City of Carpinteria
Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Monday, April 18, 2022
Council Chamber, 5775 Carpinteria Avenue
5:30 p.m.
In-Person and Virtual Participation Options
Attendance/Viewing Options:
• Attend the in-person meeting in City Council Chambers at City Hall (5775 Carpinteria Ave.).
• View the meeting live through the City’s website (https://carpinteria.ca.us/cityhall/agendas-meetings) on your computer, tablet or smartphone. • View the meeting on Government Access Television Channel 21 (broadcast live and rebroadcast on the Wednesday and the Saturday following the meeting at 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., respectively).
• Call 669-900-9128 (and enter Webinar ID 854 5806 4613) to listen to the meeting on your phone.
• Join the City’s Zoom webinar from your computer, tablet, or smartphone by CLICKING HERE. Alternatively, you can join the Zoom webinar by logging on to www.zoom.us, downloading the application, selecting "Join Meeting", and entering Webinar ID 854 5806 4613.
Public Comments
• Provide a live public comment during the in-person meeting in City Council Chambers at City Hall (5775 Carpinteria Ave.). Please note the City has the discretion to limit both the overall and individual speaker time for any meeting or agenda matter. Typically, the Council’s practice has been to limit each speaker to three minutes.
• Provide a live comment through the City’s Zoom webinar platform (through the link provided above). To make public comments through this platform please use the “raise your hand” feature to notify staff that you would like to make a public comment during designated public comment times. Once it is your turn to provide a public comment, staff will unmute your microphone and you will be given a designated amount of time to provide your comment (typically, the practice has been up to 3 minutes per speaker on each item). At the end of your comment, staff will once again mute your microphone.
• Submit a written comment (as either a general public comment or on a specific agenda item) to be distributed to Council Members by 12:00 P.M. on the day of Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
April 18, 2022
the meeting by either submitting your comment via (1) email to [email protected], or (2) the eComment link on the City's agenda website (https://carpinteria.ca.us/city-hall/agendas-meetings). Please reference the agenda item to which your comment pertains.
Please note that the City will make every effort to make the meeting accessible virtually; however, if one of the above virtual attendance/viewing or public comment options is unavailable due to technological issues, you are invited to take advantage of one of the other participation options outlined above (including attending and providing public comment in-person in the City Council Chambers). Additional options may be made available at the meeting.
Also, please note that Spanish interpretation will be available at the in-person meeting (but will not be available through the City’s Zoom webinar).
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS
The City Council and Planning Commission will meet to discuss the following subject matter:
Update on new housing laws taking effect in 2022.
Recommendation: Receive and file report on new housing laws taking effect in 2022.
Staff presenter: Steve Goggia, Community Development Director a. Staff presentation
b. Public comment
c. Discussion
PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE HEARD CONCERNING ONLY THE AGENDIZED ITEM
FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING
ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 755-4403 or the California Relay Service at (866) 735-2929. Notification two business days prior to the Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Meeting Agenda
April 18, 2022
meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for accessibility to this meeting.
Materials related to an agenda item submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public review at the City Clerk's Office.
This agenda was posted on Thursday, April 14, 2022, in the City Clerk's Office, on the City Hall Public Notices Window, and on the Internet.
City of Carpinteria
Jorrur Cnv Coutrtcrt- Rtto PmruNING ContlMrsstoru
Specnr- Meerrruc Aceruol Srnrr Reponr
April 18,2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Update on new housing laws taking effect in 2022
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file report on new housing laws taking effect in 2022 Motion: I move to receive and file the report on new housing laws taking effect in 2022
BACKGROUND
Continuing efforls to address California's housing crisis, Governor Newsom signed 31 bills related to housing into law from the 2021 legislative session. The legislature views these new housing laws as a multi-prong attempt to promote the development of new housing and increase the availability of affordable housing. The entire housing legislation package creates new, complex requirements for local agencies responsible for permitting housing. lmplementation of these new housing laws is made even more complex for coastal cities, like the City of Carpinteria ("City"), due the need to implement the new housing laws consistent with California Coastal Act (Pub. Res. Code, SS 30000 ef seg.).
This agenda item will summarize the key new housing laws taking effect in 2022 and their potential impacts on the City. The Staff Report and Presentation is generally organized around how the new housing legislation impacts key issue areas and updates existing state laws effecting housing development within the City. The new housing legislation focuses on the following issue areas:
1 . Local Government Accountability;
2. lncentives for Housing Production across the board (e.9., Senate Bills ("SBs") 8, 9 and 10); and
3. lncentives for Affordable Housing Production.
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April18,2022
The following discussion sections briefly describes existing state laws related to these issues areas, explains the changes to existing law taking effect in 2022, and discuss how these laws will affect the City.
DISCUSSION
Local Government Accountability
Assembly Bill ("AB") 215
The existing Planning and Zoning Law requires a city to adopt a general plan for land use development that includes, among other things, a housing element. AB 215 amends existing law to require that local agencies must make draft revisions of the housing element available for public comment for 30 days and, if any comments are received, take at least 10 additional business days to consider and incorporate public comments into the draft revision before submitting it to the department.l AB 215 also strengthens the State's enforcement abilities by authorizing the Attorney Generalto brin_g suit for any violation of certain housing laws including the Housing Crisis Act, SB 35 Streamlining, Permanent Supporting Housing streamlining (AB 686f and Low Barrier Navigation Center streamlining (AB 101).2
On August9,2021the Council authorized the Community Development Director to enter into a Consultant Services Agreement between the City of Carpinteria and John Douglas, AICP, Owner, JHD Planning LLC to prepare the City's 2023-2031Housing Element. Work has just begun gathering the baseline information. The City will need to comply with the public comment process as part of its ongoing Housing Element update process.
AB 602
AB 602 places additional requirements on local agency's ability to impose development impact fees including, but not limited to, (1) requiring a more robust procedure when conducting an impact fee nexus study, (2) requiring agencies to generally calculate fees on a housing development project proportional to the unit square footage in order to have a valid method for balancing the fee charged and the burden posed, and (3) requiring local agencies to post written fee schedules on their websites.3 The city must comply with AB 602's posting requirement and employ the new methodology to calculate development impact fees for the City's in-progress impact fee nexus study.
