BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                       AB 1537|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                    THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 1537
          Author:   Levine (D)
          Amended:  8/19/14 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE  :  8-1, 6/24/14
          AYES:  Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso, Pavley, Roth,  
            Wyland
          NOES:  DeSaulnier
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Lara, Liu

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  Senate Rule 28.8
           
          ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  62-4, 5/19/14 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Housing element default densities

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill, for purposes of the Bay Area housing  
          element cycle that runs from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2023,  
          and redefines Marin County and the cities under 100,000  
          population within the County as suburban for purposes of the  
          default densities.

           Senate Floor Amendments  of 8/19/14 correct drafting errors and  
          resolve chaptering conflicts with AB 1690 (Gordon).

           ANALYSIS  :    The Planning and Zoning Law requires cities and  
          counties to prepare and adopt a general plan, including a  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          2

          housing element, to guide the future growth of a community.   
          Following a staggered schedule, cities and counties located  
          within the territory of a metropolitan planning organization  
          (MPO) must revise their housing elements every eight years, and  
          cities and counties in rural non-MPO regions must revise their  
          housing elements every five years.  These five- and eight-year  
          cycles are known as the housing element planning period.  If a  
          city or county on an eight-year cycle fails to adopt a housing  
          element within 120 days of its due date, then the city or county  
          must revise and readopt its housing element at mid-point of the  
          cycle after four years.  

          Before each revision, each city and county receives its fair  
          share of housing through the regional housing needs assessment  
          (RHNA) process.  First, the Department of Housing and Community  
          Development (HCD) works with a council of governments to  
          determine the region's housing need.  A council of governments  
          then allocates the region's need to each city and county within  
          the region.  The RHNA allocation includes both an overall  
          housing need number and a breakdown of this overall need into  
          four income categories:  above moderate-, moderate-, low-, and  
          very low-income households.  A housing element must identify  
          adequate sites with appropriate zoning to meet the city's or  
          county's share of the RHNA by income category and ensure that  
          regulatory systems provide opportunities for, and do not unduly  
          constrain, housing development.  HCD reviews both draft and  
          adopted housing elements to determine whether or not they are in  
          substantial compliance with the law.  

          In establishing whether or not a given site is appropriately  
          zoned to accommodate housing affordable to very low- or  
          low-income households, housing element law relies on density as  
          a proxy for affordability.  In general, spreading fixed land  
          costs over a larger number of units will reduce the per-unit  
          land costs and thereby reduce the total development cost of each  
          unit.  A reduced per-unit cost allows market rents and sale  
          prices to be more affordable and reduces the public subsidy  
          required for affordable units.  

          As a result, housing element law requires a city or county to  
          demonstrate how its adopted densities accommodate the need for  
          affordable housing.  A city or county may make this  
          demonstration in either of two ways:








                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          3

          1.Provide an analysis demonstrating how the adopted densities  
            accommodate lower-income housing, based on market demand,  
            financial feasibility, and recent development experience.

          2.Document that adopted densities meet or exceed the following  
            "default densities" established in statute:

                 30 units per acre for metropolitan jurisdictions,  
               generally defined as any city or county over 25,000  
               population in a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) with a  
               population of two million persons or greater and any city  
               or county over 100,000 population in any size MSA.

                 20 units per acre for suburban jurisdictions, generally  
               defined as cities and counties under 25,000 population in  
               an MSA of two million persons or greater and jurisdictions  
               under 100,000 population in all other MSAs.

                 15 units per acre for incorporated cities within  
               non-metropolitan counties and for non-metropolitan counties  
               that have micropolitan areas (i.e., Del Norte, Humboldt,  
               Lake, Mendocino, Nevada, Tehama, and Tuolumne counties).

                 10 units per acre for unincorporated areas in all  
               non-metropolitan counties.

          This bill:

          1.Redefines, for purposes of the Bay Area housing element cycle  
            that runs from July 1, 2014 to December 31, 2023, Marin County  
            and the cities under 100,000 population within the county as  
            suburban for purposes of the default densities, which means  
            that sites within those jurisdictions are deemed appropriate  
            for low-income housing at 20 units per acre instead of 30  
            units per acre.  

          2.Requires a city or county so redefined to report in 2019 and  
            2023 to HCD and the Legislature regarding its progress in  
            developing low- and very low-income housing.

          3.Requires that density requirements within one-half mile of  
            Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit stations in place on June 30,  
            2014 continue to apply.








                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          4

          4.Requires Marin County utilize the sum existing in the county's  
            housing trust fund as of June 30, 2013, for development and  
            preservation of housing affordable to low- and very low income  
            households.

          5.Contains double-jointing language with AB 1690 (Gordon).

           Background
           
          While this bill does not name names, the criteria listed in this  
          bill change the default densities for only three jurisdictions:   
          the unincorporated County of Marin and the cities of Novato and  
          San Rafael.  These three jurisdictions happen to be located in  
          what is arguably the most expensive county in the state, if not  
          the nation.  According to the National Low Income Housing  
          Coalition's Out of Reach report for 2013, Marin County is tied  
          with San Francisco and San Mateo Counties as the most expensive  
          counties in the nation for renting housing, in which a working  
          person must earn $37.62 per hour to afford the fair market rent  
          on a two-bedroom apartment.  Since then, the Marin Independent  
          Journal reports that rents in Marin during the first quarter of  
          2014 jumped 9.6% over the first quarter of 2013 and that  
          occupancy was at 97.4% (95% is considered fully occupied).   
          Already, an estimated 60% of the people employed in Marin County  
          are forced to commute from out of county.  

