Dublin City Council
September 17, 2024

Agenda Item 8.2
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Linda Smith, City Manager
SUBJECT: Overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities Policy
Prepared by: Crystal De Castro, Senior Planner
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City Council will receive an initial overview of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is designed to support the region’s transit investment by encouraging jurisdictions to adopt transit-supportive land use policies for areas within a half-mile radius of existing or planned transit stops or stations, and to adopt additional policies they intend to further equitable transit-oriented communities. The TOC Policy lays out a menu of policy options for local jurisdictions to choose from. Compliance with the TOC Policy is required to qualify for future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) transportation funding.

Additionally, funding for Valley Link is tied to compliance by the local jurisdictions served by them.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the Staff presentation.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Implementation of the TOC Policy will require the allocation of resources including staff time and consultant services. Staff will return to the City Council in the future to further discuss the additional policy considerations outlined in the TOC Policy, which may include a budget adjustment as needed for technical analysis and consultant services. 1059

DESCRIPTION:

Background
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the agency responsible for planning, financing, and coordinating transportation for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. MTC and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) adopted Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050) in 2021, as a 30-year regional plan to improve housing, the economy, transportation, and the environment. In 2022, MTC adopted the Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy. The TOC Policy is an implementation policy of PBA 2050. The TOC policy replaces the TOD Policy to emphasize the importance of broader transit-oriented communities vs. individual development projects at transit stations and along transit corridors.

The TOC policy seeks to leverage the regional investments in transit by encouraging the adoption of transit friendly land use policies that facilitate intensification of uses around transit and to adopt additional policies MTC believes will further equitable transit-oriented communities. The TOC Policy was further revised in 2023 to clarify the application of the TOC Policy to transit extension projects, such as Valley Link.

The stated goals of the TOC Policy are to:

1. Increase the overall housing supply in part by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit-rich areas;

2. In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for businesses and commercial development;

3. Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility (such as bike share and car share) within and to/from transit-rich areas, particularly to Equity Priority Communities located more than one half mile from transit stops or stations; and

4. Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit-oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area.

Grant Funding
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides MTC with funding for investments in roads, highways, public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian projects. MTC distributes the region’s share of FHWA funding through the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG). While compliance with the TOC Policy is voluntary, it is necessary to qualify for future OBAG transportation funding. There is also the possibility that other regional sources of transportation funding, such as the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC), may include a TOC compliance requirement in the future.

The City has received approximately $1.13 million from the last three rounds of OBAG funding, which have been used for pavement repairs and maintenance on Positano Parkway, corridor improvements on Doughtery Road, and bicycle and pedestrian improvements on Dublin Boulevard. To qualify for the upcoming OBAG 4 funding in 2026, the City must demonstrate compliance with the TOC Policy by January 2026. Potential future OBAG-funded projects may include pavement repairs and maintenance, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, streetscape enhancements, and Safe Routes to School improvements.
1060

Alameda CTC is responsible for the planning, programming, and allocating local, regional, State, and federal funds for transportation improvements throughout Alameda County. Alameda CTC administers these funds through the Alameda CTC Comprehensive Investment Plan (CIP). From 2015-2024, Dublin has been allocated a total of approximately $56 million in Alameda CTC CIP transportation funds. Per recent discussions with Alameda CTC staff, future CIP call for projects could emphasize elements of the TOC Policy to qualify for funding. For context, Attachment 1 provides a list of Alameda CTC Transportation CIP funds Dublin has received over the last five years including funds to be allocated within two years.

Valley Link Funding
Valley Link is currently in the process of applying for two rounds of funding from MTC. This includes an application in September – October 2024 for approximately $3M in supplemental grant funds to complete their environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Valley Link anticipates submitting another application to MTC for a $135M grant in the December 2024 – February 2025 timeframe. The TOC Policy ties MTC funding for Valley Link to compliance by the jurisdictions they serve, including Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore. While local jurisdictions have until 2026 to achieve TOC Policy compliance, MTC is seeking input from these local jurisdictions with each grant application. MTC is requesting a letter from the three cities acknowledging the TOC Policy for the initial grant application. For the subsequent grant application, MTC is seeking a letter in support of the TOC Policy along with a commitment that the City is taking meaningful steps toward TOC compliance.

TOC Policy Overview
The TOC Policy identifies Station Areas, which are areas within a half-mile radius of a fixed or planned transit station. Station Areas subject to the TOC Policy are categorized by tiers according to the level of transit service. As shown in Figure 1, the City of Dublin is served by two Station Areas along a single Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) line. The West Dublin BART station is within the Downtown Dublin Specific Plan (DDSP) area and the Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station is within the Transit Center which is in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area. These Station Areas are categorized under the Tier 3 TOC Policy requirements.
1061

Figure 1. TOC Sites within the City of Dublin
The TOC Policy is divided into four elements: 1) Density and Intensity Standards, 2) Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization, 3) Parking Management, and 4) Access and Circulation.

Some elements have required policies while others offer a menu of policy options (both Stationbased and citywide) for local jurisdictions to choose from. More information about the TOC Policy is available at the MTC website: https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/land-use/transit-orientedcommunities-toc-policy.

To implement these policies, Staff would need to further analyze the impact of required and optional policies and present the information to the City Council. There is a cost associated with this analysis, including staff time, consultant services and related budget adjustments, as well as to prepare any related General Plan/Specific Plan amendments, zoning amendments, policy language, and environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The TOC Policy, as currently written, requires each local jurisdiction to achieve 85 percent compliance with adopted policies to qualify for OBAG funding; however, MTC has not yet defined how compliance will be measured. Compliance determinations will be addressed as part of the OBAG 4 program development starting in 2025. Staff will continue to engage with MTC on compliance determinations, and MTC plans to provide technical assistance to jurisdictions later this year, including funding, to help develop policies that align with the TOC Policy.

The following is a summary of the four elements of the TOC Policy. Attachment 2 provides the MTC final draft guidance for TOC compliance.
1062

MTC TOC Policy Elements in Detail
1) Density and Intensity Standards (Station Areas Only) The TOC Policy requires minimum development standards near Station Areas to promote high intensity uses. It outlines the process for a city to calculate the required minimum densities and Floor Area Ratio (FAR). These minimum standards can be averaged across the relevant land around the station for areas where residential or office uses are permitted by right. Existing residential neighborhoods can be excluded from this density calculation. The TOC Policy includes minimum and maximum development standards to ensure high intensity uses as shown in Table

1. Table 1 - TOC Density and Intensity Standards
TOC Standards
Tier 3
TOC
Standard
West Dublin BART Station Area
(DDSP)
Dublin/Pleasanton
BART Station Area
(Transit Station)
Minimum
Residential
Density
(units/acre)
50 TOD 30 25.1
Retail 22
Village None
Maximum
Residential
Density
(units/acre)
75 TOD 85 None
Retail None
Village 15
Minimum Office
Intensity (FAR)
2 TOD None .25
Retail None
Village None
Maximum Office
Intensity (FAR)
4 TOD 2.5 .80
Retail 2 (Retail District)

2.5 (Retail Core)
Village 0.35
The proposed Standards may be extremely impactful to certain areas within defined Station Areas.

For example, a 2 FAR minimum would mean a two-story building covering an entire lot, a fourstory building covering half of a lot, or an eight-story building covering a quarter of a lot. The first two examples would require some level of structured parking to meet market demands and that could impact the feasibility of development or redevelopment of the area. On the matter of minimum/maximum residential density, issues could arise around the periphery of the DDSP area where that type of density could not be supported economically or financially.

Staff time and consultant services would be required for the associated changes, such as but not limited to, preparing an evaluation of impacts such as traffic and to prepare General Plan/Specific Plan amendments, zoning amendments, and environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Staff will return to the City Council in the future to provide a scope and budget and to request a budget adjustment as necessary to complete this effort. 1063

2) Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policies (Citywide Policies) The MTC TOC Policy identifies numerous elective policies in four categories related to affordable housing and commercial stabilization. A City must adopt at least seven policies across the following four categories to demonstrate TOC Policy compliance:
 Production (minimum of two out of seven policy options)  Preservation (minimum of two out of eight policy options)  Protection (minimum of two out of eleven policy options)  Commercial Stabilization (minimum of one out of four policy options) In recognition of the variation in the Bay Area jurisdictions’ housing needs and funding capacity, the TOC Policy also determines the minimum amount of funding a jurisdiction must provide for specific policy options requiring a minimum funding commitment. This amount is based on the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for very low- and low-income units, placing Dublin under Tier E (See Attachment 2, Appendix B: Table 1- Jurisdictions by Funding Tier).

The Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization policies are summarized below and shown in Table 2, 3, 4, and 5. Certain policies appear in multiple categories but can only be applied once.

Policies not applicable to Dublin are shown in strikethroughs. Additionally, the City already has some required policies in place or has committed to adopting them as part of Housing Element implementation programs. Policies that align with existing City policies or are Housing Element (HE) programs are shown in bold. A summary of each policy is summarized after each table.

Production Policies
Table 2- Production Policies
Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Inclusionary Housing Existing Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance qualifies. (HE Program B.4: Inclusionary Zoning Regulations)
2 Affordable Housing Fund Funding commitment of $4 million 3 Affordable Housing Overlay Requires incentives beyond State law 4 Public Land for Affordable
Housing
City is working with Alameda County Surplus
Authority to provide affordable housing at the Transit
Center Site. (HE Program B.16: Publicly Owned Land)
5 Ministerial Approval Maximum of 0.5 parking spaces per unit 6 Public/Community Land Trusts Funding commitment of $4 million 7 Development Certainty and
Streamlined Entitlement Process
Requires staff, consultant time, and resources to
determine effects of vested development rights.

Production Policy 1 Inclusionary Housing:

Requires that 15% of units in new residential development projects above a certain number of units be deed-restricted affordable to low-income households. A lower percentage may be adopted if it can be demonstrated by a satisfactory financial feasibility analysis that a 15% requirement is not feasible.
1064

Note: The City adopted an updated Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance in 2024 and complies with this policy.

Production Policy 2 Affordable Housing Fund:

Dedicated local funding for production of deed-restricted affordable housing.

Production Policy 3 Affordable Housing Overlay:

Area-specific incentives, such as density bonuses and streamlined environmental review, for development projects that include at least 15% of units as deed-restricted affordable housing; exceeds any jurisdiction-wide inclusionary requirements or benefits from state density bonus.

Production Policy 4 Public Land for Affordable Housing:

Policies to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable and mixed-income housing that go beyond existing state law, typically accompanied by prioritization of available funding for projects on these sites.

Note: The City is currently working with The Alameda Surplus Authority to provide affordable housing in the Transit Center Site and would comply with this policy.

Production Policy 5 Ministerial Approval:

Grant ministerial approval of residential developments that include, at a minimum, 15% affordable units if projects have 11 or more units, or that exceed inclusionary or density bonus affordability requirements and do not exceed 0.5 parking spaces per unit.

Production Policy 6 Public / Community Land Trusts:

Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections.

This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.

Production Policy 7 Development Uncertainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process:

Include the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions currently outlined in SB330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date.
1065

Preservation Policies
Table 3- Preservation Policies
Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Funding to Preserve
Unsubsidized Affordable
Housing
Funding Commitment of $1M
2 Tenant/ Community
Opportunity to Purchase
Requires further studies to determine staff,
consultant time, and resources
3 Single Room Occupancy (SRO) No SROs in Dublin
4 Condominium Conversion
Restrictions
Existing Condominium Ordinance (DMC 8.54) to be
updated to include 1:1 replacement of converted
units, no funding requirement and requires staff
time.
5 Public/ Community Land Trusts Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.

Cannot be applied simultaneously with Production
Policy 4.
6 Funding to Support
Preservation Capacity
Funding commitment for a dedicated staff for four
years
7 Mobile Home Preservation No Mobile Home Parks in Dublin 8 Preventing Displacement from
Substandard Conditions and
Associated Enforcement
Activities
Minimum funding commitment. Amnesty program
to waive fines/fees or a low- or no interest loan
grant program ($10K minimum per loan/ grant).

City currently provides a grant up to $5K a year in
coordination with the County
Preservation Policy 1 Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing:

Public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing affordable to lower- or moderate-income residents (sometimes referred to as "naturally occurring affordable housing”) as permanently affordable.

Preservation Policy 2 Tenant/ Community Opportunity to Purchase:

Policies or programs that provide tenants or mission-driven nonprofits the right of first refusal to purchase a property at the market price when it is offered for sale, retaining existing residents and ensuring long-term affordability of the units by requiring resale restrictions to maintain affordability.

Preservation Policy 3 Single Room Occupancy:

Limits the conversion of occupied SRO rental units to condominiums or other uses that could result in displacement of existing residents.
1066

Preservation Policy 4 Condominium Conversion Restrictions:

Require that units converted to condominiums be replaced 1:1 with comparable rental units, unless purchased by current long-term tenants or converted to permanently affordable housing with protections for existing tenants.

Note: The City currently has a Condominium Conversion Ordinance (Dublin Municipal Code (DMC) 8.54) that permits the subdivision of existing apartment buildings into condominiums before they are sold. To align with MTC TOC Preservation Policy 4, the Ordinance would need to be revised to mandate a 1:1 replacement of comparable units unless the units are purchased by existing long-term tenants or converted into permanent affordable housing. This policy would not apply to new condominium developments.

Preservation Policy 5 Public / Community Land Trusts:

Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections.

This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.

Preservation Policy 6 Funding to Support Preservation Capacity:

Dedicated local funding for capacity building or other material support for community land trusts (CLTs) or other community-based organizations (CBOs) engaged in affordable housing preservation.

Preservation Policy 7 Mobile Home Preservation:

Policy or program to preserve mobile homes from conversion to other uses that may result in displacement of existing residents.

Preservation Policy 8 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Enforcement Activities:

Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti-displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.

Note: Currently, the City funds a Minor Home Improvement Grant Program through Alameda County, providing up to $5,000 a year per eligible household. To align with Preservation Policy 8, the City would need to increase this funding to $10,000 per household each year. 1067

Protection Policies
Table 4- Protection Policies
Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Just Cause Eviction Protection Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.
2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to
Demolished Homes
Requires staff, consultant time, and
resources.
3 Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $300,000 4 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $300,000 5 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $300,000 6 Rent Stabilization Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.
7 Preventing Displacement from
Substandard Conditions and Associated
Code Enforcement Activities
Requires staff, consultant time, and
resources. Cannot be used if using
Preservation Policy 8.
8 Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.
9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization No Mobile Homes in Dublin 10 Fair Housing Enforcement Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.
11 Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Requires staff, consultant time, and resources.

Protection Policy 1 Just Cause Eviction Protection: Defines the circumstances for evictions, such as nonpayment of rent, violation of lease terms, or permanent removal of a dwelling from the rental market, with provisions that are more protective of tenants than those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu).

Protection Policy 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes: Include the no net loss provisions currently outlined in SB 330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Require one-to-one replacement of units that apply the same or a deeper level of affordability, the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and comparable square footage to the units demolished. Provide displaced tenants with the right of first refusal to rent new comparable units at the same rent as demolished units.

Protection Policy 3 Legal Assistance for Tenants: Investments or programs that expand access to legal assistance for tenants threatened with displacement. This could range from a “right to counsel” to dedicated public funding for tenant legal assistance.

Note: Currently, the City provides financial assistance with the allocation of annual grants funded by the CDBG program and the General Fund to non-profits that provide legal assistance. However, the City would be required to provide secured funding in the amount of $300,000 to be TOC compliant.
1068

Protection Policy 4 Foreclosure Assistance: Provide a dedicated funding source to support owneroccupied homeowners (up to 120% of Area Median Income (AMI)) at-risk of foreclosure, including direct financial assistance (e.g., mortgage assistance, property tax delinquency, HOA dues, etc.), foreclosure prevention counseling, legal assistance, and/or outreach.

Protection Policy 5 Rental Assistance Program: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income households.

Protection Policy 6 Rent Stabilization: Restricts annual rent increases based upon a measure of inflation or other metric, with provisions exceeding those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu).

Protection Policy 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for anti-displacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.

Protection Policy 8 Tenant Relocation Assistance: Policy or program that provides relocation assistance (financial and/or other services) to tenants displaced through no fault of their own, with assistance exceeding that required under state law.

Protection Policy 9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization: Restricts annual rent increases on mobile home residents based upon a measure of inflation or another metric.

Protection Policy 10 Fair Housing Enforcement: Policy, program, or investments that support fair housing testing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement.

Protection Policy 11 Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections: Policy or program that grants tenants legal protection from unreasonable, abusive, or coercive landlord behavior.

Commercial Stabilization Policies
Table 5- Commercial Stabilization Policies
Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay Requires one of the following: operating subsidy, eviction protections, or relocation
requirements
2 Small Business and Non-Profit
Preference Policy
Requires new commercial space
preferences
3 Small Business and Non-Profit Financial
Assistance Program
Funding commitment
4 Small Business Advocate Office City currently provides this service Commercial Stabilization Policy 1 Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay:
1069

Establish boundaries designated for an overlay, triggering a set of protections and benefits should development impact small businesses (including public markets) or community-serving nonprofits.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 2 Small Business and Non-Profit Preference Policy:

Give priority and a right of first offer to local small businesses and/or community-serving nonprofits when selecting a tenant for new market-rate commercial space.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 3 Small Business and Non-Profit Financial Assistance Program:

Dedicated funding program for any impacted small business and community-serving non-profits.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 4 Small Business Advocate Office:

Provide a single point of contact for small business owners and/or a small business alliance.

Note: Commercial Stabilization Policy 4 aligns with and builds upon the work the City has already undertaken and remains committed to doing through the City’s Economic Development Department.
3) Parking Management (Station Areas)
State law (AB 2097) prohibits the City from imposing parking minimums near the Station Areas.

Consequently, parking provided by an owner or developer in new projects near transit is optional.

The TOC Policy further requires the City to establish parking maximums, which would prevent developers from exceeding the specified limit, even if they wanted to provide more parking. Table 6 provides a comparison of the Station areas and TOC standards:

Table 6 - Parking Management
TOC Policy –
Tier 3 Policy
Parking
Requirement
Existing Parking
Requirement -
West Dublin BART
Station Area (i.e.,
DDSP)
Existing Parking
Requirement -
Dublin/Pleasanton Bart
Station Area (i.e., Transit
Center)
Minimum
Residential and
Commercial
Parking
No Minimum No Minimum No Minimum (Per
requirements of AB 2097)
Maximum
Residential
Parking
1 Space per
unit
No Maximum No Maximum
Maximum
Commercial Office
Parking

2.5 Spaces per
1,000 SF
None None
The City must also allow shared parking for different land uses and set minimum bicycle parking standards in the Station Areas.
1070

4) Station Access and Circulation (Citywide Policies)
The final policy category for compliance with the TOC Policy pertains to transportation access and circulation. The City is required to meet all the requirements, and the City has existing policies in place that would need to be reviewed by Staff to ensure compliance as provided in Table 7.

