designation, or zoning of a parcel or parcels of property to a less intensive use or reducing the intensity of land use within an existing general plan land use designation, specific plan land use designation, or zoning district in effect at the time of the proposed change, below what was allowed under the land use designation or zoning ordinances of the affected county or affected city, as applicable, as in effect on January 1, 2018, except as otherwise provided in clause (ii) of subparagraph (B) or subdivision (i). For purposes of this subparagraph, “reducing the intensity of land use” includes, but is not limited to, reductions to height, density, or floor area ratio, new or increased open space or lot size requirements, new or increased setback requirements, minimum frontage requirements, or maximum lot coverage limitations, or any other action that would individually or cumulatively reduce the site’s residential development capacity.
(Gov. Code, § 66300, subd. (b)(1)(A).) In addition, the HCA is to be broadly construed to maximize the development of housing.
HCD’s analysis of the adopted Ordinance involved identifying new or modified development standards, comparing those development standards against the development standards applicable to the R-1 Zone District and in effect on January 1, 20181, and noting instances that suggested a reduction in residential development capacity. In reviewing materials from the October 5, 2021; November 9, 2021; December 7, 2021; and January 4, 2022, Planning Commission and City Council meetings, it appears that the potential impacts of the HCA on the Ordinance were not discussed. For this reason, HCD assumes that no HCA analysis was undertaken and no concurrent and compensatory increase in the intensity of land use pursuant to subdivision (i) of Government Code section 66300 occurred.
Development Standard 1: Maximum Unit Size of 800 Square Feet. 2:The Ordinance creates
new maximum size standards for residential development that appear to reduce the intensity of land use. The Ordinance limits the maximum size of a dwelling built under SB 9 to 800 square feet (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.4.c). The development standards of the R-1 Zone District currently impose no equivalent limitation on the absolute maximum size of dwellings. Rather, the R-1 Zone District regulates the size of dwellings by a combination of maximum floor area ratios and maximum floor areas, which vary depending on lot area, depth, and whether the dwelling is one or two stories in height. It is beyond the scope of this letter to comprehensively describe the intricacies of these development standards; however, by examining the maximum lot 1 For the purposes of this analysis, HCD assumes that the relevant current development standards were in effect on January 1, 2018.
2 While it is beyond the scope of this letter to address potential violations of SB 9 itself, Government Code section 65852.21, subdivision (b)(2)(A), seems to contemplate units that are “at least 800 square feet in floor area,” not limited to a maximum of 800 square feet, as required by the Ordinance. 5-450
Scott Reimers, Community Development Director
coverage standard, it is possible to see how the new standard represents a reduction in residential development capacity. This section examines only the maximum lot coverage standard in order to provide a comparison; other development standards could also serve for this purpose.
Table 9-1G-3 (R-1 Zone District Residential Development Standards) provides that the maximum lot coverage shall be calculated according to the following formula: (.275 x lot area) + 1,125 square feet. The resulting figure represents the maximum amount of ground level residential floor area that a development can have. Lots with existing development (e.g., a single-family home) can receive additional floor area by constructing additions or by constructing new structures until the maximum lot coverage limit is reached. Vacant lots are subject to the same maximum lot coverage limit as already developed lots. HCD is particularly concerned by scenarios under which the Ordinance will prevent a property owner from developing its lot to the extent permitted under the previously existing development standards.
For example, a typical 7,200 square-foot lot in the R-1 zone is generally able to be developed with a house approximately 3,000 square feet in size. Were the same size lot developed with “urban dwellings” pursuant to the City’s SB 9 implementation Ordinance, the size of each home would be limited to 800 square feet. This represents a reduction in floor area of approximately 75 percent if one urban dwelling were constructed and approximately 50 percent if two urban dwellings were constructed. As demonstrated here, the Ordinance’s 800 square-foot maximum unit size reduces the site’s residential development capacity dramatically in certain instances.
One potential remedy to this situation would be to impose the same suite of floor area-related development standards to lots with SB 9 units as to lots with one single-family dwelling.
Development Standard 2: Height Limit: The Ordinance limits the maximum height of a new attached or detached dwelling built under SB 9 to one story and 18 feet (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.4.f).
The development standards of the R-1 Zone District currently limit building heights depending on the lot characteristics. Lots wider than 75 feet allow one-story or two-story dwellings up to 32 feet in height. Lots narrower than 75 feet allow one-story or two-story dwellings up to 28 feet in height. On flag lots, uniquely shaped lots, or lots with less than 35 feet of street frontage, the building height is limited to one story and 18 feet. The Ordinance would impose the smallest, one-story, and 18-foot height limitation on all units built under SB 9 regardless of the size or other characteristics of the lot. This limitation, to the extent it prevents development of equivalent floor area compared to that allowed under the existing development standards as described above, reduces the intensity of land use and represents a reduction in residential development capacity.
Development Standard 3: Courtyards: The Ordinance requires that all new detached dwellings built under SB 9 provide an open space courtyard with a minimum area of 1,000 square feet or ten percent of the lot area and with a minimum width and depth of 20 feet, 5-451
Scott Reimers, Community Development Director
whichever is larger (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.6.m). The development standards of the R-1 Zone District currently impose no such requirement on other dwellings. As a point of comparison, in the higher density R-2 Zone District, a courtyard is required only for sites proposing more than two units and having a lot width of 50 feet or more. As with the height standard discussed above, imposing a courtyard requirement in the R-1 Zone District creates a reduction in residential development capacity if it prevents development of equivalent floor area compared to that allowed under the existing development standards.
Governmental Constraints under Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, §§ 65580-65589.11) Housing elements are required to contain analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints on the development of housing for all income levels. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).) This includes, but is not limited to, analysis of land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, and locally adopted ordinances that directly impact the cost and supply of residential development. After identifying governmental constraints, the City must implement programs to remove those governmental constraints to the development of housing where legally possible. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) Therefore, the City should be aware that HCD will examine the City’s SB 9 implementation Ordinance in the context of the commitments made in the City’s forthcoming draft 6th Cycle Housing Element.
In addition to Development Standards 1-3 discussed above, the following provisions of the Ordinance appear to create governmental constraints on the development of housing that would reduce the economic feasibility of projects.
Parking Requirements: The Ordinance prohibits a property owner from constructing off-street parking spaces that would serve the residents of an SB 9 unit (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.4.j; 9-1T21.11.f). Additionally, the property owner must remove existing driveways and driveway aprons that might facilitate off-street parking. The development standards of the R-1 Zone District currently impose no such prohibition on the creation of additional off-street parking spaces beyond the two-space-per-dwelling minimum provided they meet the requirements of subsection G (Vehicle Parking and Driveways) of the R-1 Zone District development standards. These requirements impose a new burden on property owners seeking to develop housing under SB 9—a burden which is not borne by any other property owner in the R-1 Zone District. Coupled with the Ordinance’s prohibition on the issuance of on-street overnight parking permits to residents of SB 9 units (TCMC 3-3A-23.B.1.i), these requirements likely represent a governmental constraint on the development of housing.
Additionally, these requirements raise concerns related to AFFH and housing discrimination.
Materials reviewed by HCD indicate that the City did not perform an analysis to demonstrate that, within the R-1 Zone District in Temple City, households with protected characteristics that do not have a personal vehicle can access resources in a manner equivalent to households 5-452
Scott Reimers, Community Development Director
that do have a personal vehicle.
