point, following a 1980s City Council action (supported at the time by city staff and development interests) that invited increased density in central city areas, bringing "crackerbox" apartments that destabilized single family neighborhoods. The Council action, now widely discredited, didn't provide increased services and infrastructure to keep pace and brought negative impacts still being felt citywide.
In 1992, then-CSULB Professor Alan Lowenthal, considered an underdog at the time, won election to the 2d district City Council seat after blasting the incumbent over the "crackerbox" action. In 1998, Councilman Lowenthal won an Assembly seat; he is now term-limited and seeking the state Senate seat occupied by Senator Betty Karnette.
Sen. Karnette, who is termed out in her Senate office, is seeking the Assembly seat being vacated by Assemblyman Lowenthal. Senator Karnette is facing a high visibility challenge in November from former Congressman and Assemblyman Steve Kuykendall.
Earlier this year, LB community meetings on a local proposal (more modest than AB 2702) to loosen parts of LB's "granny flat" ordinance met with neighborhood resistance.
AB 2702 applies the following provisions to communities that adopt local "second unit" ordinances (LB already has one):
- Prohibit "local ordinances regulations, or policies from precluding or effectively precluding second units in all residential zones unless specified findings are made;
- Require development standards to be reasonable, written, and objective and contribute significantly to the economic feasibility of producing housing at the lowest possible cost;
- Permit the local government to limit approval to an applicant who is an owner-occupant in either the primary or second unit;
- Preclude a jurisdiction from requiring occupancy of either unit by a dependant or caregiver or restricting occupancy on a discriminatory basis;
- Preclude a jurisdiction from imposing deed restrictions that restrict future sales to owner-occupants or future occupancy on a discriminatory basis;
- Preclude minimum size requirements of less than 550 square feet unless requested by the owner;
- Set an absolute limit on parking requirements of one space per unit or bedroom, precludes a jurisdiction from requiring covered parking;
- Allow local governments to impose reasonable standards to limit on-street parking; and
- Allow local government to prohibit or regulate transient use of a second unit for which rent is charged and collected on a daily basis
In its joint opposition, the League of CA Cities, the American Planning Association (CA Chapter) and CA Association of Counties cited the following grounds for their opposition:
Poor Timing: Less than nine months have passed since the effective date of AB 1866 (Wright), which removed opportunity’s for discretionary reviews of applications by planning commission, and mandated that all second unit applications to be ministerial. This required local governments to expend time and resources updating their ordinances. Given that the new law is barely in effect, it makes little policy sense to mandate additional changes to these ordinances.
Bad Policy and No Justification: This bill mandates standards that have proven unacceptable to the residents of single-family housing. Policies in this bill such as those limiting local ability to prohibit absentee-landlord duplexes to be created in single-family neighborhoods, reducing parking standards, dictating irrational minimum lot and unit sizes regardless of lot dimensions have already provoked a reaction from residents. Aside from the disruption caused to single-family neighborhoods throughout the state, our organizations are not convinced that compelling evidence exists to justify either the one-size-fits-all restrictions on local land use decisions or the expense of once again revising second unit ordinances. Furthermore, the mandated densities for housing on school sites provision in this bill not only usurps local zoning authority, it represents irresponsible planning, with no appreciation or understanding of location, traffic, site conditions, or other local issues.
Significant Costs: At a time when an additional $1.3 billion in local property tax and other cuts are proposed to be taken from local governments to resolve the state’s budget deficit, we would hope that the Legislature would exercise some restraint prior to imposing additional mandates and costs on local governments. This bill will compel 478 cities and 58 counties to amend their ordinances to comply with these new mandates. Language inserted into this measure which implies that local governments will not have to either amend their ordinances or can simply charge "fees" to is simply an attempt to avoid the mandated costs of this measure. Local governments will be required to front the costs of this measure, and with limited applications in many jurisdictions the fees would be excessive.