Table 7 - Station Access and Circulation
TOC Requirement Notes
Adopt a Complete Streets Policy Adopted Complete Streets Policy in 2012 (Resolution 199-12)
Prioritize Implementation of Active
Transportation Projects in station Areas
DDSP, PDA: Transit Center Dublin Crossing, PDA:

Town Center
CIP- Downtown: Grid Street network and Golden Gate
Drive
Gap Analysis and Improvement Program
for Station Areas
LAVTA Long Range Transit Plan (March 2024)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
(2023)
Identify Mobility Hub Opportunities in
Station Areas
LAVTA Tri-Valley Hub Network Integration Study
(2021)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
(2023)
Climate Action Plan
Local Roadway Safety Plan
Conclusion
Staff anticipates proceeding with the preparation of policies that have already been committed to through the Housing Element. Staff will return to the City Council in the future to further discuss the additional policy considerations outlined in the TOC Policy and to request budget adjustments as needed for technical analysis and consultant services.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

None.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This informational report is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and no environmental review is necessary. Environmental review will be performed, as required by CEQA, for any future City adoption of the policies necessary to comply with the MTC TOC Policy.
1071

NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH:

Public noticing is not required to seek policy direction. A copy of the Staff Report was also made available on the City’s website.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Alameda CTC CIP Five Year Programming with Two-year Allocation for the City of Dublin 2) MTC’s Transit Oriented Development Draft Administrative Guidance 1072
Prior
Allocations
Two-Year Allocation Plan
Future Programming
Project Title Fund Source Programmed Amount Prior Thru FY2022-23 FY2023-24 FY2024- 25 FY2025-26 FY2026- 27 FY2027-28 Total Allocated (Thru FY2024-25) City of Dublin Street Rehab OBAG $ 661,000 661,000 $ $ 661,000 Dublin Boulevard Preservation OBAG $470,000 470,000 $ $ 470,000 Dougherty Rd Widening (from 4 to 6 Lns) (Dublin - CCC line) 2014 MBB $11,200,000 11,200,000 $ $ 11,200,000Downtown Dublin Streetscape Plan Implementation 2000 MB $41,000 41,000 $ $ 41,000 Downtown Dublin Streetscape Plan Implementation 2010VRF $226,000 226,000 $ $ 226,000 Dublin Blvd. Widening, WB from 2 to 3 Lns (Sierra Ct-Dougherty Rd) 2014 MBB $3,000,000 3,000,000 $ $ 3,000,000Dublin Boulevard - North Canyons Parkway Extension 2014 MBB $2,374,000 2,374,000 $ $ 2,374,000Dublin Boulevard - North Canyons Parkway Extension 2014 MBB $5,374,000 5,374,000 $ $ 5,374,000Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $ 166,000 166,000 $ $ 166,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $ 1,128,000 1,128,000 $ $ 1,128,000 Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard 2014 MBB $ 4,751,000 4,751,000 $ $ 4,751,000Iron Horse Trail Crossing at Dublin Boulevard TFCA $856,000 856,000 $ $ 856,000 Iron Horse Transit Route - Dougherty Road 2000 MB $6,267,000 6,267,000 $ $ 6,267,000Regional Street Improvement Project 2000 MB $75,000 75,000 $ $ 75,000 Safe Routes to School - Crosswalk Improvements 2000 MB $ 94,000 94,000 $ $ 94,000 Safe Routes to School Improvements Dublin 2010 VRF $110,000 110,000 $ $ 110,000 Safe Routes to School Improvements Dublin 2010 VRF $390,000 390,000 $ $ 390,000 San Ramon Road Arterial Mgmt TFCA $146,000 146,000 $ $ 146,000 Tassajara Rd Improvements from N. Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School 2014 MBB $872,000 $ 872,000 $ 872,000 Tassajara Rd Improvements from N. Dublin Ranch Drive to Quarry Lane School TFCA $128,000 $ 128,000 $ 128,000 Tassajara Road Arterial Management Project TFCA $146,000 146,000 $ $ 146,000 Village Parkway Complete Streets Improvements STIP $9,150,000 $9,150,000 $ 9,150,000 Sub -Total $ 37,475,000 $ 47,625,000
*City applied on behalf of BART, BART is the implementing authority Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Active Access Improvements* 2014 MBB $7,910,000 $ 7,910,000 $ 7,910,000 Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Active Access Improvements* TFCA $495,000 $ 495,000 $ 495,000 Sub -Total $ 8,405,000
TOTAL 56,030,000 $
Programming and Allocations
Attachment 1
1073

MTC Administrative Guidance:

Transit-Oriented Communities Policy
Guidance for Public Agency Staff Implementing Metropolitan Transportation Commission Resolution 4530
Draft – September 2023
I. Background and Purpose
This document provides guidance to local jurisdictions on how to demonstrate compliance with MTC’s Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy (MTC Resolution 4530), adopted in September 2022. The TOC Policy seeks to support the region’s transit investments by ensuring communities around transit stations and along transit corridors are places that not only support transit ridership, but that are places where Bay Area residents of all abilities, income levels, and racial and ethnic backgrounds can live, work, and access services, such as education, childcare, and healthcare. The TOC Policy is rooted in Plan Bay Area 2050 (PBA 2050), the region’s Long Range Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and addresses all four elements of the Plan— transportation, housing, the economy, and the environment. Compliance with the TOC Policy is voluntary for jurisdictions that want to advance the goals of PBA 2050 or to be eligible and/or competitive for some MTC discretionary funding.

Four goals guide the TOC Policy and advance PBA 2050 implementation:
• Increase the overall housing supply in part by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit-rich areas. • In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for new commercial office development.
• Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility within and to/from transit-rich areas, particularly to Equity Priority Communities located more than one half-mile from transit stops or stations.
• Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit-oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area.

Future One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funding cycles (i.e., OBAG 4 and subsequent funding cycles) will consider funding revisions that prioritize investments in transit station areas that are subject to and compliant with the TOC Policy. With MTC Attachment 2
1074

Commission approval, MTC may consider compliance with the TOC Policy to evaluate applications for additional discretionary funding sources.

II. Definitions
Bus Rapid Transit: “Bus Rapid Transit” (BRT) means a rubber-tired form of rapid transit in an integrated system of facilities, equipment, services, and amenities that exceed the speed and reliability of regular bus service. BRT projects must meet all of the following criteria:

1. Operates along a dedicated right of way for at least two (2.0) Lane Miles along its route. Dedicated Right of Way (ROW) means that private motor vehicles are prohibited from use of the lane except for turns, parking, and/or the use of variable pricing High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes.

2. All vehicles serving the route are equipped with Transit Signal Priority (TSP)

3. Has peak period minimum frequencies of 12 minutes or less.

Endorsement: When the MTC Commission acts to endorse projects seeking funding from other sources or when a project is added to the list of projects and programs included in MTC’s Major Project Advancement Policy (MAP) or a change is made to a project’s MAP Level.

Planned Station: A new station/stop will be added to the map and list of transit stations/stops subject to the TOC Policy when the project has a sufficiently defined station location as determined by MTC staff. However, a jurisdiction should consider the steps necessary to comply with the TOC Policy as early as possible in the planning process for the station/stop.

Regional discretionary funding: For the purposes of the TOC Policy, “regional discretionary funding” for transit projects includes the following fund sources: regional bridge tolls and associated programs (e.g., RM2 & RM3), Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG), Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP), and Regional Exchange Program (MTC Exchange). This list is non-exhaustive and could be amended in the future if MTC exercises discretionary control over additional funding sources.

Transit extension: Creation of a new fixed guideway transit system (rail, ferry, or bus rapid transit), or extension of an existing fixed guideway transit system to a new station, stations, or terminals. Transit extensions include new infill stations on a fixed guideway transit system, and major expansions of existing stations to accommodate new or upgraded fixed guideway service.
1075

III. TOC Policy Requirements
The TOC policy requirements consist of the following four elements:

1. Minimum residential and commercial office densities for new development.

2. Affordable housing production, preservation and protection, and stabilizing businesses to prevent displacement.

3. Parking management.

4. Transit station access.

The specific requirements for each topic area are described in more detail below.

Jurisdictions will be evaluated for compliance with all requirements in each of the four topic areas for each station area within the jurisdiction that is subject to the TOC Policy.

A jurisdiction may use an existing adopted policy or plan to meet the requirements or, as needed, may adopt new policies/standards by the deadline for compliance with the TOC Policy (see section V. Documentation Submittal and Review, below, for more details). Where applicable, a jurisdiction may rely on jurisdiction-wide policies to demonstrate compliance.

IV. Policy Applicability
Types of Transit
The TOC Policy applies to areas within one half-mile of the following types of existing and planned fixed-guideway transit1 stops and stations:
• Regional rail (e.g., Bay Area Rapid Transit, Caltrain) • Commuter rail (e.g., Capitol Corridor, Altamont Corridor Express, Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit, Valley Link)
• Light-rail transit (LRT)
• Bus rapid transit (BRT)
• Ferries
The half-mile radius around a transit station/stop applies even if the jurisdiction has adopted a Priority Development Area (PDA) whose boundaries are different. 1 “Fixed guideway means a public transportation facility that uses and occupies a separate right-of-way or rail line for the exclusive use of public transportation and other high occupancy vehicles, or uses a fixed catenary system and a right of way usable by other forms of transportation. This includes, but is not limited to, rapid rail, light rail, commuter rail, automated guideway transit, people movers, ferry boat service, and fixed-guideway facilities for buses (such as bus rapid transit) and other high occupancy vehicles.” (49 CFR § 611.105)
1076

Existing Transit and Transit Enhancements or Improvements The TOC Policy applies to jurisdictions with existing fixed-guideway transit service stops and stations, as defined above, including as those stations may evolve with future enhancements or improvements. For jurisdictions with an existing stop/station, OBAG (i.e., OBAG 4 and subsequent funding cycles) is currently the only funding source for which MTC will consider TOC compliance in its investment decisions. With Commission approval, MTC may consider compliance with the TOC Policy to evaluate applications for additional discretionary funding sources for enhancements or improvements to existing stops/stations.

Interregional Projects
Interregional projects that trigger MTC's Interregional Project Funding and Coordination Policy (Resolution No. 4399) shall be subject to the TOC Policy as set forth in this paragraph. For any portion of the project within MTC's jurisdiction, the project sponsor must satisfy the requirements as noted above for Existing Transit and Transit Extensions, as applicable. For portions of the project within the jurisdiction of another Metropolitan Planning Agency (MPO)/Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), the Interagency Agreement referenced in Resolution 4399 must include a provision acknowledging the applicability of the TOC Policy, confirming compliance with the TOC Policy for the Bay Area portion of the project, and a commitment from the other MPO/RTPA to strive towards achievement of TOC Policy requirements for the portions of the project outside of the Bay Area. The other MPO/RTPA's commitment for non-Bay Area portions of the project should include, as practicable, an agreement to regularly report on the status of progress to meeting TOC Policy requirements, to explain any challenges with achieving TOC Policy requirements, and any steps that will be taken to overcome those challenges.

Transit Tiers
Geographic areas subject to the TOC Policy are categorized by tier according to the level of transit service at fixed guideway station(s) within ½ mile:
• Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San José)
• Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain • Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit
• Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals
Some TOC Policy requirements are defined by transit tier, with some requirements consistent across all tiers.
1077

Opt-In for Jurisdictions Not Served by Fixed-Guideway Transit Service
Jurisdictions with transit stops and stations that are not served by fixed-guideway service (e.g., areas that are only served by regular fixed-route bus transit) may choose to “opt in” and voluntarily meet TOC Policy requirements.2 Station areas/stops where a jurisdiction has voluntarily complied with the TOC Policy may be eligible for any future funding sources where the MTC Commission chooses to adopt TOC Policy compliance as a prerequisite for funding or a factor in prioritizing funding.

Station Area Geography
The ½-mile area is measured from a single point at the center of the stop or station.

Where a station/stop includes infrastructure such as platforms, bus transfer facilities, and parking areas, a single centroid is identified rather than computing distance from multiple station entrances or property boundaries.

The following standards are used when determining if an area is inside or outside the ½-mile stop/station area boundary:
• Open water, rivers, canals, and other water bodies are excluded. • Parcels bisected by the ½-mile boundary are included if 75 percent or more of the parcel falls within the boundary. In such instances, the entire parcel is included, including the portion outside the ½-mile radius. • Parcels bisected by the ½-mile boundary are excluded if less than 75 percent of the parcel falls within the boundary. In such instances, the entire parcel is excluded, including the portion inside the ½-mile radius.

Following these measurement guidelines results in the TOC stop/station area being an irregular shape rather than a perfect circle.

Overlapping Station Areas
In some cases, the ½-mile area around one stop/station may overlap with the ½-mile area around another stop/station. As a jurisdiction must demonstrate compliance for each station area separately, a parcel within an overlapping area will be considered independently in the calculation of the average zoning density and the evaluation of parking standards for each of the overlapping station areas. However, if the overlapping station areas represent different transit tiers, then the parking standards for parcels in the overlapping areas default to the higher tier.

MTC will work with local staff to streamline the submission process for jurisdictions with multiple stop/station areas, particularly overlapping stop/station areas and stations 2 For locations with no fixed-guideway transit service, the Tier 4 density and parking management requirements will apply in addition to all other TOC Policy requirements. 1078

along LRT or BRT corridors. This may include allowing a jurisdiction to submit aggregated analyses that cover overlapping stop/station areas for some of the required documentation.

Multi-Jurisdiction Station Areas
The ½-mile area around some stops/stations may encompass multiple jurisdictions. A jurisdiction is exempt from complying with the TOC Policy if it contains 20 percent or less of the ½-mile stop/station area. A jurisdiction that comprises more than 20 percent of the stop/station area must comply with all TOC Policy requirements for its portion of the stop/station area.

For the TOC Policy’s density standards, a jurisdiction is not responsible for the zoning densities and intensities outside of its boundaries, but it must meet the TOC Policy standards for the portion of the stop/station area within its jurisdiction.3 However, joint applications are encouraged for a stop/station area that crosses jurisdictional boundaries; in such instances, compliance with the average density standards should be based on the combined area of the stop/station area in both jurisdictions (or in all jurisdictions, if more than two are involved).

V. Documentation Submittal and Review
Documentation Submittal
MTC will accept submissions from jurisdictions to demonstrate compliance with the TOC Policy for each stop/station area subject to the policy within the jurisdiction.

Jurisdictions must use the submission form developed by MTC to submit the documentation required to demonstrate compliance. MTC will make the final submission checklist available on its website prior to formal acceptance of submissions. All submissions must be submitted electronically to [email protected]. Questions about the submission form and process should also be directed to [email protected].

Local Jurisdiction Resolution
The jurisdiction’s submission must be accompanied by a resolution adopted by the city council or board of supervisors confirming compliance with the TOC Policy. For jurisdictions with multiple station areas subject to the TOC Policy, the jurisdiction may submit a single resolution that includes reference to all stop/station areas for which the jurisdiction is confirming compliance.
3 Average zoning density calculation requirements are covered in Section V of this Guidance document. 1079

Submission Deadline
To ensure eligibility for OBAG 4 funding and any other discretionary funding that may be linked to TOC Policy compliance, jurisdictions should anticipate demonstrating compliance prior to adoption of OBAG 4, expected in 2026. MTC will provide more information about submission deadlines as part of developing the OBAG 4 program.

MTC Review Process
MTC will provide written acknowledgement of a jurisdiction’s submission within ten (10) calendar days of receipt. To complete its review of the submission, MTC may request additional clarifying documentation and information from the jurisdiction. Additionally, to assist with its review of the submission, MTC may consult with and gather relevant information from any individual, entity, or public agency. Jurisdictions will receive an official letter upon confirmation of compliance with TOC Policy requirements.

VI. Guidance for TOC Policy Submission
This section provides the guidance necessary to demonstrate compliance with MTC’s TOC Policy requirements. It is divided into four sections:

1. Zoning density and intensity requirements for residential and commercial office development.

2. Affordable housing production, preservation, and protection policies and commercial stabilization policies

3. Parking management policies

4. Station access and circulation requirements
Section 1: Density for New Residential and Commercial Office Development
Summary of TOC Policy Requirements
The TOC Policy seeks to ensure that local planning policies and zoning regulations enable new development around transit stops and stations to be built at sufficiently high densities to support transit ridership and increase the proportion of trips taken by transit.

The Policy does not require a jurisdiction to plan or zone specific parcels for a particular land use or density. Rather, a jurisdiction is required to meet zoning density and intensity standards that are averaged across the station area. The density requirements are based on the stop/station area’s Transit Tier (see Tables 1 and 3).

The TOC Policy allows certain areas to be excluded from the density/intensity calculations. Areas where residential uses are not allowed are excluded from the residential calculations. For the commercial office calculations, only those zoning districts that allow commercial office land uses as a primary use are included. The 1080

Policy also allows existing dwelling units to be excluded from the residential and commercial office calculations in order to minimize the risk of potential displacement.

A total of four calculations are required to demonstrate conformance to the Policy:
• Minimum zoning density required on parcels allowing residential uses. • Maximum zoning density allowed on parcels allowing residential uses. • Minimum commercial office intensity (FAR) required on parcels allowing office uses.
• Maximum commercial office intensity (FAR) allowed on parcels allowing office uses.

The guidance provided below explains how these calculations should be completed, what may be excluded, and how to determine density and FAR equivalencies if a zoning district does not use these metrics to regulate development. The calculations do not require a determination of “buildout” in the stop/station area. Rather, they only require calculation of the average minimum and maximum density/intensity allowed by zoning on the eligible parcels.

All zoning districts within the stop/station area where housing and commercial office uses are considered primary uses (e.g., permitted by right) should have minimum and maximum density or intensity standards. The minimums in a given district may be below the TOC Policy thresholds (Tables 1 and 3), provided the average across the station area meets the requirement. This is further explained in the methodology below.

Submitting Required Documentation
A jurisdiction has two options for completing the density/intensity calculations:
• Option A is simpler and involves determining the area of all zoned parcels within the ½ mile radius where residential uses are allowed (Step 1A) and commercial office uses are allowed (Step 1B).
• Option B is more fine-grained and allows exclusion of certain parcels in each of these zones due to existing uses.4
A jurisdiction may use either option. Both options require a “weighted average” calculation that accounts for the proportional land area in each zone.