3 If the City is concerned with environmental impacts
associated with personal automobile use, a more defensible policy may be to make off-street parking and on-street parking permits optional for SB 9 units and their residents while encouraging active transportation and transit use. Policies that encourage these behaviors can include covered and secure bicycle parking, subsidized bus passes, etc. 30-Year Affordable Housing Deed Restriction: The Ordinance requires that all units created under SB 9 be deed-restricted to low- or very low-income households (9-1T-21.A.4.l). While inclusionary zoning requirements are a well-used and important tool for the creation of affordable housing, this requirement is equivalent to a 100 percent inclusionary requirement that is not imposed on any other type of residential development in Temple City. A typical inclusionary requirement is 15 or 20 percent and is applicable to a broad range of residential development. This requirement has the potential to render development of SB 9 units economically infeasible, and as such may constitute a governmental constraint to housing development. As a part of the ongoing housing element update process, the City will need to demonstrate that local development costs and anticipated affordable rents will result in projects that are economically feasible.
Additionally, Government Code section 65850, subdivision (g), authorizes local agencies to adopt an inclusionary housing ordinance that includes residential rental units affordable to lower- and moderate-income households. In certain circumstances, HCD may request the submittal of an economic feasibility study to ensure the ordinance does not unduly constrain housing production. For additional information, see HCD’s Rental Inclusionary Housing Memorandum.
LEED Platinum Certification: The Ordinance requires that all new detached dwellings built under SB 9 achieve LEED Platinum certification (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.4.o). While environmental sustainability is a laudable goal, the development standards of the R-1 Zone District currently impose no such requirement on other dwellings. For a building to achieve a LEED Platinum certification, it must provide the very highest level of energy efficiency—far beyond the requirements of the state building code. To achieve this highest-level of sustainable design, specific building design, siting, materials, fixtures, appliances, and heating/cooling systems are required. These additional physical requirements will substantially increase the cost of development of SB 9 units and will therefore likely result in a governmental constraint to the development of housing.
3 This may also raise concerns under 2 CCR § 12060(a) regarding practices with a discriminatory effect. Discriminatory effects occur when the policy or practice predictably results in a disparate impact on a group of individuals, or creates, increases, reinforces, or perpetuates segregated housing patterns based on membership in a protected class. See also Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law (Gov. Code, § 65008) and AFFH (Gov. Code, § 8899.50).
5-453
Scott Reimers, Community Development Director
As stated above, housing elements must contain an analysis of governmental constraints on the development of housing for all income levels (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5)) and implement programs to remove those constraints (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3)). The concerns raised above may constitute such constraints.
Subterranean Third Story Requirement: In certain instances, the Ordinance requires that a portion of the floor area of a dwelling built under SB 9 be located underground (TCMC 9-1T21.A.4.f). Under SB 9, when a local agency’s development standards would physically preclude the construction of up to two residential units at least 800 square feet in size, the local agency is required to modify or waive one or more development standards to accommodate a development of that size. (Gov. Code, §§ 65852.21, subd. (b); 66411.7, subd. (c).) Anticipating that in some cases SB 9 units may need to be built as three-story dwellings to meet this statutory requirement, the City appears to have included this undergrounding requirement. In no other instance is a dwelling in the R-1 Zone District required to build habitable floor area that is otherwise consistent with other development standards such as maximum floor area, FAR, etc., as underground living space. This requirement could substantially increase the cost of development of some SB 9 units and may result in a governmental constraint to the development of housing.
State ADU Law (Gov. Code, §§ 65852.2 and 65858.22)
SB 9 and State ADU Law are complementary. Both laws can be implemented in ways that result in developments with both “SB 9 Units” and ADUs. When combined, up to four units may be built in the same lot area typically used for a single-family home. The calculation varies slightly depending on whether a lot split is involved, but the outcomes regarding total maximum unit counts are identical. After reviewing the City’s Ordinance to verify consistency with State ADU Law, the following concern was noted.
Accessory Dwelling Units – No Lot Split: The Ordinance establishes a limit of two residential units on each lot developed under SB 9 and requires that ADUs and Junior ADUs (JADUs) count toward that limit (TCMC 9-1T-21.A.4.b). As written, this limitation applies to situations in which a lot split is proposed as well as to situations when a lot split is not proposed. This inaccurately implements SB 9 and denies property owners the right to develop ADU(s) consistent with State ADU Law. (Gov. Code, §§ 65852.2; 65852.22.) The provisions of SB 9 that allow a local agency to impose a limit of two residential units specifies that ADUs/JADUs are to be counted towards that limit only in instances when a lot split is proposed. (Gov. Code, § 66411.7, subd. (j)(1).) In instances when a lot split is not proposed, these limitations do not apply and the local agency must allow ADUs as it typically would pursuant to State ADU Law. (Gov. Code, § 65852.21, subd. (f).)
5-454
Scott Reimers, Community Development Director
Conclusion
Separately and collectively, these development standards and other requirements reduce the intensity of land use, raising concerns under the HCA. They also raise concerns under State Housing Element Law, State ADU Law, AFFH, and Anti-Discrimination in Land Use Law. The implementation of these policies will almost certainly have a chilling effect on the production of housing under SB 9 by rendering projects economically infeasible. HCD would like to remind the City that under Government Code section 65585, subdivision (j), HCD has enforcement authority over these and other housing laws. Accordingly, HCD may review local government actions to determine consistency with these and other laws. (Gov.
Code, § 65585, subd. (i).). If HCD finds that a city’s actions do not comply with state law, HCD may notify the California Office of the Attorney General. (Gov. Code, § 65585, subd. (j).)
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. HCD recommends the City conduct a comprehensive review of the HCA and other applicable state housing laws and update its SB 9 implementing ordinance accordingly. Additionally, HCD requests that the City respond in writing within 30 days of receipt of this letter. The City’s response should include a proposed timeline for corrective actions. If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Brian Heaton, of our staff, at [email protected].
Sincerely,
David Zisser
Assistant Deputy Director
Local Government Relations and Accountability
cc: Brian Cooke, City Manager
Greg Murphy, City Attorney
5-455
8/17/22, 11:01 PM Housing Advocates in Los Angeles & San Diego are requesting the support of HCD https://mail.beverlyhills.org/owa/[email protected]/projection.aspx 1/2 CAUTION: External Sender
Use caution when clicking links or opening attachments
Housing advocates in Los Angeles & San Diego are requesting the support of HCD. We are requesting that the state housing authority step in and work with local advocates to build/maintain a social housing authority by county.
How much longer will localities in Los Angeles County & San Diego be permitted to abuse their positions as residents continue to flee the state and those that stay continue to fall into homelessness? I'm asking HCD again to please authorize a county-led social housing authority that is people-led across all CA cities. We cannot wait for the establishment that has not done the right thing to finally just wake up one morning and decide they are going to do the right thing. When has that ever happened and if it does, it's very rare! The people have waited long enough, literally GENERATIONS! We need localities to get their hands out of the housing market, they are causing serious disruptions in the lives of millions! What is a housing authority if they are not aligned with the best interests of the mass majority of residents who have a RIGHT TO LAND USE & HOUSING?
Thank You for your attention to the matter, I'm patiently waiting for your response. A working group is being formed and soon we will look to override local jurisdictions and the state for crimes against humanity against the people! Silence is violence! Housing Advocates in Los Angeles & San Diego are requesting the support of HCD
Reply all |
Inbox
HowTheWest Was Saved <[email protected]>
Sun 7/31, 9:20 AM
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]+9 more To help protect your privacy, some content in this message has been blocked. To re-enable the blocked features, click here.
To always show content from this sender, click here.