A legislative analysis for the Aug. 4 state Senate Appropriations Committee hearing stated in pertinent part:
1. Purpose of the bill. Second units can be an important
source of affordable housing, especially in communities
with little vacant land. They tend to be smaller and more
affordable than other forms of housing and fit into
existing communities. While state law encourages second
units and requires local governments to ministerially
approve applications that meet their local standards,
resistance to second units has led some local governments
to adopt standards that severely limit or effectively
preclude their development. This bill seeks to facilitate
the development of second units while balancing the
interests of local governments to set reasonable
development standards.
2. Overly restrictive policies. While local governments
understandably have a desire to regulate the development of
second units, some policies seemed clearly designed to
undermine state law and make their development extremely
difficult. According to the sponsors, at least six
communities limit second units to 400 square feet or less,
with one allowing no more than 250 square feet. At least
three jurisdictions allow second units only on lots of one
acre or more. At least ten communities require covered
parking for the second unit. In addition, some communities
limit occupancy of second units to seniors. It is unclear
what legitimate basis exists for such restrictions. On the
other hand, such restrictions clearly make it unlikely that
second units will be developed in the community. This bill
seeks to limit specific types of onerous requirements
relating to size, occupancy and parking while maintaining
significant flexibility for local communities in other
regards
3. Arguments in opposition. Opponents argue that the bill
mandates standards that have proven unacceptable to the
residents of single-family housing. In addition, they are
not convinced that compelling evidence exists to justify
either the one-size-fits-all restrictions on local land use
decisions or the expense of once again revising second unit
ordinances.
The letters also state that the mandated densities for
housing on school sites represents irresponsible planning,
with no appreciation or understanding of location, traffic,
site conditions, or other local issues. The opponents ask
for further study of the second unit issue.
In May, AB 2702 cleared the Assembly on a 50-21 vote...with "yes" votes by Assemblymembers Alan Lowenthal (D., LB-SP-PV) and Jenny Oropeza (D., LB-Carson).
The roll call vote on the Assembly floor was:
MEASURE: AB 2702
AUTHOR: Steinberg
TOPIC: Housing: second units.
DATE: 05/27/2004
LOCATION: ASM. FLOOR
MOTION: AB 2702 Steinberg Assembly Third Reading
(AYES 50. NOES 21.) (PASS)
AYES
****
Aghazarian Benoit Berg Bermudez
Calderon Campbell Chan Chavez
Chu Cogdill Correa Cox
Diaz Dutton Dymally Firebaugh
Frommer Garcia Goldberg Hancock
Harman Haynes Jerome Horton Keene
Kehoe Laird Leno Leslie
Levine Lieber Longville Lowenthal
Maddox Matthews Montanez Mullin
Negrete McLeod Oropeza Parra Reyes
Ridley-Thomas Runner Salinas Spitzer
Steinberg Strickland Vargas Wesson
Wiggins Nunez
NOES
****
Bogh Canciamilla Daucher Shirley Horton
Houston Jackson La Malfa La Suer
Liu Maldonado Maze Mountjoy
Nakano Nation Pavley Plescia
Richman Samuelian Wolk Wyland
Yee
ABSENT, ABSTAINING, OR NOT VOTING
*********************************
Bates Cohn Corbett Dutra
Koretz McCarthy Nakanishi Pacheco
Simitian
We post below AB 2702 as of its most recently listed May amendments. (Caveat: We encourage readers to visit www.leginfo.ca.gov for updates):
[begin text]
BILL NUMBER: AB 2702 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 25, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 6, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 28, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 19, 2004
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 26, 2004
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Steinberg
FEBRUARY 20, 2004
An act to amend Section 65583 of, to add Sections 65852.8
and 65917.1 to, and to repeal Section 65852.2 of, the Government
Code, An act to amend Sections 65583 and 65852.2 of,
and to add Section 65917.1 to, the Government Code, relating to
housing.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2702, as amended, Steinberg. Housing: second units.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires the housing element of
the general plan of a city or county to include, among other things,
a program with a 5-year schedule of actions that the local government
is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the goals and
objectives of the housing element. The program is also required to
provide for sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied
and rental multifamily residential use by right.
This bill would revise the definition of the phrase "use by right"
as specified and state that the changes are declaratory of existing
law.
