BILL ANALYSIS
AB 305
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 305 (Mullin)
As Amended July 15, 2003
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |49-28|(May 1, 2003) |SENATE: |23-14|(August 21, |
| | | | | |2003) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: H. & C.D.
SUMMARY : Requires a city or county to grant an additional
density bonus, concession, or incentive to a developer of
housing, otherwise entitled to a density bonus or other
incentive if that developer includes a child care facility as
part of the housing development, unless the city or county makes
a finding that the existing area has adequate child care
facilities.
The Senate amendments redraft the density bonus provisions for
child care according to the following:
1)Provide that when a developer seeks to build a housing
development that otherwise qualifies for a density bonus and
includes a child care facility the local government shall
grant either of the following:
a) An additional density bonus of residential space that is
equal to or greater than the child care facility; or,
b) An additional incentive that contributes to the economic
feasibility of the child care facility.
2)Require the local government to place the following conditions
on approval:
a) The child care facility shall remain in operation for as
long as the density bonus units are to remain affordable;
and,
b) The children who attend the child care facility shall be
of the same proportion or greater than the income
distribution reflected in the density bonus units.
AB 305
Page 2
3)Defines "child care facility" as a child day care facility
other than a family day care home, including, but not limited
to, infant centers, preschools, extended day care facilities,
and schoolage child care centers.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires a city or county to grant a density bonus and at
least one other specified incentive, or other housing
incentives of equivalent value, to a developer who agrees to
construct an affordable housing development of five or more
units unless the local government makes a finding that the
bonus and incentives are not needed to achieve affordability
(Government Code Section 65915).
2)Provides that to qualify for the benefits of this provision, a
proposed housing development must contain at least 20 % of the
units affordable to low income households, 10 % of the units
affordable to very low income households, or 50 % of the units
reserved for seniors (Government Code Section 65915).
3)Requires that the density bonus must be at least 25 % over the
existing maximum density for the site, unless a lesser amount
is elected by the developer (Government Code Section 65915).
4)Provides that local government incentives may include
(Government Code Section 65915):
a) Reduction in site development standards;
b) Modification of zoning code requirements (including a
reduction in setbacks, square footage requirements, or
parking spaces, or architectural design requirements that
exceed the minimum building standards);
c) Approval of mixed use zoning in conjunction with the
housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or other
land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development,
and if such nonresidential uses are compatible with the
project; or,
d) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by
the developer or the city or county that result in
identifiable cost reductions.
AB 305
Page 3
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill required a city or county
to grant an additional density bonus, concession, or incentive
to a developer of housing, otherwise entitled to a density bonus
or other incentive if that developer includes a child care
facility as part of the housing development, unless the city or
county makes a finding that the existing area has adequate child
care facilities.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : California's current housing shortage is well
documented. In addition to the lack of affordable housing,
according to the author, the demand for licensed day care also
exceeds supply. The author asserts that there are 4.06 million
children in need of child care and only 886,871 licensed day
care slots. The state average cost of child care is $8,521
annually and for the larger urban counties the average cost is
approximately $10,000 annually. The author argues that builders
need an incentive to build child care in most urban areas
because of the high cost of land (e.g. in San Mateo the average
home sells for approximately $600,000). California is the
largest state by population and still among the fastest growing.
To help address the affordable housing shortage, the Legislature
enacted the density bonus law to encourage development of more
housing units.
This bill seeks to allow local governments to offer additional
density bonuses and other incentives to builders of affordable
housing who also include child care facilities within the
development.
Analysis Prepared by : Hubert Bower / H. & C.D. / (916)
319-2085 FN:
0002477