1 Gov. Code $ 65585(b)(1).
2 See Gov. Code $ 65585(j)-(p)
3 See Gov. Code $ 66016.5.
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April 18,2022
lncentives for Housing Production
SB8
SB 8's primary effect is to extend the duration of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 ("HCA") from 2025 to 2030. The HCA set limits on the local approval process for housing projects, curtailed local governments' ability to downzone residential parcels after project initiation, and limited fee increases on housing applications, among other things.a Specifically, SB 8 extends until 2034 the HCA provision that prohibits cities from conducting more than five hearings on an application as well as HCA provisions that provide vesting rights for housing projects that submit a qualifying "preliminary application."5
Applicants who submit qualifying preliminary applications for housing development prior to January 1,2030, can now invoke vesting rights until January 1,2034.6 SB 8 also extends until 2030 the provisions of the HCA that limit a local agency's authority to impose shifting requirements as part of application "completeness" review.T Finally, SB 8 enacts clarifying provisions intended to provide that HCA provisions apply to both discretionary and ministerial approvals as well as to clarifying that certain provisions of state housing law apply to construction of a single dwelling unit.8 SB 8 applies within the City to the extent that its provisions do not conflict with the CoastalAct and City's certified Local Coastal Program ("LCP'), which applies throughout the City because the City is located entirely in the coastal zone.e SB9
SB 9 allows urban lot splits and/or the development of duplexes on single-family zoned parcels to be approved ministerially (i.e., without discretionary approval or hearings) if certain requirements are met. Consequently, such projects would bypass the CEQA process.l0 Theoretically, this bill could allow for up to four residences where there was historically only one (if an applicant receives ministerial approval for both a lot split and the development of duplexes on each parcel).11
4 See Stats. 2019, c.654 (SB 330).
5 Gov. Code $$ 65905.5, 65941.1.
6 Gov. Code $ 66301.
7 Gov. Code $ 65943.
8 Gov. Code $ 65905.5(bX3).
e See, e.9., Gov. Code $$ 65589.5(e), 66300(hX2).
1o Gov. Code $$ 65852.21, 66411.7.
11 Gov. Code $ 66411.7(jX1).
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April18,2022
To be eligible for a ministerially approved duplex construction under SB 9, the project must not involve:
o ? ProPerty located in a historic district or urbanized area or urban cluster, o demolition of more than 25o/o of the existing exterior walls of an existing dwelling unless (a) the local agency chooses to allow otherwise, or (b) the site has not been occupied by a tenant in the last three years, and
o demolition or alteration of affordable housing, rent-controlled housing, housing that was withdrawn from rent within the last 15 years or housing occupied by a tenant (market-rate or affordable) in the past three years.12 To be eligible for a ministerially approved lot split under SB 9, a parcel or lot must:
o flot be located in a historic district, high fire zone area or rural area, . be a minimum of 2,400 square feet (i.e., the new parcels must be at least 1 ,200 square feet),
o hot result in a parcel that is smaller than 40% of the original parcel, and I not be subjected to demolition or alteration of affordable housing, rent-controlled housing, housing that was withdrawn from rent within the last 15 years or housing occupied by a tenant (market rate or affordable) in the past three years.13
SB 9 also includes various measures to prevent displacement. For instance, pursuant to SB 9, a lot split cannot require the demolition or alteration of a housing unit currently serving moderate-, low- or very low-income households or rent-controlled units nor can it result in the demolition or alteration of housing that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years or where an owner has used the Ellis Act to remove a rental from the market within the last 15 years.la Additionally, for lot splits, local agencies must require owner-occupancy of one of the housing units for a minimum of three years.
SB 9 also specifies that rental units created as a result of SB g must be for a term of 30 days or more (i.e., no vacation rentals).15 Finally, the bill ensures that lots created as a result of SB 9 cannot be further split and the same person cannot perform a lot split on adjacent lots.16
SB 9 allows localjurisdictions to impose objective zoning, subdivision and design review standards and require a setback of up to four feet.17 However, localjurisdictions may not impose standards that would preclude the construction of up to two units, or physically preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor 12 Gov. Code $ 65852.21(a)
13 Gov. Code $ 66411.7(a).
1a Gov. Code $$ 66411.7(a)(3)(D); see also Gov. Code g 65852.21(a)(4) 15 Gov. Code $$ 658582.21(e), 66411.7(h)
16 Gov. Code $ 66411.7(a)(3XF) & (c).
17 Gov. Code $$ 65852.21(b), 6641 1(b) & (c).
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April 18,2022
area.18 Localjurisdictions may require up to one off-street parking space in certain scenarios.le Finally, local agencies maintain the authority to prohibit ADUs on parcels that have been split and developed with two-unit development under SB 9.20 SB 9 also does not supersede or lessen the application of the California Coastal Act.21 As a result of the City being located wholly within the coastal zone and having a certified LCP, similar to the City's ADU ordinance amendment processing path, SB 9 will not take effect within the City's boundaries, except for provisions related to public hearings on coastal development permits, until the City Council amends its LCP to implement SB 9 and certifies the amendment with the Coastal Commission.
On January 21,2022, the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission published guidance for coastal cities regarding lmplementation of New SB 9 Housing Laws in Sea Level Rise Vulnerable Areas (Attachment A) ("Coastal Commission Guidance"). The Coastal Commission Guidance supports the City's interpretation of SB 9 while encouraging cities to "adopt LCP amendments with standards that harmonize with SB 9 requirements as much as is feasible and that also ensure such new development is consistent with the Coastal Act and any applicable LCP policies[.]" (Coastal Commission Guidance, p. 3.) As a result, the City Council may direct staff to commence the LCP amendment process to incorporate SB into the City's certified LCP.
SB 10
SB 10, also signed by the governor on September 16th, allows but does not require jurisdictions to develop and adopt an ordinance that increases the density of parcels in transit-rich areas or on urban infill sites to up to 10 residential units per parcel.22 Such an ordinance would be exempt from CEQA and must be adopted between Jan. 1 ,2021, and Jan. 1,2029.23
SB 10 requires that any ordinance adopted under its authority meet the following requirements:
o Clearly identify the areas that are subject to the ordinance, . Be consistent with the jurisdiction's obligation to further fair housing, . Be adopted by a 213 vote if the ordinance supersedes any zoning restrictions established through a local initiative, and
o Not reduce the currently zoned density of any parcel subject to the ordinance.2a 18 Gov
1e Gov
20 Gov
21 Gov
22 Gov
23 Gov
2a Gov
Code $$ 65852.21(bX2), 66a1 1(c)(2)
Code $$ 65852.21(c) ,66411(e)(3).
Code $ 664117(jX1)
Code $$ 65852.21(k), 66al 1.7(o)
Code $ 65913.5.
Code $ 65913.5(a)(2) & (3).
Code $ 65913.5(b)
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April 18,2Q22
While the rezoning of parcels under SB 10 is not subject to CEQA, any projects that result from the ordinance may still be subject to CEQA unless the local ordlnance provides for ministerial processing or the project is exempted by another law or local ordinance.2s Moreover, if an applicant seeks to build more than 10 units on a parcel after an SB 10 rezoning, the bill prohibits the project from qualifying for any other CEeA exemption, ministerial or by-right process.26 Finally, parcels in very high fire severity zones or on open space/recreational lands approved by the voters are not eligible for increased density under SB 10.27
The City Council may direct staff to prepare an amendment to the City's Zoning Code and certified LCP to re-zone qualifying parcels in the City. lncentives for Affordable Housing Production
AB 571
AB 571 prohibits affordable housing impact fees, including inclusionary zoning fees and in-lieu fees, from being imposed on a housing development's affordabie units under State Density Bonus Law.28 As a result, when a housing development project receives bonus density based on its percentage of affordable units, the City cannot charge any affordable housing impact fees on the designated affordable units, but it can continue to change these fees on the market rate units.