          The default densities were a consensus recommendation of the  
          HCD-convened Housing Element Working Group in 2004.  The idea  
          was to create a safe harbor at which densities would be presumed  
          to promote affordability and to eliminate the time-intensive  
          analysis for cities and counties that already used higher  
          densities.  As described above, housing element law does not  
          require cities and counties to use the default densities.   
          Instead, they may still complete an analysis that demonstrates  
          that lesser densities can accommodate lower-income housing,  
          based on market demand, financial feasibility, and recent  
          development experience.  Novato, for example, has chosen to do  
          this.  Instead of using the default density of 30 units per acre  
          for the current housing element cycle, the city chose to  
          complete the analysis and demonstrated to HCD's satisfaction  
          that development at densities of 23 units per acre can  
          accommodate lower-income housing.  

          For the current housing element cycle due to end in July,  







                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          5

          unincorporated Marin County, Novato, and San Rafael had to  
          identify sites to accommodate 320, 446, and 469 units of  
          lower-income housing, respectively.  All three were able to do  
          so and received HCD approval of their housing elements.  In the  
          case of San Rafael, the city regularly allows densities up to 40  
          units per acre, particularly in its downtown area.  Although due  
          in 2009, Novato adopted its housing element in late 2013 and  
          applied an affordable housing overlay to five new sites  
          comprising roughly 10 acres.  Likewise, Marin County adopted its  
          element in late 2013 and applied an affordable housing overlay  
          allowing densities of 30 units per acre to additional sites.   
          For the upcoming housing element cycle, Marin County, Novato,  
          and San Rafael have a lower-income housing need of 87, 176, and  
          388 units, respectively.  Given that little to no development  
          has occurred since the adoption of each jurisdiction's current  
          element, the identified sites are still available for the cities  
          to use towards their new and much smaller RHNA allocations.   
          Presumably, these jurisdictions will have little trouble getting  
          HCD approval of their new housing elements.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/15/14)

          Association of Bay Area Governments
          Bel Marin Keys Community Service District
          BRIDGE Housing Corporation
          California State Association of Counties
          Center for Sustainable Neighborhoods
          City of Novato
          Domus Development
          EAH Housing
          Eden Housing
          League of California Cities
          Marin Association of Realtors
          Marin County Board of Supervisors
          Marin County Council of Mayors and Council Members
          Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California
          Transportation Authority of Marin

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  8/15/14)

          California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation







                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          6

          Housing California
          Western Center on Law and Poverty

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to supporters, the default  
          density standards are in need of refinement due to inconsistent  
          outcomes.  Certain cities and counties within larger  
          multi-county MSAs are considered "metropolitan" under the  
          current default density standards despite being suburban or  
          rural in character.  Specifically, unincorporated Sonoma County  
          is considered "suburban" despite having a higher population than  
          unincorporated Marin County.  Instead, Marin has the same  
          default density standard as San Francisco due to its inclusion  
          in the same MSA.  This bill will refine the default density  
          housing formula to allow for suburban designations in Marin  
          County.  

          The author believes that this bill will help create momentum for  
          more affordable housing development in areas that have had  
          challenges in getting projects off the ground due to concerns  
          about high-density development.  Reducing the default density  
          will address local concerns and give cities and counties more  
          flexibility to zone land suitable for affordable housing in a  
          way that fits within the communities' individual circumstances.   
           

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    Opponents of this bill point to the  
          fact that default densities are not mandatory.  In establishing  
          the adequacy of sites for affordable housing, local governments  
          can either zone the site at the default density or provide HCD  
          with an analysis demonstrating that the site is adequate to  
          support lower-income housing development at its zoned density  
          level.  

          Opponents also point to the issue that default density standards  
          were instituted after a lengthy working group process involving  
          a diverse group of stakeholders.  In opponents' view, this bill  
          is a result of local opposition to affordable housing, and  
          legislating to accommodate this narrow opposition is the wrong  
          approach.  Opponents point to the current lack of availability  
          of affordable housing for low- and moderate-income individuals  
          and families and contend that this bill will have the effect of  
          making it even more costly to develop affordable housing in  
          Marin County.  
           







                                                                    AB 1537
                                                                     Page  
          7


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR :  62-4, 5/19/14
          AYES:  Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonilla,  
            Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau,  
            Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly,  
            Donnelly, Eggman, Fox, Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez,  
            Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Roger  
            Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue,  
            Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, V.  
            Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas,  
            Salas, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams,  
            Yamada, Atkins
          NOES:  Ammiano, Maienschein, John A. P�rez, Skinner
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Alejo, Dickinson, Fong, Frazier, Harkey,  
            Lowenthal, Mansoor, Medina, Nazarian, Nestande, Pan,  
            Rodriguez, Waldron, Vacancy


          JA:k  8/20/14   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****