A five-step process is outlined below. Step 1 is determining the baseline set of zones or parcels to be used in the average density/intensity calculations for each stop/station area. Steps 2 to 5 (which are the same for Option A and Option B) correspond to the calculations of minimum residential density, maximum allowable residential density, 4 Calculation of the average density includes parcels where it may not be physically possible to construct new residential, commercial office, or mixed-use buildings within the specified density ranges due to small parcel sizes, environmental factors, or conflicts with Airport Land Use Compatibility Plans, etc. 1081

minimum commercial office intensity, and maximum allowable commercial office intensity for those zones or parcels.

Step 1: Determine the Baseline Areas to be Included in the Calculations Option A:
a) Identify all zoning districts in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted by right. This includes single-family zones, multi-family zones, mixeduse zones where housing is a permitted use, and non-residential districts that specifically identify housing as a permitted use. Public/quasi-public zones are excluded. (Step 1A).
b) Identify all zoning districts in the stop/station area where commercial offices are permitted by right. This includes office zones, commercial and mixed-use zones where office is permitted by right, and any residential zones that allow 100% office uses (zones that only allow office as an ancillary use are excluded). It also includes light industrial and similar non-residential zones where commercial office is permitted by right and as the primary land use. Public/quasi-public zones are excluded. (Step 1B)
c) Calculate the net area in each zoning district within the stop/station area. “Net” area means that any streets or un-zoned features within the zoning boundary are not counted.
d) Report the acreage in each eligible residential zone and each eligible commercial office zone, the sums of these acreages, and the percentage of the total eligible zones that each individual zone represents. Zoning districts included in the residential calculation may also be included in the office calculation. e) Proceed to steps 2 through 5.

Option B:
a) Conduct steps (a) and (b) as described above for Option A. b) For each zoning district, prepare a list of parcels to be excluded (subtracted) from the eligible acreage in that zoning district. For any excluded parcel, the jurisdiction must document the reason for the exclusion. This requires the use of a parcel-level Excel database that lists each assessor parcel number, address, acreage, existing zoning, existing land use, and the nature of the constraint underlying the exclusion. Exclusions may be based on any one of the following factors:
• The parcel is currently occupied by single- or multi-family dwelling units.

However, if the parcel was counted as a Housing Opportunity Site in the 6th Cycle Housing Element, it may not be excluded.
• The parcel is a park, institution, or public facility and is not suitable for residential use.
1082

c) Report the remaining acreage in each eligible residential zone and each eligible commercial office zone, the sums of these acreages, and the percentage of the total eligible zones that each individual zone represents. Zoning districts included in the residential calculation may also be included in the office calculation. d) Proceed to Steps 2 through 5.

Step 2: Calculate the Average Minimum Residential Density Required by Zoning in the Stop/Station Area
A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average minimum zoning density in the ½-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Minimum Zoning Densities Required for Residential Development Level of Transit Service Minimum Zoning Density
Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e.,
Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and
Downtown San Jose)
100 units/net acre or higher
Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain
75 units/net acre or higher
Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit
50 units/net acre or higher
Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor,
Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals
25 units/net acre or higher
Notes:

1. Tier 3 jurisdictions with 30,000 residents or fewer may use Tier 4 standards.

An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where housing is permitted but minimum density is expressed using floor area ratio (FAR), height, or another variable. The intent of the table is to allow jurisdictions using zones that are not measured in dwelling units per acre to convert to density equivalents so that averages may be more accurately estimated. Table 2 shows the equivalent densities for FARs ranging from 0.5 to 5.0 and for height limits ranging from zero to 75 feet. The standards in Table 2 are “default” standards based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within their stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. MTC staff will automatically approve jurisdiction-developed equivalency tables that were accepted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in a certified Housing Element from the 6th Cycle or later.
1083

Table 2: Equivalency Table for Minimum Density Calculation (only for use in zones with no density standard)
If there is no minimum
density, but the
minimum FAR required
is...
…then use this
equivalent for
minimum
density
If there is no minimum
density or FAR, but the
minimum height is…
…then use this
for equivalent
minimum density
None Zero None Zero
Less than 0.5 8 DUA Less than 25′ 20 DUA
Between 0.5 and 0.74 16 DUA 25′ to 34.9′ 35 DUA
Between 0.75 and .99 25 DUA 35′ to 44.9′ 55 DUA
Between 1.0 and 1.49 50 DUA 45′ to 54.9′ 75 DUA
Between 1.5 and 1.99 75 DUA 55′ to 64.9′ 100 DUA
Between 2.0 and 2.99 100 DUA 65′ to 74.9′ or higher 125 DUA Between 3.0 and 3.99 125 DUA 75′ or higher 150 DUA

4.0 or higher 150 DUA
Although a minimum residential density standard is not mandatory for every zone in the stop/station area in which housing is permitted, it is strongly recommended. A jurisdiction without minimum residential density zoning standards may use the minimums identified in its General Plan, to the extent that the jurisdiction has a General Plan policy that new development must occur at or above a minimum threshold. In the absence of such a policy or zoning standard, a zone without a minimum density will be assigned a “zero” for the purposes of calculating the average for the stop/station area.

This will make it more difficult to achieve the required areawide averages.

Minimums should be adopted even where density is not used as a metric. In other words, cities that have adopted Form Based Codes without density standards are strongly encouraged to adopt minimum densities, minimum FARs, or minimum heights for future residential and mixed-use projects. Commercial zones where housing is permitted by right should likewise either include minimum densities, minimum FARs, or minimum heights for residential and mixed uses.

Once a density or density equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 1 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. A jurisdiction may use an alternative methodology to determine average minimum density, subject to approval by MTC.
1084

Figure 1: Calculation of Average Required Minimum Residential Zoning Density As shown in Figure 1, to calculate the average minimum residential zoning density for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded.

This result is then multiplied by the minimum density for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 2 to determine the equivalent density. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average minimum residential density.

Step 3: Calculate the Average Maximum Residential Density Allowed by Zoning in the Station Area
A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average maximum allowable residential zoning density in the ½-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 3.
1085

Table 3: Maximum Zoning Densities Allowed for Residential Development Level of Transit Service
Maximum Allowable
Zoning Density
Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose)
150 units/net acre or
higher
Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain
100 units/net acre or
higher
Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit
75 units/net acre or higher
Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 35 units/net acre or higher
Notes:

1. Tier 3 jurisdictions 30,000 or fewer residents may use Tier 4 standards.

2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 2050 modeling for Strategy H3 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 44-45).

An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where housing is permitted but maximum allowable density is expressed using floor area ratio (FAR), height, or another variable. The intent of the table is to allow jurisdictions using zones that are not measured in dwelling units per acre to convert to density equivalents so averages may be more accurately estimated. Table 4 shows the equivalent densities for FARs ranging from 0 to 5.0 and for height limits ranging from 0 to 75 feet. The standards in Table 4 are “default” standards based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within their stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC. MTC staff will automatically approve jurisdiction-developed equivalency tables that were accepted by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in a certified Housing Element from the 6th Cycle or later.

Table 4: Equivalency Table for Maximum Density Calculation (only for use in zones with no density standard)
If there is no maximum
density, but the
maximum FAR allowed
is...
…then use this
equivalent for
maximum
density
If there is no maximum
density or FAR, but the
maximum allowable
height is…
…then use this
for equivalent
maximum density
Less than 0.74 12 DUA Less than 25′ 12 DUA
Between 0.75 and .99 25 DUA 25′ to 34.9′ 35 DUA
Between 1.0 and 1.49 50 DUA 35′ to 44.9′ 55 DUA
Between 1.5 and 1.99 75 DUA 45′ to 54.9′ 75 DUA
Between 2.0 and 2.99 100 DUA 55′ to 64.9′ 100 DUA
Between 3.0 and 3.99 125 DUA 65′ to 74.9′ or higher 125 DUA Between 4.0 and 4.99 150 DUA 75′ or higher 150 DUA
Add 40 DUA for each 1.0 FAR above 5.0 Add 25 DUA for each 10′ above 75′ 1086

Once a density or density equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 2 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average maximum density, subject to approval by MTC.

Figure 2: Calculation of Average Maximum Allowable Residential Zoning Density As shown in Figure 2, to calculate the average maximum allowable residential zoning density for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded.

This result is then multiplied by the allowable maximum density for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 4 to determine the equivalent density. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where residential uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average maximum residential density.

Step 4: Calculate the Average Minimum Commercial Office Space Intensity Required by Zoning in the Station Area
A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average minimum required zoning intensity for commercial office space in the ½-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 5. Again, it is recognized that a jurisdiction 1087

may not have adopted minimum FAR standards (or minimum heights) for commercial office space in its stop/station area. A jurisdiction without such standards may refer to its General Plan ranges, to the extent the General Plan includes a range and has a policy that development must occur at or above the minimum. Cities without minimum standards for FAR (either in zoning or the General Plan) must assign a “zero” to the applicable zones when calculating the stop/station area average.

Table 5: Minimum Zoning Intensities Required for Commercial Office Development Level of Transit Service
Minimum Zoning Intensity
Required for Commercial
Office Space (FAR)
Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e., Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and Downtown San Jose)
4 or higher
Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain
3 or higher
Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit
2 or higher
Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals 1 or higher
Notes:

1. For mixed-use projects that include a commercial office component, this figure shall not be less than the equivalent of the applicable allowed or permitted FAR standard.

2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 2050 modeling for Strategy EC4 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 57-58).

An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where minimum required intensity is expressed using height rather than FAR. Table 6 shows the equivalent FARs for height limits ranging from zero to 100 feet. The equivalencies in Table 6 are “default” values based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within the stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC.

Table 6: Equivalency Table for Minimum Zoning Intensity for Commercial Office (only for use in zones with no Floor Area Ratio [FAR] standard) If there is no FAR standard, but the minimum
height required is...
…then use this as the equivalent
FAR
Zero or less than 25 feet None
25′ to 34.9′ 0.75
35′ to 44.9′ 1.5
45′ to 54.9′ 2.0
55′ to 64.9′ 3.0
65′ to 74.9′ or higher 4.0
75′ or higher 5.0
1088

Once an FAR or FAR equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average should be determined. Figure 3 illustrates the formula to be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average minimum zoning intensity, subject to approval by MTC.

Figure 3: Calculation of Average Minimum Required Commercial Office Zoning Intensity As shown in Figure 3, to calculate the average minimum commercial office zoning intensity for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded.

This result is then multiplied by the minimum intensity for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 6 to determine the FAR equivalent. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average required minimum commercial office intensity.

Step 5: Calculate the Average Maximum Commercial Office Space Intensity Allowed by Zoning in the Station Area
A jurisdiction must demonstrate that the average maximum allowable zoning intensity for commercial office space in the ½-mile stop/station area meets the adopted TOC Policy standard for its transit tier shown in Table 7.
1089

Table 7: Maximum Zoning Intensities Allowed for Commercial Office Development Level of Transit Service
Maximum Allowable Zoning
Intensity for Commercial
Office Space (FAR)
Tier 1: Rail stations serving regional centers (i.e.,
Downtown San Francisco, Downtown Oakland, and
Downtown San Jose)
8 or higher
Tier 2: Stop/station served by two or more BART lines or BART and Caltrain
6 or higher
Tier 3: Stop/station served by one BART line, Caltrain, light rail transit, or bus rapid transit
4 or higher
Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART, ACE, Capitol Corridor,
Valley Link) stations, Caltrain stations south of Tamien, or ferry terminals
3 or higher
Notes:

1. For mixed-use projects that include a commercial office component, this figure shall not be less than the equivalent of the applicable allowed or permitted FAR standard.

2. The allowable densities are consistent with PBA 20505 modeling for Strategy EC4 (see Forecasting and Modeling Report, pp. 57-58).

An equivalency table has been developed for zoning districts where maximum allowable intensity is expressed using height rather than FAR. Table 8 shows the equivalent FARs for height limits ranging from 25 to 100 feet. The equivalencies in Table 8 are “default” values based on sample projects. Jurisdictions are encouraged to develop their own equivalency tables based on actual projects within the stop/station area or nearby, subject to approval by MTC.

Table 8: Equivalency Table for Maximum Zoning Intensity for Office (only for use in zones with no Floor Area Ratio [FAR] standard)
If there is no FAR standard, but the
maximum height allowed is...
…then use this as the equivalent FAR
Less than 25′ 0.5
25′ to 34.9′ 1.0
35′ to 44.9′ 1.5
45′ to 54.9′ 2.0
55′ to 64.9′ 3.0
65′ to 79.9′ or higher 4.0
80′ to 99.9′ 5.0
For each 15 feet above 100 feet, add 1.0
Once an FAR or an FAR equivalent has been assigned to each zone, the weighted average FAR for the TOC area should be determined. Figure 4 illustrates the formula to 1090

be used for this calculation. Jurisdictions may use an alternative methodology to determine average maximum density, subject to approval by MTC.

Figure 4: Calculation of Average Maximum Allowable Commercial Office Zoning Intensity As shown in Figure 4, to calculate the average maximum allowable commercial office zoning intensity for the stop/station area, the total number of acres in each zone to be included (shown as Zone 1, Zone 2, etc.) is divided by the total number of acres in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted. Use the sums developed in Step 1 for the numerator and the denominator. If using Option B for Step 1, exempted parcels are excluded.

This result is then multiplied by the maximum intensity for that zone. If the zone has no density standard, use Table 8 to determine the FAR equivalent. This process is repeated for each zoning designation in the stop/station area where office uses are permitted, and the results for each zone are summed to result in the weighted average required minimum commercial office intensity.

General Guidance and Special Circumstances for Average Density and Intensity Calculations
Mixed-Use Districts: Parcels to Include
Parcels in mixed-use zoning districts that allow both residential and commercial office as primary uses should be counted in calculations of average residential density and then again in calculations of average commercial office density for each stop/station area. No 1091

assumptions about the mix of uses are necessary on mixed-use parcels—simply report the minimum and maximum density or FAR permitted by zoning in each case.

SB 6 (2022, Caballero)/AB 2011 (2022, Wicks)
SB 6 and AB 2011 allow residential uses by right in most commercial zoning districts.

For the purposes of the minimum and maximum average density calculations, residential uses should only be counted in a commercial zone if they are expressly listed as a permitted use in the zoning regulations. Jurisdictions are encouraged to amend their zoning codes to list residential as permitted in those zones affected by SB 6 and AB 2011.

Planned Unit Development or Planned Development (PD) Districts For parcels in zoning districts where densities are determined through a subsequent project-level planning process (e.g., Planned Unit Developments), or were previously determined through such a process, the jurisdiction may use the densities and intensities in its General Plan. The jurisdiction also has the option of using any minimum and maximum densities/intensities that were established when the PD was created.

Overlay Zones
For parcels to which a base zone and overlay zone apply, a jurisdiction should use the standards included in the base zone if it permits residential and/or commercial office uses. Otherwise, a jurisdiction should use the standards included in the overlay zone.

Density Bonuses
For parcels subject to a density bonus, the density requirements apply to the base zoning (i.e., density bonuses cannot be considered for meeting the TOC Policy’s thresholds for minimum density or allowable maximum density).

Planned Rezonings
Jurisdictions that are in the process of rezoning property per the jurisdiction’s certified Housing Element may report the new zoning designation (or the amended zoning district standards) if the zoning will be in place at the time a determination will be made on the application. In such cases, the jurisdiction must note the current zoning, the proposed zoning, and the status of the rezone.

Verification of Data
A jurisdiction may review and verify data from MTC’s Bay Area Spatial Information System (BASIS) or provide a GIS shapefile with the required data. 1092

Section 2: Affordable Housing Production, Preservation, and Protection Policies and Commercial Stabilization Policies Summary of TOC Policy Requirements
A jurisdiction will fulfill the Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization requirements by selecting from the menu of options in Table 9 the policies that best meet local needs. To comply, a jurisdiction must adopt at least:
• Two policies for each of the “3Ps”—affordable housing production, preservation, and protection.
• One policy related to commercial stabilization, unless the jurisdiction can document there are no potential impacts to small businesses and/or community non-profits.

A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or, as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. Appendix A describes each of the policy options in more detail and outlines the specific minimum standards a jurisdiction’s policy must meet to comply with TOC Policy requirements. Compliance with TOC housing policy requirements should be completed in conformance with relevant federal and state laws, including a jurisdiction’s duty to affirmatively further fair housing.

For each of the “3Ps” policies selected to comply with TOC Policy requirements, the jurisdiction must also include a brief explanation for how the policy addresses the jurisdiction’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and/or other housing needs as identified in the jurisdiction’s Housing Element.

Table 9: Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization Policy Options Affordable
Housing
Production Policy
Affordable Housing
Preservation Policy
Affordable Housing
Protection and AntiDisplacement Policy
Commercial
Stabilization
Policy
Select at least
2 policies
Select at least
2 policies
Select at least
2 policies
Select at least
1 policy

1. Inclusionary Zoning Funding to Preserve
Unsubsidized Affordable
Housing
“Just Cause” Eviction Small Business
and Non-Profit
Overlay Zone

2. Affordable Housing
Funding
Tenant/Community
Opportunity to Purchase
No Net Loss and Right
to Return to Demolished
Homes
Small Business
and Non-Profit
Preference Policy

3. Affordable Housing
Overlay Zones
Single-Room
Occupancy (SRO)
Preservation
Legal Assistance for
Tenants
Small Business
and Non-Profit
Financial
Assistance
Program
1093

Affordable
Housing
Production Policy
Affordable Housing
Preservation Policy
Affordable Housing
Protection and AntiDisplacement Policy
Commercial
Stabilization
Policy

4. Public Land for
Affordable Housing
Condominium
Conversion Restrictions
Foreclosure Assistance Small Business
Advocate Office

5. Ministerial Approval Public/Community Land
Trusts1
Rental Assistance
Program
Blank

6. Public/Community
Land Trusts1
Funding to Support
Preservation Capacity
Rent Stabilization Blank

7. Development
Certainty and
Streamlined
Entitlement Process
Mobile Home
Preservation
Preventing
Displacement from
Substandard Conditions
and Associated Code
Enforcement Activities2
Blank

8. Blank Preventing
Displacement from
Substandard Conditions
and Associated Code
Enforcement Activities2
Tenant Relocation
Assistance
Blank

9. Blank Blank Mobile Home Rent
Stabilization
Blank

10. Blank Blank Fair Housing
Enforcement
Blank

11. Blank Blank Tenant Anti-Harassment
Protections
Blank
Notes:

1. This policy may fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.

2. This policy may fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.

Geography for Policy Applicability
At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction-wide policy). Some policies detailed in Appendix A have additional, policy-specific geographic applicability considerations.