AB 787
AB 787 creates new incentives for cities to secure more "workforce housing" or deedrestricted affordable homes for working families by authorizing a planning agency to include in its annual report (for up to 25 percent of jurisdiction's moderate-iniome regional housing need allocation or RHNA) the number of units in an existing multifamily building that were converted to deed-restricted rental housing for moderate-income households by the imposition of unit affordability covenants and restrictions.2e The bill authorizes the jurisdiction to reduce its share of regional housing need for the income category of the converted units on a unit-for-unit basis.3o For a unit to count toward the City's RHNA allocation, it must meet specific criteria, such as, the unit must not already be affordable to moderate-income or below households and the City must enter into a regulatory agreement to ensure the affordability of the unit for moderate income households for a term of 55 years.31 ln addition, the unit must 2s Gov. Code $ 65913.5(c).
26 lbid.
27 Gov. Code $ 65913.5(aXa).
11 9ou. Code $ 65915.1; see also Gov. Code SS 65915-65918 (State Density Bonus Law). 2e Gov. Code S 65400.2.
30 Gov. Code $ 65a00.2(c).
31 Gov. Code $ 65400.2(b).
Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April 18,2022
be subject to ongoing City monitoring to ensure continued affordability and occupancy by qualifying households.32
The Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") is not required to implement AB 787 until January 1,2023; however, the City can report any units that convert to affordable-restricted units after January 1,2022. Accordingly, the City may choose to negotiate with existing multifamily building owners to enter into deed restrictions to provide for moderate-income affordable units and count these units toward up to 25 percent of the City's moderate income RHNA allocation next cycle. A modification to the City's Zone Code also would be required to implement this program AB 1029
ln light of the approximately 30,000 units in California under affordability covenants set to expire over the next decade, this bill aims to preserve the state's supply of rental affordability agreements by offering credits to cities that negotiate extensions with property owners.33 Specifically, AB 1029 permits HCD to allow cities to qualify for extra points or preference when scoring program applications for state programs, including the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities ("AHSC") grant program, Transformative Climate Communities ("TCC") Program and the lnfill lncentive Grant ("llG") Program of 2007 for award cycles commenced after July 1 ,2021.34 The City will evaluate whether it can leverage these opportunities for extra points to secure grant funding after it adopts a compliant housing element.35 Other Housino Leqislation
Additional information on the other housing laws taking effect in2022 is included in the summary table attached hereto as Attachment B for reference.
POLICY CONSISTENCY
Updating the City's Municipal Code in response to changes in state law is consistent with the City's General Plan and Housing Element Policies.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
This item does not result in a fiscal impact; however, updates to the City's Municipal Code and certified LCP in response to changes in state law are anticipated to have a fiscal impact.
Code $ 65400.2(bxo)
Code $ 65589.9.
Code $ 65589.9(b).
Gov
Gov
Gov
tbid.
32 JO
34 Update on New Housing Laws Taking Effect in 2022
April 18,2022
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
The City Attorney's Office worked with the Community Development Department to prepare the attached report and is available to answer questions
OPTIONS
Council could direct staff to take actions in response to the new housing legislation, including directing staff to bring back agenda items to consider initiation otbity Zoning Code and Local Coastal Program amendments.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
General Public
ATTACHMENTS
A. Coastal Commission Guidance re lmplementation of New SB g Housing Laws in Sea Level Rise Vulnerable Areas (January 21,2022)
B. Table Summary of 2021Housing Legislation
Report Prepared by and Staff Contact:
Mack Carlson, Legal Counsel on behalf of
as City Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLp acting
Reviewed by:
Steve Goggia, Community Development Director
(805) 7 55-441 4, steveq @ci. carp i nteria. ca. us ;
ignature
Reviewed by: Dave Durflinger, City Manager
(805) 7 55-4400, [email protected]. ca. us
ATTACHMENT A
Coastal Commission Guidance re lmplementation of New SB 9 Housing Laws in Sea Level Rise Vulnerable Areas (January 21,2022\
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOYERNOR
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
455 MARKET STREET, SUITE 3OO
sAN FRANCISCO, CA,94t05- 22t9
vorcE (4r5) 904- 5200
FAX (415) 904-5400
WWW COASTAL CA GOV
e
To: Planning Directors of Coastal Cities and Counties
From: John Ainsworth, Executive Director, California Coastal Commission Date: January 2L,2022
Re: lmplementation of New SB 9 Housing Laws in Sea Level Rise Vulnerable Areas As of Janua ry 1,2022, SB 9 (Atkins) changed the way that local governments can regulate new residential development and lot splits in single-family residential zones within designated urban areas, with the goal of increasing housing density in those areas. The new housing laws added by SB 9, Government Code Sections 65852.2L and 66411.7, contain Coastal Act savings clauses.
This means that, except for public hearing requirements, the Coastal Act continues to apply in full force in the coastal zone. Accordingly, certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) provisions continue to apply but, in most places, will need to be updated to conform with SB 9 to the greatest extent possible while still complying with the CoastalAct. This memorandum focuses on how to harmonize the new SB 9 requirements with LCP and CoastalAct policies in areas that are vulnerable to sea level rise because increasing residential density in these areas presents unique challenges and risks. When updating LCPs, local governments should keep in mind that LCP provisions must continue to be consistent with all applicable Coastal Act policies in all areas.
l. Housing in the CoastalZone
The State of California is experiencing a critical shortage of affordable housing. ln recognition of this critical shortage, the state Legislature passed numerous laws in recent years aimed at increasing construction of additional housing units, and preferably affordable units. Many of these measures, including SB 9, state that they do not supersede or lessen the application of the CoastalAct. The Coastal Commission (Commission) recognizes the particularly critical shortage of affordable housing in the coastal zone and has strongly supported strategies to increase access to affordable housing near the coast. To address housing shortages in the coastal zone over the long-term, new residential development must be built in locations and with designs that ensure it will be safe from hazards, have access to adequate public services, and will minimize coastal resource impacts.
lmportantly, siting new housing in areas projected to be impacted by sea level rise, without planning for adaptation, will not address the housing crisis over the long-term and will instead put more residences and lives at risk and exacerbate housing shortages. The hazards and other impacts associated with sea level rise require local governments to plan carefully to ensure that new housing is safe both now and for future generations. Likewise, effective January t,2022, a L
new section was added to the CoastalAct that explicitly requires the Commission to "take into account the effects of sea level rise in coastal resources planning and management policies and activities in order to identify, assess, and, to the extent feasible, avoid and mitigate the adverse effects of sea level rise." (Pub. Res. Code 5 3O27O.l While the Commission has considered sea level rise in its planning, policies, and activities for many decades, the new section of the Coastal Act further emphasizes the importance of accounting for sea level rise.
