CC 12-07-2021 Item No. 31 SB9 Interim Ordinance_Written CommunicationsCC 12-07-21
#31
Interim Ordinance
to implement
Senate Bill 9
Written Comments
350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
www.svathome.org • info@siliconvalleyathome.org
TRANSMITTED VIA EMAIL
December 7th, 2021
Mayor Paul and Councilmembers
City Hall
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Item 31 — Interim Ordinance to Implement Senate Bill 9
Honorable Mayor Paul, Vice Mayor Chao, and Councilmembers Moore, Wei, and Willey:
SV@Home advocates for increased housing supply and housing affordability throughout
Santa Clara County. We are reaching out to local cities to share information and general
recommendations about a new law, SB-9, which you are considering on tonight’s agenda.
This letter does not constitute legal advice.
About SB-9
We see SB-9 in the context of the several legislative changes and funding allocations passed
recently to comprehensively address our housing crisis. These bills preserve existing homes,
produce new homes (this is where SB-9 fits in), protect renters, and increase funding for
affordable homes and homeless homes and social services, including for those members of
our community who are experiencing homelessness. SB-9 is only one piece of the puzzle.
When the Legislature first passed laws making it easier for homeowners to create Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs), there was local backlash in many communities. However, in just a
few years, most opponents realized ADUs did not cause harm and actually created
opportunities for homeowners. Following the experience with ADUs, earlier this year the
California Legislature and governor passed and signed SB-9, which empowers homeowners
to split their lot into two parcels, or to turn their home into a duplex, or both. SB-9 was
supported by every legislator representing Santa Clara County.
Opportunities for Cities
Now that SB-9 is about to take effect, we encourage cities to embrace the new
opportunities provided by the law for the following reasons:
1. California adopted SB-9 based on evidence and expert economic analysis that allowing
smaller homes through lot-splits and duplexes will make more homes available to more
people at relatively more attainable prices when compared to typical new or rebuilt houses
on existing lots.
2. New options for lot-splits and duplexes provide new options for homeowners
(especially for those who are “house-rich,” with limited income but wealth in their property)
including, (a) generating additional income from a new rental unit, (b) downsizing and
selling a portion of their property while continuing to live on the remaining portion; and/or
(c) reconfiguring their property to better suit their family’s needs.
3. Communities across California have taken steps to study and grapple with historical
and ongoing housing segregation perpetuated by exclusionary zoning. While allowing
Board of Directors
Kevin Zwick, Chair
United Way Bar Area
Gina Dalma, Vice Chair
Silicon Valley Community
Foundation
Candice Gonzalez, Secretary
Sand Hill Property Company
Andrea Osgood, Treasurer
Eden Housing
Shiloh Ballard
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
Bob Brownstein
Working Partnerships USA
Amie Fishman
Non-Profit Housing
Association of Northern CA
Ron Gonzales
Hispanic Foundation
of Silicon Valley
Javier Gonzalez
Google
Poncho Guevara
Sacred Heart Community
Service
Janice Jensen
Habitat for Humanity
East Bay/Silicon Valley
Janikke Klem
Jan LIndenthal
MidPen Housing
Jennifer Loving
Destination: Home
Mary Murtagh
EAH Housing
Chris Neale
The Core Companies
Kelly Snider
Kelly Snider Consulting
Staff
Regina Celestin Williams
Executive Director
From:Jennifer Griffin
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk
Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com
Subject:Fw: SB 9 Problems and SB 10 Problems
Date:Tuesday, December 7, 2021 2:46:52 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
FYI. Please add to the Public Record. Thank you.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
To: "citycouncil@cupertino.org" <citycouncil@cupertino.org>
Cc: grenna5000@yahoo.com <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021, 02:45:10 PM PST
Subject: SB 9 Problems and SB 10 Problems
Dear City Council:
I am very concerned about the havoc SB 9 is going to create in our neighborhoods.
This bill along with its bad cousin got dumped on California starting on January 1
with no input from residents. They should declare a moratorium on SB 9 and
SB 10 because neither bill has been thought out rationally and they will create
reckless building and pandemonium in neighborhoods!
Any lot less than 60 feet across is going to have flag lots! You have got to be
kidding. I understand that the city has been pushed to try to defend rational
thinking in the wake of the senseless and cluelessness of SB 9 and SB 10, but
a moratorium must be announced immediately if suddenly 20 percent of the
city is going to become flag lots. This is going to create massive safety
problems and planning bedlam.
No one in their right mind should have even written these bills or let alone
passed them in the first place. This is an example of how the California
public is being played by Sacramento. The public was prevented from
saying anything about SB 9 and SB 10 when they were passed in secret?
They didn't want to hear the truth from thr public? They did not respect us
enough to listen to us? They treated us like kindergarteners and just passed
these two insipid laws? Well, now they are going to get an earful and I sure
hope a lot of these people involved in passing these two "dense" housing bills
will be removed from office or voted out of office.
This is why there is so much the effort for the Our Neighbors Voice Initiative to be passed in
California. Sacramento does not have a clue about local control. They already
suppressed the public's voice. Lets make sure local control goes back
to where it belongs: the public, neighborhoods and our cities.
SB 9 and SB 10 need to be halted immediately.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110
408.780.8411 • www.svathome.org • info@siliconvalleyathome.org
duplexes and lot-splits by homeowners will not redress these systemic inequities immediately, encouraging
production of more housing opportunities — accessible to more people, in neighborhoods throughout the city
— will be a step in the right direction.
In crafting SB-9, the Legislature ensured that local governments would have an opportunity to develop objective
design guidelines which enhance the feasibility and value of new duplexes and lot-splits while supporting
development that reflects the local context of each city. If implemented thoughtfully, opportunities for lot-splits
and duplexes can help current and future residents alike without harming neighborhoods.
We encourage Cupertino to reject efforts to undermine the Legislature’s intent, or to violate the legal
parameters of SB-9 or other state laws. We are concerned by attempts to undermine SB-9, which may overstep
local authority and potentially create risk of litigation. Further, as we have seen with initial legislation on ADUs,
bad faith attempts to undermine the spirit and intent of SB-9 by finding and exploiting loopholes will likely be
overturned by the Legislature in future legislation. In short, efforts to purposely undermine SB-9 run the risk of
being time-consuming, ineffectual, and potentially damaging to the City and its residents.
Next Steps
SB-9 will take effect on January 1st, and thoughtful local implementation can make it more effective,
incorporate local priorities, enhance the benefits to the community, and smooth the application process for
homeowners. Here are some points to consider:
• Cities may pass objective standards that do not violate SB-9 or other state laws.
• Cities should not set new, stricter standards for SB-9 than would apply to developing a house, in areas such
as FAR, lot-coverage, height, etc. It shouldn’t be harder to build a duplex or to split a lot than it is to tear
down an existing house and replace it with a single large house.
• Cities may not impose any objective standards that violate the by-right provisions of SB-9, which require
ministerial approval of redevelopment that conforms with objective design standards.
• Cities should not reduce zoned capacity, nor unreasonably constrain development so as to make it
infeasible.
We appreciate your time and consideration. Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions about this
new law and its implications. We welcome further discussion and opportunities for ongoing engagement.
Sincerely,
SV@Home
Sincerely,
Mathew Reed
Policy Director