CityofGoletaSource: City of Goleta
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021, at 5:30 P.M., the Goleta City Council will conduct a virtual public hearing to consider adoption of Urgency and Non-Urgency Ordinances related to implementation of Senate Bill 9 of 2021 (SB 9). The Planning Commission will consider the below-described ordinances on December 13, 2021. Any recommendations from the Planning Commission will be provided to City Council.
SB 9 requires cities to both (a) allow a single-family lot to be split, roughly into halves and (b) allow up to two single-family dwellings to be developed on each single-family residential lot.
The proposed ordinances would amend Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations), Title 16 (Subdivisions), and Title 17 (Zoning) of the Goleta Municipal Code (GMC) to ensure the City’s regulations comply with SB 9 and to maintain City authority to regulate SB 9 projects where possible. Proposed amendments to the GMC include the following:
- An amendment to Title 5 to include a cross-reference prohibition of Short-Term Vacation Rental licenses for any site where an SB 9 project was approved under Title 16 or Title 17.
- New standards and procedures in Title 16 for urban lot splits in the Single-Family Residential (RS) zone district to subdivide existing residential lots in two. Consistent with SB 9, urban lot splits will be processed ministerially if certain objective standards are met.
- New standards and procedures in Title 17 to process applications for up to two principal dwelling units on lots in the RS zone district. This could be an additional unit on an existing lot that already has a principal dwelling or up to two new dwelling units on a newly created lot through an urban lot split described above. Consistent with SB 9, these new residential dwelling units will be processed ministerially if certain objective standards are met.
View the Notice here. The agenda and staff report for the hearing will also be posted on the City website at www.CityofGoleta.org/GoletaMeetings prior to the meeting date.
Information on how to participate in the public hearing will be included on the City Council agenda.
For further information on the project, contact Anne Wells, Advance Planning Manager, at (805) 961-7557 or awells@cityofgoleta.org. For inquiries in Spanish, please contact Marcos Martinez at (805) 562-5500 or mmartinez@cityofgoleta.org.
|
SB 9 will only apply to a limited number of properties because it requires the property being split to be owner occupied. In addition, most smaller single family lots can’t be split in two without splitting or demolishing the existing residence, an expensive process. While it’s technically possible to buy any parcel zoned for residential use in Goleta or Santa Barbara, split the lot, and build a duplex on each newly created lot, I suspect we will only see a limited number of these splits take place. However, lots of folks are terrified of the idea of neighbors splitting lots and building rental units. I suspect some kind of ballot initiative will be passed soon that puts a stop to this.
That website is very misleading. It indicates that corporate developers will use SB9 to transform neighborhoods. However, this is not possible because SB9 was written to prevent big developers from using it. Only homeowners who sign an affidavit to live in one of the resulting housing units for 3 years can use sb9 to split a lot. I’m not really a supporter of sb9, but this website is very misleading. In any case, I don’t think the truth/details really matter in this situation and I expect this initiative will pass. Homeowners see sb9 as a threat, and they will vote to stop it. Local control in Santa Barbara will mean no more ADUs, no more lot splits, and very limited development.
Chip- It’s amusing you think a property owner signing an affidavit means anything. There will be no enforcement of any requirements. As an example check out all the “legal non conforming” cannabis growers who signed affidavits that they had been growing medical marijuana on a specific property prior to 2015. These were easy to verify by multiple means, yet the county took no action and simply believed the affidavits. 90% were in violation and the county looked the other way.
SB9 will be no different. Developers already utilize every loophole and weakness they can find. There are very few areas in town where SB9 would be appropriate. A majority of Californians were against it, 250 cities wrote the Governor in opposition to SB9 &10. Our own representatives were too chicken to even cast a vote due to the unpopularity of SB9.
Chip: Who drove SB9? CA Building Industry Association (developers), CA Realtors, and tech companies who fronted YIMBY (Yes in my backyard – to shout down NIMBYs and housing justice advocates).
It was ABSOLUTELY by and for developers. The 3 year affidavit that you intend to live there before developing it? Numerous city attorneys and county attorneys have already realized they have no ability to prosecute that…it was window dressing to sell the bill.
Local growth is fueled by city employee unions because local growth translates as higher paychecks for themselves. If you don’t have a way to increase local tax revenues you cannot keep handing out more raises, benefits and perks to city employees. The simplest explanation is always the right one. Follow the money and who benefits most from increased growth?. Not the residents and not even the developers who only get one bite out of the pie. The ongoing benefit of growth and increase tax revenues is always the city employees.