New residential development in the coastal zone must be consistent with Coastal Act and LCP policies, including requirements relating to protection of coastal resources and hazards, such as Coastal Act Sections 30250, 30253, 30235 and 30240, as discussed further below. ln addition to these requirements, a variety of other provisions in the Coastal Act relate to housing in the coastal zone. As relevant here, the Coastal Act does not exempt local governments from complying with state and federal law "with respect to providing low- and moderate-income housing, replacement housing, relocation benefits, or any other obligation related to housing imposed by existing law or any other law hereafter enacted." (Pub. Res. Code $ 30007.) The Coastal Act also requires the Commission to encourage housing opportunities for low- and moderate-income households (Pub. Res. Code I 30604(f)), but states that "[n]o local coastal program shall be required to include housing policies and programs." (Pub. Res. Code 5 30500.L.) Lastly, the CoastalAct regulates where new development can be sited. New residential development must be "located within, contiguous with, or in close proximity to, existing developed areas able to accommodate it" or in other areas where development will not have significant adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on coastal resources. (Pub.
Res. Code 5 30250(a).) Land divisions, otherthan leasesforagriculturaluses, are permitted outside existing developed areas "only where 50 percent of the usable parcels in the area have been developed and the created parcels would be no smaller than the average size of surrounding parcels." (Pub. Res. Code 5 30250(a).)
ll. Overview of New Legislation
As of Janua ry L,2022, SB 9 adds Government Code Sections 65852.21and 66411.7 , and amends Government Code Section 66452.6. The new laws apply only to parcels located in: (a) a city that includes some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, within the city's boundaries; or (b) an unincorporated area, and the parcel is located entirely within either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau. (Gov. Code 55 65852.2j.(aXt), 664LL.7(al(3XB).) Currently certified LCPs are not superseded by the new laws and continue to apply until an LCP amendment is adopted.
The new legislation makes two primary changes to existing law:
2 a. Ministerial consideration of proposals to develop two or fewer residential units in urban areas
For projects outside the coastal zone, local governments must now ministerially consider, without discretionary review, proposals to develop two or fewer residential units in a singlefamily residential zone in designated urban areas when certain criteria are met. (Gov. Code 5 65852.21.) Proposals to construct two new residential units and proposals to add one new unit to a parcel with an existing unit are both covered by this section. (Gov. Code 5 65852.2L(iX1).) For ministerial consideration of proposed residential development to be required, proposals must meet the many criteria set forth in the statute, including that rental of any new unit created is for a term longer than 30 days. (See Gov. Code 5 65852.21(a), (d)-(g).) Local governments are free to adopt objective zoning, subdivision, and design review standards for development of residential units in any residential zone that do not conflict with Government Code Section 65852.2L. (Gov. Code g 65852.2L(b)-(c).) This new section of the Government Code does not supersede or in any way alter application of the Coastal Act, except that local governments are not required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit (CDP) applications. (Gov. Code 5 65852.21(k).)This means that, aside from CDP public hearing requirements, Government Code Section 65852.21, does not override the CoastalAct or LCP policies implementing the CoastalAct, which may involve the application of discretion.
Therefore, local governments should adopt LCP amendments with standards that harmonize with SB 9 requirements as much as is feasible and that also ensure such new development is consistent with the Coastal Act and any applicable LCP policies, including requirements relating to notice of local decisions to the public and the Commission. b. Ministerial approval of urban lot splits
For projects outside the coastal zone, local governments must now ministerially approve lot splits that create no more than two new lots in single-family residential zones in designated urban areas when certain criteria are met, (Gov. Code 5 66411.71. However, as with the new requirements regarding residential development, this section of the Government Code does not supersede or in any way alter application of the Coastal Act, except that local governments are not required to hold public hearings for coastal development permit (CDP) applications. (Gov. Code 5 66411.7(o).) Accordingly, for projects in the coastal zone, review for consistency with Coastal Act and applicable LCP policies is still required, and that may involve the application of discretion. For ministerial approval to be required outside the coastal zone, proposals must meet the many criteria set forth in the statute, including that no more than two new lots are created, and that rental of any new unit created is for a term longer than 30 days. (See Gov. Code S 6641.L.7.l'Although discretionary review is prohibited in these circumstances in non-coastal zone areas, local governments are free to adopt objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards applicable to urban lot splits that do not conflict with Government Code S 664!L.7. (Gov. Code 5 66411.7(c), (e).) 3 Although the new laws do not supersede the CoastalAct, and the requirement for ministerial approval does not automatically apply in the coastal zone, the laws should be harmonized with the Coastal Act as much as feasible. This could be accomplished, for example, by updating LCps to create a checklist of objective standards for qualifying projects so that little or no discretion is involved when considering them. Overall, localgovernments should adopt LCP amendments with standards to ensure that such new development is consistent with the Coastal Act and any applicable LCP policies, including requirements relating to notice of local decisions to the public and the Commission.l
lll. SB 9 Application to Co,astal Act Policies Generallv Local governments should consider how to amend their LCPs to comply with SB 9 to the greatest extent possible, while continuing to be consistent with the Coastal Act. Approval of the types of lot split and residential development projects contemplated by SB 9 is likely to increase residential density in urban areas, both in terms of the overall number of residential units and in terms of the nature of the built environment itself. ln some areas, this increase in density may be able to be accommodated with limited coastal resource impacts. However, in other areas, there may be cases where such projects cause significant adverse impacts to coastal resources such as public access, sensitive habitats, and recreation areas. (See Pub. Res. Code 5 30250.) For example, approval of new residential development projects and lot splits pursuant to SB 9 would not be consistent with the Coastal Act if the projects are adjacent to environmentally sensitive areas (ESHA) and are not sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade those areas, or are incompatible with the continuance of those habitat and recreation areas. (Pub. Res. Code S 30240.) Residential areas in the coastal zone are often intertwined with significant coastal resource areas, such as along the immediate shoreline, between the first public road and the sea, near LCP-designated scenic areas, and near sensitive habitat areas. LCPs generally include a myriad of provisions protecting these coastal resources; LCP provisions designed to implement SB 9 should not conflict with or inappropriately diminish any such LCP protections that already apply.At the same time, SB 9's focus on ensuring that applicable standards are objective and processed ministerially means that local governments should consider ways to evaluate the potential for coastal resource impacts at the LCP planning stage, such as by using checklists or other such ministerial tools that can be employed at the CDP application stage as much as possible. Local governments are encouraged to coordinate with Commission staff as they develop LCP provisions to implement sB 9.
1SB 9 also amends Government Code $ 66452.61o allow local governments to provide by ordinance an additional 24-month time period before an approved or conditionally approved tentative subdivision map expires.
4 lV. SB 9 Aooli on in Sea Level Rise Vulnerable Areas
As described in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Commission's 2018 Update to the Sea Level Rise Policv Guidance (SLR Guidance), as sea levels rise, tidal and groundwater inundation, flooding, wave impacts, bluff and beach erosion, saltwater intrusion, and other impacts are projected to worsen and further threaten residential development and coastal resources in the coastal zone.