(2) The Planning and Zoning Law authorizes a local agency to
provide by ordinance for the creation of 2nd units on parcels zoned
for a primary single-family and multifamily residence. When the
local agency has not adopted an ordinance, it is required to grant a
variance or special use permit for the creation of a 2nd unit that
complies with statutory requirements but may require the applicant to
be an owner-occupant. Existing law specifies the floor area of a
permitted 2nd unit and parking requirements.
This bill would revise the above requirements, as specified, and
would provide that local agency ordinances, regulations, or policies
may not preclude or effectively preclude 2nd units unless the local
agency makes findings based on substantial evidence, as specified.
The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting an ordinance
that requires an applicant or occupant of a 2nd unit or
principal dwelling unit to be an owner-occupant or his or her
owner's dependent or a
caregiver for the owner or dependent or that restricts the
rent or income of occupants of 2nd units to occupy the
primary dwelling or 2nd unit or that limits occupancy based on
familial status, age, or other specified characteristics. The bill
would prohibit a local agency from imposing a deed restriction
requirement or other specified restriction relating to occupancy,
tenure, or other characteristics, as specified. The bill would also,
among other things, prohibit a local agency from establishing
minimum unit size requirements for attached and detached 2nd units
below 550 livable square feet unless requested by the owner and would
revise the parking requirements for 2nd units.
The bill would authorize a local agency to charge a permit
applicant a reasonable fee to cover the costs that it incurs as a
result of the enactment of these provisions.
(3) The Planning and Zoning Law also requires, when a developer of
housing proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of
the local government, that the city, county, or city and county
provide the developer with incentives or concessions for the
production of lower income housing units within the development if
the developer meets certain requirements.
The bill would provide, with respect to those incentives, that
multifamily and single-family residential use is a permitted use on
any parcel zoned and developed for primary or secondary education and
residential uses. By increasing the duties of local public
officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
(4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse
local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the
state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that
reimbursement, including the creation of a State Mandates Claims Fund
to pay the costs of mandates that do not exceed $1,000,000 statewide
and other procedures for claims whose statewide costs exceed
$1,000,000.
This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state,
reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these
statutory provisions.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 65583 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
65583. The housing element shall consist of an identification and
analysis of existing and projected housing needs and a statement of
goals, policies, quantified objectives, financial resources, and
scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development
of housing. The housing element shall identify adequate sites for
housing, including rental housing, factory-built housing, and
mobile homes, and shall make adequate provision for the existing and
projected needs of all economic segments of the community. The
element shall contain all of the following:
(a) An assessment of housing needs and an inventory of resources
and constraints relevant to the meeting of these needs. The
assessment and inventory shall include all of the following:
(1) An analysis of population and employment trends and
documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality's
existing and projected housing needs for all income levels. These
existing and projected needs shall include the locality's share of
the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584.
(2) An analysis and documentation of household characteristics,
including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing
characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition.
(3) An inventory of land suitable for residential development,
including vacant sites and sites having potential for redevelopment,
and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities
and services to these sites.
(4) An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints
upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all
income levels and for persons with disabilities as identified in the
analysis pursuant to paragraph (6), including land use controls,
building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and
other exactions required of developers, and local processing and
permit procedures. The analysis shall also demonstrate local efforts
to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from
meeting its share of the regional housing need in accordance with
Section 65584 and from meeting the need for housing for persons with
disabilities identified pursuant to paragraph (6).
(5) An analysis of potential and actual nongovernmental
constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of
housing for all income levels, including the availability of
financing, the price of land, and the cost of construction.
(6) An analysis of any special housing needs, such as those of the
elderly, persons with disabilities, large families, farmworkers,
families with female heads of households, and families and persons in
need of emergency shelter.
(7) An analysis of opportunities for energy conservation with
respect to residential development.
(8) An analysis of existing assisted housing developments that are
eligible to change from low-income housing uses during the next 10
years due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment,
or expiration of restrictions on use. "Assisted housing
developments," for the purpose of this section, shall mean
multifamily rental housing that receives governmental assistance
under federal programs listed in subdivision (a) of Section 65863.10,
state and local multifamily revenue bond programs, local
redevelopment programs, the federal Community Development Block Grant
Program, or local in-lieu fees. "Assisted housing developments"
shall also include multifamily rental units that were developed
pursuant to a local inclusionary housing program or used to qualify
for a density bonus pursuant to Section 65916.
