BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1500
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ed Chau, Chair
AB 1500
(Maienschein) - As Introduced February 27, 2015
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act: homeless
complex projects: exemption
SUMMARY: Exempts from the requirements of California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) homeless complex projects, as
defined. Specifically, this bill:
1)Exempts "homeless complex projects" from the requirements of
CEQA.
2)Defines "homeless complex projects" as an activity or approval
necessary for, or incidental to, the development, planning,
design site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing,
construction, operation, or maintenance of:
a) An emergency shelter;
b) Temporary or transitional housing;
c) Supportive housing;
AB 1500
Page 2
d) Low-income housing;
e) Building that provides services for homeless
persons; and
f) Associated development, including any accessory
roadway, utility, or other improvement to that shelter,
housing, building, or associated development.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Under CEQA requires lead agencies with the principal
responsibility for carrying out or approving a proposed
project to prepare a negative declaration, mitigated
declaration, or environmental impact report (EIR) for this
action, unless the project is exempt from CEQA. CEQA includes
various statutory exemptions, as well as categorical
exemptions in the CEQA Guidelines (Public Resources Code
Section 21000, et seq.).
2)Requires the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the
Natural Resources Agency to prepare, adopt, and periodically
update CEQA guidelines, including identifying classes of
projects determined to have no significant effect on the
environment and therefore eligible for a categorical
exemption, as well as guidelines for the mitigation of
greenhouse gas emissions (Public Resources Code Section
21083).
3)Exempts from CEQA specified residential housing projects that
meet criteria established to ensure the project does not have
a significant effect on the environment, including:
a) Affordable agricultural housing projects of not more
AB 1500
Page 3
than 45 units within a city, or 20 units within an
agricultural zone, on a site not more than five acres in
size;
b) Affordable urban housing projects of not more than
100 units on a site not more than five acres in size; and
c) Urban infill housing projects of not more than 100
units on a site not more than four acres in size that is
within one-half mile of a major transit stop.
(Public Resources Code Sections 21159.20-21159.28)
4)With respect to the CEQA exemption for affordable housing
projects, authorizes an exemption to any development project
that consists of the construction, conversion, or use of
residential housing consisting of not more than 100 units that
is affordable to low-income households if:
a) The developer of the development project provides
sufficient legal commitments to the appropriate local
agency to ensure the continued availability and use of
the housing units for lower income households for a
period of at least 30 years, at affordable monthly
housing costs;
b) The development project site is, among other things,
not more than five acres in area, and is located within
an urbanized area; and
c) The development project meets the criteria listed
in Public Resources Code Section 21159.21, including
consistency with any applicable general plan, specific
plan, and local coastal program, is not located within
the boundaries of a state conservancy, and does not have
a significant effect on historical resources.
(Public Resources Code Section 21159.23)
AB 1500
Page 4
5)Requires local agencies to file notice of specified CEQA
housing exemptions with OPR however, failure to file this
notice does not affect the validity of the project (Public
Resources Code Section 21152.1).
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.
COMMENTS:
Background:
CEQA provides a process for evaluating the environmental effects
of applicable projects undertaken or approved by public
agencies. If a project is not exempt from CEQA, an initial study
is prepared to determine whether the project may have a
significant effect on the environment. If the initial study
shows that the project would not have a significant effect on
the environment, the lead agency must prepare a negative
declaration. If the initial study shows that the project may
have a significant effect, the lead agency must prepare an EIR.
Generally, an EIR must accurately describe the proposed project,
identify and analyze each significant environmental impact
expected to result from the proposed project, identify
mitigation measures to reduce those impacts to the extent
feasible, and evaluate a range of reasonable alternatives to the
proposed project. Prior to approving any project that has
received environmental review, an agency must make certain
findings. If mitigation measures are required or incorporated
into a project, the agency must adopt a reporting or monitoring
program to ensure compliance with those measures.
AB 1500
Page 5
CEQA includes various statutory exemptions, as well as
categorical exemptions in the CEQA Guidelines. SB 1925 (Sher),
Chapter 1039, Statutes of 2002, exempted from CEQA certain
residential projects providing affordable urban or agricultural
housing, or located on an infill site within an urbanized area,
and meeting specified unit and acreage criteria. The stated
intent of the Legislature in enacting those provisions included
"creating a streamlined procedure for agricultural employee
housing, affordable housing, and urban infill housing projects
that do not have an adverse effect on the environment." For
purposes of qualifying for the CEQA exemption for affordable
housing, among other criteria projects must not be located
within an urbanized area, not more than five acres in area, and
fewer than 100 units.
