BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1500
Page 1
Date of Hearing: January 11, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Das Williams, Chair
AB 1500
(Maienschein) - As Amended January 4, 2016
SUBJECT: California Environmental Quality Act: priority
housing projects: exemption
SUMMARY: Exempts from CEQA a "priority housing project," which
includes an emergency shelter, transitional housing, or
supportive housing project.
EXISTING LAW:
1)CEQA requires lead agencies with the principal responsibility
for carrying out or approving a proposed project to prepare a
negative declaration, mitigated negative 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.)
2)Exempts from CEQA any residential development project,
including any subdivision, or any zoning change that is
undertaken to implement and is consistent with a specific plan
for which an EIR has been certified after January 1, 1980,
unless substantial changes or new information require the
preparation of a supplemental EIR for the specific plan, in
AB 1500
Page 2
which case the exemption applies once the supplemental EIR is
certified.
3)Requires cities and counties to accommodate their need for
emergency shelters on sites where the use is allowed without a
conditional use permit (i.e., approval is non-discretionary,
and therefore not subject to CEQA) and requires cities and
counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects
as a residential use of property. [SB 2 (Cedillo), Chapter
633, Statutes of 2007]
4)Exempts from CEQA specified residential housing projects which
meet detailed criteria established to ensure the project does
not have a significant effect on the environment. [SB 1925
(Sher), Chapter 1039, Statutes of 2002] The SB 1925
exemptions are available to:
a) affordable agricultural housing projects not more than
45 units within a city, or 20 units within an agricultural
zone, on a site not more than five acres in size;
b) urban affordable housing projects not more than 100
units on a site not more than five acres in size; and,
c) urban infill housing projects not more than 100 units on
a site not more than four acres in size which is within
one-half mile of a major transit stop.
5)Requires metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to include
a sustainable communities strategy (SCS), as defined, in their
regional transportation plans, or an alternative planning
strategy (APS), for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions, aligns planning for transportation and
housing, and creates specified incentives for the
implementation of the strategies, including CEQA exemption or
abbreviated review for residential or mixed-use residential
"transit priority projects" if the project is consistent with
the use designation, density, building intensity, and
AB 1500
Page 3
applicable policies specified for the project area in either
an approved SCS or APS. [SB 375 (Steinberg), Chapter 728,
Statutes of 2008]
6)Establishes abbreviated CEQA review procedures for specified
infill projects, where only specific or more significant
effects on the environment which were not addressed in a prior
planning-level EIR need be addressed. An EIR for such a
project need not consider alternative locations, densities,
and building intensities or growth-inducing impacts. Infill
projects may include residential, retail, commercial, transit
station, school, or public office building projects located
within an urban area. [SB 226 (Simitian), Chapter 469,
Statutes of 2011] SB 226 requires the Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines to implement its
infill provisions, including statewide standards to promote
smart growth, reduction of GHG emissions, reduction in water
use, energy efficiency improvements, and protection of public
health.
7)Exempts from CEQA residential, mixed-use, and "employment
center" projects, as defined, located within "transit priority
areas," as defined, if the project is consistent with an
adopted specific plan and specified elements of a SCS or APS
adopted pursuant to SB 375. [SB 743 (Steinberg), Chapter 386,
Statutes of 2013]
THIS BILL:
1)Exempts from CEQA a "priority housing project" if all the
following conditions are met:
a) The lead agency has filed a notice of determination
with OPR.
b) The city or county has adopted a housing element
approved by the Department of Housing and Community
AB 1500
Page 4
Development and is in compliance with the housing element
portion of its annual general plan report.
2)Defines "priority housing project" as any 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, or supportive housing.
3)Incorporates the following definitions by reference:
a) "Emergency shelter" means housing with minimal
supportive services for homeless persons that is limited
to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person.
No individual or household may be denied emergency
shelter because of an inability to pay.
b) "Transitional housing" means housing with supportive
services for up to 24 months that is exclusively
designated and targeted for recently homeless persons.
Transitional housing includes self-sufficiency
development services, with the ultimate goal of moving
recently homeless persons to permanent housing as quickly
as possible, and limits rents and service fees to an
ability-to-pay formula reasonably consistent with the
United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development's requirements for subsidized housing for
low-income persons. Rents and service fees paid for
transitional housing may be reserved, in whole or in
part, to assist residents in moving to permanent housing.
c) "Supportive housing" means housing with no limit on
length of stay, that is occupied by the target
population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite
services that assist the supportive housing resident in
AB 1500
Page 5
retaining the housing, improving his or her health
status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and,
when possible, work in the community.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS:
1)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.