Limits on Housing Policies Eligibility to Meet TOC Policy Requirements As noted in Table 9 and Appendix A, there are two cross-cutting policies that appear in multiple places in the menu of options:
• Public/Community Land Trusts can be used to meet the requirement for Production or Preservation policies, but not both.
• Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities can be used to meet the requirement for Preservation or Protection policies, but not both.
1094

Additionally, in some cases, a minimum requirement for one housing policy option may overlap with a minimum requirement for a different housing policy option. In these situations, a jurisdiction will only receive credit toward the TOC Policy requirements for one of the overlapping policies and the jurisdiction may elect which policy. As noted in Appendix A, the policies for which this restriction applies are:
• Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones • Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval
• Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process
References to State Laws
In some cases, the descriptions of housing policy options included in the TOC Policy refer to existing state laws. The laws listed may not represent all laws that are relevant to the policy topic. MTC may adjust the requirements for complying with the TOC Policy over time in response to any changes to state law.

Jurisdiction Tiers for Funding Amounts
Several of the affordable housing policy options require a specified financial commitment from a local jurisdiction. The minimum financial commitments reflect the fact that an effective housing program will have minimum staffing and related costs, below which meaningful impact is unlikely. A jurisdiction must demonstrate that it meets a minimum funding threshold for its policy to comply with the TOC Policy. The policy options that require a funding commitment are:
• Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding
• Production Policy 6: Public/Community Land Trusts
• Preservation Policy 1: Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing • Preservation Policy 5: Public/Community Land Trusts
• Protection Policy 3: Legal Assistance for Tenants
• Protection Policy 4: Foreclosure Assistance
• Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program
• Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement
In recognition of the variation in Bay Area jurisdictions’ housing needs and funding capacity, there are eight different tiers to determine the minimum amount of funding a jurisdiction must provide over a four-year period for each policy listed above, if that policy is selected by the jurisdiction to meet TOC Policy requirements. The tiers are based on the jurisdiction’s combined 2023-2031 RHNA for very low- and low-income units. The tiers, and the associated minimum funding commitment, are shown in Table 10 below. See Appendix A.1. for a list of the jurisdictions in each Funding Tier. 1095

Table 10: Minimum 4-Year Funding per Policy by Tier
Production Preservation Protection
Production 2.

Affordable Housing
Funding
Preservation 1.

Funding to Preserve
Unsubsidized
Affordable Housing
Protection 3. Legal
Assistance for
Tenants
Protection 4.

Foreclosure
Assistance
Tier
Production 6.

Public/Community
Land Trusts
Preservation 5.

Public/Community
Land Trusts
Protection 5. Rental
Assistance Program
Protection 10. Fair
Housing Enforcement
A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 C $2,000,000 $700,000 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000
G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000
Option for Local Jurisdiction Collaboratives to Meet TOC Policy Requirements MTC will allow implementation of affordable housing and commercial stabilization policies through collaboratives that involve more than one jurisdiction partnering to manage policy implementation. Implementation through a collaborative is intended to reduce administrative costs for local jurisdictions and increase efficiency of program delivery. This option may be particularly beneficial for smaller jurisdictions (those in Tiers A to D above) or medium-sized jurisdictions (those in Tiers E and F above).

Implementing a policy through a collaborative does not change the minimum requirements for each participating jurisdiction. For example, a city that transfers funds to its county to administer a tenant rental assistance program must meet the funding threshold in Table 10 and require that the county operate the program in accordance with the standards in Appendix A.

Target Policies
MTC specifically anticipates that the policies below will benefit from collaborative implementation. However, jurisdictions may use a collaborative to implement any of the affordable housing and commercial stabilization policies, subject to MTC approval.

Production: 2. Affordable Housing Funding and 6. Public/Community Land Trusts.

Preservation: 1. Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing, 5.

Public/Community Land Trusts, 6. Funding to Support Preservation Capacity, and 8.

Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
1096

Protection: 3. Legal Assistance for Tenants, 4. Foreclosure Assistance, 5. Rental Assistance Program, 7. Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities, and 10. Fair Housing Enforcement Commercial Stabilization: 3. Small Business and Nonprofit Financial Assistance Program
Any jurisdiction intending to implement a TOC housing policy through a collaborative shall provide MTC with documentation on the roles and responsibilities for the collaborative and jurisdiction, as well as a schedule of expected funding to the collaborative. MTC may request additional information on collaboratives.

Relationship to HCD’s Prohousing Program
The California Department of Housing and Community Development has a Prohousing Designation Program that provides incentives to jurisdictions that have policies to support increased housing production. While there are similarities between the requirements for a Prohousing Designation and the TOC Policy, there is not sufficient consistency between the policy options and other requirements for a jurisdiction that has received the Prohousing Designation from HCD to automatically meet TOC Policy requirements for affordable housing production policies.

Table 11 provides information on which Prohousing Designation policies correspond to the affordable housing production policy options for the TOC Policy. If jurisdictions are currently applying for or planning to apply for HCD’s Prohousing Designation, they should consider committing to policies in their Prohousing Designation application that would also achieve TOC Policy compliance. Importantly, policies adopted for the Prohousing Designation would also need to meet the minimum requirements detailed in Appendix A of the TOC Policy implementation guidance.
1097

Table 11: Overlap Between HCD Prohousing and TOC Policy Affordable Housing Production Policy Options
Affordable Housing
Production Policy Options for
TOC Policy Policy Options for HCD Prohousing Designation Production Policy 2: Affordable Category 4A: Establishment of local housing trust funds Housing Funding Category 4E: Directed residual redevelopment funds to affordable housing.

Blank Category 4F: Development and regular (at least biennial) use of a housing subsidy pool, local or regional trust fund, or other similar funding source.

Blank Category 4G: Prioritization of local general funds for affordable housing.

Production Policy 3: Affordable
Housing Overlay Zones
Category 1D: Density bonus programs which exceed
statutory requirements by 10 percent or more.

Production Policy 4: Public Land
for Affordable Housing
Category 4C: A comprehensive program that complies with the Surplus Land Act (Gov. Code, § 54220 et seq.) and that makes publicly owned land available for affordable housing, or for multifamily housing projects with the highest feasible percentage of units affordable to lower income households.

A qualifying program may utilize mechanisms such as land donations, land sales with significant write-downs, or belowmarket land leases.

Production Policy 5: Ministerial
Approval
Category 2A: Establishment of ministerial approval
processes for a variety of housing types, including singlefamily and multifamily housing.

Production Policy 7:

Development Certainty and
Category 2D: Establishment of permit processes that take less than four months.

Streamlined Entitlement
Process
Category 2E: Absence or elimination of public hearings for projects consistent with zoning and the general plan.

Blank Category 2F: Establishment of consolidated or streamlined permit processes that minimize the levels of review and approval required for projects, and that are consistent with zoning regulations and the general plan.

Blank Category 2L: Limitation on the total number of hearings for any project to three or fewer.

Submitting Required Documentation
For each policy a jurisdiction selects to meet the minimum number required for TOC Policy compliance, the jurisdiction must provide:
• A website link to the adopted policy or relevant municipal code section. • Citations (e.g., page number or code section) for descriptions of policy details that meet the minimum standards.
• The name of the agency or organization responsible for implementing the policy. 1098

• Local jurisdictions should submit all documents electronically, which can be done by providing a website URL linking to the document or uploading a copy of the document using the submission form created by MTC (currently under development).

There are additional documentation requirements for some policies. These are described in more detail in Appendix A.

Section 3: Parking Management
Summary of TOC Policy Requirements
The purpose of the TOC Policy parking management requirements is to further support reducing automobile trips and prioritizing the limited land area near transit for other shared transportation modes and active transportation. Parking management is a key complement to residential and commercial density increases that support higher transit ridership on the region’s existing and planned fixed-guideway transit investments.

To determine compliance with the TOC Policy, MTC will focus on a local jurisdiction’s compliance with the parking standards (listed in Table 12). To support limits on offstreet parking for new development, one or more additional policies or programs that address parking management must also be in place. These may be one of the policies or programs included in MTC/ABAG’s Parking Policy Playbook, or another policy or program that aligns with the intent of the parking management requirement. For parking management policies or programs that are not one of those listed below, a jurisdiction should explain how the policy or program addresses parking demand management in the transit stop/station area.

Parking Standards for New Residential or Commercial Development Off-street vehicle parking standards for new residential or general and neighborhoodserving commercial development (e.g., office, retail, and service businesses) must meet the applicable standards for its Transit Tier listed in Table 12, including:
• No minimum automobile parking requirement in most Transit Tiers for new residential or commercial development5
• For parcels on which residential development is allowed:
o The applicable maximum automobile parking per dwelling unit ratio o At least one secure bicycle parking space per dwelling unit. • For parcels on which commercial development is allowed:
5 The TOC Policy does not have a requirement related to minimum parking for Tier 4 station areas.

However, jurisdictions must comply with applicable state law, such as AB 2097. 1099

o The applicable maximum automobile parking per 1,000 square foot ratio o At least one secure bicycle parking space per 5,000 occupied square feet for commercial office.
• Allow unbundled parking.6
• Allow shared parking between different land uses.

Table 12: TOC Policy Parking Management Requirements
Level of Transit Service
New Residential
Development
New Commercial
Development
Tier 1: Rail stations serving
regional centers (i.e., Downtown
San Francisco, Downtown
Oakland, and Downtown San José)
No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 0.375
spaces per unit or lower.

No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 0.25
spaces per 1,000 square
feet or lower.

Tier 2: Stop/station served by two
or more BART lines or BART and
Caltrain
No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 0.5
spaces per unit or lower.

No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 1.6
spaces per 1,000 square
feet or lower.

Tier 3: Stop/station served by one
BART line, Caltrain, light rail
transit, or bus rapid transit
No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 1.0
spaces per unit or lower.

No minimum parking
requirement allowed.

Parking maximum of 2.5
spaces per 1,000 square
feet or lower.

Tier 4: Commuter rail (SMART,
ACE, Capitol Corridor, Valley Link)
stations, Caltrain stations south of
Tamien, or ferry terminals
Parking maximum of 1.5
spaces per unit or lower.

Parking maximum of 4.0
spaces per 1,000 square
feet or lower.

All Tiers Minimum of 1 secure
bicycle parking space per
dwelling unit.

Minimum of 1 secure bicycle
parking space per 5,000
square feet for commercial
office.

The TOC Policy’s off-street parking standards do not supersede other applicable requirements for parking for people with disabilities that are required by the California Building Code, or other state or federal laws, or off-street parking for deliveries.

While not specified in the TOC Policy, in addition to accommodating conventional bicycles in the bicycle parking requirement, bicycle parking spaces should consider specifications that will also accommodate electric bicycles (e-bikes). 6 Unbundling parking means separating the cost of leasing a parking space from the sale or rental price of residential and commercial uses.
1100

Meeting Parking Standards Through a Parking District
Standards may apply to individual projects or may be met through creation of a parking district that provides shared vehicle parking for multiple land uses within an area. For example, a specific or area plan may determine an overall total amount of new, offstreet parking that may be constructed in the area. Some development projects may provide more off-street parking, while others may provide less off-street parking, or parking may be shared between multiple new uses. In such cases, the total amount of new off-street parking to be built should be equivalent to the TOC Policy’s parking standards.

Complementary Policies for Parking Management
In addition to complying with the off-street parking standards, a jurisdiction must adopt at least one policy or program included in MTC/ABAG’s Parking Policy Playbook to address transportation demand management (TDM) and curb management in station/stop areas that complement the Policy’s required parking standards:
• TDM Policy for New Development: require provision and enforcement of transportation demand management (TDM).
• Curb Strategy/Management: Priority curb access based on variable need. • Parking Benefit District (PBD): Invest parking revenues into a PBD to fund streetscape, safety, and TDM programs.
• Demand-Responsive Pricing: Price parking according to level of convenience and demand.
• Priced Parking: Adding priced parking where it used to be free.

TDM and curb-management policies or programs may apply to either the stop/station area or jurisdiction-wide.

Submitting Required Documentation
A jurisdiction must document its current off-street parking requirements and secure bicycle parking requirements for new multifamily residential and new commercial office development in locations subject to the TOC Policy, including the citation for the municipal code or ordinance codifying such requirements.

For parking districts or other types of area-wide approaches to parking requirements and management, a jurisdiction must provide the adopted plan and relevant policies and describe how it will result in creation of the same or less new off-street parking than the TOC Policy’s parking management requirements, on average.

For unbundled and shared parking, a local jurisdiction must document and provide citations for the adopted plans, policies, and/or municipal code or ordinance allowing 1101

unbundled and shared parking. Further detail on unbundled and shared parking is provided in the MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook.

A local jurisdiction must also document and provide citations for the adopted plans, policies, and/or municipal code or ordinance for one or more of the listed policies or programs from the MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook that apply either to the geographic area where the TOC Policy applies or jurisdiction-wide.

Section 4: Station Access and Circulation
Summary of TOC Policy Requirements
In coordination with transit agencies and other mobility service providers, community members, and other stakeholders, a jurisdiction must complete the following in all transit station areas subject to the TOC Policy:
• Adopt policies and design guidelines that comply with MTC’s Complete Streets Policy.7
• Prioritize implementation of active transportation projects on the regional Active Transportation Network and/or any relevant Community Based Transportation Plans within the TOC station area in its capital improvement program (CIP) or other adopted plan or program that lists the jurisdiction’s funding and implementation priorities.
• Complete an access gap analysis and accompanying capital and/or service improvement program for station access from destinations within a 10-minute travel time (accounting for differences in travel speed and time for people who use wheelchairs or other mobility aids), and 15-minute bicycle or bus/shuttle trip either as a separate study or analysis or as part of a specific or area plan, active transportation plan, or other transportation plan or study that, at a minimum, includes the following:
o The geographic area that can currently be accessed via a 10- or 15- minute trip by these modes, with particular focus on access to Equity Priority Communities and other significant origins and/or destinations. 7 See MTC Resolution No. 4493.

Available Resources for Parking Management
The MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook provides detailed guidance and practical tools, such as sample policy language, about how to implement policy changes related to parking, transportation demand management (TDM), and curb management.
1102

o Infrastructure and/or service improvements that would expand the geographic area that can be accessed via a 10- or 15-minute trip by these modes.
o Incorporation of recommended improvements into a capital improvement or service plan for the local jurisdiction and/or transit agency (if applicable). • As all TOC Policy station areas are also MTC Mobility Hub locations, identify opportunities for Mobility Hub planning and implementation as described in the Mobility Hub Implementation Playbook. For transit lines where stops or stations are more closely spaced (e.g., less than one half-mile apart) such as light rail or bus rapid transit facilities, planning and implementation for Mobility Hubs may be done on a corridor-wide basis rather than for each individual stop or station. Additionally, recognizing that not all light rail or bus rapid transit stops/stations will receive enhancement treatments, locations that are transfer points for at least two different transit systems or major activity centers should be the focus.

Submitting Required Documentation
Complete Streets:

A jurisdiction with an adopted Complete Streets (CS) Policy is considered compliant for the complete streets policy requirement. MTC has documented jurisdiction CS Policies through its One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Program, most recently compiled in 2017. If a jurisdiction has updated its CS Policy since 2017, it should submit or include a link to the updated CS Policy.

A jurisdiction submitting CS projects for regional funding must be compliant with MTC’s updated Complete Streets Policy, Resolution 4493.

Project Prioritization/Implementation:

To demonstrate that it has prioritized implementation within the station area of active transportation projects and/or projects from MTC’s Community-Based Transportation Planning Program, a jurisdiction must submit at least one of the following:
• Capital Improvement Program with relevant projects identified. • Projects funded or submitted for funding (e.g., OBAG, ATP, etc.) within the past five years.
• Other funding or implementation plans that include relevant projects.

Access Gap Analysis:

To demonstrate that it has completed analysis or planning with a focus on improving 10- to 15-minute access to/from the TOC station area (and connecting to Equity Priority 1103

Communities, if applicable), emphasizing capital or service improvements, a jurisdiction must submit at least one of the following:
• Adopted PDA, Specific, Precise or Area plan(s) that include a station access or circulation element (submit access/circulation element only, or include link to adopted plan with specific page numbers that reference access/circulation element).
• Transit agency station access plans.

However, if these plans have not been completed for the TOC station area, a jurisdiction may submit:
• Adopted active transportation, bicycle or pedestrian plan(s) that include recommended access improvements to/from the station area. • Applicable sections of General Plan Circulation Element that highlight specific elements that guide or inform station access improvements.

Jurisdiction-wide or county-wide documents such as active transportation, bicycle, pedestrian plans or General Plan Circulation Elements may only be submitted as evidence of compliance if they include details for specific improvements within the TOC area and should be noted upon submittal. MTC staff will work with local jurisdictions to streamline the process for verifying compliance in locations with overlapping stop/station areas.

Mobility Hubs:

To comply with the Mobility Hub planning and implementation requirement, jurisdictions must submit any current plans or projects that enhance the TOC station area as a community anchor enabling travelers of all backgrounds and abilities to access transit and other forms of shared transportation. Enhancements may include (but are not limited to) safety improvements, bike parking, electric charging infrastructure (bikes, scooters, carshare), public realm improvements (e.g., lighting, green infrastructure), information improvements (e.g., wayfinding, real-time information) or any other active transportation access improvements within the station area.

If the documents submitted to comply with the access requirements listed above contain plans for or implement these enhancements, they must be specifically noted to comply with this Mobility Hubs requirement; or
List any current or prior funding application for MTC’s Mobility Hub Program for the transit stop/station area. Include the date of application submission.

MTC staff will work with local jurisdictions to streamline the process for verifying compliance in locations with overlapping stop/station areas. 1104

Available Resources for Station Access and Circulation
Complete Streets and Active Transportation
• MTC’s Complete Streets webpage
• MTC’s Regional Active Transportation Plan webpage
• MTC’s Community-Based Transportation Plans webpage
• Map of TOC Policy Areas and Active Transportation Network Access Gap Analyses
• San Mateo Transit-Oriented Development Pedestrian Access Plan • Irvington Station Area Plan, Access & Mobility Chapter • Berkeley El Cerrito Corridor Access Plan
Mobility Hubs
• MTC’s Mobility Hubs webpage.
• MTC’s Mobility Hubs Technical Assistance webpage.
• Map of TOC Policy Areas and potential Mobility Hub locations 1105

Appendix A: TOC Policy Housing and Commercial
Stabilization Policy Requirements
I. Affordable Housing Production Policy Options
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the affordable housing production policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction-wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.