(A) The analysis shall include a listing of each development by
project name and address, the type of governmental assistance
received, the earliest possible date of change from low-income use
and the total number of elderly and nonelderly units that could be
lost from the locality's low-income housing stock in each year during
the 10-year period. For purposes of state and federally funded
projects, the analysis required by this subparagraph need only
contain information available on a statewide basis.
(B) The analysis shall estimate the total cost of producing new
rental housing that is comparable in size and rent levels, to replace
the units that could change from low-income use, and an estimated
cost of preserving the assisted housing developments. This cost
analysis for replacement housing may be done aggregately for each
five-year period and does not have to contain a project-by-project
cost estimate.
(C) The analysis shall identify public and private nonprofit
corporations known to the local government which have legal and
managerial capacity to acquire and manage these housing developments.
(D) The analysis shall identify and consider the use of all
federal, state, and local financing and subsidy programs which can be
used to preserve, for lower income households, the assisted housing
developments, identified in this paragraph, including, but not
limited to, federal Community Development Block Grant Program funds,
tax increment funds received by a redevelopment agency of the
community, and administrative fees received by a housing authority
operating within the community. In considering the use of these
financing and subsidy programs, the analysis shall identify the
amounts of funds under each available program which have not been
legally obligated for other purposes and which could be available for
use in preserving assisted housing developments.
(b) (1) A statement of the community's goals, quantified
objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation,
improvement, and development of housing.
(2) It is recognized that the total housing needs identified
pursuant to subdivision (a) may exceed available resources and the
community's ability to satisfy this need within the content of the
general plan requirements outlined in Article 5 (commencing with
Section 65300). Under these circumstances, the quantified objectives
need not be identical to the total housing needs. The quantified
objectives shall establish the maximum number of housing units by
income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved
over a five-year time period.
(c) A program which sets forth a five-year schedule of actions the
local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement
the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing
element through the administration of land use and development
controls, provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the
utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy
programs when available and the utilization of moneys in a low- and
moderate-income housing fund of an agency if the locality has
established a redevelopment project area pursuant to the Community
Redevelopment Law (Division 24 (commencing with Section 33000) of the
Health and Safety Code). In order to make adequate provision for
the housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the
program shall do all of the following:
(1) (A) Identify adequate sites which will be made available
through appropriate zoning and development standards and with
services and facilities, including sewage collection and treatment,
domestic water supply, and septic tanks and wells, needed to
facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of
housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing,
factory-built housing, mobile homes, housing for agricultural
employees, emergency shelters, and transitional housing in order to
meet the community's housing goals as identified in subdivision (b).
(i) Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the
need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to Section
65584, the program shall provide for sufficient sites with zoning
that permits approval of owner-occupied and rental multifamily units
to obtain a residential use by right, including density and
development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the
feasibility of housing for very low and low-income households.
(ii) Where the inventory of sites pursuant to paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a) does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the
need for farmworker housing, the program shall provide for sufficient
sites to meet the need with zoning that permits farmworker housing
use by right, including density and development standards that could
accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of the development of
farmworker housing for low- and very low income households.
(B) For purposes of this subdivision, the phrase "use by right"
shall mean that the use does not require a conditional use permit or
a planned unit development permit, except when the proposed project
is a mixed-use project involving both commercial or industrial uses
and residential uses. Use by right for all rental housing shall be
provided in accordance with subdivision (f) of Section 65589.5. The
amendments to this subparagraph made by the act adding this sentence
are declaratory of existing law.
(C) The requirements of this subdivision regarding identification
of sites for farmworker housing shall apply commencing with the next
revision of housing elements required by Section 65588 following the
enactment of this subparagraph.
(2) Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the
needs of low- and moderate-income households.
(3) Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove
governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and
development of housing, including housing for all income levels and
housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove
constraints to, or provide reasonable accommodations for housing
designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services
for, persons with disabilities.