The applicability of SB 9 in areas vulnerable to the impacts associated with sea level rise is thus a critical concern.
a. Development of two or fewer residential units in sea level rise vulnerable areas ln many cases, increasing density in areas subject to sea level rise impacts without including appropriate siting, design, and mitigation features will not be consistent with Coastal Act policies. Proposals to develop two or fewer residential units pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2L may be permitted in sea level rise-vulnerable areas if they can be developed in such a way as to be found consistent with the Coastal Act and LCP provisions, and can be designed and sited to be safe from hazards for the expected life of the structures. Proposed projects to construct two or fewer residential units pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.21typically qualify as "development" under the Coastal Act because such projects usually involve "the placement or erection of any solid material or structure," andf or a "change in the density or intensity of use of land. . . ." (Pub. Res. Code 5 30106.)2 As new development, the new units must minimize risks to life and property in areas of geologic and flood hazard; assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area; and not in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs. (Pub. Res. Code 55 30253, 3O27O; see also corresponding LCP provisions.) New residential development must be consistent with the Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act and any relevant LCP policies, including that they must be sited and designed to prevent significant degradation of adjacent sensitive habitats and recreation areas and to allow the continuance ofthose areas into the future (Pub. Res. Code 5 30240(b)). ln some areas vulnerable to sea level rise, the risk of hazards during the anticipated life of the structure may be too great to permit development of two residential units on one lot if the new unit(s) cannot be sited and designed safely and consistent with relevant Coastal Act and LCP provisions. ln other vulnerable areas, development may be permitted where adaptation strategies and special conditions can minimize hazard risks and avoid impacts on coastal 2 As discussed in the Updates Regarding the lmplementation of New ADU Laws Memorandum (Jan. 2022), conversion of existing habitable space within a single-family residence into another residential unit may not qualify as development if there are no major structural changes (e.g., changes to roofs, exterior walls, foundations, etc.) and no change to the size or intensity of use of the existing structure. (See Pub. Res. Code $ 30106.)
5 resources. Local governments and applicants should refer to the Commission's SLR Guidance when determining whether construction of residential units pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.21in vulnerable areas is consistent with the Coastal Act and LCP policies.
Chapter 7 of the SLR Guidance describes some of the adaptation strategies to consider when planning for development in sea level rise vulnerable areas. Some adaptation strategies may require land use plans or proposed projects to anticipate long-term impacts now. Other strategies may build adaptive capacity into the plan or project itself, such as special conditions that require elevation or removal of structures when certain triggers are met, so that future changes in hazard risks can be effectively addressed while ensuring long-term resource protection.
b. Lot splits in sea level rise vulnerable areas
As discussed above, Government Code Section 6641L.7 requires ministerial consideration of urban lot splits in single-family residential zones in designated areas outside the coastal zone when certain criteria are met, "[S]ubdivision . . . and any other division of land, including lot splits," qualify as "development" under the Coastal Act, thereby triggering the need for a CDP or other appropriate authorization. (Pub. Res. Code S 30L06.) Lot splits also qualify as development because they constitute a "change in the density or intensity of use of land." (/d.) As new development, proposals to subdivide land must:
(a) Minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard. (b) Assure stability and structural integrity, and neither create nor contribute significantly to erosion, geologic instability, or destruction of the site or surrounding area or in any way require the construction of protective devices that would substantially alter natural landforms along bluffs and cliffs. (Pub. Res. Code 5 30253.) New development must also be sited and designed to prevent significant degradation of adjacent sensitive habitats and recreation areas and to allow the continuance of those areas in the future. (Pub. Res. Code 5 30240(b).) ln addition, new development must be consistent with all Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act, including Sections 30210 through 30224 protecting public access and recreational opportunities; Sections 30230 and 30231 protecting marine habitats and water quality; Section 30250 requiring development to have adequate public services; and Section 30251 protecting visual resources.
Subdivisions in areas with certified LCPs must also be consistent with corresponding, relevant LCP provisions. The Commission must also consider the effects of sea level rise in its coastal resources planning and management policies and activities, including those relating to new residentialdevelopment. (Pub. Res. Code S 30270.)
The Commission's SLR Guidance states that to comply with Section 30253 of the Coastal Act or the equivalent LCP section, projects will need to be planned, located, designed, and engineered 6 for the changing water levels and associated impacts that might occur over the life of the development. ln addition, Chapter 7 of the SLR Guidance recommends concentrating development away from hazardous areas and limiting subdivisions in areas vulnerable to sea level rise. To be consistent with the CoastalAct, including how it is interpreted through the SLR Guidance, proposals to subdivide land in areas vulnerable to sea level rise should be considered very carefully for several reasons.
First, subdividing land projected to be negatively impacted by sea level rise in the foreseeable future is not a sound way to minimize risks to life and property in areas with high flood and geologic hazards. (See Pub. Res. Code S 30253.) lnstead, subdivision in these areas is likely to increase risks to life and property by allowing for increased density and intensity of use of sites that are projected to be exposed to hazards such as tidal and groundwater inundation, flooding, wave impacts, bluff and beach erosion, and saltwater intrusion. Under SB 9, a lot currently zoned for a single-family residence could support many additional residential units. For example, a lot could be subdivided pursuant to Government Code Section 664LL.7, and then two residential structures could be built on each of the newly divided lots pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2'J,. This scenario would result in four residences on a lot that, prior to SB 9, could only support one residence. When considering the circumstances in which residentially zoned lot splits (pursuant to SB 9 or otherwise) should be allowed in the coastal zone, local governments should consider whether each of the new lots would have a buildable area that is safe from coastal hazards for the foreseeable future without relying on shoreline armoring and could be developed in conformance with relevant coastal resource protection policies of the LCP and Coastal Act.
Second, it is important to analyze the safety of proposed lot splits over the longest feasible timeframe. Hazard analyses typically evaluate potential hazards for the expected life of the development. Unlike the development of residential structures that may only need to be safe for approximately 75-100 years, land divisions tend to be permanent and have little to no adaptive capacity. Although the SLR Guidance does not suggest a specific timeframe for the hazard analysis of proposed lot splits, it does note that projects that are expected to last indefinitely should consider time frames of 1-00 years or more, and this is also consistent with past Commission action. For example, Commission staff recently recommended denial of a proposal to subdivide property in Orange County that was particularly vulnerable to sea level rise because, among other reasons, the project did not minimize r:isks to life and property and could not assure stability and structural integrity of the project, as Section 30253 of the Coastal Act requires. (Staff Report, Application Nos. 5-18-0907 & 5-1-8-0908, August 29,20L9.) The staff report found that the proposed subdivision could last in perpetuity, potentially long beyond the anticipated life of the proposed residential structure, and that both new lots would likely be subject to sea level rise impacts after the anticipated life of the residential structure. (/d.)After some deliberation with the Commission at the public hearing, the applicant withdrew its application and submitted a new proposal to build two single-family residences on the lot 7 without subdivision. The Commission approved the new application with the condition that the property cannot be subdivided now or in the future, among other conditions addressing the property's sea level rise vulnerabilities. (Staff Report, Application No. 5-20-0646, May ZL,2OZL.| ln the zoning context, the Commission denied a request by the County of Santa Barbara to amend its Land Use Plan (LUP)to rezone a single oceanfront propertyfrom recreation/open space to single-family residential because the property was projected to be impacted by hazards in the foreseeable future, among other reasons. The Commission found that the hazards analysis for a proposed land use designation change should consider hazards for the foreseeable future because "[u]nlike residential structural development, where the Commission generally analyzes whether the structure will be stable and safe for its expected life of 75 to 100 years, the land use designation change of a parcel would be more or less permanent." (Staff Report, Application No. LCP-4-STB-18-0039-1- Part D, July LO,2O!9, p. 16.) Land divisions, like land use designation changes, may last in perpetuity. Thus, the Commission's past guidance and actions demonstrate that; in most circumstances, a hazard analysis for a lot split proposal should consider the longest time frame feasible.