Production Policy 1: Inclusionary Zoning
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Requires that 15% of units in new residential development projects above a certain number of units be deed-restricted affordable to low-income households. A lower percentage may be adopted if it can be demonstrated by a satisfactory financial feasibility analysis that a 15% requirement is not feasible.

Purpose
Inclusionary zoning requires new residential construction projects to contribute to a jurisdiction’s affordable housing stock. Inclusionary zoning can enable jurisdictions to leverage private dollars for affordable housing, bringing affordable units online faster and in greater numbers than relying exclusively on public funding streams. Inclusionary zoning also helps ensure new affordable housing units are developed in the same neighborhoods as new market-rate development, furthering the goal of economic integration.

Typically, a city or county will adopt an inclusionary zoning policy to both add more affordable homes to its inventory and ensure lower-income8 households can live in highopportunity neighborhoods where they would otherwise be priced out. Inclusionary 8 Lower-Income: State law (Health and Safety Code, section 50079.5) defines “lower-income” as households earning less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI). In some contexts, state and federal agencies use the term “low-income” to refer to the more specific category of households earning between 50% of AMI and 80% of AMI. The use of the term “low-income households” in MTC Resolution No. 4530 is assumed to be synonymous with the broad category of “lower-income,” or all households below 80% of AMI. Where the TOC Policy or this document discuss policies serving lower-income households, jurisdictions are free to design policies that serve any income group earning less than 80% of AMI, including very low-income (30% to 50% of AMI) and extremely low-income (0% to 30% of AMI) households. MTC recognizes that different income and rent limits are imposed by different programs and it is not the intent of the TOC Policy to create new requirements. 1106

zoning can be a method to address historic patterns of exclusion and segregation by ensuring housing is available for lower-wage workers, guarding against concentrations of poverty and affluence, and making it possible for lower-income households to live in higher-resource neighborhoods. An effective inclusionary zoning policy will establish affordability requirements and standards for affordable units, as well as provide incentives and compliance alternatives for developers.

Relevant State Law
AB 1505 (2017)
AB 1505 (2017) outlines state requirements for a jurisdiction’s inclusionary zoning ordinance. The law requires jurisdictions to allow alternative means to comply with requirements, such as in-lieu fees, building affordable units off-site, or dedicating land for the construction of affordable housing. Under certain circumstances, the law also allows HCD to review a local ordinance that requires more than 15% affordable units.9 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s inclusionary zoning policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The policy must apply to newly constructed residential or mixed-use residential projects. The policy must apply to ownership and rental units. • The policy may exempt properties with fewer than 11 units, student housing, 100% affordable housing, senior housing, or other special housing types. • The policy must require at least 15% of units be deed-restricted affordable housing units.
• The policy’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income10 households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • The policy may require less than 15% affordable units if:
o The jurisdiction provides an analysis showing that an alternative requirement is economically equivalent to the 15% standard (for example, a policy that required fewer units at a deeper affordability level, such as 10% of units affordable to households earning less than 50% of AMI).

OR
9 For more information about Assembly Bill (AB) 1505 (2017) and the state legal framework governing inclusionary zoning policies, see this memorandum prepared by the Public Interest Law Project. 10 Moderate-Income: State law (Health and Safety Code, section 50093) defines “moderate-income” as households earning between 80% and 120% of AMI.
1107

o A financial feasibility analysis (completed within 24 months of the date that inclusionary zoning was adopted) found that a 15% requirement was not feasible.
• The policy may require more than 15% affordable units.11 • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing or at least 45 years for ownership housing.
• Per state law, inclusionary zoning must allow for alternative means of compliance (e.g., paying in-lieu fees to support affordable housing development, building affordable units off-site, or dedicating land for the construction of affordable housing). For compliance with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction with an in-lieu fee that typically results in a payment of less than $100,000 per affordable unit, must provide a justification for why the fee will result in at least as many restricted affordable housing units as would be required of a project providing onsite units.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• If the inclusionary zoning policy requires less than 15% affordable units, an analysis showing economic equivalency of the alternative standard (e.g., fewer units at deeper levels of affordability) or a financial feasibility analysis showing a 15% requirement is not feasible for the jurisdiction’s local market conditions. MTC will provide a spreadsheet illustrating the analysis of economic equivalency.

Jurisdictions may fill in the template spreadsheet or create/commission a comparable analysis to show that the jurisdiction’s requirements are comparable to the cost of providing 15% of rental units affordable to 80% of AMI and/or 15% or ownership units to 120% of AMI.
• If the policy allows payment of an in-lieu fee, documentation (e.g., municipal ordinance citation or program guidelines) demonstrating that the fee will typically exceed $100,000 per required onsite affordable unit. If the in-lieu fee paid per affordable unit is typically less than $100,000, the jurisdiction must provide an analysis showing the in-lieu fee will be sufficient to produce at least as many restricted affordable housing units as the number that would have been required for onsite compliance.
• A management plan for monitoring and implementation that outlines procedures for annual monitoring to ensure that residents are income-eligible, and rents are consistent with program guidelines.
11 State Law (AB 1550) allows HCD to request a feasibility study for requirements greater than 15%, but does not require that such a feasibility study be completed prior to adoption of the ordinance. 1108

Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated local funding for production of deedrestricted affordable housing.

Purpose
Dedicated, ongoing funding provided by local jurisdictions for the creation of deedrestricted affordable housing is a central piece of a comprehensive and inclusive affordable housing strategy. In addition to helping to make projects financially feasible, local financial support is a critical factor in securing outside subsidy. Without local funding, it can be difficult for projects to compete for the necessary state and federal funding. These funds are often collected into a housing trust fund or other dedicated account to be dispersed as subsidies and/or low-cost loans to developers. Effective affordable housing funding programs will pool and disperse funds, which are made available to developers through a single application process.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s affordable housing funding program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding12 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements. The program’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should incentivize deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.
12 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1109

• Funding must be locally generated. Potential local sources include:
o Commercial linkage fees and housing impact fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries.
o In-kind contributions to developments in the form of fee waivers for building permit fees, impact fees, and other fees can also be counted toward the required amount of local affordable housing funding. Staff hours are not eligible for consideration.
o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be constructed during the OBAG cycle). o If a jurisdiction is also using inclusionary zoning (Production Policy 1) for the TOC Policy’s production requirement, funding generated by collecting in-lieu fees from inclusionary zoning cannot be counted toward the funding minimums required for this affordable housing funding policy (Production Policy 2). If the jurisdiction has inclusionary zoning but does not use it to satisfy the TOC Policy's affordable housing production requirement, the funding generated by collecting in-lieu fees may be counted towards satisfying Production Policy 2.
o Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s financing terms. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.). • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
1110

• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period.

MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.

Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Area-specific incentives, such as density bonuses and streamlined environmental review, for development projects that include at least 15% of units as deed-restricted affordable housing; exceeds any jurisdiction-wide inclusionary requirements or benefits from state density bonus.

Purpose
Changes to local land use law and other regulatory reforms can both enable and incentivize the construction of affordable housing. Zoning incentives can increase the cost-effectiveness of building affordable homes. An Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ) is a general term reflecting a variety of potential approaches that provide a package of incentives to developers who include units in their projects that are affordable to lower-income households. They are called “overlay” zones because they layer on top of established base zoning regulations, offering additional benefits to projects that increase the supply of affordable homes. AHOZ incentives may include increased density, relaxed height limits, reduced parking requirements, fast-tracked permitting, and exemptions from mixed-use requirements.

AHOZs are a mechanism through which cities can incentivize affordable housing development to specific zones. In addition, jurisdictions can expedite the approval and permit processes for affordable housing projects. Unlike inclusionary zoning policies that require either the building of affordable housing or the payment of an in-lieu fee, AHOZs are optional and incentive-based, offering developers key concessions in exchange for producing affordable housing. An effective AHOZ policy will provide meaningful incentives to projects that provide affordable housing and establish minimum affordability requirements at levels that reflect the jurisdiction’s need.

Relevant State Laws
State Density Bonus Law
State law (California Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives) dictates that a developer who meets certain requirements is entitled to a density bonus, including up to a 50% increase in density depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and an 80% increase for completely affordable projects. 1111

This law includes incentives such as reduced parking requirements and concessions for reduced setbacks and minimum square footage requirements.13 SB 35 (2017)
SB 35 (2017) dictates that a developer can request a streamlined, ministerial approval process for multifamily developments which include specified levels of affordable housing in jurisdictions that have not met their prorated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Projects that comply with the jurisdiction’s objective design standards and existing zoning are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review and public hearings. Depending on the number of units, the timeline for determining eligibility is either 60 or 90 days and the final decision must be issued between 90 and 180 days from application submittal.14
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies.

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s AHOZ policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The policy must offer incentives for projects with at least 15% affordable housing.

The policy’s minimum affordability requirement must exceed any jurisdiction-wide inclusionary zoning requirements. The policy could incentivize any higher proportion of affordable housing up to and including 100% (e.g., only provide incentives to 100% affordable projects). In all cases, the share of affordable units incentivized must exceed what is otherwise incentivized by state law for any given income category.
• To incentivize greater shares of affordability than otherwise incentivized by State Law, the AHOZ policy must provide qualifying projects with greater development potential in the form of:
o Density bonus: the policy must offset greater affordability with residential density greater than what is available under the state Density Bonus Law. o Additional “concessions” or “incentives”: the policy must provide qualifying projects with at least one additional “concession” or “incentive” than what is already available under the state Density Bonus Law. Incentives or concessions could include ministerial approval, some other form of 13 For more information, including the full density bonus chart that outlines the percentage density bonus given for each level of affordability, see this guide on state Density Bonus Law prepared by Meyers Nave Legal Services. 14 For more information, see this fact sheet on Senate Bill 35 prepared by the City of San Leandro. 1112

streamlining, or modifications to other planning code requirements.

Incentives and concessions must result in an actual and identifiable cost reduction for the project.
• The policy’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives.
• Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent and price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.

Production Policy 4: Public Land for Affordable Housing Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable and mixed-income housing that go beyond existing state law, typically accompanied by prioritization of available funding for projects on these sites.

Purpose
High land costs can make it difficult to create new affordable housing for low- or moderate-income households, particularly in high-value, amenity-rich locations. Local jurisdictions can help overcome this obstacle by identifying public property (including surplus government agency property and tax delinquent/seized property) that can be repurposed for residential use and making it available to developers who commit to creating and maintaining ongoing affordability.15 Utilizing public land can increase feasibility for developing affordable housing. Jurisdictions may donate land; sell land at a deep discount; or transfer land using a below-market, long-term ground lease to affordable housing developers or community land trusts. Jurisdictions can also incentivize the use of public land for affordable housing through zoning, fee waivers, and/or permit streamlining. This policy tool can be used effectively in all communities and is particularly important in communities where vacant land appropriate for residential use is scarce. Effective actions to prioritize the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable housing will include creating an inventory of publicly owned sites, noticing practices aimed towards maximizing affordable housing development, and collaboration with other public agencies.
15 For more information, see the brief “Use of publicly owned property for affordable housing” prepared by Local Housing Solutions.
1113

Relevant State Law
Surplus Lands Act
The Surplus Lands Act (Government Code Sections 54220 – 54234) requires local agencies to make findings that property is either surplus or exempt surplus land before disposing of it. If the property is not exempt, the local agency must provide written notice to housing developers to give them the first chance to purchase and develop surplus agency-owned land for affordable housing. If one of these interested parties purchases the land, then at least 25% of units developed must be affordable. However, if 90 days pass without reaching an agreement with one of these interested parties, then the affordability requirement for whatever development occurs on the land is 15% if 10 or more residential units are developed. The Surplus Land Act also includes penalties for local agencies that violate the Act when disposing of surplus lands.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must meet the following minimum requirements for prioritizing the reuse of publicly owned land for affordable housing:
• If the jurisdiction does not have an ongoing or planned public lands project, staff must demonstrate that at least one publicly owned parcel in the jurisdiction has been deemed suitable for affordable housing development. • The jurisdiction must have a program or policy in the Housing Element that describes the redevelopment of publicly owned land for affordable housing and aligns with the other requirements described below. Additionally, the jurisdiction must provide evidence of a recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on a public land site that meets the requirements of this policy. o In the absence of a Housing Element policy/program and recent or planned public lands project, the jurisdiction must adopt a public lands policy that includes a set of principles and standards for planning, leasing, and disposing of publicly owned land, as well as a program of implementation actions. The policy must include the other requirements described below. • Eligible developments on publicly owned land must exceed the 25% affordable housing minimum required by the Surplus Lands Act, with a target of 33% affordable units. Affordability requirements must define affordable units as housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of AMI or less.

Jurisdictions should require higher percentages of affordable units and/or deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives. • Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.
1114

• Building on its Housing Element sites inventory and supplementary data provided by MTC/ABAG (if needed), the jurisdiction must create a comprehensive inventory of publicly owned sites to identify opportunities to produce affordable or mixedincome housing. The site inventory must include both land that qualifies as “surplus” under the Surplus Lands Act and other currently underutilized sites owned by the jurisdiction and other public agencies (e.g., state, county, and local agencies, as well as other public entities such as school districts). • The jurisdiction must demonstrate that they have dedicated staff or consultant time for monitoring and advancing the public lands program, including periodic review and evaluation of the inventory of publicly owned sites suitable for affordable housing development, outreach to affordable housing developers, and updates to City Council.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A site inventory that meets the requirements described above. • At least one of the following:
o Documentation of a Housing Element policy/program for public land redevelopment that meets the standards described above, along with evidence (such as a RFQ/RFP) of a recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on public lands that meets the standards outlined above.

OR
o An adopted public lands policy that meets the requirements described above. • In the absence of an ongoing or planned public lands project, evidence that the jurisdiction has at least one publicly owned land site suitable for affordable housing development.
• Documentation of dedicated staff or consultant for program for monitoring and advancing program, including anticipated FTE.

Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Grant ministerial approval of residential developments that include, at a minimum, 15% affordable units if projects have 11 or more units, or that exceed inclusionary or density bonus affordability requirements and do not exceed 0.5 parking spaces per unit.

Purpose
“Ministerial approval” means a process for development approval involving little or no subjective judgment by a public official or commission. A public agency or commission merely ensures the proposed development meets all the objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards in effect at the 1115

time the application is submitted to the local government. Developments under ministerial approval are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which eliminates the costs and time for environmental review.16 An effective ministerial approval policy will significantly reduce the turnaround time of housing projects by expediting the approval process, reduce development risk by providing more certainty in the approval process, and thereby lead to faster construction of housing with decreased carrying costs.

Relevant State Laws
SB 35 (2017)
Jurisdictions that have not met their pro-rated Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets must offer a streamlined (ministerial) approval process for multi-family developments per SB 35. The ministerial approval process applies to infill developments that comply with existing residential and mixed-use zoning and objective design standards. Affordability requirements vary depending on the jurisdiction’s progress in meeting its RHNA targets or the submittal status of its Annual Progress Report.

Developments of 10 units or fewer are not subject to the affordability requirements.

Furthermore, jurisdictions cannot impose parking standards on developments within 0.5 miles of transit and other circumstances. While SB 35 only applies to jurisdictions that have not met their RHNA targets and for infill projects, language from SB 35 may be helpful for jurisdictions to include in their adopted ministerial approval policy.

State Density Bonus Law
Government Code Chapter 4.3 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives states that eligible developments are entitled to a density bonus, including up to a 50% increase in density depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and an 80% increase for completely affordable projects. This law includes incentives such as reduced parking requirements and concessions for reduced setbacks and minimum square footage requirements.17
Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies.
16 For more information, see Caltrans’ overview of Chapter 34 - Exemptions to CEQA. 17 For more information, see this guide on the state Density Bonus Law prepared by Meyers Nave Legal Services, which includes the full density bonus chart that outlines the percentage density bonus given for each level of affordability.
1116

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s ministerial approval policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• For projects with 11 or more units, the policy must do one of the following:
o Grant ministerial approval where at least 15% of units are deed-restricted affordable housing units.
o Grant ministerial approval for projects whose affordability share exceeds any existing local inclusionary zoning requirements and provides more affordable housing units or deeper affordability than would be required under state density bonus rules (given the bonus density obtained by the project). • The policy’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives.
• Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.
• At minimum, jurisdictions must provide ministerial approval to projects with 11 or more units meeting the affordability standards described above. This does not preclude jurisdictions from applying ministerial approval to a broader range of projects, such as all multifamily housing regardless of affordability. • Projects eligible for ministerial review cannot include more parking than is allowed by the parking space requirements outlined in Table 12 of MTC’s TOC Policy Administrative Guidance.

Production Policy 6: Public/Community Land Trusts
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.

Purpose
Community Land Trusts (CLTs) are typically nonprofit organizations that acquire and steward land on behalf of community members. They contribute to the affordable housing stock by maintaining land ownership to ensure the housing built on land they own remains affordable to future renters or buyers. Community control of land through 1117

CLTs has high potential to prevent displacement in a variety of housing markets and around transit.
18, 19
Land banks are public authorities or non-profit organizations occasionally created through local ordinances to acquire, hold, manage, and sometimes redevelop property to return these properties to productive use to meet community goals, such as increasing affordable housing.
20, 21
Housing cooperatives are democratically controlled corporations established to provide housing for members. Limited Equity Housing Cooperatives offer long-term affordable homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. The development of these types of cooperatives is often funded with a combination of private and public funds.22
The acquisition and rehabilitation of housing by CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives can help preserve a range of housing types, stabilize housing costs, and expand housing choice for low- and moderate-income households.
23 Support for CLTs, land banks, and
cooperatives not only serves as an anti-displacement measure, but also represents a place-based community development strategy for disinvested neighborhoods and communities with concentrated poverty, as jurisdictions can provide funding for these entities to acquire and rehabilitate vacant and distressed properties or maintain existing affordable housing options. This policy intends to set aside funding for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives to remove land from the speculative market and ensure longterm affordability.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s affordable housing production funding program focused on public/community land trusts must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding24 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The 18 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti-Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021).
19 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley.
20 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 21 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ’s. 22 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 23 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners. 24 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding 1118

amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • Funding must be locally generated. Some of the potential local sources include:
o Commercial linkage fees and housing impact fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries.
o In-kind contributions to developments in the form of fee waivers for building permit fees, impact fees, and other fees can also be counted toward the required amount of local affordable housing funding. Staff hours are not eligible for consideration.
o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be constructed during the OBAG cycle). o If a jurisdiction is also using inclusionary zoning (Production Policy 1) for the TOC Policy’s production requirement, funding generated by collecting in-lieu fees from inclusionary zoning cannot be counted toward the funding minimums required for this affordable housing funding policy (Production Policy 2). If the jurisdiction has inclusionary zoning but does not use it to satisfy the TOC Policy's affordable housing production requirement, the funding generated by collecting in-lieu fees may be counted towards satisfying Production Policy 2.
o Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • The funding program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements.
• The program’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower income households earning 80% of AMI or less, and ownership housing to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1119

feasible or through offering additional incentives. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program.
• Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.
• The program’s funds must be reserved for CLTs and/or cooperatives to use for affordable housing production, or the jurisdiction or other public entities can use the funding to acquire and hold property that will be used for production of affordable housing.
• A jurisdiction whose policy meets the minimum requirements above cannot also count this policy for credit for Production Policy 2 (Affordable Housing Funding).

