SB9 in Union City

Union City receives a grade of D for SB9 implementation. This grade signals that the city has not supported or facilitated SB9 development in any meaningful way. For investors, this means there is no track record of SB9 applications or approvals, and the local environment is not conducive to small-scale lot splits or duplex conversions under SB9. Investment strategies relying on SB9-driven density increases should proceed with caution or avoid the city altogether.

Union City’s SB9 ordinance is a standard East Bay compliance measure. It meets the minimum state requirements for lot splits and duplex conversions under SB9. The ordinance does not impose additional restrictive design standards, setbacks, or parking requirements beyond what state law mandates. There are no unique incentives or streamlined processes that encourage uptake. The city’s approach is procedural compliance without active promotion or facilitation.

Despite having a compliant ordinance, Union City has seen zero SB9 applications or approvals from 2022 through 2025. This flat trajectory indicates that the ordinance alone has not generated any development activity under SB9. There is no evidence of local policy initiatives, outreach, or incentives to stimulate interest among property owners or developers. The lack of applications suggests either low market demand for SB9 projects or barriers outside the ordinance, such as community opposition, zoning constraints, or administrative hurdles. No charter city litigation or legal challenges have affected SB9 implementation in Union City. The city’s SB9 compliance has remained static with no measurable progress or change over the four-year period.

There is no record of any enforcement action by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) against Union City related to SB9 compliance. The city has not been subject to letters, lawsuits, or other enforcement mechanisms.

Union City is not a viable market for SB9-driven investment at this time. The complete absence of applications or approvals over multiple years demonstrates that the city does not support or enable SB9 development in practice. Investors seeking to capitalize on SB9 should avoid Union City and focus on jurisdictions with proven SB9 activity or more proactive local policies. Without demand or facilitation, SB9 projects in Union City face significant uncertainty and risk. For the grading methodology, see the SB9 City Guide post.