[Save Sacramento Neighborhoods] Take action re this Thursday April 22 hearings on making Sacramento & CA more dense
no2rezone at list.omsoft.com
no2rezone at list.omsoft.com
Tue Apr 20 22:19:54 PDT 2021
For any questions or comments, please do not hit reply but email Save
Sacramento Neighborhoods at <mailto:No2Rezone at gmail.com>
No2Rezone at gmail.com. Thank you.
In this message from Save Sacramento Neighborhoods:
1. Sacramento is proposing more densification of existing neighborhoods with
its draft Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) ordinance to be heard by the city
<http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=21> Planning &
Design Commission this Thursday, April 22 at 5:30pm. (See below.)
2. Two State bills, SB 9 and SB 10, that adversely affect existing
neighborhoods will be heard by the <https://sgf.senate.ca.gov/> CA Senate
Governance and Finance Committee this Thursday, April 22 at 10:30am. Attend
the hearing if you can and tell Senator Pan (or
<http://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/> your state senator) to oppose both
bills. SB 9 will eliminate single family zoning and increase densities in
existing neighborhoods statewide. This would override any local government
zoning. (See below.)
3. The April 15 <https://youtu.be/ueeaLMe7fEY> Webinar on the Future of
Sacramento Neighborhoods can now be viewed on YouTube.
1. Sacramento Proposes More Densification with new ADU ordinance
Council person and the
d-Design> Sacramento Planning and Design Commission that you oppose the
proposed increase in Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) square footage and
reduced setbacks being proposed by City planners. Tell them that any
deviations from the zoning requirements must be heard by the Planning
Commission and City Council, not just decided administratively.
Tell them you want the city’s ordinance to have the same requirements as
State law governing ADUs. This means that:
- For detached ADUs, no more than 800 square feet can be exempted from lot
- For attached ADUs, the maximum floor area is the great of 50% of the
primary unit or 800 sq feet (1 or less bedrooms) or 1000 (2 or more
- The minimum side and rear yard setbacks must be 4 feet.
- One parking space per ADU.
● If you can, attend the hearing this Thursday, April 22, 2021, 5:30pm.
Once the meeting starts, you can
<http://sacramento.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=21> click here to
watch it. To give a verbal comment during the meeting, Call (916) 808-7213
and Dial 5 to Make a Comment on Item 5, which is: Ordinance Amending Various
Sections of the Sacramento City Code Related to Accessory Dwelling Units
(M21-001) (Noticed 04/09/21) File ID: 2021-00387
Council member and the Planning and Design Commissioner for your
Council District - Planning Commissioner names and emails
d-Design> are here.
Please cc <mailto:gnorman at cityofsacramento.org>
gnorman at cityofsacramento.org, <mailto:ecompton at cityofsacramento.org>
ecompton at cityofsacramento.org, and
<mailto:PublicComment at cityofSacramento.org>
PublicComment at cityofSacramento.org
Please bcc <mailto:no2rezone at gmail.com> no2rezone at gmail.com
Sacramento City Planners are proposing to:
- Increase the exemption from lot coverage requirements from 800 square feet
to 1200 square feet. (So more of the lot could be covered with a bigger
- Increase the maximum floor area for an attached ADU from the greater of
50% of the primary unit or 800/1000 sq ft to the greater of 50% or 1200
square feet. (So attached ADUs could be bigger.)
- Reduce the side yard setback from 4 feet to 0-3 feet. (So ADUs could
potentially be built on the rear or side property line if they are 60 feet
from the front property line.)
- Continue the parking exemption so that no onsite parking is required for
a_id=624298> Click to read the staff report.
Currently R-1 single family zoning has a maximum lot coverage of 40% or 2500
square feet, whichever is greater and minimum side yards of 5 feet.
The city staff reports states that this new ADU ordinance “cements the
current ordinance’s provisions for processing ADUs and confirms these
applications are subject to ministerial review without discretionary review
if the ADU meeting all objective requirements.” This means that city
employees review and approve ADUs without public input. If deviations are
required, these should be resolved by a public body, not just city
While State law has mandated that every residential parcel can have at least
two ADUs, these were intended to be small units. Increasing the footprint of
an ADU from 800 to 1200 sq feet is making these into 150% larger units. Many
houses in Sacramento’s existing neighborhoods are less than 1200 sq. feet,
so this proposal basically allows a detached second full unit, which could
be a 3-bedroom house with no parking (because the city’s current ordinance
exempts ADUs from parking requirements).