Since then, additional legislation has provided CEQA exemptions
and streamlining for residential and certain other projects in
infill areas. SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter 728, Statutes of
2008, provided a CEQA exemption for a narrow set of eligible
residential projects in infill areas adjacent to transit. SB
226 (Simitian), Chapter 469, Statutes of 2011, provided
abbreviated CEQA review procedures for a broader set of urban
infill projects, including retail, commercial, and public
buildings. SB 743 (Steinberg), Chapter 386, Statutes of 2013,
established a new exemption for residential, mixed-use and
"employment center" projects located within one-half mile of a
major transit stop, if the project is consistent with an adopted
specific plan and specified elements of a SB 375 strategy. It
also required OPR to propose revisions to the CEQA Guidelines
for transportation impacts to better support infill development.
Affordable housing in California:
There is no question that California is facing an affordable
housing crisis, and the state has long been associated with high
AB 1500
Page 6
housing costs. The Public Policy Institute of California has
identified that more than 36% of mortgaged homeowners and 47% of
all renters are spending more than 35% of their household
incomes on housing. There is a decrease in the number of
homeowners and an increase in the number of renters. At the same
time vacancy rates are low and rents are increasing.
According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, California has six of the most expensive rental
markets in the country. Nationwide, rents in 2014 grew the
fastest in the San Jose and San Francisco metropolitan areas,
increasing by 14.4 percent and 13.5 percent, respectively.
Between 2006 and 2011, rents increased throughout the state by
an average of ten percent. Lower-income households represent a
majority of renter households. Out of 5.1 million renters in
California, 60% are in lower-income households, while one in
four renter households are in the extremely low-income. One in
two renters in California pay in excess of 30% of their income
towards housing and one in four renters pay half of their income
towards housing.
In March of 2015, the LAO published a report entitled
"California's High Housing Costs: Causes and Consequences."
Among other things, the report noted that "California's home
prices and rents have risen because housing developers in
California's coastal areas have not responded to economic
signals to increase the supply of housing and build housing at
higher densities." The report went on to specify that CEQA is
one of the most significant factors hindering development, as it
can be used to stop or limit housing development in coastal
areas, thus reducing supply and driving up prices statewide.
Between 2004- 2013, the LAO found that local agencies in the
state's ten largest cities took on average about two and a half
years to approve housing projects that required an EIR.
AB 1500
Page 7
There is an often divisive balancing act between avoiding
unnecessary significant environmental impacts and unduly
hindering development. CEQA exemptions and streamlining attempt
to strike a balance between these two concerns.
Purpose of this bill:
According to the author, "CEQA has contributed to increased
housing costs and has been a barrier to affordable housing in
California." AB 1500 "would cut costs for the construction and
maintenance of emergency shelters, temporary or transitional
housing, supportive housing or low-income housing resulting in
an increase in housing opportunities for the homeless or soon to
be homeless." In the author's view, CEQA has an especially
pronounced effect on affordable housing because "[u]nlike other
major development projects, homeless complex projects do not
have a high potential for profits upon completion and are less
worth the costs incurred with CEQA challenges."
The author also points out that "California has the largest
population of persons experiencing homelessness of any state in
the country? The state has one of the highest rates of
homelessness, with one in every 230 residents homeless at any
point in time, and one in every 95 residents homeless at some
point during the course of a year. In the rest of the country,
most homeless people are sheltered, temporarily living in
shelters or in transitional housing. In California, 70% of
homeless people live unsheltered, the largest percentage in the
nation."
AB 1500
Page 8
Arguments in Support :
The California Building Industry Association and the California
Chamber of Commerce contend that "[a]lthough CEQA is an
important and well-intended environmental law, the unfortunate
reality is that CEQA is being misused by interest groups for
reasons completely unrelated to the environment, thus keeping
many of California's most impoverished residents from a safe and
adequate place to call home."
The American Planning Association, California Chapter, supports
AB 1500 if amended. Their suggestions are focused on the
emergency shelter exemption, and would limit the other types of
exempted projects in the bill to those that are tied to an
emergency shelter. Additionally, they specify that "without a
definition of 'associated development' the bill appears to
provide the exemption to additional, unnamed projects, including
a large project even if the homeless emergency shelter or any
facilities specifically tied to that shelter are only one small
piece of the development." Other suggestions include ensuring
that facilities remain in service for a reasonable period of
time, and that local agencies should be allowed to limit the
size of the complex depending on its location and surrounding
uses.