Label: E2K10 731 Day Retention Tag (2 years and 1 day) Expires: 7/31/2024 9:20 AM
Show all 2 attachments (4 MB) Download all
SocialHousingAuthority.…
846 KB
PenmarGolfCourse+SM…
3 MB
Reply all | Delete Junk |
5-456
8/17/22, 11:01 PM Housing Advocates in Los Angeles & San Diego are requesting the support of HCD https://mail.beverlyhills.org/owa/[email protected]/projection.aspx 2/2 --
Best,
How The West Was Saved
https://htwws.org/social-housing-ca/
Walkable, bike-friendly communities that are affordable are the right of every single human being.
These communities are great for humanity, other species, and the Earth itself! Everything in the HUEMANS life does NOT need to be a drive away. Reply all | Delete Junk |
5-457
February 28, 2022
Policy Recommendations for 6th Cycle Housing Element
Dear Planning staff:
YIMBY Law submits this letter to share our policy goals and recommendations for the Policies and Programs section of your Housing Element. We appreciate the opportunity to participate in the Housing Element process.
The Policies and Programs section of the city’s Housing Element must respond to data, analysis and findings presented in the Housing Needs section. We repeatedly see findings that housing prices are high, segregation exists, and there is a lack of housing for special populations, but the Policies and Programs don’t respond to these findings or try to change outcomes. The overview of the city’s housing environment should set the scene, and the policies and programs should explain what the city is going to do to fix it.
Our policy goals are as follows:
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
1. Prioritize rezoning in high resource, historically exclusionary neighborhoods.
Many of the highest resource neighborhoods with the best access to jobs, good schools, and other amenities have histories of exclusion which are still reflected in their zoning. Cities should rezone to allow more housing opportunities in those neighborhoods, particularly those with low Vehicle Miles Traveled, as part of their 1 5-458
Housing Elements.
2. Establish a strong tenant protection ordinance so that new housing benefits everyone. Development should not permanently displace current residents.
Housing replacement programs, temporary housing vouchers, right of return, and demolition controls will create stability for renters while allowing new homes to be built for new households and to accommodate the growth associated with RHNA.
In your sites inventory and rezoning programs, you should prioritize development on sites with owner-occupied housing & commercial uses over those with existing rent-controlled apartments or other rental housing with lower income residents.
3. Support homeownership opportunities for historically excluded groups.
Homeownership continues to be a path to building financial security and inter-generational wealth, which has been systematically denied to many Americans. As a society, we need to make this right by intentionally offering opportunities to communities who have been excluded. The housing element should identify opportunities to create a variety of for-sale housing types and create programs to facilitate property ownership among excluded groups.
Site Capacity
4. Adequately plan for density. Ensure that a site’s density will accommodate the number of homes that are projected to be built. In addition, make sure height limits, setback requirements, FAR, and other controls allow for adequate density and the ability to achieve a site’s realistic capacity. Housing will not be feasible if you have a high density paired with low height limits. This density should be emphasized around jobs and transit and should go beyond the Mullin density in those areas.
5. Provide sufficient zoned capacity to accommodate all income levels, including a minimum No Net Loss buffer of 30%. Not every site will be developed at maximum density during the eight-year planning period. Identify an ample amount of opportunity sites and zone the sites to accommodate lower-income housing types (usually a statutory minimum of 30 dwelling units per acre) to give the city the best chance at meeting its RHNA. 5-459
6. Use data from the 5th Cycle to calculate the likelihood of development for your 6th Cycle site inventory. Likelihood of development is a measure of the probability of an inventory site being developed during the planning period. The median likelihood of development across the state is 25%, meaning only one of every four sites will likely be developed during the planning period for the median city. Incorporating the likelihood of development into the zoned capacity will set the city up to successfully achieve their RHNA, making the housing element less of a paper exercise and more of an actionable, functional document.
Accessory Dwelling Units
7. Commit to an automatic mid-cycle adjustment if ADU permitting activity is lower than estimated in the housing element. We highly recommend complying with HCD’s standards of using one of its “safe harbor” methodologies to anticipate future ADU production. However, if the city is optimistic about ADU growth, then creating an automatic mid-cycle adjustment will automatically facilitate alternative housing options (i.e., a rezoning program, removing development constraints, ADU incentives, etc.) if the city falls behind the estimated ADU production.
8. Incentivize new ADUs, including those that are rent-restricted for moderateor lower-income households or that are prioritized for households with housing choice vouchers. Consider offering low- or no-interest loans, forgivable loans, impact fee waivers for ADUs that are 750 square feet or larger, allowances to facilitate two-story and second-story ADU construction, etc.
Zoning
9. Allow residential to be built in areas that are zoned for commercial use.
There are a myriad of ways to do this, but a housing overlay is one common policy.
Additionally, consider eliminating new commercial space in mixed-use developments where there is not a strong demand or there is otherwise a glut of commercial space that is unused or frequently vacant.
10. Allow flexibility in inclusionary zoning. Cities should require different percentages for different AMI levels. Additionally, we urge cities to incentivize land 5-460
dedication to affordable developers in order for market-rate developers to meet their inclusionary requirements. Avoid getting trapped into thinking that the affordable units must be “sprinkled throughout” the market-rate units, or require the market-rate units to look exactly the same as the affordable ones. This should be balanced against not locating all of the affordable units in one place and ghettoizing neighborhoods by creating or perpetuating racially concentrated areas of poverty.
Better Entitlement Process & Reducing Barriers to Development
11. Ensure that the city has a ministerial process for housing permitting, especially multi-family housing, and remove impact fees for deed-restricted housing. A discretionary process for housing development creates uncertainty and adds to the cost of construction. For example, multi-family housing should not require a conditional use permit or city council approval unless the builder is asking for unique and extraordinary concessions. Right-sizing governmental constraints, entitlement processes, and impact fees will help the city successfully meet its RHNA.
12. Reduce parking standards and eliminate parking minimums. Minimum parking requirements are a major constraint on housing, especially for lower cost housing types. They can cost in excess of $30,000 per spot and can raise rents by as much as 17%, and eliminating them is particularly important for smaller & other spatially constrained sites. Consider adopting a parking maximum.
13. Cap fees on all new housing. Most construction costs are outside the City’s control, but reducing impact fees can demonstrate that a city is serious about building new housing. At a minimum, cities should delay the collection of impact fees until the issuance of the certificate of occupancy to reduce financial impacts on new housing and make the units cheaper by not asking the developer to carry impact fee charges or debt throughout the construction phase.
14. Provide local funding. One of the largest barriers to building new affordable homes is the lack of city/county funds available to assemble sites, provide gap funding, and to pay for dedicated staff. Without new funding, especially at the local level, we will not be able to build more affordable homes. There are three 5-461
new revenue streams that should be considered: 1) Transfer tax, a one-time payment levied by a jurisdiction on the sale of a home, may be utilized to raise much needed revenue to fund affordable homes; 2) Vacancy tax may be collected on vacant land to convince landowners to sell their underutilized properties and be used to fund the construction of affordable homes; 3) Commercial linkage fees should be adopted or revisited for increases on new commercial developments.
We urge you to include these policies in your 6th cycle Housing Element.
Best regards,
Sonja Trauss
Executive Director
YIMBY Law
[email protected]
5-462
MATTHEW GELFAND, COUNSEL
I CALIFORNIANS FOR [email protected]
HOMEOWNERSHIP TEL: (213) 739-8206
BEV HILLS CITY CLERK July 14, 2022 2022 JUL 15 p2:57
VIA EMAIL AND PRIORITY MAIL
Huma Ahmed
Office ofthe City ClerkCity of Beverly Hills
455 N. Rexford Dr.Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Email: hahmedbeverlyhil1s.org, cityclerkbeverlyhills.org RE: Gov. Code § 65009(d) Notice Regarding Beverly Hills’ Housing Element.