This proposal will reduce open space between existing houses and increase
density in existing neighborhoods. Reducing setbacks to 0 because the unit
is at the back of a lot ignores the impact that will have on adjacent lots
including reducing privacy and blocking light.
The city staff report clearly states one of the goals to “promote[s]
residential infill in the City’s existing neighborhoods”. Typically infill
is considered building on vacant lots but now the city is looking at all
single family lots as “underutilized” unless they have additional units.
This goal is really an attack on single family neighborhoods, delegitimizing
the choice and eventually removing the ability of living in a single family
detached house that has some yard space.
This proposed ADU ordinance would significantly densify all existing single
family neighborhoods, particularly those with smaller lots.
The City is using the same justification for increasing the size of ADUs
exempt from lot coverage as it is using to promote upzoning of single family
neighborhoods to allow for up to six units.
>From the staff report:
■ “Allowing two ADUs per parcel .. promotes residential infill in the
City’s existing neighborhoods. Most of the infill development occurs in the
older neighborhoods with larger parcels, helping to increase overall density
levels throughout the city.”
(Note that “larger” is not defined and many older neighborhoods have small
■“The City shall promote compact development patterns, mixed use, and
higher-development intensities that use land efficiently, reduce pollution
and automobile dependency and the expenditure of energy and other resources
and facilitate walking, bicycling, and transit use.”
(This move to make Sacramento a dense urban city is a radical departure from
why many people moved here and is not necessarily what people want.
Nor does packing people in guarantee that there will be less pollution, less
automobile use, or less use of energy or other resources. Pollution and
energy use might actually be increased by density particularly in Sacramento
were trees and vegetation are key in both reducing heat and air pollution.
And having moderate density neighborhoods clearly promotes walking and
biking as it is safer on less crowded streets. Public transit would likely
be used more if it were an efficient way to get around.)
■ “The City shall support an overall increase in average residential
densities thorough the city.”
(Again are Sacramentans really aware and supportive of this proposed
densification affecting existing neighborhoods?)
2. SB 9 and SB 10
Both bills were discussed at the April 15, webinar
<https://youtu.be/ueeaLMe7fEY> Emily Gabel-Luddy and Isaiah Madison from
Attend the CA Senate Governance and Finance Committee
<https://sgf.senate.ca.gov/> hearing this Thursday, April 22 at 10:30am if
Tell Senator Pan <https://sd06.senate.ca.gov/contact/email> to oppose both
bills. senator.pan at senate.ca.gov <mailto:senator.pan at senate.ca.gov> (916)
Excerpt from Livable California website
* SB 9 (Atkins) Revives SB 1120. Ends single-family zoning to allow 6 units
where 1 home is now. SB 9 is not a “duplex” bill. State law allows two
units already (AB 68), letting homeowners add a house in their yards, or
turn their homes into duplexes. SB 9 encourages investors to bid against
families, such as the
-be-a-pension-fund-11617544801> pension funds now gobbling up homes. Facing
withering criticism, SB 9’s author Toni Atkins, in a Sacramento Bee op-ed,
said her bill gives “homeowners the opportunity to reimagine their
property.” Imagine, perhaps. But few families can finance full-sized homes
in their yard. SB 9 is
disrupted-home-ownership-among-21m-californians/> a copycat of SB 1120, the
false “duplex” bill misreported by journalists in 2020. It is a
lack-and-latino-homeowners/> senseless gamble against 21M people living in
homes they own. Strongly Oppose.
-as-Amended-4_5_21-Final-4_9_21.pdf> Link to LC Position Letter
* SB 10 (Wiener) Copycat of the defeated SB 902 in 2020, SB 10 lets a simple
majority on a city council to override CEQA to allow 10-unit pricey
market-rate apartments almost anywhere - state Sen. Scott Wiener’s
obsession for the past three years. Perhaps even more outrageous, this
strongly anti-environment bill
-as-Amended-4_5_21-Final-4_9_21.pdf> allows a City Council to override
voter-approved land-protection initiatives including urban boundaries and
open space, an attack on our 108-year-old right to initiative. Strongly
rnia-Oppose-SB-10-final-3_11_21.pdf> Link to LC Position Letter
3. Click to view <https://youtu.be/ueeaLMe7fEY> the April 15 webinar on the
Future of Sacramento Neighborhoods.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the No2rezone