However, if a jurisdiction establishes a funding program that meets requirements for Production Policy 2, and if this program additionally has set asides for public/community land trusts that meet the funding listed in Appendix B, then the program can also receive credit toward Production Policy 6 (Public/Community Land Trusts). For example, a Tier A jurisdiction that has a production program with $2,000,000 in secured funding during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle would receive credit for both Production Policy 1 and Production Policy 6 if the program has a set aside for CLTs of $1,000,000, as these amounts meet the $1,000,000 four-year minimum for both policies.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.) • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period.

MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the 4-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.
1120

Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Include the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions currently outlined in SB330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date.

Purpose
In some cities, towns, and counties, the process associated with obtaining approval for new construction is so time-consuming or costly that it dampens the amount of new development and adds significantly to its costs. Permit streamlining and other improvements in the regulatory environment can make cities more attractive to developers of both market-rate and affordable housing, helping to increase the housing supply over the long term and moderate price increases.25 Relevant State Law
Housing Crisis Act of 2019
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021). State law establishes vested rights through a preliminary application—a project is only subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when this application is submitted. State law requires timely processing of housing permits that follow existing local zoning rules (must issue written determination of consistency with objective standards within 30 days for 150 or fewer units or 60 days for more than 150 units). SB 330 requires that no more than five total hearings be allowed for residential development projects and the final decision on a residential project must be made within 90 days after certification of an EIR for a development project, or 60 days for a development project where at least 49% of the units in the development are affordable to very low or low-income households. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 has a sunset date of January 1, 2030.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
Note: Production Policy 3 (Affordable Housing Overlay Zones), Production Policy 5 (Ministerial Approval), and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) are related and contain overlapping requirements. As a result, jurisdictions may only count one of these policies for the purpose of TOC compliance for production policies. However, if a jurisdiction implements all provisions from SB 330/SB 8 without a sunset date, then the jurisdiction meets the standards required by and can claim credit for both Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process) and Protection Policy 2 (No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes).
25 For more information, see the brief “Streamlined permitting processes” prepared by Local Housing Solutions.
1121

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s development certainty and streamlined entitlement policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Adopt a local ordinance with no sunset date that provides the vested rights and five hearing limit provisions from SB 330.
• Adopt Protection Policy 2: No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes.

If a jurisdiction does not adopt Protection Policy 2, staff must provide a detailed analysis of how the jurisdiction otherwise prevents displacement and protects tenants in areas where development certainty and streamlined approvals are available.

II. Affordable Housing Preservation Policy Options
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the affordable housing preservation policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction-wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.

Preservation Policy 1: Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing affordable to lower- or moderate-income residents (sometimes referred to as "naturally occurring affordable housing”) as permanently affordable.

Purpose
Most lower-income households in the Bay Area rent in the private market without any form of housing assistance. The private market properties offering rents that lowerincome people can afford without subsidy are known as unsubsidized or “naturally occurring” affordable housing. Without subsidy, lower-income tenants are particularly vulnerable to rent increases as well as poorly maintained housing, and in the Bay Area’s competitive housing market these properties may be targeted by investors seeking to update units and raise rents. Lower-income homeowners are also vulnerable to market pressures that can result in displacement and loss of affordable homes. Preservation programs for unsubsidized affordable housing typically engage community organizations to help identify and monitor at-risk properties while also providing funding to support rehabilitation needs as well as acquisition and conversion to long-term affordable housing. Effective public investments to preserve unsubsidized housing will have funds available to secure unsubsidized affordable housing (rental or ownership), 1122

eligibility criteria for receiving funds, regulatory restrictions to maintain affordability of preserved units, and an anti-displacement strategy for existing tenants.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s funding program to preserve unsubsidized affordable housing must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction has at least one funding program dedicated to the preservation of existing affordable housing, where preservation of unsubsidized affordable housing is explicitly identified as an eligible use.
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding26 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing preservation funding program when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing preservation funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be acquired or rehabilitated during the OBAG cycle). • The jurisdiction has established criteria for borrower eligibility that require funding recipients to have experience with affordable housing preservation. • The program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements.
o The average rent for all units at each property at the time of acquisition must be affordable to households earning no more than 80% of AMI. After acquisition, new residents must be income qualified and earn less than 120% of AMI, and the building must maintain an average income of no more than 80% of AMI. Existing residents of acquired buildings shall not be displaced, even if the household’s income exceeds the AMI thresholds noted above. o Units acquired through the program must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent restrictions to ensure affordability. These 26 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1123

requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing. • Funding must be locally generated. Some of the potential local sources for funding affordable housing production include housing impact and commercial linkage fees, in-lieu fees, taxes (such as an employee head tax or real estate transfer tax), local bond measures, successor agency funds, business/gross receipts tax on rental property, and general fund allocations. Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on preservation projects within its boundaries. Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s financing terms. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.). • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding to be received by the fund over the 4-year period.

MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the four-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.

Preservation Policy 2: Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies or programs that provide tenants or mission-driven nonprofits the right of first refusal to purchase a property at the market price when it is offered for sale, retaining existing residents and ensuring long-term affordability of the units by requiring resale restrictions to maintain affordability.

Purpose
A Tenant (or Community) Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA/COPA) policy can give tenants and nonprofits sufficient time to compete to purchase a property. TOPA/COPA policies aim to prevent displacement of lower-income communities, long-term renters, and other marginalized residents by preserving currently affordable housing and 1124

creating pathways for long-term affordability. A TOPA/COPA policy can also facilitate homeownership for tenants by creating limited equity housing cooperatives or other ownership models, enabling increased wealth building opportunities for communities who may have historically been denied access to homeownership. For these reasons, jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area have identified TOPA/COPA as key preservation tools to combat displacement.27 Effective TOPA/COPA policies will identify what housing types are subject to the policy, what organizations are qualified to purchase a property, noticing procedures for the sale of property, a consistent local funding source, a reasonable timeline to respond to the intent to sell, and an anti-displacement strategy for existing residents.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s TOPA and/or COPA policy must meet the following minimum requirements:28
• The jurisdiction can meet TOC Policy requirements with either a TOPA or COPA ordinance, or both.
• The TOPA/COPA ordinance defines eligible and exempt properties. • The ordinance establishes the legal right of first refusal that gives tenants and/or nonprofits the first right to purchase a covered property. • The ordinance establishes timelines for notice of sale, offer period, time to close, and time to counter-offer under TOPA/COPA.29
Preservation Policy 3: Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Preservation Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Limits the conversion of occupied SRO rental units to condominiums or other uses that could result in displacement of existing residents.

Purpose
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units are a unique form of affordable rental housing that does not exist in all communities. SROs are generally comprised of small, furnished single rooms within multi-tenant buildings with shared kitchens and/or bathrooms. SROs do not typically require a security deposit, credit references, proof of income, or a longterm lease agreement. For these reasons, SROs have provided low-cost housing for vulnerable populations with unstable finances, very low incomes, or limited access to 27 Bay Area Housing Element Advocacy Working Group. “Leveraging the Housing Element to Advance Tenant & Community Opportunity to Purchase Policies.”
28 The requirements are derived from key components of: (1) OPA Policy described by Partnership for the Bay’s Future. 2022. Opportunity to Purchase Act Campaign Playbook (p.22) and (2) Public Advocates, “Key Considerations for Designing Tenant and Community Opportunity to Purchase Policies.” 29 San Jose Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) Proposed Program Summary – January 2023 Update.
1125

credit. In some cases, SROs are used as transitional housing for people who are in between more permanent housing arrangements.

In the absence of preservation policies, housing market pressures leave SRO units vulnerable to demolition or conversion to tourist hotels, condominiums, or market-rate apartments, resulting in displacement and potential homelessness for low-income SRO residents. The purpose of SRO unit conversion regulations is to ensure the retention of existing SRO units and to assist SRO tenants that will be displaced by demolition, conversion, or rehabilitation of these units. An effective SRO preservation policy will limit the number of units that can be converted, ensure housing stability for SRO tenants, and monitor at-risk properties.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must have an existing supply of SRO buildings owned by private entities other than mission-driven nonprofit organizations. Due to the heightened vulnerability of both SRO housing stock and the residents who occupy it, a jurisdiction with an adopted SRO preservation policy that applies to all at-risk SROs may receive credit for this policy even if none of the SRO building are located within TOC station areas.

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s SRO preservation policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The policy must limit the number of SRO units approved to be converted in a given calendar year to no more than the number of equivalent rental units completed the previous calendar year. “Equivalent rental units” shall be defined as low-cost SRO units or any income-restricted housing affordable to households with incomes at 30% of AMI or less.
• At the time of application for conversion of units, require applicants to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan30 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents.
• Exemptions to the conversion restrictions can be made for conversion of SRO buildings to 100% affordable units for tenants at 50% of AMI or less. However, affordable housing developers need to provide existing tenants with a first right of refusal for new units. Rents for these tenants must be based on their incomes, though rents for their units could reset at 50% of AMI upon turnover. Developers 30 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. 1126

also need to produce the Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan referenced above for any temporarily or permanently displaced tenants.
• If none of the at-risk SROs in a jurisdiction are located within a TOC station area, then the jurisdiction must apply this policy jurisdiction-wide.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documentation of the presence of SRO units owned by private entities other than mission-driven nonprofit organizations that would be protected by the policy.

Preservation Policy 4: Condominium Conversion Restrictions Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Require that units converted to condominiums be replaced 1:1 with comparable rental units, unless purchased by current long-term tenants or converted to permanently affordable housing with protections for existing tenants.

Purpose
The conversion of rental housing to condominiums presents a risk to maintaining a supply of rental housing, which typically serves a wider range of households than ownership units in condominiums. Establishing criteria for the conversion of rental housing to condominiums can help preserve much-needed rental housing stock, reduce the risk of displacement of existing tenants in rental units, and ensure continued housing stability for tenants who are displaced in the event of conversions. Effective condominium conversion policies will include restrictions on conversion, right to purchase protections and relocation assistance, and the promotion of affordable housing through comparable replacement units.

Relevant State Law
Subdivision Map Act
The Subdivision Map Act (Gov Code 66410-66424.6) requires developers to provide notices of condominium conversion to tenants at every stage of the process.

Requirements for TOC Compliance
To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate that condominium conversion is a salient housing issue in the jurisdiction by documenting a trend of recent conversions or by providing a detailed discussion of condominium conversions in the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s condominium conversion policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Require 1-for-1 replacement of existing units with comparable rental units, when permitted by law. A program may allow or require replacement units be provided 1127

through payment of a fee in an amount approximately sufficient to provide the local share of subsidy for one income-restricted rental unit serving lower-income households (earning 80% of AMI or less) and, in no case less than $100,000 per rental unit being converted. Jurisdictions may allow the following exemptions:
o Conversions where at least 90% of condominium units are purchased by current tenants.
o Conversions to 100% housing units with long-term affordability restrictions for households earning 120% of AMI or less.
• Provide existing tenants the first right to purchase a unit at the same price offered to the general public consistent with the Subdivision Map Act.31 • Condo conversion applications shall include a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan32 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents.

Preservation Policy 5: Public/Community Land Trusts
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or policies to expand the amount of land held by public- and non-profit entities such as co-operatives, community land trusts, and land banks with permanent affordability protections. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.

Purpose
Community Land Trusts (CLTs) are typically nonprofit organizations that acquire and steward land on behalf of community members. They contribute to the affordable housing stock by maintaining land ownership to ensure the housing built on land they own remains affordable to future renters or buyers. Community control of land through CLTs has high potential to prevent displacement in a variety of housing markets and around transit.
33, 34
Land banks are public authorities or non-profit organizations occasionally created through local ordinances to acquire, hold, manage, and sometimes redevelop property 31 This is a right under the Subdivision Map Act (Gov Code 66410-66424.6). 32 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. 33 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti-Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021).
34 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley.
1128

to return these properties to productive use to meet community goals, such as increasing affordable housing.
35, 36
Housing cooperatives are democratically controlled corporations established to provide housing for members. Limited Equity Housing Cooperatives offer long-term affordable homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income households. The development of these types of cooperatives is often funded with a combination of private and public funds.37
The acquisition and rehabilitation of housing by CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives can help preserve a range of housing types, stabilize housing costs, and expand housing choice for lower-income households.
38 Support for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives
not only serves as an anti-displacement measure but also represents a place-based community development strategy for disinvested neighborhoods and communities with concentrated poverty, as jurisdictions can provide funding for these entities to acquire and rehabilitate vacant and distressed properties or maintain existing affordable housing options. This policy intends to set aside funding for CLTs, land banks, and cooperatives to remove land from the speculative market and ensure long-term affordability.

Relevant State Law
SB 1079 (2020): Residential Property: Foreclosure
SB 1097 (2020) grants “eligible bidders” including CLTs certain rights and priorities to make bids on a foreclosed property after the initial trustee sale and potentially to purchase it as the last and highest bidder.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s affordable housing preservation funding program focused on public/community land trusts must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding39 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. 35 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 36 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ’s. 37 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 38 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners. 39 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1129

o Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a housing preservation funding program for CLTs when submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count existing funds toward the required total so long as funds are available for expenditure during the four-year planning period (anticipated to align with the OBAG cycle).
o Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing preservation funds for CLTs prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as the funds are used during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a project that will be acquired or rehabilitated during the OBAG cycle). • The funding program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements.
• The average rent for all units at each preserved property at the time of acquisition must be affordable to households earning no more than 80% of AMI. After acquisition, new residents must be income qualified and earn less than 120% of AMI, and the building must maintain an average income of no more than 80% of AMI. Existing residents of acquired buildings shall not be displaced, even if the household’s income exceeds the AMI thresholds noted above. • Units acquired through the program must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at least 55 years for rental housing and at least 45 years for ownership housing.
• The program’s funds must be reserved for CLTs and/or cooperatives to use for affordable housing preservation.
• A jurisdiction whose policy meets the minimum requirements above cannot also count this policy for credit for Preservation Policy 1 (Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing). However, if a jurisdiction establishes a funding program that meets requirements for Preservation Policy 1, and if this program additionally has set asides for CLTs that meet the funding amounts listed in Appendix B, then the program can also receive credit Preservation Policy 5 (Public/Community Land Trusts). For example, a Tier A jurisdiction that has a preservation program with $800,000 in secured funding during the relevant fouryear OBAG cycle would receive credit for both Preservation Policy 1 and Preservation Policy 5 if the program has a set aside for CLTs of $400,000, as these amounts meet the $400,000 four-year minimum for both policies.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
1130

• A copy of the program’s financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. Financing terms must indicate the income limits/affordability levels and required affordability period, and the terms must identify a legal mechanism for enforcement of affordable housing requirements (e.g., deed restriction, regulatory agreement, etc.) • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements for being considered “secured.”
• A schedule of expected funding allocated to the program over the four-year period.

MTC understands that projections of future funding may be imprecise, and the expectation is that a jurisdiction will provide a reasonable projection of future funding based on the best information available at the time of submitting compliance documentation to MTC. At the end of the 4-year planning period (expected to align with the OBAG cycle), MTC will expect documentation of actual funding received by the program and invested in projects, which may differ from initial projections.

Preservation Policy 6: Funding to Support Preservation Capacity Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated local funding for capacity building or other material support for community land trusts (CLTs) or other community-based organizations (CBOs) engaged in affordable housing preservation.

Purpose
Capacity refers to an organization’s ability to deliver a service or product. For organizations such as CBOs and CLTs which are engaged in affordable housing preservation, capacity may refer to having adequate staffing, organizational knowledge, and material or financial resources to effectively preserve affordable housing. By providing capacity funding to smaller organizations such as CBOs and CLTs, these entities are better equipped to secure properties and financing necessary to preserve affordable housing in a competitive housing market. Key features of an effective funding source to support preservation capacity include pairing capital funds for preservation with grants for capacity building, established guidelines for eligible funding recipients, and supporting developer experience through joint-venture partnerships. Effective policies to support preservation capacity will commit to multi-year funding dedicated for CBOs and CLTs.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s funding to support preservation capacity must meet the following minimum requirements:
1131

• The jurisdiction must have a dedicated funding program (with secured funding40) that supports capacity building for CLTs and CBOs for housing preservation work.

Funding must maintain project management staffing for a minimum of four years at approximately .5 FTE.
• The jurisdiction must define eligibility for financial awards to CLTs and CBOs.

If a jurisdiction establishes a preservation funding program that meets requirements for Preservation Policy 1 (Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing) and/or Preservation Policy 5 (Public/Community Land Trusts), the jurisdiction can use this program to also receive credit for Preservation Policy 6 (Funding to Support Preservation Capacity) if the program additionally has a set aside for capacity building that meets the requirements listed above.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• An explanation for how the jurisdiction determined the amount of funding necessary to maintain project management staffing for the four-year period. • Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria, if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program.

Preservation Policy 7: Mobile Home Preservation
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program to preserve mobile homes from conversion to other uses that may result in displacement of existing residents.

Purpose
Mobile home parks provide a distinct type of naturally occurring affordable housing, due to the size of mobile homes, the type of construction, and a unique dynamic where residents typically own their mobile homes but rent the lots under them from mobile home park owners. While state law extends certain protections to mobile home units, mobile home parks are increasingly being acquired by speculative investors for potential future redevelopment. Such market pressures pose displacement risks to mobile home residents, many of whom live on fixed incomes and have limited alternative affordable housing options. Accordingly, a strategy to prevent displacement and promote 40 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1132

community stability for mobile home residents is to regulate and limit the conversion of mobile home parks, and support residents and community organizations in purchasing the park to preserve affordability. An effective Mobile Home Preservation policy or program will either limit conversions through zoning rules or provide significant relocation assistance for park residents in the event of a closure.