Third, subdivision may limit the adaptation strategies available to individuals and communities as sea levels rise. Unlike structural development, which can be designed to incorporate adaptive elements like waterproofing, elevation, or relocation, subdivisions have little to no adaptive capacity; thus, it is not always feasible to mitigate the impacts created by subdivisions.
Subdividing a parcel can also limit the opportunities to adapt to sea level rise on that land by decreasing the land available on a lot for existing development to be moved landward, or for new development to be sited in a more landward or higher elevation location. Land divisions also increase the number of property interests in a site. This can add cost and logistical complexity to community-scale adaptation strategies, making it harder to form and manage geological hazard abatement districts, negotiate buyouts, and implement conservation easements, and making it more difficult to minimize hazards and protect coastal resources in the future.
Lastly, allowing subdivisions in vulnerable areas may negatively impact coastal resources and public access. Coastal resources such as beaches and wetlands will migrate and naturally adapt due to future coastal erosion and sea level rise conditions. lncreased residential density and intensity of use along the shoreline and in vulnerable areas may impact coastal resources through, for example, "coastal squeeze" where shoreline development prevents beaches and bluffs from migrating inland, which causes the narrowing and eventual loss of beaches, dunes, and other shoreline habitats as well as the loss of offshore recreational areas. Having fewer structures on relatively larger lots may allow more opportunities for those structures to adapt-for example, by being moved to other parts of the lot that are safer. Depending on the geography and other site-specific conditions, creating additional, smaller lots with more structures may reduce this adaptive capacity.
8 ln light of the potential hazards and coastalresource impacts associated with subdivision in areas vulnerable to sea level rise, many local governments have avoided such land divisions. For example, Policy 7-2 of the City of Half Moon Bay's Local Coastal LUP limits "subdivisions in areas vulnerable to environmental hazards, including as may be exacerbated by climate change, by prohibiting any new land divisions, including subdivisions, lot splits, and lot line adjustments that create new building sites unless specific criteria [are] met that ensure that when the subject lots are developed, the development will not be exposed to hazards, pose any risks to protection of coastal resources, or create or contribute to geologic instability." Likewise, San Mateo County's LCP lmplementation Plan (lP) requires applications for proposed subdivisions to include a development footprint analysis that comprehensively evaluates site development constraints and potential impacts, including sea level rise impacts, prior to approval of subdivision parcel maps. These LCP policies allow lot splits, such as those authorized by Government Code 5 664L1.7, but only when consistent with the Coastal Act. c. ldentifying areas vulnerable to sea level rise
The best available, up-to-date scientific information about coastal hazards and sea level rise should be used to determine whether proposals for lot splits and new residential units in areas vulnerable to sea level rise are consistent with the Coastal Act and LCP provisions. Local governments and applicants should refer to the SLR Guidance when conducting this analysis.
Step l-: ldentifv sea level rise proiections. First, identify the best available, locally-relevant sea level rise projections. ln line with statewide guidance, the Commission currently recognizes the Ocean Protection Council's 2018 State Sea-Level Rise Guidance as the best available science on sea level rise projections for California.
a
o
Tide gauges. Appendix G of the SLR Guidance includes sea level rise projections for every 10 years from 2030 to 2150 for t2 tide gauges along the California coast; the projections from the closest tide gauge to the project site should be used.
Plonning horizon. Hazard analyses typically evaluate potential hazards for the expected life of the development. Some LCPs include a specified design life for new types of development. lf no specified time frame is provided, a time frame may be chosen based on the type of development. For proposed development of new residential units, it is generally appropriate to analyze sea level rise impacts for at least the expected life of the proposed structure(s), often 75-100 years for residential structures, as described in Chapter 6 of the SLR Guidance. Although situations may vary, local governments and applicants should typically use a longer planning horizon of at least 1-00 years for lot splits because, as described in subsection (b), land divisions are expected to be permanent, unlike many other kinds of development, and have a limited ability to adapt.
Risk oversion scenario. Evaluate impacts from the "medium-high risk aversion" scenario, as described in Chapters 5 and 6 of the SLR Guidance. The SLR Guidance recommends a
9 that all communities evaluate the impacts from the "medium-high risk aversion" scenario (p.76i), and that residential structures and projects with greater consequences and/or a lower ability to adapt use this projection scenario (p. 102). ln addition, impacts under other risk aversion scenarios may be helpful to analyze.
Steo 2: Analvze the n I effects of sea level rise Analyze the following hazards under the medium-high risk aversion scenario: erosion of beaches, bluffs, cliffs, and other landforms; tidal inundation of shoreline areas; flooding (wave run-up and storm impacts); and saltwater intrusion and groundwater impacts, consistent with the SLR Guidance and Coastal Act and LCP requirements.
Steo 3: Assess imoacts to future d ooment and coastal resources. Determine whether the proposed residential units and/or potential building sites on new parcels are vulnerable to sea level rise impacts.
Step 4: Determine whether proposed development is appropriate. Lastly, determine whether the proposed development is consistent with the LCP and Coastal Act as proposed, or can be made consistent with design modifications, adaptive strategies, or other conditions.
Development of new residential units in areas projected to be impacted by sea level rise may be inconsistent with the Coastal Act or LCPs if adaptive strategies cannot minimize the risk of hazards and protect coastal resources, as discussed in subsection (a). Lot splits may be inconsistent with the Coastal Act or LCP policies if they occur in areas projected to be impacted by the hazards associated with sea level rise over the next 100+ years under the medium-high risk aversion scenario, as discussed in subsection (b). As described in the SLR Guidance, local governments should consider whether to "[p]rohibit any new land divisions, including subdivisions [and] lot splits . . . that create new beachfront or blufftop lots unless the lots can meet specific criteria that ensure that when the lots are developed, the development will not be exposed to hazards or pose any risks to protection of coastal resources." (SLR Guidance, p. 130.) A lot split may be appropriate if the project site is not projected to be impacted by sea level rise hazards for the longest time frame feasible, typically at least 100 years, and is otherwise consistent with the LCP and CoastalAct.
V. Local Government Application of SB 9 in the Coastal Zone a. Update applicable ICP provisions
Local governments in the coastal zone are required to comply with both the Coastal Act and, to the extent they do not conflict with Coastal Act requirements, the new SB 9 requirements.