To the City Clerk:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE pursuant to Government Code Section 65009(d)(3)(A) that the housing element ofthe City ofBeverly Hills’ general pian is inadequate and does not substantially comply with the requirements ofArticle 10.6 (Section 65580 et seq.) ofthe Government Code and that Californians for Homeownership, Inc. may initiate litigation against the City if it does not adopt a revised and legally adequate housing element by September 12, 2022.
The specific deficiencies in the City’s housing element are identified in the July 30, 2021 and January 14, 2022 letters sent to the City by the California Department of Housing andCommunity Development, which we have attached to this letter as Exhibits A and B respectively and which we incorporate here by reference, in their entirety.
Sincerely,
ss
Matthew Gelfand
cc: City of Beverly Hills
Laurence Wiener, Esq., City Attorney (by email to lwienerrwglaw.com) City Council (by email to mayorandcitycouncilbever1yhi11s.org) California Department of Housing’ and Community Development Chelsea Lee (by email to Chelsea.Leehcd.ca.gov)
525 S. Virgil Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90020
5-463
EXHIBIT
A
5-464
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS. CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W El Camino Avenue Suite 500
Sacramento CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
July 30, 2021
Ryan Gohlich, Director
Community Development Department
City of Beverly Hills
455 North Rexford Drive, First Floor
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Dear Ryan Gohlich:
RE: Review of City of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle (2021 -2029) Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Beverly Hills’s (City) draft housing element received for review on June 2, 2021. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. In addition, HCD considered comments from Abundant Housing LA and Josh Albrektson pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).The draft element addresses many statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code).
The enclosed Appendix describes the revisions needed to comply with State Housing Element Law.
To remain on an eight-year planning cycle, the City must adopt its housing element within 120 calendar days from the statutory due date of October 15, 2021 for Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) localities. If adopted after this date, Government Code section 65588, subdivision (e)(4), requires the housing element be revised every four years until adopting at least two consecutive revisions by the statutory deadline. For more information on housing element adoption requirements, please visit HCD’s website at: http:Ilwvvw. hcd .ca.qov/community-developmentlhousinq elementlhousinci-element-memos/docs/sb375 finall 00413. pdf.
Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. 5-465
Ryan Gohlich, Director
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other fundingsources.
HCD is committed to assisting the City of Beverly Hills in addressing all statutory req uirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Chelsea Lee at Chelsea.Leehcd.ca.qov.
Sincerely,
Shannan West
Land Use & Planning Unit Chief
Enclosure
5-466
APPENDIX
CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS
The following changes are necessary to bring the City’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.
Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at hffp ://www. hcd . ca .qov/commu n ity-developmentlhousinq-elementlhousinq-element memos.shtml. Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at http:I/www. hcd .ca.ciov/community-developmentlbuildinq-blocks/index.shtml and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.
A. Review and Revision
Review the previous element to evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, and progress in implementation, and reflect the results of this review in the revised element. (Gov. Code, § 65588 (a) and (b).)
As part of the evaluation of programs in the past cycle (Appendix D), the element must provide an explanation of the effectiveness of goals, policies, and related actions in meeting the housing needs of special needs populations (e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, female headed households, farmworkers and personsexperiencing homelessness).
B. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints
1. Affirmatively further[ing] fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division I of Title 2.. .shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) The element generally does not address this requirement. The element, among other things, must include outreach, an assessment of fair housing, identification, and prioritization of contributing factors to fair housing issues and goals and actions sufficient to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity. For more information, please contact HCD and visit https://www. hcd .ca.qov/community-developmentlaffh/index.shtml.
2. Include an analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality’s existing and projected needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(1).)
The element includes analysis regarding extremely low-income (ELI) households such as the number of households and overpayment but must also identify projected HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 1 July 30, 2021
5-467
housing needs. The projected housing need for ELI households can be calculated by using available census data to determine the number of very low-income households that qualify as ELI households or presume that 50 percent of the regional housing need allocation (RHNA) for very low-income households qualify as ELI households. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at http:/Iwww. hcd .ca.gov/commun itydevelopment/build i nq-blocks/housing-needs/extremely-Iow-income-housi ng needs.shtml.
3. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designatedincome level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, 65583, subd. (a)(3).) Parcel Listing: The element lists parcels by acreage, general plan and zoning but must also identify the anticipated affordability levels of all the units on identified sites.
In addition, the parcel listing includes a column for existing uses. However, in many cases, the column is blank and should be completed. Finally, the parcel listing insome cases does describe existing uses, but the description is generic, such as office building or store building. Instead, the description of existing uses should be sufficiently detailed to facilitate an analysis demonstrating the potential for additionaldevelopment in the planning period.
Suitability of Nonvacant Sites: While the element describes the mixed-use overlay, it generally does not address this requirement. The element must include an analysis to demonstrate the potential for additional development. The methodology shall consider factors including the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, the City’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development, the current market demand for the existing use, an analysis of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential development, development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional residential development on thesesites.
In addition, relying on nonvacant sites to accommodate 50 percent or more of the housing needs for lower-income households triggers requirements to make findings based on substantial evidence that the existing use is not an impediment and will likely discontinue in the planning period.
Realistic Capacity: While the element includes an estimate of the number of units that can be accommodated on each site in the inventory, the estimate should rely on minimum density standards or include analysis demonstrating how the number of units for each site was determined. The estimate of the number of units for each site must account for land-use controls and site improvements, typical densities of existing orapproved residential developments at a similar affordability level in the City and on the HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 2 July 30, 2021
5-468
current or planned availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities.
In addition, the element appears to assume residential development on sites zoned for nonresidential uses, but to support this assumption, the element must analyze the likelihood of residential in zoning where 100 percent nonresidential uses are allowed.
The analysis should be based on factors such as development trends including nonresidential, performance standards requiring residential uses or other relevant factors such as enhanced policies and programs.
Small Sites: Many identified sites are smaller than half an acre. Sites smaller than a half-acre in size are deemed inadequate to accommodate housing for lower-income households unless it is demonstrated that sites of equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent number of lower-income housing units as projected for the site or unless the housing element describes other evidence to HCD that the site is adequate to accommodate lower-income housing. As a result, if utilizing these sites toward the housing need for lower-income households, the element must include analysis and programs as appropriate. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community development/building-blocks/site-i nventory-analysis/analysis-of-sites-and zoning.shtml.
Availability of Infrastructure: The element includes information on water capacity but must also address total sewer capacity sufficient to accommodate the RHNA. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at hftp://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/building-blocks/site-i nventory-analysis/analysis-of-sites-and zoning .shtml#environmental.
Environmental Constraints: While the element generally describes a few environmental conditions within the City (page B-49), it must also describe any knownenvironmental constraints or other conditions on identified sites that could impact housing development in the planning period. For additional information and sample analysis, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.qov/communitydevelopment/buildi nq-blocks/site-inventory-analysis/analysis-of-sites-and zoning .shtml#environmental.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing: The element must demonstrate the sites inventory affirmatively furthers fair housing. For more information, see HCD’s guidance at https://www. hcd .ca.gov/community-development/housing element/housing-element-memos.shtml.
Replacement Requirements: If utilizing sites with residential uses, the element must include a policy requiring the replacement of all those units affordable to the same or lower-income level as a condition of any development on the site pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (g), paragraph (3). Replacement requirements shall be consistent withthose set forth in Government Code section 65915, subdivision (c), paragraph (3).
HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 3 July 30, 2021
5-469
Accessory Dwelling Units (AD Us): The element projects 150 ADUs over the planning period or approximately 18 ADUs per year over the eight-year planningperiod. The element also notes permitting 7 ADUs in 2018, 6 in 2019 and 9 in 2020. These trends are inconsistent with HCD records (nothing reported in 2018,6 in 2019 and 4 in 2020) and do not support an assumption of 18 ADUs per year.
