Good morning. Welcome to today's Law and Legislation Committee. I now call this meeting to order

at 11.01 a.m. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll.

Council Member Dickinson.

Here.

Council member Plekibom is expected momentarily.

Council member Jennings.

Here.

And Chair Maple.

I am here.

All right.

So please join me in the land acknowledgement and pledge of allegiance.

So please rise if you are able for the opening acknowledgements in honor of Sacramento's indigenous people and tribal lands.

To the original people of this land, the Nisanan people, the Southern Maidu, Valley and Plains Miwok,

Pachman Wintun peoples and the people of the

Bolton Rancheria, Sacramento's only

federally recognized tribe. May we

acknowledge and honor the Native people who came before us

and still walk beside us today on

these ancestral lands by choosing to gather today

in the active practice of acknowledgement

and appreciation for Sacramento's Indigenous

people's history, contributions

and lives. Remain standing.

Salute and pledge.

I pledge allegiance to the

flag of the United States of America

and to the republic for which

it stands, one nation,

under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.

All right.

With that, we'll move on to our consent calendar.

Any items?

Do we have a consent calendar?

We have a law and legislation log.

My agenda.

So any comments or polling items for separate votes?

Move the consent calendar.

Second.

A motion and a second.

Seeing no members, are there any members of the public signed up to speak?

There are no speakers on the sign-up.

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed or abstained?

That passes unanimously.

We'll move on to our one and only item, discussion item.

Welcome.

Good morning, Chair and Committee members.

Appreciate you gathering for this item today.

My name is Kevin Collin.

I'm the City Zoning Administrator,

and today I'll be presenting an omnibus ordinance

to Title 17, our Planning and Development Code.

overview of my brief presentation I'll just get straight into it what does omnivus mean

you might think of it as miscellaneous it comes from Latin and it means to for by with and from

everything we've gathered a miscellaneous bag of amendments and put it into a single ordinance

for your consideration today and in terms of focus we have been before you and other city

bodies previously and presenting it in terms of three topics, state law consistency, streamlining

and administrative cleanup. The ordinance before you this morning, it concerns the first and the

third topics. In our staff report, we've provided an explanation of each amendment, why, what is the

topic covered. Where is the ordinance section where you can learn more about it? What are the

existing rules? What's the amendment we're proposing and what's the rationale for it?

In terms of state law consistency, the omnibus ordinance responds to bills from the 2024

legislative session as well as the 2025 budget trailer bill. I provided a summary here of each

AB and SB bill that is in the omnibus ordinance.

If you'd like more explanation about a particular bill,

I do have additional slides that I can forward to.

I would characterize these as state mandated changes

that we are seeking to align our local code

to ensure we have consistent standards

at the state level and locally,

as well as administrative procedures

that match with the state mandates.

The third topic in terms of an omnibus, for administrative cleanup there's basically two

changes.

First is to clarify at what point in time an appeal is considered filed.

The Org Title 17 currently doesn't specify fee payment as a requirement.

We'd like to have that clarification.

And secondly, the Preservation Commission has considered and has forwarded a recommendation

to the full council for objective standards

that apply to accessory dwelling units

in historic districts.

And we are not here to discuss the standards today,

but this ordinance we are including essentially

an enabling provision that should the council adopt

such standards recommended by the commission

that they would be applicable

and we would clarify their applicability

in relation to non-historic properties.

So that's a quick summary, high level of the omnibus ordinance.

We have been to the Planning and Design Commission and received their approval recommendation

to council.

We're here today for yours.

And then if we're successful, we'll proceed to city council for a pass for publication

and public hearing on the ordinance.

With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Well, thank you so much for the presentation.

Any questions from my colleagues?

I see Council Member Dickinson.

Thank you.

So, Kevin, thank you.

I want to first of all understand what you have just told us and what I thought I read

in the staff report.

So I thought what you were asking us to do this morning was recommend essentially the

changes to the city codes to align with the state legislation that you listed.

But just from your last comments, it sounded like there were, at least on the ADUs and

historic districts, you were talking about just not the content, but saying we're going

to send this on if we agree to the council to actually consider the content.