Currently certified provisions of LCPs are not superseded by Government Code Sections 65852.2t and 66411.7 and continue to apply to CDP applications until an LCP amendment is adopted. Where LCP provisions directly conflict with the new Government Code provisions or require refinement to be consistent with the new laws, those LCP provisions should be updated to be consistent with SB 9 to the greatest extent feasible while still complying with Coastal Act 10 requirements. As discussed above, when updating LCP policies to account for SB 9, local governments should also consider how proposed lot splits and residential development might impact public access, sensitive habitats, recreation areas, and other coastal resources. Local governments should also consider new LCP provisions that limit ot'prohibit subdivisions in areas vulnerable to sea level rise, and that appropriately account for coastal hazards and coastal resource impacts, including as exacerbated or associated with sea level rise, for new residential development.
Although a public hearing is not required under SB 9, public notice requirements still apply. LCP amendment applications should specify how local and Coastal Act public notice requirements will be fulfilled, including the notice requirements for: (a) pending action to interested parties prior to a local decision, and (b) notice of final action to the Commission and those who have requested such notice after a local decision. LCP amendment applications should specify the procedures for issuing a Final Local Action Notice (FLAN) for local decisions on applications for development that are appealable to the Commission. Some LCP amendments may qualify for streamlined review as minor or de minimis amendments. (Pub. Res. Code 5 3051a(d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, 5 13554.)
b. Review SB 9 applications consistent with the Coastal Act/LCP and SB 9 Local governments should generally follow the below process when considering proposed SB 9 projects outside of areas that are potentially vulnerable to sea level rise.
Review Prior CDP Historv. First, determine whether a CDP or other form of Coastal Act authorization was previously issued for development of the site and whether that CDP and/or authorization limits, or requires a CDP or CDP amendment for, changes to the approved development or for future development or uses of the site. The applicant should contact the appropriate Commission district office if a Commission-issued CDP and/or authorization limits the applicant's ability to apply to construct two or fewer residential units or split the lot.
Consider Possible Expedited Permittins Processes. Second, and only if an application proposes to undertake development in an area where it will be consistent with LCP and Coastal Act hazard and coastal resource protection policies, consider whether any expedited permitting processes, such as waivers or administrative permits, are available. lf a local government's LCP includes a waiver provision, and the proposed lot split and/or residential unit development proposal meets the criteria for a CDP waiver, the local government may issue a CDP waiver in place of a CDP. The Commission has generally allowed a CDP waiver only when the Executive Director determines that the proposed development is de minimis (i.e., it is development that has no potential for any individual or cumulative adverse effect on coastal resources and is consistent with all Chapter 3 policies of the Coastal Act). Such a finding can typically be made when the proposed project has been sited, designed, and limited in such a way as to ensure any potential impacts to coastal resources are avoided (such as through habitat and/or hazards setbacks, provision of adequate off-street parking to ensure that public access to the coast is tL
not impacted, etc.). (See Pub. Res. code 5 30624.7.) Projects that qualify for a cDp waiver typically allow for a substantially reduced evaluation process and streamlined approval.
It may be appropriate for local governments to use waivers to approve applications in both appealable and non-appealable areas to streamline permitting.3 Local governments interested in exploring this option should consult with Commission staff. LCP amendment applications that propose to allow waivers in appealable areas should ensure that there are proper proceduies for notifying the public and the Commission of approvals for individual, appealable waivers (such as Final Local Action Notices) so that the proper appeal period can be set, and any appeals received are properly considered.a
Reouire and Revi a CDP Aoolication. Lastly, if a proposal is not eligible for a waiver or similar expedited process authorized by the Coastal Act and the certified LCP, including because it is located in an area potentiallysubjectto coastalhazards and/or future sea level rise hazards, it requires a CDP. (Pub. Res. Code 5 30600.)The CDP must be consistent with the requirements of the certified LCP and any relevant policies of the Coastal Act. Local governments must provide all required public notice for any CDP applications for development covered by SB 9 and process the application pursuant to LCP requirements, but local governments are not required to hold public hearings. (Gov. Code 55 65852.21(k); 66411.2(o).) Once the local government has made a CDP decision, it must send the required final local action notice of that decision to the appropriate Commission district office. lf the CDP decision on the proposed project is appealable, a local government action to approve a CDP for the proposed project may be appealed to the Commission. (Pub. Res. Code 5 30603.)
3 Most, if not all, LCPs with CDP waiver provisions do not allow for waivers in areas where local CDp decisions are appealable to the Coastal Commission. There have been a variety of reasons for this in the past, including that the Commission's regulations require that local governments hold a public hearing for all applications for appealable development (14 Cal. Code Regs S 13566), and also that development in such areas tends to raise more coastal resource concerns and that waivers maytherefore not be appropriate. However, underSB 9 provisions, public hearings are not required for qualifying development. Because of this, the above-described public hearing issue would not be a concern, so it could be appropriate for LCPs to allow CDP waivers in both appealable and non-appealable areas at least related to this criterion. Local governments should consult with Commission staff should they consider proposing CDP waiver provisions in their LCP.
4 The development authorized by SB 9-specifically, residential lot splits and development of new residential units that change the intensity of use-are not types of development that the Commission has typically found to be exempt from CDP requirements as improvements to single-family residences. (See Pub. Res. Code $ 30610; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, S 13250(a).) tn addition, any development that is not designated as the principal permitted use under the approved zoning ordinance or zoning district map-such as lot splits-is appealable to the Commission. (pub. Res. Code S 30603(a)( ).) t2
Vl. Conclusion
The Commission strongly supports increased access to affordable housing and increased residential density in the coastal zone. For new housing to be a long-term solution to the housing shortage, it must be sited and designed to be safe from hazards, such as sea level rise, and to not have significant adverse effects on coastal resources. Local governments should review their LCPs to determine what changes are necessary to implement SB 9 in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Act and appropriate for local geography, and prepare and submit LCP amendments to the Commission as soon as is feasible.
This document was developed using federalfinoncial assistance provided by the Coastol Zone Management Act, as omended, under award NA19NO54790073, administered by the Office for Coastal Monagement, Nationol Oceonic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The statements, findings, conclusions, dnd recommendations are those of the outhor ond do not necessorily reflect the views of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the U.S. Deportment of Commerce.
13 Attach ment B
The below table provides a brief summary of all 31 new housing laws aimed at further boosting housing production in California. They are organized based on four key focus areas: local Sovernment accountability, incentives for housing production, incentives for affordable housing production and addressing systematic bias in housing.