(4) Conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable
housing stock, which may include addressing ways to mitigate the loss
of dwelling units demolished by public or private action.
(5) Promote housing opportunities for all persons regardless of
race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin,
color, familial status, or disability.
(6) (A) Preserve for lower income households the assisted housing
developments identified pursuant to paragraph (8) of subdivision (a).
The program for preservation of the assisted housing developments
shall utilize, to the extent necessary, all available federal, state,
and local financing and subsidy programs identified in paragraph (8)
of subdivision (a), except where a community has other urgent needs
for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program
may include strategies that involve local regulation and technical
assistance.
(B) The program shall include an identification of the agencies
and officials responsible for the implementation of the various
actions and the means by which consistency will be achieved with
other general plan elements and community goals. The local
government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public
participation of all economic segments of the community in the
development of the housing element, and the program shall describe
this effort.
(d) The analysis and program for preserving assisted housing
developments required by the amendments to this section enacted by
the Statutes of 1989 shall be adopted as an amendment to the housing
element by July 1, 1992.
(e) Failure of the department to review and report its findings
pursuant to Section 65585 to the local government between July 1,
1992, and the next periodic review and revision required by Section
65588, concerning the housing element amendment required by the
amendments to this section by the Statutes of 1989, shall not be used
as a basis for allocation or denial of any housing assistance
administered pursuant to Part 2 (commencing with Section 50400) of
Division 31 of the Health and Safety Code.
SEC. 2. Section 65852.2 of the Government Code is repealed.
SEC. 3. Section 65852.8 is added to the Government Code, to read:
65852.8. (a) (1) Except as provided in subdivisions (c), (d),
(e), (f), (g), and (k), a local agency may, by ordinance, provide for
the creation of second units in single-family and multifamily
residential zones. The ordinance may do any of the following:
(A) Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency
where second units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be
based on criteria, that may include, but are not limited to, the
adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of second units
on traffic flow.
(B) Impose reasonable standards on second units that include, but
are not limited to, parking, height, setback, lot coverage,
architectural review, maximum size of a unit, and standards that
prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in the
California Register of Historic Places.
(C) Provide that second units do not exceed the allowable density
for the lot upon which the second unit is located, and that second
units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing
general plan and zoning designation for the lot.
(2) The ordinance shall not be considered in the application of
any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth.
(3) When a local agency receives its first application on or after
July 1, 2003, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the
application shall be approved or disapproved ministerially without
discretionary review or a hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or
65906 or any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or
special use permits. Nothing in this paragraph may be construed to
require a local government to adopt or amend an ordinance for the
creation of second units. A local agency may charge a fee to
reimburse it for costs that it incurs pursuant to this paragraph,
including the costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that
provides for the creation of second units.
(b) (1) When a local agency that has not adopted an ordinance
governing second units in accordance with subdivision (a) or (c)
receives its first application for a permit pursuant to this
subdivision, the local agency shall accept the application and
approve or disapprove the application ministerially without
discretionary review pursuant to this subdivision, unless it adopts
an ordinance in accordance with subdivision (a) or (c) within 120
days after receiving the application. Notwithstanding Section 65901
or 65906, a local agency may not require a variance or discretionary
permit for the creation of a second unit and shall approve an
application for a second unit that complies with all of the
following:
(A) The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented.
(B) The lot is zoned for single-family or multifamily use.
(C) The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling.
(D) The second unit is either attached to the existing dwelling or
detached from the existing dwelling and located on the same lot as
the existing dwelling.
(E) Requirements relating to height, setback, lot coverage,
architectural review, site plan review, fees, charges, and other
zoning requirements generally applicable to the primary dwelling in
which the property is located.
(F) Local building code requirements which apply to detached
dwellings, as appropriate.
(G) Approval by the local health officer where a private sewage
disposal system is being used, if required.
(H) The increased floor area of an attached second unit is not
less than 550 square feet, unless requested by the owner.
(I) The total floor area of a detached second unit is not less
than 550 square feet, unless requested by the owner.
(2) No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the
basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit under this
subdivision.