Relevant State Law
Mobile Home Residency Law
The California Mobile Home Residency Law (California Civil Code Section 798 – 799.11) sets rules and regulations for mobile homes, specifically regulating the relationship between landlords and residents. The law states that in the case of a change of use of the park, the management must follow specific noticing requirements and appear before a local governmental board, commission, or body to request permits for a change of use.

Requirements for TOC Compliance
To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate there is at least one mobile home park (as defined by California’s Mobile Home Park Act) within the jurisdiction. Due to the heightened vulnerability of mobile home parks and the residents who occupy them, a jurisdiction with an adopted mobile home preservation policy that applies to all mobile home parks may receive credit for this policy even if none of the parks are located within TOC station areas.

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a mobile home preservation policy that meets the minimum standards for one of the following options:

1. Establish a Mobile Home Zoning District or Overlay Zone over existing mobile home parks which limits or prohibits the redevelopment of existing parks. o A jurisdiction may allow 100% affordable housing projects to be considered in this zone, conditionally permitted and after public hearings. If a jurisdiction chooses to do this:
 The policy’s affordability requirements must define affordable units as rental housing available to lower-income households earning 80% of Area Median Income (AMI) or less, and ownership housing to lowerand moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less.

Jurisdictions should require deeper levels of affordability where feasible or through offering additional incentives.
 Affordable units must have recorded documents that set binding maximum rent or price restrictions to ensure affordability. These requirements must restrict rents and sales prices to affordable levels as defined by the rules of any applicable state or federal affordable housing program. These restrictions must also ensure affordability for at 1133

least 55 years for rental housing or at least 45 years for ownership housing.
 The ordinance must provide existing mobile home residents with the right to return to a unit in the new development.
 At the time of application for conversion of units, applicants must be required to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan41 spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents.

2. Adopt a Mobile Home Closure Ordinance that requires relocation assistance and conditional approval after public hearings.
o The ordinance must require owners to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan spelling out tenant protections, benefits and required relocation payments for any temporarily or permanently displaced residents.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documentation of the presence of at least one mobile home park within the jurisdiction.

Preservation Policy 8: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for antidisplacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.

Purpose
Substandard conditions and physical deterioration represent a key threat to the region’s rental housing stock and unsubsidized affordable housing units. These conditions create health and safety risks for tenants and can lead to condemnation, abandonment, and/or demolition of housing units. The remediation of substandard conditions in unsubsidized affordable housing is not only necessary to preserve this housing but also represents an important anti-displacement strategy. Code enforcement programs need to ensure habitability issues and needs for substantial property repairs do not lead to the permanent displacement of tenants, which also requires maintaining housing 41 Relocation Assistance Plan: A plan outlining the benefits and protections afforded to tenants to minimize displacement and support relocation, including at a minimum: no penalty for the tenant to terminate a lease, payment of tenant reasonable moving expenses, relocation assistance payments in an amount that is at least three times the monthly fair market rent of the unit that the resident is being relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit. 1134

stability for tenants during any temporary displacement necessary for repairs. Code enforcement and other programs to address substandard conditions need to be centered in an anti-displacement framework, otherwise these activities can lead to the immediate displacement of vulnerable tenants if properties are deemed uninhabitable.

An effective program which prevents the loss of housing stock due to code issues provides public support to landlords and low-income homeowners to maintain their properties.

Relevant State Law
California Health and Safety Code (HSC)
HSC Section 17920.3 provides a definition of a substandard building, which includes inadequate sanitation such as a lack of plumbing, ventilation, or heating; structural hazards such as deteriorated floors, walls, or ceilings; faulty weather protection such as defective waterproofing and windows; and so on. Section 17970 – 17972 requires that when a jurisdiction receives a complaint from a tenant, they must inspect the building, document any findings, prescribe a remedy to the property owner, and schedule a reinspection to verify the correction. Section 17980 – 17992 states that once a building is determined to be substandard, the enforcement agency of the jurisdiction cannot require the vacating of residents unless it concurrently requires expeditious demolition or repair to comply with state law. If the tenant cannot safely reside in their unit due to repair, state law requires a property owner to provide affected tenants with compensation for moving expenses; the value of property lost, stolen or damaged in the process of moving; and costs associated with connection charges imposed by utility companies for starting service. The relocation benefit also includes two months of the established fair market rent for the area as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the property owner must return the full security deposit to the tenant.

Requirements for TOC Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a policy to prevent displacement from substandard conditions that meets the minimum standards for at least one of the following options:

1. Establish an amnesty program to waive fines and fees for property owners with occupied units constructed without the proper permits in exchange for bringing the unit into compliance with health and safety codes.
o Prior to making repairs, the property owner must complete a tenant habitability plan describing how they will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing. 1135

o As a condition of receiving amnesty for fines and fees, the property owner must agree to continue renting to the existing tenant after repairs are complete with reasonable limits on rent increases for that tenant.

2. Create a low-or no-interest loan or grant program to support low-income homeowners (including seniors and people with disabilities) with making repairs or modifications to their homes.
o The program must define eligibility for receiving a loan or grant, eligible uses for funds, and minimum/maximum loan or grant amounts.
o Funding recipients must be below 80% of AMI.
o The minimum loan/grant amount must be at least $10,000.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A template of the tenant habitability plan or some other documented requirements about the details of what must be included in such a plan, if a jurisdiction is selecting the amnesty program for unpermitted units.
• The home rehabilitation program’s financing terms, if a jurisdiction is selecting this option.

III. Affordable Housing Protection Policy Options
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the tenant protection/anti-displacement policies listed below. A jurisdiction may meet the requirements with existing adopted policies or as needed, adopt new policies by the TOC Policy compliance deadline. At minimum, policies must apply in transit station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC station area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdiction-wide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.

Protection Policy 1: “Just Cause” Eviction
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Defines the circumstances for evictions, such as nonpayment of rent, violation of lease terms, or permanent removal of a dwelling from the rental market, with provisions that are more protective of tenants than those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu).

Purpose
Just cause ordinances prohibit landlords from ending a tenancy or evicting a tenant without a specific reason. Just cause protections are generally intended to shield tenants from arbitrary evictions that may occur due to economic incentives in a competitive rental market, retaliation against specific tenants, or other instances in 1136

which tenants are not at fault. Accordingly, research identifies just cause eviction as a policy with high potential to prevent residential displacement.42 Though state law currently provides just cause protections for some tenants, these protections expire in 2030 and do not cover a wide range of tenancies and housing situations. Moreover, in the absence of local just cause policies and local government infrastructure to implement these protections, tenants may be unaware of their rights under AB 1482 and how to utilize them. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted local just cause eviction ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for tenants. An effective just cause eviction ordinance will clearly define a limited set of recognized causes for eviction, provide protections for a wide range of tenants and most housing situations, and create processes for local implementation.

Relevant State Law
AB 1482 (Tenant Protection Act of 2019)
While some tenants now have just cause eviction protections due to AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019), this law currently has a sunset of January 1, 2030.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s just cause ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The ordinance must not have a sunset date.
• The ordinance must require landlords to file notices of termination of tenancy with a designated local government agency, such as a rent program/board or other city department.
• The ordinance must make the failure to file these notices with a designated agency an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction case.

Additionally, the ordinance must also expand on other aspects of AB 1482 in at least one of the following ways:

1. Limit the legally recognized causes for eviction: The “at-fault” and “no-fault” just causes for eviction allowed by AB 1482 can be found in California Civil Code Section 1946.2(b)(1). If choosing this option, a jurisdiction’s just cause policy must include fewer just causes for eviction or define them with greater restrictions to increase protections for tenants.

2. Expand the types of housing and tenancies covered by just cause protections: The protections from AB 1482 only apply after all tenants have lived in the unit for 12 months, or where at least one tenant has occupied the unit for 24 months. Additionally, California Civil Code Section 1946.2(e) exempts several unit 42 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
1137

types from AB 1482 protections. If choosing this option, a jurisdiction’s just cause policy must provide protections to a wider range of tenants and housing types, with the possibility of applying these protections to all renters in the jurisdiction and/or with no minimum period of tenancy to qualify.

Protection Policy 2: No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Include the no net loss provisions currently outlined in SB 330 (2019, Skinner) without a sunset date. Require one-to-one replacement of units that applies the same or a deeper level of affordability, the same number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and comparable square footage to the units demolished. Provide displaced tenants with right of first refusal to rent new comparable units at the same rent as demolished units.

Purpose
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 was established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021). The no net loss provisions in the Housing Crisis Act prevent development projects that require demolition of existing residential structures from reducing the overall housing stock and supply of affordable housing. These provisions create safeguards to ensure that new development increases the housing supply and maintains or improves existing levels of affordability. The Housing Crisis Act’s right to return protections and relocation benefits aim to prevent permanent displacement of existing lower-income tenants by development projects that require demolition. These protections can enable lower-income tenants to maintain housing in their communities at affordable rents, which deters new development from contributing to displacement, housing instability, and homelessness for vulnerable renters.

Relevant State Law
Housing Crisis Act of 2019
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 prohibits a jurisdiction from approving a housing development that requires demolition unless the project creates at least as many units as will be demolished. The project must also replace all demolished occupied or vacant “protected units,” which include units deed-restricted for lower-income households within the past five years, units subject to rent control within the past five years, units occupied by lower-income households within the past five years, or units withdrawn from the rental market via Ellis Act within the past 10 years.43 The law also includes protections for existing tenants of units that will be demolished. All existing tenants must be allowed to remain until six months prior to the start of construction. Lower-income occupants are entitled to relocation benefits and a right of first refusal to rent or purchase a comparable unit in the new development at an affordable price. The amount 43 For more information on “protected units” defined by state law, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(F)(vi).
1138

of relocation assistance is defined by California Government Code Sections 7260 – 7277. The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 has a sunset date of January 1, 2030.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
Note: If a jurisdiction implements all provisions from SB 330/SB 8 without a sunset date, then the jurisdiction meets the standards required by and can claim credit for both Protection Policy 2 (No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes) and Production Policy 7 (Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process).

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s policy for no net loss and right to return must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Include all the no net loss provisions in the Housing Crisis Act with no sunset date, which requires replacing all demolished units with units of equivalent size44 and replacing demolished protected units with units affordable to low-income households.45
• Include all right of return provisions in the Housing Crisis Act with no sunset date, which requires providing displaced lower-income tenants with relocation assistance and right of first refusal to a comparable unit at an affordable rent.46 Protection Policy 3: Legal Assistance for Tenants
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Investments or programs that expand access to legal assistance for tenants threatened with displacement. This could range from a “right to counsel”47 to dedicated public funding for tenant legal assistance.

Purpose
Many tenant protections granted by state law can only be enforced by tenants using the court system to assert their rights, as is the case for the just cause and rent stabilization protections provided by AB 1482 as well as state anti-harassment laws. However, research and advocates have documented tenants’ lack of legal representation in eviction cases and disputes with landlords, while landlords are more commonly represented by attorneys. Legal representation for tenants can ensure greater fairness and due process and increase the likelihood of tenants keeping their housing. Providing legal assistance to tenants helps ensure that tenants have access to legal counsel and are better equipped to defend their rights in court. In recent years, there have been increasing efforts by cities to expand access to legal assistance for tenants facing 44 State law defines equivalent size as containing at least the same number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
45 For more information on the affordability requirements for replacing protected units, see subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of California Government Code Section 65915. 46 For more information on relocation assistance and right of refusal provided to lower-income households, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(D). 47 “Right to counsel” extends the right to an attorney, required in criminal procedures, to tenants in eviction trials, which are civil procedures.
1139

eviction, which can promote housing stability and prevent homelessness. An effective tenant legal assistance program will include eligibility criteria, a definition of the legal services provided, dedicated funding, and outreach.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s tenant legal assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding48 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program’s funding terms must define the situations in which a tenant receives legal assistance and set the eligible criteria for who receives assistance. At minimum, eligibility must include eviction and pre-eviction legal services for lowerincome tenants. • A jurisdiction must contract with one or more legal services organizations to provide legal assistance and representation for cases involving eviction and other eligible tenant issues.
• The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the legal service providers who are funded to assist residents.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.

Protection Policy 4: Foreclosure Assistance
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source to support owner-occupied homeowners (up to 120% of Area Median Income (AMI)) at-risk of foreclosure, including direct financial assistance (e.g., mortgage assistance, property tax delinquency, HOA dues, etc.), foreclosure prevention counseling, legal assistance, and/or outreach.
48 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1140

Purpose
Foreclosures occur when homeowners are unable to make mortgage or other debt payments on a property and therefore must forfeit the rights to their home. Homeowners at risk of foreclosure, especially lower-income households, are also vulnerable to community displacement, homelessness, and may struggle to secure housing in the future due to foreclosure related credit issues. Accordingly, local policies providing foreclosure assistance actively seek to keep homeowners in their residence, which prevents displacement and promotes community and household stability. Foreclosure assistance activities may be administered directly by a jurisdiction, but often are administered in partnership with nonprofit organizations. An effective foreclosure assistance program will provide stable annual operating support to qualified partners to support homeowners facing foreclosure.

Relevant State Laws/Programs
California Homeowner Bill of Rights
The California Homeowner Bill of Rights provides some protections to homeowners facing foreclosure, which focus largely on requirements for how loan servicers must act during the foreclosure process.

California Mortgage Relief Program
The California Mortgage Relief Program provides financial assistance for homeowners who have fallen behind on housing payments or property taxes during the COVID-19 pandemic because of COVID-related hardships. Funds will be deployed from the program until they are all allocated, with an end date projected by 2025.

Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program
The Foreclosure Intervention Housing Preservation Program (Health and Safety Code Sections 50720 - 50720.12) provides funds as loans or grants to eligible borrowers to acquire and rehabilitate properties at risk of foreclosure or in the foreclosure process.

The program’s purpose is to preserve affordable housing and promote resident or nonprofit organization ownership of residential real property. The Budget Act of 2021 appropriated $500 million through June 30, 2027, for the program.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s foreclosure assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding49 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The 49 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as 1141

amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • A jurisdiction must contract with one or more organizations to provide foreclosure assistance to homeowners earning up to 120% of AMI.
• Foreclosure assistance activities may include tax delinquency forgiveness, emergency direct financial assistance (loans, grants, or other investment), loan modification services, legal services, foreclosure counseling, and proactive, targeted outreach to eligible households.
• The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the foreclosure assistance providers who are funded to assist residents.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.

Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income households.

Purpose
Health emergencies, job loss, or other unexpected expenses disproportionately impact lower-income households, and force renters to choose between paying rent and covering other necessary life expenses. Most eviction filings result from unpaid rent totaling less than the cost of one month, according to research from Princeton University’s Eviction Lab.50 For these reasons, rental assistance programs providing low-income tenants with emergency funds for rent are effective at preventing eviction and stopping displacement.51 In addition to one-time assistance to prevent eviction, some rental assistance programs provide short-term assistance (e.g., six months to one year) to help residents experiencing homelessness become rehoused and achieve stability. Effective rental assistance programs provide one-time or short-term financial support to lower-income tenants at greatest risk of experiencing eviction and homelessness.
there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 50 Badger, Emily. (2019). Many Renters Who Fact Eviction Owe Less than $600. The New York Times. 51 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
1142

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s tenant rental assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding52 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction. • The program must define the situations in which a tenant receives rental assistance and set the eligibility criteria for who receives assistance. Assistance must serve lower-income tenants (with incomes at 80% AMI or less), and jurisdictions may decide to target specific income groups or populations deemed most at risk of displacement and/or homelessness. The jurisdiction may choose to include additional eligibility requirements, such as the type(s) of documentation required for a tenant to establish eligibility (e.g., signed self-attestation form, etc.). • Rental assistance can be distributed directly by the jurisdiction, or the jurisdiction can contract with nonprofits and/or community-based organizations to administer the funds.
• The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the rental assistance providers who are funded to assist residents.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has committed funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.

Protection Policy 6: Rent Stabilization
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases based upon a measure of inflation or other metric, with provisions exceeding those established by AB 1482 (2019, Chiu).

Purpose
Rent stabilization ordinances limit annual rent increases to protect tenants from displacement. Importantly, research finds that rent stabilization policies are effective in 52 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 1143

preventing displacement and promoting neighborhood stability, particularly when paired with condominium conversion restrictions and just cause eviction regulations. 53 By
decreasing renter housing cost burden over time, rent stabilization leaves tenants with more money to spend on essential needs and in the local economy. The increased stability and affordability created by rent stabilization also has positive consequences for mental and physical health as well as children’s educational outcomes.54 Though state law currently caps rent increases for some tenants, these protections expire in 2030 and allow rent increases beyond what many tenants can afford.55 Moreover, in the absence of local rent stabilization ordinances and local government infrastructure to enforce them, tenants may be unaware of their rights and how to utilize them. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted local rent stabilization ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for tenants. An effective rent stabilization ordinance will define a maximum annual rent increase and create mechanisms for local enforcement.

Relevant State Laws
Tenant Protection Act of 2019
AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019) limits annual rent increases to no more than 5% plus the local Consumer Price Index (a measure of the inflation rate) or 10%, whichever is lower. This law currently has a sunset of January 1, 2030.

Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act
Local rent stabilization ordinances must adhere to the framework established in state law by the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. This law establishes certain parameters for the policy features of local ordinances, such as prohibiting rent stabilization on single-family homes or buildings constructed after 1995, and allowing landlords to reset rents to market rate after a tenant leaves their unit (known as “vacancy decontrol”).

Local ordinances retain significant room for policy flexibility to respond to local circumstances but must meet Costa-Hawkins’s standards.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The ordinance must not have a sunset date.
53 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
54 PolicyLink. “Rent Stabilization.” Available at: https://www.policylink.org/resources-tools/tools/all-incities/housing-anti-displacement/rent-control 55 Research shows that the 8% rent cap in place in San Jose from 1979 to 2016 had little impact on displacement, leading the city to lower its rent cap to 5% in 2016. Accordingly, the 10% cap allowed in state law may be similarly ineffective at preventing displacement. For more information see the findings in “Exploring The Effectiveness Of Tenant Protections In Silicon Valley” by the Urban Displacement Project at UC Berkeley.
1144

• The ordinance must apply to multifamily rental housing with three or more units, while adhering to the parameters of the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. If the jurisdiction chooses, the ordinance may apply to additional housing types, such as duplexes.
o The ordinance may allow for exemptions for special housing types (e.g., deed-restricted affordable housing, student housing, assisted living facilities). • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby tenants can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.56
• A rent stabilization ordinance must define maximum annual rent increases as one of the following:
o A flat rate increase of up to 5%.57 A jurisdiction may choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase below 5% (for example, several Bay Area jurisdictions set the maximum allowable rent increase at 3%). o A rate increase linked to the local Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is a measure of inflation. A jurisdiction must set the maximum allowable rent increase no higher than 100% of CPI, or the jurisdiction could choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase at a smaller percentage of CPI. o Some combination of the two standards described above (e.g., a maximum annual rent increase limited to 60% of CPI or 5%, whichever is lower).

