BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1690
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ed Chau, Chair
AB 1690 (Gordon) - As Introduced: February 13, 2014
SUBJECT : Local Planning: Housing Elements.
SUMMARY : Deletes the requirement that a local government,
when it fails to identify adequate sites in its housing element
and must adopt a rezoning program, rezone at least 50% of its
affordable housing sites on land designated for residential use
and for which nonresidential uses or mixed-uses are not
permitted. This bill would instead require the program to
accommodate at least 50% of the affordable housing need on sites
designated for residential use or mixed-uses.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires every city and county to prepare and adopt a general
plan containing seven mandatory elements, including a housing
element. (Government Code Sections 65300 and 65302)
2)Requires a jurisdiction's housing element to identify and
analyze existing and projected housing needs, identify
adequate sites with appropriate zoning to meet the housing
needs of all income segments of the community, and ensure that
regulatory systems provide opportunities for, and do not
unduly constrain, housing development. (Government Code
Section 65583)
3)Requires cities and counties located within the territory of a
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) to revise their
housing elements every eight years following the adoption of
every other regional transportation plan. Cities and counties
in rural non-MPO regions must revise their housing elements
every five years. (Government Code 65588)
4)Requires, prior to each housing element revision, that each
council of governments (COG), in conjunction with the
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), prepare
a RHNA and allocate to each jurisdiction in the region its
fair share of the housing need for all income categories.
Where a COG does not exist, HCD determines the local share of
the region's housing need. (Government Code Sections
AB 1690
Page 2
65584-65584.09)
5)Divides the RHNA into the following income categories:
a) Very low-income (50% or lower of area median income);
b) Low-income (80% or lower of area median income);
c) Moderate-income (between 80% and 120% of area median
income); and
d) Above moderate-income (exceeding 120% area median
income).
(Government Code Section 65584)
6)Requires housing elements to include an inventory of land
suitable for residential development that identifies enough
sites that can be developed for housing within the planning
period to accommodate the jurisdiction's entire share of the
RHNA. (Government Code Sections 65583 and 65583.2)
7)Requires that, where the inventory of sites does not identify
adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all
household income levels, rezoning of those sites, including
adoption of minimum density and development standards, is
required by a specified deadline. (Government Code Section
65583)
8)Requires the rezoning program to accommodate 100 % of the need
for housing for very low- and low-income households for which
site capacity has not been identified in the inventory of
sites. These sites must:
a) Be zoned to permit owner-occupied and rental
multifamily residential use by-right during the planning
period;
b) Be zoned with minimum density and development
standards that permit between 16 and 20 units per acre,
depending on the jurisdiction; and
c) Accommodate at least 50% of the very low- and
low-income housing need on sites designated for
residential use and for which nonresidential uses or
AB 1690
Page 3
mixed-uses are not permitted.
(Government Code Section 65583.2)
FISCAL EFFECT : None.
COMMENTS :
Adequate Sites:
Every local government is required to prepare a housing element
as part of its general plan. The housing element process starts
when HCD determines the number of new housing units a region is
projected to need at all income levels (very low-, low-,
moderate-, and above-moderate income) over the course of the
next housing element planning period to accommodate population
growth and overcome existing deficiencies in the housing supply.
This number is known as the regional housing needs assessment
(RHNA). The COG for the region, or HCD for areas with no COG,
then assigns a share of the RHNA number to every city and county
in the region based on a variety of factors.
In preparing its housing element, a city or county must show how
it plans to accommodate its share of the RHNA. The housing
element must include an inventory of sites already zoned for
housing. When a local government's housing element does not
identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of
all household income levels, it must rezone those sites by a
specific deadline during the planning period. This rezoning
program has to accommodate 100% of the RHNA need for very low-
and low-income households, for which site capacity has not been
identified, on sites that are zoned to permit owner occupied and
rental multifamily use by-right during the planning period.
These zones must allow for, depending on the jurisdiction,
between 16 and 20 units per acre. At least 50% of the very low-
and low-income housing need must be accommodated on sites
designated for residential use and for which nonresidential uses
or mixed-uses are not permitted.
Purpose of the Bill :
According to the author, encouraging mixed-use development is
critical to California's smart growth goals. As local
governments, particularly built-out urban communities, add more
zoning designations and overlays, restrictive segregation of use
AB 1690
Page 4
is increasingly rare. Integrating commercial uses into a
low-income and very low-income project can also provide benefits
from a development perspective. In the author's view, a
commercial component can also make a project more attractive to
a community, like a food desert, starved for services. The most
direct benefit of accommodating more low-income and very-low
income residents in mixed-use projects is that they are less
likely to be isolated from jobs and services. The author
contends that AB 1690 will allow local cities and counties the
option of planning for growth in a way that better integrates
new low- and very low-income housing into communities.
Staff Comments:
AB 1690 will impact reforms to housing element law that came out
of the Housing Element Working Group (HEWG), which convened in
2003. One of the bills that implemented the reform, AB 2348
(Mullin), amended housing element law by clarifying the land
inventory requirements to provide local governments more
certainty about the statutory requirements. Amongst other
things, AB 2348 provided clarity about the relationship between
the land inventory and adequate sites program. The bill
clarified that a rezoning program to provide adequate sites is
only needed when the inventory does not identify adequate sites
already appropriately zoned to accommodate the RHNA.
AB 1690 relates to the scenario where a local government has not
identified adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA which, in the
most recent housing element cycle, is comprised of about 25% of
local governments statewide. As noted above, if a local
government fails to identify adequate sites, then it must adopt
a rezoning program to accommodate its RHNA share, and at least
50% of the very low- and low-income RHNA must be accommodated on
sites designated for residential use and for which
nonresidential uses or mixed-uses are not permitted. These
sites must also be zoned to permit owner-occupied and rental
multifamily residential use by-right.
The idea behind these existing requirements was likely to
encourage the development of affordable housing in areas that
did not identify adequate sites for it to begin with. Requiring
that affordable housing sites must allow residential uses
by-right certainly removes impediments to developing affordable
housing. Affordable housing developers have indicated that,
while it is possible to develop mixed-use projects, there tends
AB 1690
Page 5
to be more impediments to this type of development. For
example, once sites are zoned as mixed use, the price of the
land is likely to increase, which has the effect of excluding
affordable housing developers. The 50% floor on residential
sites for affordable housing can be viewed as promoting the
actual development of affordable housing by making it more
feasible for developers.
AB 1690 provides that this 50% requirement may also be
accommodated on mixed-use sites, which is prohibited under
existing law. Although the author states that AB 1690 allows
cities and counties the option of planning for growth in a way
that better integrates new low- and very low-income housing into
communities, it is unclear how the bill in its current form will
accomplish this. The restriction that the bill seeks to remove
only applies to local governments that have not already
identified adequate sites, and this restriction was implemented
to remove impediments to the development of affordable housing.
The Committee may wish to consider whether the bill in its
current form is sound statewide policy in light of the shortage
of affordable housing. If the author's goal is to encourage
mixed-use projects to better align with smart growth goals, it
may be more appropriate to reexamine the sections of housing
element law that relate to site inventory requirements or how a
local government may identify adequate sites for residential
development.
Double referred: If AB 1690 passes this committee, the bill will
be referred to the Committee on Local Government.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
League of California Cities
City of Santa Monica
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Rebecca Rabovsky / H. & C.D. / (916)
319-2085
AB 1690
Page 6