To support assumptions for ADUs in the planning period, the element should reduce the number of ADUs assumed per year and reconcile trends with HCDrecords, including additional information such as more recent permitted units and inquiries, resources and incentives, other relevant factors and modify policies and programs as appropriate. Further, programs should commit to additional incentives and strategies, frequent monitoring (every other year) and specific commitment to adopt alternative measures such as rezoning or amending the element within a specific time (e.g., 6 months) if ADU assumptions for the number of units and affordability are not met.
Electronic Sites Inventory: For your information, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, the City must submit an electronic sites inventory with its adopted housingelement. The City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD.
Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community developmentlhousing-elementlindex.shtml#element for a copy of the form and instructions. The City can reach out to HCD at sitesinventoryhcd.ca.gov for technicalassistance.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types: The element must demonstrate zoning toencourage and facilitate a variety of housing types, as follows:
Emergency Shelters: Zoning may impose development standards onemergency shelters including sufficient parking to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter, provided that the standards do not require more parking for emergency shelters than other residential or commercial uses within the same zone. The element describes parking requirements are based on need which appears inconsistent with statute.
As a result, the element should add or modify programs as appropriate. • Permanent Supportive Housing: Supportive housing shall be a use by-right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses pursuant to Government Code section 65651. The element must demonstrate compliance with this requirement and include programs as appropriate.
• Transitional and Supportive Housing: Definitions for transitional and supportive housing and target population (page B-37) appear inconsistent in Government Code section 65582, and the element should be revised, including with programs, as appropriate.
• Employee Housing: The element must demonstrate zoning is consistent with the Employee Housing Act (Health and Safety Code, § 17000 et seq.) or add or modify programs. Specifically, section 17021.5 requires employee HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 4 July 30, 2021
5-470
housing for six or fewer employees to be treated as a single-family structure and permitted in the same manner as other dwellings of the same type in the same zone.
4. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types ofhousing identified in paragraph (1) ofsubdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land-use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)Land-Use Controls: The element lists several potential constraints, particularly unit sizes, setbacks, parking, modulation requirements and heights and then appears to conclude these standards are not constraints because projects have been built near maximum densities. This analysis does not demonstrate these land use controls are not constraints. For example, none of the listed projects are less than a decade old and most did not achieve maximum densities under the general plan.
The analysis should at least address a newer and more complete list of projects, whether exceptions or deviations to developments standards were utilized, the lack of regularly achieving general plan densities, why assemblage appears necessary to achieve higher densities, which zones were used and any other factors that impact the cost, supply and feasibility of development. Based on the outcomes of the analysis, the element must include programs to address identified constraints.
Fees: The element indicates that fees are approximately $100,000 per multifamily unit and concludes the fees are nominal based on sales prices. However, regardless of proportion of sales prices, cumulative fees of $100,000 per unit have a significant impact on development costs. The element should include a closer evaluation of these fees and add programs to address the constraint as appropriate.
Processing and Permit Procedures: The element describes planning and architectural commission reviews as well as decision making standards such as “.. . promote harmonious development...”, “...conformity with good taste... .“, and “. . . contributes to the image of Beverly Hills as a place of beauty, spaciousness, balance, taste, fitness, broad vistas and high quality.” The City’s processing approach to these potentially roving standards is to provide technical assistance and examples of past projects.
While this approach could be effective in facilitating approval certainty, the analysis should also consider impacts on costs, supply and built density. Also, given thesignificant ambiguity implied in these decision-making standards, the element should include programs to monitor their impacts and should consider more fixed and objective standards.
Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities: The element must include an analysis of zoning, development standards, building codes, and process and permitprocedures as potential constraints on housing for persons with disabilities, as follows:
HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 5 July 30, 2021
5-471
• Family Definition: The element discusses definitions of family, bona fide housekeeping unit and single-family housekeeping unit that appear to constrainhousing, including for persons with disabilities. For example, the definitions require households to be the “functional equivalent of a traditional family” with members that are “non-transient”, “interactive” and several other provisions. The element should add or modify programs to address these constraints. • Group Homes: Group homes for seven or more persons appear to be excluded from most residential zones and the element does not otherwise address this important housing type. The element should identify what zones permit this housing and evaluate approval requirements for impacts on objectivity and approval certainty. For example, excluding this housing from residential zones or imposingstandards such as compatibility with surrounding uses without clarity would be considered a constraint. The element must include programs as appropriate toaddress identified constraints based on the outcomes of this analysis.
SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process: The element must identify and analyze written procedures for the SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process.
Zoning, Development Standards and Fees: The element must clarify its compliancewith new transparency requirements for posting all zoning, development standards and fees for each parcel on the jurisdiction’s website.
5. An analysis of potential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels,including the availability of financing, the price of land, the cost of construction, the requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated in the analysisrequired by subdivision (c) of Government Code section 65583.2, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of anapplication for building permits for that housing development that hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need in accordance with Government Code section 65584. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(6).) Identified Densities and Approval Times: The element did not address these requirements. The element must address requests to develop housing at densitiesbelow those anticipated in the sites inventory and the length of time between receiving approval for housing development and submittal of application for buildingpermits. The analysis must address any hinderances on housing development andprograms should be added as appropriate.
6. Analyze existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change to non low-income housing uses during the next 10 years due to termination ofsubsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of use restrictions. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(9) through 65583(a)(9)(D).)
HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 6 July 30, 2021
5-472
While the element identifies the Beverly Hills Senior Housing project is at risk of converting from affordable to market-rate during the next ten years, the element must also estimate the total cost of preserving these units and include a list of entities with the capacity to acquire multifamily developments that are at risk. The analysis should guide policies and programs necessary to address the critical activity of preserving at-risk units. For additional information and sample analysis, see the Building Blocksat http:I/www. hcd .ca.qov/community-developmentlbuilding-blocks/housinq needs/assisted-housing-developments.shtml and for more information on identifyingunits at-risk, see the California Housing Partnership Corporation athttp://www.chpc.net.
C. Housing Programs
1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when available. The program shall include anidentification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
To have a beneficial impact in the planning period and address the goals of the housing element, programs must be revised with discrete timelines, including Programs 9.3 (Home Repair and Improvement), 10.3 (Housing Trust Fund), 10.4(ADU5), 10.6 (Partnerships with Affordable Housing Developers), 11.5 (Housing Opportunities for Persons with Disabilities) and 12.1 (Development Standards).
2. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing needfor each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in theinventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) ofsubdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factorybuilt housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing,single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov.
Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
As noted in Finding B3, the element does not contain a complete sites inventory and analysis. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types.
HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 7 July 30, 2021
5-473
3. The housing element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, veiy low-, low- and moderate-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).) The element must include a program(s) with specific actions and timelines to assist inthe development of housing for extremely low-income households and individuals and households with special needs (beyond seniors). The program(s) could commit the City to adopting priority processing, granting fee waivers or deferrals, modifying development standards, granting concessions and incentives for housingdevelopments that include units affordable to lower and moderate-income households; assisting, supporting or pursuing funding applications; and outreach and coordination with affordable housing developers. For additional information, see the Building Blocks at http:/Iwww. hcd .ca.qov/community-development/building blocks/program-requirements/assist-in-development-housing.shtml.
4. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive seivices for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) As noted in Finding B4, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs to address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints. In addition, Program 12.1 must be revised with specific commitment tocomplete actions early in the planning period. While the program commits to “explore” and “evaluating”, these actions must be coupled with specific actions to amend and complete the appropriate zoning changes. Finally, as noted on page B-15, thisprogram should be revised to evaluate and revise parking requirements.
5. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion,sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Section 65008, and any otherstate and federal fair housing and planning law. (Gov. Code, § 65583,subd. (c)(5).) As noted in Finding BI, the element must include a complete assessment of fair housing. Based on the outcomes of that analysis, the element must add or modifyprograms. For additional guidance on program requirements to affirmatively further fair housing, please see HCD’s guidance at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community development/housing-element/housing-element-memos.shtml.
HOD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 8 July 30, 2021
5-474
6. The housing program shall preserve for low-income household the assisted housing developments identified pursuant to paragraph (9) of subdivision (a). The program for preservation of the assisted housing developments shall utilize, to the extent necessaty, all available federal, state, and local financing and subsidy programsidentified in paragraph (9) ofsubdivision (a), except where a community has other urgent needs for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program may include strategies that involve local regulation and technical assistance. (Gov.
Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(6).)
As noted in Finding B6, the element must complete an analysis of units at risk of conversion to market rate during the planning period. The element must add or modify programs based on the outcomes of that analysis. In addition, Program 9.7 should be revised to comply with noticing requirements, provide education andassistance to tenants, assist with funding, and promptly reach out to qualified entities to preserve at-risk housing units.
7. Develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of ADUs that can be offered at affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c) (7).)
The element is required to include a program that incentivizes or promotes ADU development for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. To address this requirement, the element includes Program 10.4, but many actions only “explore” or “consider” and the program should be revised with specific commitment to complete, adopt, amend or begin implementation of actions that will have an actual and beneficial impact on housing.
0. Public Participation
Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of alleconomic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).) While the element describes a survey, public meetings and a webpage; the element should include additional efforts to include a broad spectrum of individuals and representative organizations; consider language access barriers and describe how comments were incorporated into the housing element. In addition, other public participation requirements may be triggered if the City did not make the element available to the public prior to submittal to HCD. By not providing an opportunity for the public to review and comment on a draft of the element in advance of submissionto HCD, the City will have not yet complied with statutory mandates to make a diligent effort to encourage the public participation in the development of the element and it reduces HCD’s ability to consider public comments in the course of its review. The availability of the document to the public and opportunity for public comment prior tosubmittal to HCD is essential to the public process and HCD’s review. The City must HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 9 July 30, 2021
5-475
proactively make future revisions available to the public, including any commenters, prior to submitting any revisions to HCD and diligently consider and address comments, including making revisions to the document where appropriate. HCD’s future review will consider the extent to which the revised element documents were circulated and how the City solicited, considered, and addressed public comments in the element. The City’s consideration of public comments must not be limited by HCD’s findings in this review letter.
HCD Review of Beverly Hills’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Page 10 July 30, 2021
5-476
EXHIBIT
B
5-477
STATE OF CALIFORNIA -BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTDIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 2020 W El Camino Avenue Suite 500
Sacramento CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcdca.gov
January 14, 2022
Ryan Gohlich, Director
Community Development DepartmentCity of Beverly Hills
455 North Rexford Drive, First Floor
Beverly Hills, CA, 90210
Dear Ryan Gohlich:
RE: City of Beverly Hills’ 6I Cycle (2021 -2029) Adopted Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Beverly Hills’ (City) housing element adopted October 12, 2021 and received for review on October 18, 2021. Pursuant toGovernment Code section 65585, subdivision (h), the California Department of Housingand Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review.
The adopted housing element addresses most statutory requirements described in HCD’s July 30, 2021 review; however, additional revisions are necessary to fully comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gay. Code). The enclosedAppendix describes the revisions needed to comply with State Housing Element Law.
As a reminder, the City’s 6th cycle housing element was due October 15, 2021. As of today, the City has not completed the housing element process for the cycle. The City’s 5th cycle housing element no longer satisfies statutory requirements. HCD encourages the City to revise the element as described above, adopt, and submit to HCD to regain housing element compliance.
For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), if a local government fails to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of thestatutory deadline (October 15, 2021), then any rezoning to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA), including for lower-income households, shall be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the localgovernment’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i).
Pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, subdivision (b), the City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD when preparing the sites inventory.
Please note, upon adoption of the housing element, the City must submit an electronic 5-478
Ryan Gohlich, Director
version of the sites inventory with its adopted housing element to sitesinventorv(hcd.ca.qov. Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https:Ilwww. hcd .ca.gov/community-developmentlhousinq-elementlindex.shtml for a copy of the form and instructions.
Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant; the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reportingrequirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City meets housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.
We are committed to assisting the City in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Chelsea Lee, of our staff, at CheIsea.Leehcdca.qov.
Sincerely,
Paul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
Enclosure
5-479
APPENDIX
CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS
The following changes are necessary to bring the City’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.
Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website athffp :I/www. hcd .ca .qov/community-developmentlhousing-element/housinq-element-memos.shtml.
Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at http:Ilwww. hcd .ca .qov/community-developmentlbuilding-blocks/index.shtml and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.
A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints
1. Affirmatively further[ing] fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2. . .shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) The element now includes additional information on outreach conducted, a few maps, and marginal sites analysis for some of the fair housing areas but generally does notaddress this requirement. Please see HCD’s prior review for additional information and HCD’s data viewer and guidance at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community developmentlaffh/index.shtml.
2. An inventoi’y of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated Thcome level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd.
Parcel Listing: The element now identifies the anticipated affordability levels of units on identified sites, but still does not include revisions to clarify generic descriptions of existing uses of sites identified in the inventory. Please see HCD’s prior review foradditional information.
Realistic Capacity: The element now includes minimal discussion that indicates allowable densities in the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone are higher than the default density for the City and lists recently approved projects in the R-4 zone that achieved densities between 30-59 units per acre. However, the element provides no analysis based on land-use controls, environmental constraints, infrastructure, and site improvements to demonstrate the calculation of residential capacity on identified sites. Please see HCD’s prior review for additional information.
Suitability of Nonvacant Sites: HCD’s prior review found the element must includeanalysis that demonstrates the potential for additional development of nonvacant sites.
City of Beverly Hills’ Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 1 January 14, 2022
5-480
In response, the element adds some information on ILV ratios and market conditions of sites in the Mixed-Use Overlay zone. However, the element does not provide sufficient analysis to demonstrate existing uses will discontinue in the planning period, analyze existing leases or contracts that would prevent redevelopment of sites, or provideevidence of the City’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher density residential development. Please see HOD’s prior review for additional information.
Environmental Constraints: HCD’s prior review found the element must describe any known environmental constraints or other conditions on identified sites that could impact housing development in the planning period. In response, the element now states, “while environmental constraints will require development to incorporate measures to mitigate potential hazards, these constraints are not expected to preclude housing development consistent with the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA),” (p. B-56).
This statement indicates the presence of constraints on sites identified; therefore, the element did not address this finding.
Replacement Requirements: HCD’s prior review found the element includes sites in the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone with existing residential uses. The element was not revised to address this requirement. Please see HCD’s prior review.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): The element now indicates that an additional 14 ADU permit applications were submitted in September 2021 to justify its projection of 150 ADUs in the planning period. The analysis should be based on permitted ADUs.
Further, the City did not address discrepancies between the City and HCD’s records on ADUs permitted in 2018, 2019, and 2020. The City must reconcile ADU figures with HCD records and rescale assumptions based on permitted ADUs.
3. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types ofhousing identified in paragraph (1) ofsubdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities asidentified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)
Land-Use Controls: In response to HCD’s prior review to analyze development standards for impacts on achieving maximum densities, the element now includes additional examples of projects recently approved in the R-4 zone. In addition, the element addresses lot assemblage issues, noting that some of the R-4 projects involved singular lots and still achieved high densities. However, revisions added to Program
12.1 (Development Standards) to “study” and “consider” do not result in meaningful actions to address potential constraints on multifamily housing and this analysis.