(3) This subdivision establishes the maximum standards that local
agencies shall use to evaluate proposed second units on lots zoned
for residential use that contain an existing single-family dwelling.
No additional standards, other than those provided in this
subdivision or subdivision (a), shall be utilized or imposed.
(4) No changes in zoning ordinances or other ordinances or any
changes in the general plan shall be required to implement this
subdivision. Any local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or
general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other
provisions applicable to the creation of second units if these
provisions are consistent with the limitations of this subdivision.
(5) A second unit that conforms to the requirements of this
subdivision shall not be considered to exceed the allowable density
for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a
residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and
zoning designations for the lot. The second units shall not be
considered in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or
program to limit residential growth.
(c) Local agency ordinances, regulations, or policies may not
preclude or effectively preclude second units within all
residentially zoned areas unless the local agency finds, based on
substantial evidence, that the ordinance may limit housing
opportunities of the region and finding that specific adverse impacts
upon the public health, safety, and welfare would result from
allowing second units within single-family and multifamily zoned
areas justify adopting the ordinance.
(1) Local governments shall apply appropriate standards as defined
in Section 65913.1, and those standards shall be written, objective,
and adopted by the local government.
(2) Local agencies may not require any of the following:
(A) An owner's dependent or caregiver to occupy the primary
dwelling or second unit. A local agency may require an applicant for
a permit issued pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant
of either the primary or second unit. A local agency may not impose
a deed restriction requirement or other limitation that (i)
restricts the sale of the property to owner-occupants, or (ii)
restricts the occupancy of the primary or second unit by tenure or
any characteristic enumerated in Section 65008, if the applicant
determines that he or she will not occupy the primary or second unit.
(B) The occupancy of either unit to be restricted by familial
status, age, or any other characteristic enumerated in Section 65008.
(3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a city, county, or city
and county from regulating or prohibiting transient use of second
units in which rent is charged and collected on a daily basis.
(d) A local agency may not establish minimum unit size
requirements for attached and detached second units below 550 livable
square feet unless requested by the owner.
(e) A local agency may not establish minimum lot size requirements
for detached second units above twice the square footage of the
primary unit, unless requested by the owner.
(f) Parking requirements for second units shall not exceed one
parking space per unit or per bedroom. Covered parking may not be
required. Local agencies may impose reasonable standards to limit
on-street parking. Off-street parking shall be permitted in setback
areas in locations determined by the local agency or through tandem
parking, unless specific findings are made that parking in setback
areas or tandem parking is not feasible based upon specific site or
regional, topographical or fire and life safety conditions, or that
it is not permitted anywhere else in the jurisdiction.
(g) Fees charged for the construction of second units shall be
determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section
66000).
(h) Except as provided in subdivision (b), this section does not
limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive
requirements for the creation of second units.
(i) Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinance or
ordinances adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the Department of
Housing and Community Development within 60 days after adoption.
(j) As used in this section, the following terms apply:
(1) "Local agency" means a city, county, or city and county,
whether general law or chartered.
(2) "Second unit" means an attached or a detached residential
dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities
for one or more persons. It shall include permanent provisions for
living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel
as the single-family dwelling is situated. A second unit also
includes any of the following:
(A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of Health
and Safety Code.
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health
and Safety Code.
(k) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in
any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California
Coastal Act (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the
Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall not be
required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit
applications for second units.
(l) A local agency may charge a reasonable fee to an applicant for
a permit pursuant to this section to reimburse the agency for costs
that it incurs as a result of the enactment of this section,
including the costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that
provides for the creation of second units.
SEC. 4.
SEC. 2. Section 65852.2 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65852.2. (a) (1) Any Except as provided
in subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (k), a local
agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units in
single-family and multifamily residential zones. The ordinance may
do any of the following:
(A) Designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency
where second units may be permitted. The designation of areas may be
based on criteria, that may include, but are not limited to, the
adequacy of water and sewer services and the impact of second units
on traffic flow.
(B) Impose reasonable standards on second units that
include, but are not limited to, parking, height, setback, lot
coverage, architectural review, maximum size of a unit, and standards
that prevent adverse impacts on any real property that is listed in
the California Register of Historic Places.