Bill
Number Summary
Locd I Gove rn me nt Accou nto bi I ity
Requires the California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD")to develop and publish on its website an annual report regarding grant programs administered by the department and land use oversight actions taken nst local agencies related to housing
Revises the Planning and Zoning Law by placing additional procedural requirements local agencies when adopting their housing elements and authorizing the rney general to bring action against local agencies that fail to comply with the ousing Crisis Act of 2079 ("HCA") (streamlines housing project approval by stricting local governments' ability to downzone and limits fee increases on ousing applications)
laces additional requirements on local agencies' ability to impose development AB 602
impact fees including, but not limited to, (1) requiring a more robust procedure when conducting an impact fee nexus study, (2) requiring agencies to generally calculate fees on a housing development project proportional to the unit square footage in order to have a valid method for balancing the fee charged and the burden posed, and (3) requiring local agencies to post written fee schedules on their websites.
ends the procedural and substantive requirements set forth in the Planning and ning Law to ensure that housing elements are drafted and adopted in a manner affirmatively further fair housing. lmportantly, the law requires that local ments provide an analysis of the relationship of sites identified in the housing element's inventory of land suitable for development to the jurisdiction's duty to affirmatively fu rther fair housing.
68 2t5
1304
ends the Planning and Zoning Law to provide more onerous conditions on local B L398
rnments that failto adopt a housing element within 120 of the statutory eadlines. Notably, the law reduces the time period that a local agency must rezone in sites from three years and 120 days to one year.
B8
810
i,,0,,
I
lncentives for Housing Production
s the provisions of the HCA through 2030. The HCA, which was set to expire in 2025, streamlines housing project approval by restricting local governments' ability to downzone and limits fee increases on housing applications. a property owner to split a single-family lot into two lots and place up to units on each new lot. Therefore, the bill permits up to four units on properties currently limited to single-family houses. SB 9 also mandates that local agencies approve development projects that meet specified size and design standards. SB 9 also requires ministerial approval for duplexes and lot splits, bypassing the CEQA process.
Establishes a process for local governments to increase the density of parcels in ransit-rich areas or on urban infill sites to up to L0 residential units per parcel. Such rohibits local governments from imposing certain floor area ratio (FAR) standards on housing projects of three to L0 units
Establishes the California Surplus Land Unit, a task force to identify surplus or empty lots and facilitate new housing developments. This bill would authorize the California Surplus Land Unit to, among other things, facilitate agreements between housing developers and local agencies, provide consultative and technical service to 9 ordinance must be adopted between Jan. L, 2021, and Jan. L,2O2g, and is exempt from CEQA
Extends the existing streamlined approval process for housing development in !r74 urisdictions that have not made sufficient progress toward their allocation of their regional housing needs.
Bergeson-Peace lnfrastructure and Economic Development Bank Act authorizes california lnfrastructure and Economic Development Bank to, among other ings, make loans, issue bonds and provide other financial assistance for various AB 1297 es of projects that qualify as public development or economic development ilities. This law establishes that economic development facilities and public evelopment facilities includes housing if it meets certain financing requirements d limits.
79t
B 447
AB 571
AB 634
local agencies with surplus land and developers, and collaborate on obtaining nts, loans, tax credits, credit enhancements and other types of financing that ilitate the construction of housing on surplus land.
lncentives for Alfordable Housing Production
Expands the low-income housing tax credit program to allow more programs to qualify for governmental assistance.
Prohibits affordable housing impact fees, including inclusionary zoning fees and inlieu fees, from being imposed on a housing development's affordable units under e Density Bonus Law
Permits local agencies to require an affordability period of longer than 55 years to qualify for the incentives provided for under State Density Bonus Law. 48787
Creates new incentives for cities to secure more "workforce housing" or deedrestricted affordable homes for working families by authorizing a planning agency to include in its annual report (for up to25o/o of jurisdiction's moderate-income regional housing need allocation or RHNA) the number of units in an existing multifamily building that were converted to deed-restricted rental housing for moderate-income households by the imposition of unit affordability covenants and restrictions. The bill authorizes the jurisdiction to reduce its share of regional housing need for the income category of the converted units on a unit-for-unit basis.
to29
ln light of the approximately 30,000 units in California under affordability covenants set to expire over the next decade, this bill aims to preserve the state's supply of rental affordability agreements by offering credits to cities that negotiate extensions with property owners.
This law adds a definition of "Deeply Low-lncome" households to state law to 1043 ncrease access to affordable housing and critical social programs for the state's eediest families
is law extends the incentives and programs provided under the Affordable 1095 Housing and Sustainable Communities Program to both rental and owner-occupied nits.
SB 290 ude
de
es more incentives for developers to build affordable housing for college nts by amending provisions of the Density Bonus Law to apply to certain nt housing projects and to allow for a moderate-income parking reduction. 8728 sB 728 expands existing density bonus grants to nonprofits buying or building affordable housing.
Systemic Bias in Housing
Requires that the Natural Resources Agency create an environmentaljustice 345
rogram and establish a grant-based reimbursement program to enable nvironmentaljustice and community groups to participate in rulemaking. The bill lso requires that setbacks be established between oil and gas production activities and sensitive receptors
lmposes a state-mandated local program requiring that mixed-income multifamily ructures provide the same access to entrances, common areas and amenities of AB 345
he structure to occupants of the affordable housing units in the structure as is rovided to occupants of the market-rate housing units. The billwould also prohibit mixed-income multifamily structure from isolating the affordable housing units to specific floor or area on a specific floor of the structure. lnvalidates remnants of d iscrimination in housing covenants and provides property AB72t
owners with a process to remove exclusionary language in housing deeds that wilt allow for more affordable and multifamily housing. This includes clarifying that density restrictions in private covenants cannot be used to curtail an affordable or pportive housing development that is otherwise consistent with local zoning and hat a property owner who commits to buildingtOO% affordable units for lowerncome households may build as many units as allowed by the local zoning code and land use laws.
Requires the Bureau of california Real Estate Appraisals to gather data on demographic information of buyers and sellers of real estate property and submit AB 948 collected demographic information on or before July 1, 2024. The bill also requires the bureau to take note of homeowners from protected classes who file laints based on low appraisals. The law also establishes several educational requirements for real estate appraisers on cultural competency and implicit bias. uires that the county recorder of each county establish a program to identify L466 and redact unlawfully restrictive covenants from California real property records.
Provides for priority for descendants of people previously displaced by San 1584 rancisco urban renewaland other redevelopment projects in state affordable srng programs
Revises the real estate practice course for an applicant for a real estate broker or salesperson license to include a component on implicit bias and would revise the legal aspects of the real estate course for applicants to include a component on and federalfair housing laws,
Mi sce I I a ne o u s Housi n g Issues
dresses occupancy of standard and substandard buildings, including requiring a ity or county that receives a complaint of a substandard building or a lead hazard ation to inspect the building, document the lead hazard violations and identify AB 838 any building, portion of a building or premises that are substandard, as applicable. e bill would require the city or county to advise the owner or operator of each iolation and of each action that is required to be taken to remedy the violation and schedule a reinspection to verify correction of the violations as well as provide certified copies of the inspection report and any citations issued plies predominately to the City of South Pasadena. The law requires that if rplus residential property located in the City of South Pasadena is not sold to a rmer owner or present occupant, the property be offered at fair market value to resent tenants who have occupied the property for five years or more. The law also slightly modifies the types of projects that require prevailing wages. the establishment of intergenerational housing developments that sB 591 include senior citizens, caregivers and transition-age youth under specific conditions.
263
B 381