I mean, could you clarify that for me?

Maybe I didn't hear you correctly.

Absolutely. I'm sorry if that was unclear. We have a local accessory dwelling unit ordinance. We're here every year, sometimes more than once a year. The state changes the standards. They have done so again in the 2025 session. We will be back next year with another omnibus to make edits to align with the state government code.

What I'm describing for Title 17 for this particular change is at the end of all of our local ordinance standards

and at the state standards which are mirrored in our code,

we have a new line that addresses accessory dwelling units located in historic districts.

If they are located in a district with an adopted separate set of standards,

that those shall be applicable rather than the local ADU standards.

Okay, I follow that.

Okay.

But now in the staff report, it describes what I thought was your proposal to conform to SB 1211.

Yeah, so that's a different, that's a state law.

So what I'm describing for-

I'm familiar with that.

Okay.

Yeah, the historic district ADU standards are not related to that bill.

They are separate.

They are under our local.

We have discretion under state law to adopt local standards for ADU,

so that's where that would be applicable.

So these are two separate things is what you're saying.

Yeah.

Okay, that's where I got the confusion.

So to be clear, you are asking us today to act on the conformity of our local ordinances to the state legislation,

but you're also asking whether we want to consider these objective standards for ADUs in historic districts to be developed.

Is that right?

Think of it as efficiency in the legislative process.

Rather than come back for another hearing, we are asking for an enabling provision.

So should the council adopt those standards?

Not today, but separately.

The Preservation Commission has forwarded that recommendation.

Should those be adopted, that they will be applicable.

Okay.

Okay, but you're also asking to have us bless amending the city ordinance to conform, in this case, to SB 1211 as well.

Is that right?

That's right.

Okay.

Okay.

I'm still not exactly clear on what you're doing.

But leaving that behind, with respect to the change

that you're suggesting or recommending

to conform to SB 1211,

you have in the staff report,

amendment summary update the number of ADUs

allowed at multifamily developments

to be consistent with SB 1211.

Can you give us an example of the application of that?

Yeah, absolutely.

So this bill, Senate Bill 1211, applies to what a state HCD,

Housing Community Development Department,

what we refer to in the Community Development Department

as state ADUs.

So these are a separate category that are distinct

from our local ADU standards.

So under state ADUs, what the legislature has done

applies to multifamily developments.

So we're talking three or more units in a building

and it's increased the number of ADUs

that are allowed at those particular properties.

So it decreases from two to eight,

but not, and there's a formula, but not more.

If there were fewer than eight on the lot,

then it would have to match the maximum of existing units.

Okay, but yeah, I mean, I read that,

but I'm trying to visualize this.

So if I build an eight unit multifamily building,

I can have eight ADUs?

That would be the rule under state law.

And if I build a 150 unit multifamily building,

I can have eight ADUs?

I mean, is that-

That's the formula.

Is that math of it?

Yes.

Okay, I see.

And then, but within that,

within that, let's get my eight unit building,

and I say I want eight ADUs too.

We still can apply objective standards

to that request that might reduce the number of ADUs

you could actually get on the piece of property.

Is that true or not true?

I would say generally no.

When you have a state ADU.

No, that's not true.

Not true.

Okay.

Yeah, when you have a state ADU,

we are strictly limited to the standards

that are within the government code.

They are sparse.

They're very few.

Right.

So think of it as a minimum, a setback.

Right.

A side yard setback.

Right.

There are very few standards that apply.

So does that answer your question, Hadquit?

Yes, I think it does.

I'm assuming that the provision about,

if there's a finding of fact of a health safety

or a related issue, whatever that language is,

it is in a lot of these state bills regarding this subject,

that would still apply.

That's available.

Is that true?

I believe it is.

However, the bar is quite high,

as we discussed previously.

Understood.

Yeah.

Okay.

So just as, again, staying with SB 12, 1211,

and I appreciate the indulgence of the chair on this.

Does it have setbacks, height requirements,

or limitations, things of that kind in it?

For ADUs at multifamily properties,

there is, I believe, a side yard setback.

You get number of units.

I'd have to review the code.

