> This bill, among other things, would require a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone to be considered ministerially, without discretionary review or hearing, if the proposed housing development meets certain requirements, including, but not limited to, that the proposed housing development would not require demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income, that the proposed housing development does not allow for the demolition of more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls, except as provided, and that the development is not located within a historic district, is not included on the State Historic Resources Inventory, or is not within a site that is legally designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district.
Source: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duplex_(building)
They were popular in many cities in the 70s as starter homes. The idea was that you'd buy the whole thing, then rent out one half to help offset your mortgage.
Obviously this lot-splitting may not work in areas like Los Altos where each single family lot by city law is required to be 10k sqft or larger (unsure how local laws will interact with SB9).
But question @koolba asks is still valid - can you recursively split large lots into many smaller lots?
But that's not the same. Ending RH-1 would mean something like "no more RH-1 buildings will be permitted, you must build at least two". Instead, it's "if you have an RH-1 lot, you are allowed to build up to two units".
So I'd say it makes RH-1 also mean RH-2, but doesn't "end" it in the sense most people interpret. (E.g., In San Francisco, you would be unlikely to get planning approval to build a single-family home on an RH-2 zoned lot, because it should have been used for two units).
SB 9 is paradigm shifting: every lot in California that’s single family zoned can a) be split into two lots of equal size AND/OR b) each resulting lot can now have up to 2 units AND c) if the lot is compliant with all other criteria, each lot is still able to have an ADU built in addition to the extra unit, per statewide ADU law passed two years ago.
So you can potentially turn a single lot into 6 units. Or 3 without splitting the lot. All of this is by-right, too. Design approval and local councils can’t stop it, and I believe they must be approved within 90 days, too.
SB 9 indeed allows duplexes on all single-family parcels, as well as lot splits if one of the new homes will be owner-occupied, and neither lot would be less than 40% of the original lot's area.
Submitters: please don't rewrite titles to make them more misleading. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Now, you are effectively not allowed to do that. So the permitting process to build a duplex is as straightforward as the permitting process to build a SFH.
Someone else could explain better but I'm also fairly sure many of the new rules here (such as exempting CEQA) also apply to SFH. They just leave the current rules untouched for commercial/large-scale residential.
Under RHNA and the HAA, if cities fail to zone for their share of housing, many projects will be approved automatically and the city loses its discretionary review authority.
> SB 10 by Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) creates a voluntary process for local governments to access a streamlined zoning process for new multi-unit housing near transit or in urban infill areas, with up to 10 units per parcel. The legislation simplifies the CEQA requirements for upzoning, giving local leaders another tool to voluntarily increase density and provide affordable rental opportunities to more Californians.