Fees: In response to HCD’s prior review to analyze fees for impacts on development costs, the element now includes a statement that indicates Program 12.2 (Reduced Fees for Affordable Housing) commits the City to conducting a fee study to assess whether additional waivers can be granted for affordable housing projects. However, City of Beverly Hills’ 6” Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 2 January 14, 2022
5-481
there are no revisions found in Program 12.2, nor is there an evaluation of fees. Please see HCD’s prior review.
Processing and Permit Procedures: In response to HCD’s prior review to analyze its permit and processing procedures for impacts on cost, supply, and built density, the element now adds minor revisions describing the design content of the “Residential Design Style Catalog,” which includes architectural features, materials, and pictures of each design style. These revisions do not address HCD’s findings. Please see HCD’s prior review.Constraints on Persons with Disabilities:
Family Definition: In response to HCD’s prior review, which found that the City’sdefinition of family acts as a constraint on persons with disabilities and isdiscriminatory, the City responded to HCD by noting that “the City believes that the current definition complies with State law and that no revisions are necessary or appropriate at this time. It is important to recognize that the existing definition is part of an integrated set of land use regulations that has been carefully crafted to protect the integrity of existing single-and-multi-family neighborhoods...” (Exhibit 1, Housing Element Comments and Responses). Based upon the City’s refusal to address these constraints, the adopted element still does not address this finding. Please see HCD’s prior review.
• Group Homes: Similarly, HCD’s prior review found that group homes for seven or more persons are excluded from most residential zones and did not evaluateapproval requirements for impacts on objectivity and approval certainty. The City responded to HCD by noting that “the City believes the regulations for grouphomes for 7+ persons complies with State law” (Exhibit 1, Housing Element Comments and Responses). Based upon the City’s response, the adoptedelement still does not address this finding. Please see HCD’s prior review.
4. An analysis ofpotential and actual nongovernmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the availability of financing, the price of land, the cost of construction, the requests to develop housingat densities below those anticipated in the analysis required by subdivision (c) of Government Code section 65583.2, and the length of time between receiving approval for a housing development and submittal of an application for building permits for that housing development that hinder the construction of a locality’s share of the regional housing need in accordance with Government Code section 65584. (Gov. Code, 65583, subd. (a)(6).)
HCD’s prior review found the element must address requests to develop housing at densities below those anticipated in the sites inventory and the length of time between receiving approval for housing development and submittal of application for buildingpermits. The element was not revised to address this requirement. Please see HCD’sprior review for additional information.
5. Analyze existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change to non-low income housing uses during the next 10 years due to termination of subsidy contracts, City of Beverly Hills’ 6th Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 3 January 14, 2022
5-482
mortgage prepayment, or expiration of use restrictions. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(9) through 65583(a)(9)(D).)
HCD’s prior review found the element must estimate the total costs of preserving at-risk units that are in danger of converting to market-rate during the next ten years. In response, the element presents confounding information that the earliest date of conversion for the Beverly Hills Senior Housing project is 2028 and is “technicallyclassified as being at-risk of conversion...”; however, the “City has the right to purchase the upper floor for one dollar in 2041; therefore, this project is not at risk of conversion to market rate.” These revisions do not address HCD’s findings. Please see HCD’s prior review for additional information.
B. Housing Programs
1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs areongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element through the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulator,’concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appropriate federal and state financingand subsidy programs when available. The program shall include an identification of theagencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. (Gov.
Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
The element now includes revisions that satisfactorily addresses timeframes for Programs 11.5 and 12.1. However, there are no revisions to Programs 9.3 (Home Repair and Improvement) and 10.3 (Housing Trust Fund). In addition, Program 10,4 (Accessory Dwelling Units) still requires timeframes for creating pre-approved ADU plans and for outreach materials, including an ADU webpage.
2. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing needfor each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) ofsubdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
As noted in Finding A2, the element does not include a complete site analysis, therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs City of Beverly Hills’ 6th Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 4January 14, 2022 5-483
to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types.
3. The housing element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderateincome households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).) In response to HCD’s prior review, the element now includes revisions that identify additional actions to assist low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households in Program 10.6 (Partnerships with Affordable Housing Developers). However, none of these actions have corresponding timeframe commitments for implementation that will result in beneficial impacts during the planning period.
4. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities. The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).) As noted in Findings A3 and A4, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints. In addition, while the element now includes revisions to Program
12.1 (Development Standards) that commit the City to amendments by 2024, it still contains terms including “studying” and “evaluating” that do not result in beneficial impacts during the planning period.
5. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and othercharacteristics protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2), Section 65008, and any other state and federal fair housing and planning law. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).) As noted in Finding Al, the element must include a complete analysis of affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH). Based on the outcomes of that analysis, the element must add or modify programs.
6. The housing program shall preserve for low-income household the assisted housing developments identified pursuant to paragraph (9) ofsubdivision (a). The program for preservation of the assisted housing developments shall utilize, to the extent necessary, all available federal, state, and local financing and subsidy programs identified in paragraph (9) ofsubdivision (a), except where a community has other urgent needs for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program may include strategies that involve local regulation and technical assistance. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(6).)
City of Beverly Hills’ 6th Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 5January 14, 2022 5-484
As noted in Finding A5, the element must complete an analysis of units at risk of conversion to market rate during the planning period. The element must add or modify prog rams based on the outcomes of that analysis.
7. Develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation ofADU that can be offered at affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for veiy low, low-, or moderate-income households. For purposes of this paragraph, “ADU” has the same meaning as “ADU” as defined in paragraph (4) ofsubdivision (I) of Section 65852.2. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).)
The element now includes revisions that address some timeframes to actions identified in Program 10.4 (Accessory Dwelling Units). However, other actions still lack specified timeframes other than indicating “throughout the planning period,” including amending the zoning code to remove barriers regarding ADUs in multi-family zones, pre-plan checks and pre-approved ADU plans, and creating an ADU webpage.
C. Public Participation
Include a diligent effort by the local government to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the program shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(9).) The element now includes revisions that address when the draft was disseminated and how public comments were incorporated. The element also includes clarifying revisions on the types of outreach conducted, including an additional Planning Commission meeting, mailings to property owners, and an ADU survey. However, these revisions are insufficient in demonstrating that all economic segments of the community, particularly low-and moderate-income households and organizations that represent them, were involved in the development of the housing element. Please see HOD’s prior review.
City of Beverly Hills’ 6th Cycle Adopted Housing Element Page 6 January 14, 2022
5-485
*anonymous
*******************************************
I’m a Beverly Hills Chapter 6 Tenant and Resident for 20 years. I worked in Beverly Hills and an active member of the Beverly Hills community. Due to tragic circumstances I became sick, my property was destroyed, and I was displaced from my beautiful Beverly Hills apartment/home of 20 years.
Many luxury residential buildings have been built and filled in Beverly Hills without affordable units in nearly 5 years. Only two affordable units have been provided, and during this time, all but one council member has voted down new affordable housing opportunities, while voting yes for luxury developments.
The Beverly Hills Council has disregarded the ability and responsibility to activate and create new affordable housing opportunities in the city.
Due to unforeseen hardships, suffering traumatic circumstances, or ill health, the Beverly Hills Residents who need Affordable Housing deserve support not rejection, or to be put on the back burner. These individuals have supported Beverly Hills Businesses for decades, invested in the community, paid taxes and voted for you.
Please redraft the plan to include activating Affordable units to be added and filled in Beverly Hills in 2022, 2023 and 2024.