I think the height of the district may apply.

Yeah.

In some instances, there is no floor area limitation.

Sometimes there is, yes.

So we'd have to examine the statute and give you a precise answer.

Okay.

I mean, again, I'm trying to visualize this in real life, what this could add up to.

So, I mean, we're thinking about as many as 16 units on a piece of property,

and I'm not quite sure how large that piece of property would need to be.

And with what I'm thinking about, I guess you couldn't combine SB9 and this to get that many units, right?

Because with SB9, it's still a smaller number of units it applies to.

So have you, let me just ask this,

have you seen anything that approaches

this kind of application of say eight units plus eight ADUs?

It's less frequent, much less frequent

than we see with single unit dwelling properties.

So R1 zoned properties to see,

it's been in the government code for a while

to allow the conversion of existing rooms

within apartment buildings that are not used for dwelling,

like a storage closet or a garage.

That conversion has been provided for.

The legislature added the ability for detached ADUs,

and now the number is going up.

Many of these are developed properties.

It's less frequent.

I don't have an exact number, but it's...

But in my hypothetical, you'd have to be in a multifamily zone.

With my hypothetical of a little eight unit multifamily building plus ADUs,

I'd have to be in a multifamily zone to do that, right?

Many of our zones do allow for multifamily.

Yes, you'd have to be in that zone to pursue this track under SB 2011, or 1211, excuse me.

Yeah, okay.

Okay.

Can you, or have you developed a map

that would show us where something of this nature

could exist?

Not to date.

We could certainly could look at that with you

if you'd like some additional information

outside of today's hearing.

We do in an annual housing progress report

for compliance purposes under our housing element,

we do present, it's very popular to see

the skateboard ramp of ADUs that just keeps going up.

So we have data in terms of numbers and location.

They're, yeah, they're kind of all over the city,

but we'd be happy to give you some more info on that.

Yeah, and I'll just say, I mean,

generally speaking, I think this is a good thing.

You know, the ability to develop housing

and less expensively is a good thing.

we are certainly in need of a lot more housing,

especially housing that people can afford.

We also run in obviously to some sensitivities

when we start seeing some of these projects come along.

And so I'm just curious about what this would permit

in terms of the balance that we're all trying to strike

to have a greater supply of housing,

but also maintain the desirability of neighborhoods as well.

So I don't know how difficult it would be to produce a map

if it's not too difficult.

It'd be great to see something that depicted this

just so we could visualize it a little bit better.

If it's a difficult exercise, then I'm not gonna ask you

to undertake a whole lot of effort to do it.

But I certainly would think it would be helpful

to see what some of this looks like

if you will.

Sure.

Okay.

Thanks, Chair.

Thanks, Kevin.

That's a good line of questioning.

Thank you.

Councilman Jennings.

Thank you very much.

I wrote three words on this sheet of paper during your presentation and during the questioning

that's been going on.

First word was a timeline.

I'll take that one first.

You mentioned the next step after, if you get approval from this body, next step would

be to go to the City Council.

So what's the timeline that that needs to happen?

Yeah, so the schedule I have is December 9.

We would have a pass for publication on the council agenda.

And then the next meeting would be, I believe it's January 13, if I remember correctly,

for the public hearing at council.

And the ordinance, if passed, would be effective 30 days after.

So that then brings me to the next word I had on here is education to my colleagues

and also to the constituents that this potentially could impact positively and negatively.

Is there any plans for that?

There, yeah, so there's, we're in concert with what we're presenting today.

Some of these laws are already in effect.

From the budget trailer bill, for example, there's a fundamental change to how we process applications under the Permit Streamlining Act.

And we are working on updating our application forms and do anticipate giving some information out to the public to make them aware of what those changes are, how it relates to the process.

So we will be providing some announcements subsequently.

On the education process.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Yes, yes.

Okay.

Yeah, we will provide an announcement of what those changes are so that our customers are aware of any changes in our process.

And so then the last word I had was impact,

because when you make change, it has an impact on people.

And are we prepared to speak to them about the impact that this may have,

that they may feel that it has?

Is there a particular bill that you think might have an impact?