(C) Provide that second units do not exceed the allowable density
for the lot upon which the second unit is located, and that second
units are a residential use that is consistent with the existing
general plan and zoning designation for the lot.
(2) The ordinance shall not be considered in the application of
any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential growth.
(3) When a local agency receives its first application on or after
July 1, 2003, for a permit pursuant to this subdivision, the
application shall be considered approved or
disapproved ministerially without discretionary review or a
hearing, notwithstanding Section 65901 or 65906 or any local
ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use
permits. Nothing in this paragraph may be construed to require a
local government to adopt or amend an ordinance for the creation of
second units. A local agency may charge a fee to reimburse it for
costs that it incurs as a result of amendments
pursuant to this paragraph enacted during the
2001-02 Regular Session of the Legislature , including the
costs of adopting or amending any ordinance that provides for the
creation of second units.
(b) (1) When a local agency which that
has not adopted an ordinance governing second units in
accordance with subdivision (a) or (c) receives its first application
on or after July 1, 1983, for a permit pursuant
to this subdivision, the local agency shall accept the application
and approve or disapprove the application ministerially without
discretionary review pursuant to this subdivision unless it adopts an
ordinance in accordance with subdivision (a) or (c) within 120 days
after receiving the application. Notwithstanding Section 65901 or
65906, every a local agency
shall grant may not require a variance or
special use discretionary permit for
the creation of a second unit if the and
shall approve an application for a second unit that
complies with all of the following:
(A) The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented.
(B) The lot is zoned for single-family or multifamily use.
(C) The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling.
(D) The second unit is either attached to the existing dwelling
and located within the living area of the existing dwelling
or detached from the existing dwelling and located on the
same lot as the existing dwelling.
(E) The increased floor area of an attached second unit
shall not exceed 30 percent of the existing living area.
(F) The total area of floorspace for a detached second unit shall
not exceed 1,200 square feet.
(G) Requirements relating to height, setback, lot
coverage, architectural review, site plan review, fees, charges, and
other zoning requirements generally applicable to
residential construction in the zone the primary
dwelling in which the property is located.
(H)
(F) Local building code requirements which apply to detached
dwellings, as appropriate.
(I)
(G) Approval by the local health officer where a private
sewage disposal system is being used, if required.
(H) The increased floor area of an attached second unit is not
less than 550 square feet, unless requested by the owner.
(I) The total floor area of a detached second unit is not less
than 550 square feet, unless requested by the owner.
(2) No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the
basis for the denial of a building permit or a use permit under this
subdivision.
(3) This subdivision establishes the maximum standards that local
agencies shall use to evaluate proposed second units on lots zoned
for residential use which contain an existing single-family dwelling.
No additional standards, other than those provided in this
subdivision or subdivision (a), shall be utilized or imposed
, except that a local agency may require an applicant for a permit
issued pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant
.
(4) No changes in zoning ordinances or other ordinances or any
changes in the general plan shall be required to implement this
subdivision. Any local agency may amend its zoning ordinance or
general plan to incorporate the policies, procedures, or other
provisions applicable to the creation of second units if these
provisions are consistent with the limitations of this subdivision.
(5) A second unit which that
conforms to the requirements of this subdivision shall not be
considered to exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which it
is located, and shall be deemed to be a residential use
which that is consistent with the existing
general plan and zoning designations for the lot. The second units
shall not be considered in the application of any local ordinance,
policy, or program to limit residential growth.
(c) No local agency shall adopt an ordinance which
totally precludes Local agency ordinances,
regulations, or policies may not preclude or effectively preclude
second units within single-family or multifamily
all residentially zoned areas unless the
ordinance contains findings acknowledging
local agency finds, based on substantial evidence, that the
ordinance may limit housing opportunities of the region and
further contains findings finding that specific
adverse impacts on upon the public
health, safety, and welfare that would result from
allowing second units within single-family and multifamily zoned
areas justify adopting the ordinance.
(1) Local governments shall apply appropriate standards as defined
in Section 65913.1, and those standards shall be written, objective,
and adopted by the local government.