A new 100 million dollar Beverly Hills luxury condominium will be completed in a year and a half. A new two billion dollar residences and suites project begins development next year. For Beverly Hills to say it will take years to establish a plan for affordable housing is insulting and demeaning.
Thank you.
In the city’s initial housing element, the city represented that it would promote the creation of more housing by incentivizing the building of ADU’s.
Despite such representations, the affordable housing shortage, the RHNA new housing requirements, the HCD’s rejection of the city’s housing element, and passing years, the city has done absolutely nothing to incentivize the building of ADU’s.
The proposed housing element, instead of being able to refer to the promised ordinance setting forth new rules for ADU’s, instead just continues to make promises. And residents are being told that an ordinance, which should have been done years ago, will not be done for another 6 months or sometime in 2023.
The delay is inexcusable, and it would be a good idea to expedite an ordinance incentivizing the building of ADU’s instead of continuing to make unfulfilled promises—a good basis for the HCD to again reject the city’s housing element.
Darian Bojeaux
MATTHEW GELFAND, COUNSEL
[email protected]
TEL: (213) 739-8206
November 23, 2022
VIA EMAIL
Chelsea Lee
California Department of Housing & Community Development 2020 W. El Camino Ave., Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
Email: [email protected]
RE: Comments on City of Beverly Hills Housing Element.
Dear Ms. Lee,
Californians for Homeownership is a 501(c)(3) organization devoted to using legal tools to address California’s housing crisis. We are writing to comment on the new draft sixth cycle Housing Element of the City of Beverly Hills, submitted to HCD on September 29, 2022. The revised Housing Element still fails to comply with state law and does not adequately address many of HCD’s comments laid out in its review of the City’s prior adopted housing element.
Duplicate and Double-Counted Site
The parcel located at APN 4331-001-049 appears twice in the City’s sites inventory, and has been double-counted in the City’s calculation of its lower-income site capacity. For reasons explained in more detail below, it is unclear exactly how many low- and very low-income units the City attributed to this site, but the removal of the site has the potential to bring the City’s site capacity below its RHNA requirement for low-income units.
Non-Specific Existing Use Information
In HCD’s prior review, the City was specifically told that the column of the parcel listing that describes the existing use of each parcel needed more information to demonstrate development potential. However, the new housing element does not add more information and continues to describe sites using non-specific terms such as “retail” and “office” that do not give a realistic idea of the conditions of each site that would make residential uses likely or not.
Inadequate Support for Nonvacant Sites
The sites inventory in the City’s draft Housing Element does not meet the requirements in Government Code Section 65583.2(g). The housing element does not adequately account for the impediment created by the existing uses on the listed sites, including the possibility that a site will be maintained in its current use rather than redeveloped during the planning period.
November 23, 2022
Many sites listed in the inventory have existing uses that are likely to continue throughout the planning period. A large number are Class A and B office buildings that seem to have been included merely because their fenestration and other key features could allow conversion to residential, without any reason to believe that the existing office use will actually end by 2029— and a lot of reasons to believe they won’t.
In some cases, it is easy to determine from leasing websites that these buildings are (1) mostly occupied, and (2) offering long-term leases to new tenants, foreclosing redevelopment by 2029. For example, based on listings available on LoopNet, 8383 Wilshire Blvd. appears to be an almost-90% occupied office building with a recently renovated lobby, high-quality management, and very active leasing efforts to fill the small amounts of available office space, some of which have brand new build-outs. As another example, 8500 Wilshire Blvd. appears to be a largely-occupied, 2008-renovated medical office building that is offering 10-year leases to new tenants. We do not believe that the City has any evidence that the existing uses in these and most of the other office buildings listed on the housing element will discontinue by 2029.
Because the City’s sites inventory barely provides the necessary number of very low- and low-income units, without any meaningful buffer, the exclusion of these sites will require the City to identify and rezone other sites in order to meet its RHNA allocation.
Medical Uses
The housing element specifically states that when the City was developing its sites inventory, it considered certain characteristics that render a site not likely to be redeveloped and therefore inappropriate for inclusion. One listed exclusion characteristic was parcels with existing medical uses, especially ones that “are occupied by prominent medical groups (i.e. Cedars-Sinai, UCLA Health, etc).” Despite conceding that these types of sites should not be included in the sites inventory due to their lack of redevelopment potential, the City nevertheless included 8501 Wilshire Blvd., which contains a major pediatrics care facility operated by Cedars-Sinai, and 8641 Wilshire Blvd., which contains a primary care practice and 8 specialty care practices run by UCLA Health. These sites have existing uses that preclude their redevelopment as housing.
Misalignment Between Development Potential and Unit Count Calculation Because the City’s inclusion of many of its larger sites is based on the potential conversion of large office buildings, or the partial redevelopment of parking podiums and the like, it is important to understand whether the unit counts included in the City’s housing element account for the type of redevelopment being contemplated. This does not appear to be the case, but the housing element contains so little information about how the unit counts for each site were calculated that it is impossible to say for certain.
For example, 8949 Wilshire Blvd. is home to the Motion Picture Academy’s Samuel Goldwyn Theater, which houses movie screenings and other public events. By all appearances, the theater will remain throughout the planning period, and we understand that the City may have included it with the understanding that the theater would remain and the rest of the building would November 23, 2022
be converted. But the assigned unit count does not appear to account for this form of redevelopment.
Similarly, we understand that a number of office buildings have been included based on their potential for conversion, or for partial redevelopment of a parking podium or portion of the site. But there is no information to suggest that the unit counts used for these sites account for the fact that redevelopment would encompass only part of the site, or be limited to the envelope of the existing structure.
Lack of Redevelopment Potential for Sites to Meet Lower Income RHNA The housing element concedes that “it is unlikely that a high percentage of the parcels within the MU Overlay Zone would be developed with mixed-use projects during the planning period” (C-11). The City nevertheless contends that its RHNA can be satisfied through a development of a “portion” of the listed sites.
Perhaps this is true for the moderate and above moderate RHNA allocations. But the surpluses of sites for the very low and low income categories are so small that it is unlikely that the City would be able to meet its requirements even assuming development of the City’s sites at nearly 100% of the maximum unit potential. The City must provide more evidence of the likelihood of development at the unit counts listed in its housing element, as well as more sites to ensure it meets its lower income RHNA requirements.
Lack of Clarity for Distribution of Units Between Income Levels Almost the entirety of the housing element’s sites inventory to meet the City’s RHNA is made up of underutilized sites in the City’s Mixed Use (MU) Overlay Zone. However, the sites inventory does not provide enough information to understand how each parcel was assigned to its income category. The housing element states that since the allowable density is greater than 30 units/acre in that zone, all sites are suitable for lower-income housing unless other factors apply, such as the state law minimum size requirement, but there is no analysis of factors that make a site more or less likely to redevelop at a certain income level. Indeed, the housing element appears to assume without evidence that all of the sites not suitable for lower-income development will be developed at 100% moderate-income levels.
Consistent with these assumptions, Table C-3 lists the number of lower income or moderate income units that can be accommodated on each site. But Table C-1 breaks down the underutilized sites into very low, low, moderate, and above moderate income categories. We have been unable to ascertain how the numbers in the two tables relate to one another, and there is no information in the document as to how the sites were assigned to particular income levels, nor does the housing November 23, 2022
element identify which sites are being counted as very low instead of low, or being counted as above moderate instead of moderate.
Instead, the City seems to have simply distributed the numbers in the manner necessary to determine that its RHNA requirement has been met. This bootstrapping approach is legally inadequate and we urge HCD not to accept it.
* * *
Thank you for considering these comments as you review the City’s housing element.
Sincerely,
Matthew Gelfand