I'm not assuming that they know as much as we know.

So I think we would have to educate them on the whole process.

of the bill passing and the impact it has to them

and their families.

Thank you for clarifying.

In terms of the changes that are presented in this ordinance,

I don't see a fundamental shift in how we do business

or standards that are affected by the state legislature

that I would characterize as a radical departure

or a significant departure from what our current

local process and or rules are.

So I wasn't anticipating a need to provide,

to anticipate an impact that might be perceived as adverse or unwelcome.

So there is my education as well.

It's because I'm anticipating there is going to be some impact or perceived impact

that they perceive it to be the case because there is,

we're making changes here at this body, good or bad,

however you look at it.

But that's why I'm saying the education process that says

it doesn't impact you in any kind of a negative way.

Everything, just, I'll repeat what you said.

Without repeating what you said.

Okay.

Yeah, we're not anticipating an impact from,

These are state mandated requirements

that we must adhere to

and every other city and county in the state must.

We'll provide education

as it pertains to our review process.

Like I mentioned,

we do have fundamental changes to the review steps

that we will modify our forms to conform to

and we will educate the public through

when that process is concluded here very shortly.

Okay.

All right, thank you, Council Member.

And thank you very much for the presentation

I know people often call that building over there the bill factory because there's always new rules that are coming down that we have to then tweak and change and update.

So I know that's an ongoing iterative process always for all of us in local government.

I guess one of the more broadly question I have, because you and I had conversations when the Yes in God's Backyard was implemented

and allowing churches to build more affordable housing and make it streamlined.

but one of the things that you had mentioned was you know that it may not

actually result in a lot of units per se because of some of the other

requirements that are on and including that it be affordable and all the other

other things that make it more challenging for folks to do are you

anticipating any of these rule changes will lead to a drastic difference in the

number of ADUs that will be built from today or is it just kind of more minor

updates yeah I don't anticipate a radical change perhaps a modest increase

but if we look at the acreage of our city,

over three quarters is zoned for single unit developments.

The balance is some industrial land,

but we also have some zoned for multifamily development.

So I think you might see a modest number,

which I characterize in terms of past permit activity.

The multifamily properties are just not coming up as frequently.

Yeah, I don't see any significant change

to what we see happening in permit activity.

Okay. Yeah, but you also made a point that if you look over time, I think it's the last 10 years or so with ADU activity.

We were, Council Member Jennings and I were in SACOG recently and we had a presentation about housing.

And we saw that line, that trend line just go up as it relates to ADUs.

And so I think probably all in all, when you add on all of these different law changes over time, it's resulted.

And plus, you know, education awareness, people understanding that they can do it.

some of the financing mechanisms getting just a little bit easier to do.

Seems like people are starting to catch on and hopefully we'll see more

because I personally would like to see more. I think this is an option that works.

It provides a lot of flexibility for people whether it's building housing in their communities

that folks can use or if you have your in-laws and you're

raising young children or any number of options, people who are trying to live in multi-generational

environments, it's been a great option. Well, thank you so much.

Madam Clark, do we have any public comment on this item?

Oh, additional.

Sorry.

Council Member Dickinson.

Well, thank you.

Just the both comments, Chair, you made and Council Member Jennings made me think of when the planning department did an ADU workshop or open house at Grant High School.

I guess that was last year.

It drew several hundred people.

and to the education point, I thought it was a great event,

and I'd love to see it replicated elsewhere around the city

because I do think it's a vehicle for exactly what you're talking about,

which is letting people know what is available, what's possible,

and what the limitations are and to some extent what the costs are.

Those can certainly be a barrier for some,

But that education element, I think, was really enhanced by that kind of approach.

And I know it takes staff time and it takes resources.

You can't do them every week, but I think it's a very good vehicle.

Agreed.

Any response?

Okay.

With that, we have no public comment on this item.

I'm happy to move this forward to the council.

And we have a second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed or abstain?

That passes unanimously.

With that do we have any public comment for matters not on the agenda?

I have no public comments.

Any council comments, questions, anything from my colleagues?

Seeing none, with that we are adjourned at 11.26am.

Thank you.

you