It's odd that SB9 allows (mandates) no more than 4ft setback for an entire housing unit, but setbacks for a shed or ADU can be much larger, 10-15ft under current CIty regulations (which are admittedly not easy to descipher). Would encouraging an ADU not limit neighbor impact, and still help with housing? If so, then allowing the 4ft setback for a lower shed or ADU would make sense.

Anyone can build a detached ADU under an SB9 application. The 2nd unit for SB9 doesn't have to be an entire house of any particular size. So that's a way people will be getting around any setback they don't like for an ADU they want to build. But I have seen existing ADU's that have been built with more like a 5 foot setback from the neighbor, but 10-15 feet from the street for a corner lot. So the ADU rules are logical because setting that particular ADU right on the street would have been bad for the use of the ADU, being that that back yard had plenty of room for the ADU at the rear ( whicih was the side border for the neighbor's lot).

Please also put incentives in for new homes to not shade neighbors who have pre-existing solar panels installed. Also look at the parking impact. The monster house that's being put up in the Waverly Park area near Cuesta/Grant is so wrong on so many levels. It's shocking that it was ever approved! The hideous monstrosity leers over the corner offering no privacy, casts shade on neighbors solar panels, has an accessory dwelling unit plus monster house with only a single car garage. We need to have wanna get rich quick contractors be required to get input from neighbors to minimize the impact of what they are doing and also make is sustainable and affordable. Better still get rid of SB9.