Arguments in Opposition:
In opposing AB 1500, Sierra Club California believes the bill
goes too far, as it exempts the construction of many types of
housing. In opponents' view, "[m]any local governments need to
provide more low-income housing, but a CEQA exemption for the
homeless is not a proper way to help provide this housing."
Staff Comments:
AB 1500
Page 9
The Committee may wish to accept the amendments below, which,
among other things, ensure that exempted low income housing
projects contain a specified percentage of low income units.
The amendments make the following substantive changes:
1)Changes the term "homeless complex project" to "priority
housing project."
2)Removes "building that provides services for the homeless"
from the exemption.
3)Narrows the definition of "low income housing" to mean housing
with at least 20% affordable units, as defined, and with
long-term deed restrictions for those units.
4)Provides that the exemption only applies if these requirements
are met:
a) The project would not result in a net loss of existing
affordable units in the project area.
b) The city or county where the project is located has a
compliant Housing Element, and is in compliance with the
Housing Element Annual Reporting Requirements, at the time
the notice of determination of exemption is filed with OPR.
1)Clarifies that the exemption does not alter, affect, expand,
or diminish a public agency's obligation to comply with
regulatory requirements imposed pursuant to other laws.
Committee Amendments:
AB 1500
Page 10
1)On page 2, between lines 4 and 5, insert:
(1) "Affordable housing cost" has the same meaning as set
forth in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) "Affordable rent" has the same meaning as set forth in
Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
2)On page 2, in line 5, strike out "(1)" and insert:
(3)
3)On page 2, strike out lines 7 to 15, inclusive, in line 16,
strike out "(3)" and insert:
(4)
4)On page 2, in line 16, strike out "affordable" , strike out
lines 17 to 19, inclusive, and insert:
AB 1500
Page 11
At least 20 percent of the units affordable to lower income
households subject to all of the following:
(A) The project developer shall provide sufficient legal
commitments to the appropriate local agency to ensure the
continued availability and use of the housing units for
extremely low income households, very low income households, or
lower income households at monthly housing costs with an
affordable housing cost or affordable rent for the period
required by the applicable financing method.
(B) Rental units shall be affordable for at least 55 years.
(C) Ownership units shall be subject to resale restrictions or
equity sharing requirements for at least 30 years.
(5) "Lower income household" has the same meaning as set forth
in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(6) "Priority housing project" means an activity or approval
necessary for, or incidental to, the development, planning,
design site acquisition, subdivision, financing, leasing,
construction, operation, or maintenance of an emergency shelter,
transitional housing, supportive housing, low-income housing, or
associated development, including any accessory roadway,
utility, or other improvement to that shelter, housing,
building, or associated development.
AB 1500
Page 12
5)On page 2, in line 20, strike out"(4)" and insert:
(7)
6)On page 2, in line 23, strike out "(5)" and insert:
(8)
7)On page 2, in line 25, strike out "homeless complex project."
and insert:
priority housing project if all the following conditions are
met:
(1) the project does not result in a net loss in the number of
housing units with an affordable housing cost or affordable rent
to lower income households within the project area.
(2) The lead agency has filed a notice of determination with
the Office of Planning and Research consistent with Section
21152.1.
(3) The city or county in which the project is located has
adopted a housing element that the Department of Housing and
Community Development has determined to be in compliance with
applicable statutes and regulations at the time the lead agency
files the notice of determination with the Office of Planning
and Research.
(4) The city or county in which the project is located is
AB 1500
Page 13
compliant with the housing element portion of its annual report,
required pursuant to Section 65400 of the Government Code, at
the time the local agency files the notice of determination with
the Office of Planning and Research.
(c) This section does not alter, affect, expand, or diminish a
public agency's obligation to comply with statutory or
regulatory requirements imposed pursuant to other laws.
Double referred : If AB 1500 passes this committee, the bill
will be referred to the Committee on Natural Resources.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
American Planning Association, California Chapter (Support if
Amended)
California Building Industry Association
California Chamber of Commerce
Opposition
AB 1500
Page 14
Sierra Club California
Analysis Prepared by:Rebecca Rabovsky / H. & C.D. / (916)
319-2085