CEQA includes various statutory exemptions, as well as
categorical exemptions in the CEQA Guidelines. SB 1925 (2002)
established CEQA exemptions for certain residential projects
providing affordable urban or agricultural housing, or located
on an infill site within an urbanized area, and meeting
AB 1500
Page 6
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 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 (not specific to,
but including, affordable housing) and certain other projects
in infill areas. SB 375 (2008) provided a CEQA exemption for
a narrow set of eligible residential projects in infill areas
adjacent to transit. SB 226 (2011) provided abbreviated CEQA
review procedures for a broader set of urban infill projects,
including retail, commercial, and public buildings. SB 743
(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. SB 743 also required OPR to propose revisions to
the CEQA Guidelines for transportation impacts to better
support infill development.
This bill provides a complete exemption for emergency
shelters, transitional housing, and supportive housing
projects, regardless of location or size.
2)Author's statement:
California has the largest population of persons
experiencing homelessness of any state in the country. The
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported
that on a single night in 2008, California communities
counting people living on the streets or in shelters
AB 1500
Page 7
reported a total of 157,277 homeless persons. Over 380,000
people are homeless for some period of time during the
course of each year in California. 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 percent of
homeless people live unsheltered, the largest percentage in
the nation.
A Legislative Analyst's Office report entitled
"California's High Housing Costs: Causes and Consequences"
was published on March 17, 2015, and identified CEQA as a
major contributor to the state's high cost of housing.
Unlike 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.
According to the San Jose Mercury News , when the city shut
down the notorious homeless encampment known as "The
Jungle," they discovered that many of its inhabitants were
actually receiving housing subsidies but were unable to
find housing to use the subsidies for. The severe shortage
of affordable housing and shelters has resulted in many
homeless people across the state who are not being helped
even though they are eligible and receiving benefits
designed to get them off the streets and into stable
housing.
3)LAO housing report. The LAO report cited by the author
includes the following statements in a section entitled "Why
Do Coastal Areas Not Build Enough Housing?":
(CEQA) requires local governments to conduct a detailed
AB 1500
Page 8
review of the potential environmental effects of new
housing construction (and most other types of development)
prior to approving it. The information in these reports
sometimes results in the city or county denying proposals
to develop housing or approving fewer housing units than
the developer proposed. In addition, CEQA's complicated
procedural requirements give development opponents
significant opportunities to continue challenging housing
projects after local governments have approved them.
Our review of CEQA documents submitted to the state by
California's ten largest cites between 2004-2013 indicates
that local agencies took, on average, around two and a half
years to approve housing projects that required an EIR.
The CEQA process also, in some cases, results in developers
reducing the size and scope of a project in response to
concerns discovered during the review process.
The LAO report did not include any specific examples or data.
It also makes no reference to the vast majority of housing
projects that do not require an EIR, because they are exempt
from CEQA or approved via a negative declaration.
4)OPR survey indicates CEQA is not a significant barrier to
infill projects. OPR's "2012 Annual Planning Survey Results"
asked city and county planners to explain the primary barriers
their jurisdictions have experienced to implementing infill
projects. Based on 238 responses, 25% of jurisdictions
reported that infrastructure constraints were a primary
barrier to implementing infill projects. Just under 25%
reported that they had problems with assembling parcels of the
right size and configuration for infill development. Only 4%
of respondents identified CEQA as a barrier.
AB 1500
Page 9
5)Emergency shelters, transitional housing, and supportive
housing projects can be approved without CEQA review under
current law. The Planning and Zoning Law requires cities and
counties, through the adoption of General Plan housing
elements, to identify housing needs and sites, including
emergency shelters. Among other things, the housing element
must identify zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a
permitted use without a conditional use permit or other
discretionary permit, meaning they are not subject to CEQA
review. In addition, any residential project is exempt from
CEQA review if it is consistent with an adopted specific plan
for which an EIR has been prepared. Housing element law
requires cities and counties to treat transitional and
supportive housing projects as a residential use of property
and prohibits restrictions that are not applicable to other
residential dwellings of the same type.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
California Association of Realtors
California Building Industry Association (prior version)
California Chamber of Commerce (prior version)
California Housing Consortium (prior version)
Opposition
AB 1500
Page 10
California League of Conservation Voters
Sierra Club California
State Building and Construction Trades Council of California
Brandt-Hawley Law Group (prior version)
California Labor Federation (prior version)
California State Pipe Trades Council (prior version)
Center for Biological Diversity (prior version)
Environmental Defense Center (prior version)
Natural Resources Defense Council (prior version)
Planning and Conservation League (prior version)
Shute, Mihaly and Weinberger (prior version)
Analysis Prepared by:Lawrence Lingbloom / NAT. RES. / (916)
319-2092
AB 1500
Page 11