Skip to main content

AgendaQuick™

View Agenda Item

Time Set   # 29.
Board of Supervisors
Meeting Date:
02/08/2022
Brief Title
Zoning Code Amendments to conform to SB9
From:
Taro Echiburu, Director, Department of Community Services
Staff Contact:
JD Trebec, Senior Planner, Department of Community Services, x8036
Supervisorial District Impact:

Subject

Hold a public hearing to consider a recommendation by the Planning Commission to adopt changes to the Yolo County Zoning Regulations to conform with Senate Bill (SB) 9. The proposed amendments to Title 8 Yolo County Code of Ordinances include the addition of non-discretionary urban lot splits in Chapter 1, Article 3 (Subdivision Requirements), and clean up and updating of housing and accessory structure standards in Chapter 2, Article 5 (Residential Zones). The Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. (No general fund impact) (Echiburu/Trebec)

Recommended Action

  1. Hold a public hearing, receive a staff presentation, accept public comment, and direct staff as to any further revisions to the proposed Zoning Code Amendment to conform with Senate Bill 9 (Attachment A);
     
  2. Determine that the Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Guidelines, and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption (Attachment B); and
     
  3. Adopt Ordinance amending Title 8 of the Yolo County Code (Attachment C).

Strategic Plan Goal(s)

Thriving Residents
Robust Economy

Reason for Recommended Action/Background

Since the comprehensive update of the County's Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 2014, the Board of Supervisors has routinely adopted minor amendments both to comply with new State laws and to keep the Zoning Ordinance current and relevant. The last set of zoning code amendments adopted by the Board in 2020 brought the Zoning Code into compliance with new laws regarding permitting and standards for Accessory Dwelling Units and a community-led initiative to limit solar utility development within Public Open Space (POS) and Parks and Recreation (P-R) Zones.

The proposed zoning amendments consist of a packet of minor changes to various sections of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations in Chapter 1, Article 3 (Subdivision Map Requirements), and Chapter 2, Article 5 (Residential Zones). The changes would bring the County Zoning Code into compliance with the recently approved Senate Bill 9 (SB 9), which requires non-discretionary approval of two homes on lots within single-family zones and parcel maps that create two equal area lots in urbanized areas and urban clusters. The changes to Article 5 would also simplify and clarify accessory structure standards within the residential zones.

The more substantial amendment to the Article 3 map requirements would include verbiage for 'urban lot splits' as required by SB 9. Urban lot splits allow an existing parcel zoned as either Low Density Residential (R-L) or Medium Density Residential (R-M) to be split into no more than two approximately equally-sized lots through a ministerial process.

This particular kind of lot split would require a number of conditions to be ministerially approved. Foremost, the parcel must be located in an area designated as an Urban Cluster or Urbanized Area as identified by the US Census Bureau, which takes into consideration population and/or housing density. There are currently only two areas in unincorporated Yolo County that are identified as such: the communities of Esparto and Madison are grouped together in the Esparto Urban Cluster and several residential subdivisions around the City of Davis fall within the Davis Urbanized Area.

Of the subdivisions around Davis, lots within El Macero currently have the highest opportunity to meet the conditions for an urban lot split because the community is served with both water and sewer services. New lots in areas without water and sewer services would still require a two-acre minimum parcel size to minimize health hazards and are therefore less likely to be divided under a ministerial approval. Additionally, SB 9 requires owner occupancy of one of the newly created lots for at least three years after the urban lot split is approved. The new ordinance requirements would be incorporated into Section 8-1.302 (Parcel Maps creating four or fewer lots) as follows:

(b)  A parcel map occurring within areas zoned R-L or R-M and defined by the United States Census Bureau as urbanized or an urban cluster shall be approved ministerially without a tentative parcel map being required if the following requirements are met:
  1. No more than two new parcels of approximately equal area (no less than 40% of the lots area) are created.
  2. The applicant for an urban lot split shall sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years from the date of the approval of the urban lot split unless the applicant is a “community land trust,” as defined in clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (11) of subdivision (a) of Section 402.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or is a “qualified nonprofit corporation” as described in Section 214.15 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
  3. The lots created from the parcel map shall: 
(i) have access to, provide access to, or adjoin County maintained public-of-way
(ii) provide easements required for the provision of public services and utilities.

Senate Bill 9 also requires non-discretionary approval of two homes on lots within single-family zones, i.e., the R-L and R-M Zones. Yolo County's Residential Zoning Regulations currently allow two single-family detached homes or two attached homes as a duplex by right in the R-L and R-M Zones. Therefore, the proposed changes to better comply with SB 9 are simply to clarify the types of multi-family land uses and accessory land uses within residential zones. The changes would clarify that single-family homes and duplexes are one use type, triplexes and fourplexes are a 'small multifamily' use type, and five or more attached units are a 'large multifamily' use type (see changes redlined in Attachment A).

Further changes are proposed in Section 8-2.504 (Tables of Residential Permit Requirements) to Table 8-2.504(b), which identifies permit requirements for accessory uses in the Residential Zones and currently lists specific types of accessory structures. This information duplicates information in the Accessory Structures Table (Table 8-2.506) found in Section 8-2.506 (Specific Use Requirements or Performance Standards). The changes would remove the list of accessory structures from Table 8-2.504(b) and revise Table 8-2.506 for clarity. Some minor clarification of definitions and standards are also included in this amendment.

The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed zoning code amendment at a special meeting on January 20, 2022 (Attachment D). The Commission considered whether unincorporated areas within the Davis Urbanized Area would qualify for urban lot splits if such areas received water and sewer services in the future. Staff clarified that an urban lot split could be applied to any lot which met the requirements and that was not limited by well and septic parcel size requirements. The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the zoning code amendments 5-0, with two members absent. Staff supports the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt the Ordinance and amend the Zoning Code to conform with SB 9, which would increase permit streamlining opportunities for higher density housing.

Collaborations (including Board advisory groups and external partner agencies)

Staff worked with County Counsel and De Novo Planning Group, Planning consultant retained for a more extensive Zoning Code update, to ensure the proposed amendments are in conformance with new state law requirements. Senate Bill 9 has been discussed at meetings with the Esparto Citizens Advisory Committee and with residents of El Macero that have asked for further information. It is worth noting that in El Macero, triplex and fourplex units are prohibited by their Planned Development overlay (PD-66) which remains in effect and that SB 9 pertains to duplexes only.

Fiscal Impact

Fiscal Impact (Expenditure)

Total cost of recommended action:
$    0
Amount budgeted for expenditure:
$    0
Additional expenditure authority needed:
$    0
On-going commitment (annual cost):
$    0

Source of Funds for this Expenditure

General Fund
$0

Attachments

Form Review

Inbox Reviewed By Date
Stephanie Cormier Stephanie Cormier 01/25/2022 01:26 PM
Stephanie Cormier Stephanie Cormier 01/26/2022 09:16 AM
County Counsel Hope Welton 01/26/2022 01:05 PM
Eric May Eric May 01/26/2022 01:16 PM
Form Started By:
JD Trebec
Started On:
01/24/2022 07:51 AM
Final Approval Date:
01/27/2022