(2) Local agencies may not require any of the following:
(A) An owner's dependent or caregiver to occupy the primary
dwelling or second unit. A local agency may require an applicant for
a permit issued pursuant to this subdivision to be an owner-occupant
of either the primary or second unit. A local agency may not impose
a deed restriction requirement or other limitation that (i)
restricts the sale of the property to owner-occupants, or (ii)
restricts the occupancy of the primary or second unit by tenure or
any characteristic enumerated in Section 65008, it the applicant
determines that her or she will not occupy the primary or second
unit.
(B) The occupancy of either unit to be restricted by familial
status, age, or any other characteristic enumerated in Section 65008.
(3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a city, county, or city
and county from regulating or prohibiting transient use of second
units in which rent is charged and collected on a daily basis.
(d) A local agency may not establish minimum
and maximum unit size requirements for both
attached and detached second units . No minimum or
maximum size for a second unit, or size based upon a percentage of
the existing dwelling, shall be established by ordinance for either
attached or detached dwellings which does not permit at least an
efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local
development standards below 550 livable square feet
unless requested by the owner .
(e) A local agency may not establish minimum lot size
requirements for detached second units above twice the square footage
of the primary unit, unless requested by the owner.
(f) Parking requirements for second units shall not exceed
one parking space per unit or per bedroom. Additional
parking may be required provided that a finding is made that the
additional parking requirements are directly related to the use of
the second unit and are consistent with existing neighborhood
standards applicable to existing dwellings. Covered
parking may not be required. Local agencies may impose reasonable
standards to limit on-street parking. Off-street parking shall
be permitted in setback areas in locations determined by the local
agency or through tandem parking, unless specific findings are made
that parking in setback areas or tandem parking is not feasible based
upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety
conditions, or that it is not permitted anywhere else in the
jurisdiction.
(f)
(g) Fees charged for the construction of second units shall
be determined in accordance with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section
66000).
(g) This
(h) Except as provided in subdivision (b), this section does
not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less restrictive
requirements for the creation of second units.
(h)
(i) Local agencies shall submit a copy of the ordinance
or ordinances adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) or
(c) to the Department of Housing and Community Development
within 60 days after adoption.
(i)
(j) As used in this section, the following terms
mean apply :
(1) "Living area," means the interior habitable area of a
dwelling unit including basements and attics but does not include a
garage or any accessory structure.
(2) "Local agency" means a city, county, or city and
county, whether general law or chartered.
(3) For purposes of this section, "neighborhood" has the same
meaning as set forth in Section 65589.5.
(4)
(2) "Second unit" means an attached or a detached
residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living
facilities for one or more persons. It shall include permanent
provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation on
the same parcel as the single-family dwelling is situated. A second
unit also includes any of the following:
(A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the
Health and Safety Code.
(B) A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health
and Safety Code.
(j)
(k) Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede
or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the
California Coastal Act (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000)
of the Public Resources Code), except that the local government shall
not be required to hold public hearings for coastal development
permit applications for second units.
(l) A local agency may charge a reasonable fee to an applicant for
a permit pursuant to this section to reimburse the agency for costs
that it incurs as a result of the enactment in 2004 of amendments to
this section, including the costs of adopting or amending any
ordinance that provides for the creation of second units.
SEC. 3. Section 65917.1 is added to the Government Code, to
read:
65917.1. When a school district agrees to allow multifamily or a
single-family residential use on the school district's property and
agrees to adequate security features such as separate entrances that
segregate the two uses, the residential density permitted on the
parcel is the highest multifamily residential density permitted on
any parcel within 300 feet plus any density bonus mandated by Section
65915. If there is no multifamily residential use permitted within
300 feet, the permitted residential density on the parcel being
developed for primary or secondary education and residential uses is
the highest multifamily residential density allowable in the
community plan area.
SEC. 5.
SEC. 4. Notwithstanding Section 17610 of the Government
Code, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act
contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies
and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part
7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the
Government Code. If the statewide cost of the claim for
reimbursement does not exceed one million dollars ($1,000,000),
reimbursement shall be made from the State Mandates Claims Fund.
Return To Front Page
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com
|