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases, if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance.

Protection Policy 7: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policies, programs, or procedures designed to minimize the risk of displacement caused by substandard conditions including through local code enforcement activities. This may include proactive rental inspection programs and assistance to landlords for property improvements in exchange for antidisplacement commitments. This policy may be used to fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.
56 While AB 1482 can only be enforced by state courts, local rent stabilization ordinances can provide more easily accessible processes for tenants to dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.
57 Maximum caps higher than 5% have been found to lack effectiveness at preventing displacement in some circumstances. For more information, see UC Berkeley Urban Displacement Project. “Exploring The Effectiveness of Tenant Protections In Silicon Valley.” 1145

Purpose
Substandard conditions and physical deterioration represent a key threat to the region’s rental housing stock and unsubsidized affordable housing units. These conditions create health and safety risks for tenants and can lead to condemnation, abandonment, and/or demolition of housing units. The remediation of substandard conditions in unsubsidized affordable housing is not only necessary to preserve this housing but also represents an important anti-displacement strategy. Code enforcement programs need to ensure habitability issues and needs for substantial property repairs do not lead to the permanent displacement of tenants, which also requires maintaining housing stability for tenants during any temporary displacement necessary for repairs. Code enforcement and other programs to address substandard conditions need to be centered in an anti-displacement framework, otherwise these activities can lead to the immediate displacement of vulnerable tenants if properties are deemed uninhabitable.

An effective program which prevents displacement due to code enforcement protects tenants from displacement when renovations are mandated by code enforcement actions by requiring plans for maintaining habitability and providing public support to landlords on the condition that they provide additional tenant protections.

Relevant State Law
California Health and Safety Code (HSC)
HSC Section 17920.3 provides a definition of a substandard building, which includes inadequate sanitation such as a lack of plumbing, ventilation, or heating; structural hazards such as deteriorated floors, walls, or ceilings; faulty weather protection such as defective waterproofing and windows; and so on. Section 17970 – 17972 requires that when a jurisdiction receives a complaint from a tenant, they must inspect the building, document any findings, prescribe a remedy to the property owner, and schedule a reinspection to verify the correction. Section 17980 – 17992 states that once a building is determined to be substandard, the enforcement agency of the jurisdiction cannot require the vacating of residents unless it concurrently requires expeditious demolition or repair to comply with state law. If the tenant cannot safely reside in their unit due to repair, state law requires a property owner to provide affected tenants with compensation for moving expenses; the value of property lost, stolen or damaged in the process of moving; and costs associated with connection charges imposed by utility companies for starting service. The relocation benefit also includes two months of the established fair market rent for the area as determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the property owner must return the full security deposit to the tenant.

Requirements for TOC Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt a policy to prevent displacement from substandard conditions that meets the minimum standards for at least one of the following options:
1146

1. Offer grants or interest-free loans to landlords to repair substandard or other dangerous/inadequate conditions in exchange for keeping rents affordable for 10 years or for the duration of the loan, whichever is longer. o If a tenant needs to be relocated while repairs are completed, the landlord must pay for moving expenses and temporary housing.
o The landlord must also agree to continue renting to the existing tenant once repairs are complete.
o Jurisdictions may set income qualifications for landlords to receive this funding.

2. Implement a rental escrow program where tenants experiencing persistent habitability issues receive rent reductions and rental payments are deposited into an escrow account until code violations are addressed.
o If a tenant needs to be relocated while repairs are completed, the landlord must pay for moving expenses and temporary housing.
o While rental funds are in escrow, the landlord can request access to them only for repairs, tenant relocation assistance, and other qualifying expenses. o The rental escrow program must clearly define the circumstances in which a tenant can safely withhold or reduce rent without fear of eviction. o The landlord is required to continue renting to the existing tenant after compares are complete.

3. Require landlords to complete a tenant habitability plan as part of the permitting process for repairs to address code issues.
o The plan must describe how the landlord will maintain habitability for the tenant and any adjacent units while repairs are being performed. o If the tenant needs to be relocated for repairs, the plan discusses how the landlord will assist with temporary relocation, which must include offering a nearby available unit at same rent (if landlord owns other properties), paying for moving expenses, and providing relocation assistance to pay for the cost of temporary housing.

Protection Policy 8: Tenant Relocation Assistance
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that provides relocation assistance (financial and/or other services) to tenants displaced through no fault of their own, with assistance exceeding that required under state law.

Purpose
Relocation assistance can prevent undue burden and hardship for renters in the Bay Area’s high-cost housing market. The majority of Bay Area tenants are lower-income, making less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), while nearly one-quarter of the 1147

region’s renters are extremely low-income and make less than 30% of AMI.58 Consequently, most tenants are likely to require financial assistance to regain stability if they are displaced from their current housing due to demolition, code enforcement violations, no-fault or no-cause evictions, or other circumstances outside of their control.

An effective relocation assistance policy includes clear definitions of tenant eligibility and required minimum compensation from landlord.

Relevant State Laws
Multiple state laws govern situations that require property owners to provide tenants with relocation assistance, including the following:
• Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482)
• California Government Code Sections 7260-7277
• Housing Crisis Act of 2019, established by SB 330 (2019) and amended by SB 8 (2021)
• California Health and Safety Code Sections 17975-17975.10 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s relocation assistance policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Landlords must make relocation payments for all no-cause or no-fault evictions.59 • Jurisdictions can choose to limit assistance to lower-income tenants (those at 80% of AMI or less) or lower- and moderate-income tenants (those at 120% of AMI or less).
• The amount of relocation assistance must be equal to at least three months’ fair market rent, unless another law (e.g., local, state, federal) requires a higher minimum amount.

Protection Policy 9: Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Restricts annual rent increases on mobile home residents based upon a measure of inflation or another metric.

Purpose
A mobile home rent stabilization policy can help protect the affordability and stability of mobile home communities. Mobile home parks are often a unique hybrid of rental 58 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release. 59 No-fault evictions can occur for tenants covered by just cause eviction protections under state law (i.e., AB 1482) or local ordinances, and these no-fault circumstances are defined by the terms of these laws.

For tenants who are not covered by just cause eviction protections under state law or local ordinances, no-cause evictions occur when a landlord chooses not to renew an annual lease or provides a notice to terminate the tenancy that is not required to state a reason. 1148

housing and ownership housing: residents typically own their homes and rent the lots where the homes are located, which generally enables mobile homes to be purchased at much lower prices than other forms of homeownership. In some cases, a mobile home resident rents the actual mobile home, either from the mobile home owner or the mobile home park. Despite their name, mobile homes are rarely able to be moved off their lots, and so an unaffordable increase in lot rent could force the sale of the mobile home and displacement of the residents. In some communities, mobile home parks comprise a significant portion of unsubsidized affordable housing, and these neighborhoods are increasingly being acquired by speculative investors.60 Given these conditions, mobile home rent stabilization can promote longer-term community stability for mobile home residents and prevent displacement of lower-income residents who lack other housing options. An effective mobile home rent stabilization ordinance will include a limit on annual rent increases and processes for ensuring compliance with the policy.

Relevant State Law
SB 940 (2022)
While the Mobile Home Residency Law previously exempted “new construction” from local mobile home rent stabilization laws, SB 940 (2022) limits this exemption to 15 years. Additionally, SB 940 creates a distinction between mobile home parks and mobile home spaces. For individual mobile home spaces within an existing mobile home park, “new construction” is newly constructed spaces “initially rented” after January 1, 1990. For mobile home parks, “new construction” is defined as all spaces in a newly constructed mobile home park for which the permit to operate is first issued on or after January 1, 2023.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To receive compliance credit for this policy, a jurisdiction must demonstrate there is at least one mobile home park (as defined by California’s Mobile Home Park Act) within the jurisdiction. Due to the heightened vulnerability of mobile home parks and the residents who occupy them, a jurisdiction with an adopted mobile home rent stabilization policy that applies to all mobile home parks may receive credit for this policy even if none of the parks are located within TOC station areas.

To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• A mobile home rent stabilization ordinance must define maximum annual rent increases for both mobile home spaces (i.e., lot rent) and mobile homes as one of the following:
60 Arnold, C., Benincasa, R., and Childs, M. 2021. How the government helps investors buy mobile home parks, raise rent and evict people. National Public Radio. 1149

o A flat rate increase of up to 5%. A jurisdiction may choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase below 5%.
o A rate increase linked to the local CPI, which is a measure of inflation. A jurisdiction must set the maximum allowable rent increase no higher than 100% of CPI, or the jurisdiction could choose to set the maximum allowable rent increase at a smaller percentage of CPI.
o Some combination of the two standards described above (e.g., a maximum annual rent increase limited to 60% of CPI or 5%, whichever is lower). • Some form of vacancy control within constitutional limits. • A jurisdiction must define a local enforcement mechanism (such as a rent board or administrative hearing) whereby mobile home residents can dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• Documentation of the presence of at least one mobile home park within the jurisdiction.
• Documents or regulations describing the processes for enforcing maximum allowable rent increases and deciding disputes regarding rent increases, if these processes are not described in the jurisdiction’s rent stabilization ordinance.

Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy, program, or investments that support fair housing testing, compliance monitoring, and enforcement.

Purpose
Fair housing laws aim to ensure that people have equal access to housing regardless of their race, national origin, family status, religion, sex, disability, or other characteristics that are known as “protected classes.”61 Across the region, people of color, people with disabilities, and other protected classes are disproportionately represented in a number of indicators of housing need that put them at greater risk of displacement.62 Consistent enforcement of existing fair housing law is a critical strategy to overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities. Local jurisdictions can further fair housing by supporting fair housing organizations who conduct fair housing testing, investigate 61 The Fair Housing Act is a federal law passed in 1968 and amended several times thereafter that protects individuals from experiencing housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability. California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act expands on the protected classes defined by federal law by also prohibiting housing discrimination based on the following characteristics: sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, genetic information, marital status, source of income, citizenship, primary language, and immigration status.
62 For more information on disparities in housing needs, see ABAG’s Housing Needs Data Packets. 1150

complaints, and assist with filing complaints with the state and/or federal agencies who can take administrative action. In response to fair housing complaints, fair housing organizations can also provide mediation between housing providers and complainants, or file lawsuits against those found to be in violation of the law.

Relevant State Laws
Fair Employment and Housing Act
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits those engaged in the housing business from discriminating against protected classes. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing is responsible for enforcing state fair housing laws, which includes investigating and settling fair housing complaints.

AB 686
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, established by AB 686 (2018), requires that local jurisdictions take meaningful actions that address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s fair housing enforcement policy must meet at least one of the following minimum requirements:

1. A jurisdiction contracts with one or more fair housing service providers to serve its constituents and provide fair housing enforcement, and the jurisdiction effectively advertises those services to residents.63
o The program must have secured funding that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction.

2. A jurisdiction establishes a fair housing testing and enforcement program.

Program staff conduct fair housing testing on a regular basis,64 investigate complaints of discrimination, provide information to tenants and landlords, and refer cases to the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing.65 63 Jurisdictions may choose to contract an organization from this list of entities that receive funding through HUD’s Fair Housing Initiatives Program. For example, jurisdictions in Marin County contract with Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California.
64 In 2017, the City of Seattle conducted their own in-house civil rights testing program where housing tests were conducted by email, phone and in-person.
65 The City of Santa Barbara has a Fair Housing Enforcement Officer on staff who completes these actions.
1151

o The program must have secured funding that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The amount contributed can vary by year as long as the total for the relevant four-year OBAG cycle meets the specified target for the jurisdiction.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has secured funding that meets the minimum requirements described above.66
Protection Policy 11: Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Policy or program that grants tenants legal protection from unreasonable, abusive, or coercive landlord behavior.

Purpose
Despite existing state law prohibiting landlords from using threats or intimidation for the purpose of influencing tenants to vacate a unit, landlord harassment continues to be an issue of concern and driver of informal evictions in many communities across the Bay Area. State law lacks specific language defining harassing behavior, which can make violations difficult to prove in court. As a result, multiple jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area and across California have adopted anti-harassment ordinances that go beyond state law to better ensure stability for vulnerable tenants.67 Informal evictions through tenant harassment are a persistent problem for low-income, undocumented, and/or limited English-speaking residents because these populations are especially vulnerable to landlord actions.68 Anti-harassment ordinances can reduce such displacement pressures by clarifying what constitutes harassment and enabling affected tenants as well as jurisdictions to stop harassment. Anti-harassment policies can also support habitability improvements by reducing the risk of retaliation against tenants who report habitability issues to landlords, thereby improving the quality of 66 Secured Funding: Housing program funds may be considered secured if they are included in a current budget from a source that is expected to continue and where the use for affordable housing can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require future budget approvals or may be dependent on uncertain but expected revenue sources, so long as there is not a known sunset date or other limit. For bond proceeds or other one-time investments, funding can be considered secured if it will be available for investment at the required level at any point in the four-year planning period, expected to align with the OBAG cycle. 67 Mercury News article from June 15, 2022, reporting on tenant harassment in Concord and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. East Bay Times article from July 13, 2021, reporting on tenant harassment in Richmond and the ordinance passed in response by the City Council. 68 Desmond, M. (2012) Eviction and the Reproduction of Urban Poverty. AJS: 118(1) 88-133; Desmond, M. C. Gershenson, and B. Kiviat (2016) Forced Relocation and Residential Instability among Urban Renters. Social Service Review 89 (2). Greenberg, D. C. Gershenson and M. Desmond (2016) Discrimination in Evictions: Empirical Evidence and Legal Challenges. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 51: 115-158.
1152

housing. An effective tenant anti-harassment ordinance defines prohibited harassing behaviors and mechanisms for enforcement.

Relevant State Laws
California Civil Code Section 1940.2
State law prohibits a landlord from using “force, willful threats, or menacing conduct” to influence a tenant to vacate a dwelling. The law also prohibits a landlord from threatening to disclose information regarding the immigration or citizenship status of a tenant. Tenants are entitled to up to $2,000 per violation if they prevail in a civil action.

California Civil Code Section 1942.5
State law prohibits a landlord from retaliating against a tenant for exercising their legal rights. Landlords who violate this prohibition are liable for actual damages, attorney’s fees, and punitive damages of up to $2,000 per retaliatory act.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s tenant anti-harassment ordinance must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The ordinance must define harassing behaviors, which at minimum shall include behaviors prohibited by state law as well as the following:
o Any behavior to prevent tenant organizing. Landlords may not impinge tenants’ ability to engage in organizing activities regarding issues of common interest or concern to other tenants, including unreasonable restrictions on distributing literature to and/or meeting with other residents at properties owned by the same landlord.
o Refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant's lawful rent payment. o Requesting information or documentation relating to immigration or citizenship status, unless otherwise required by federal law. o Failing to perform repairs or maintenance or threatening to fail to perform repairs or maintenance required by contract or by state, county, or local housing, health, or safety laws.
• The ordinance must state that the city attorney as well as the impacted tenant may bring a civil action or request an injunction in response to harassment. • The ordinance must establish penalties for landlords found to be in violation, including fines, attorneys' fees, and punitive damages. The ordinance shall also define a violation of the ordinance as an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction proceeding.
• The ordinance must establish noticing requirements for landlords to provide each tenant with an information sheet outlining anti-harassment protections and any other tenant protections in the jurisdiction (e.g., rent stabilization, just cause, 1153

relocation assistance). The sheet must include links to the city website and at least one local tenant legal services organization.

IV. Commercial Stabilization Policy Options
Commercial Stabilization Policy 1: Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Establish boundaries designated for an overlay, triggering a set of protections and benefits should development impact small businesses (including public markets) or community-serving non-profits.

Purpose
To prevent displacement caused by transit-oriented development, jurisdictions can protect existing small businesses and community-serving non-profits by affording protections and benefits beyond what is available jurisdiction-wide. A jurisdiction may select this policy to preserve the rich community of small businesses and non-profits located in areas that are subject to new development. An “overlay zone” is a district that superimposes additional regulations over existing zoning districts.69 A successful overlay zone offers benefits such as an operating subsidy, eviction protections, and relocation requirements.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit overlay policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for protections. • Offer at least one protection or benefit specific to the community and expected to prevent displacement.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 2: Small Business and Non-Profit Preference Policy
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Give priority and a right of first offer to local small businesses and/or community-serving non-profits when selecting a tenant for new market-rate commercial space.

Purpose
Transit-oriented development has the potential to displace existing small businesses and non-profits as new development may increase commercial rent costs. This policy would require that owners or managers of applicable commercial spaces provide a preference to small businesses and/or community-serving non-profits when selecting 69 Planetizen Planopedia. “What is an Overlay District?” 1154

tenants by offering them the right of first offer. A jurisdiction would select this policy to protect their existing community of non-profits and small businesses from displacement.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit preference policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirements to qualify for preference. • Establish a preference policy that prioritizes small businesses and non-profits when selecting new tenants by offering them the right of first offer. Jurisdictions may apply such a policy on publicly-owned properties, as part of the entitlement process for a new development, as a condition of a small business support program, or in other applicable circumstances.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 3: Small Business and Non-Profit Financial Assistance Program
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Dedicated funding program for any impacted small business and community-serving non-profits.

Purpose
As jurisdictions promote transit-oriented development in their communities, they must also take steps to prevent displacement and gentrification in these areas. By providing direct financial assistance, jurisdictions can support small businesses and non-profits through any community-wide transition that comes with new transit-oriented development. Jurisdictions may choose this policy to protect their small businesses and community-serving non-profits that enrich the fabric of their community.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business and non-profit financial assistance program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Fund a program that provides financial assistance to stabilize small businesses and non-profits located in the TOC station areas. The jurisdiction could choose to offer this assistance to businesses and non-profits in additional areas as well. • Provide technical assistance and up-to-date information online regarding funding opportunities and deadlines.
• Define the size of a small business eligible for financial assistance. • Define a “community-serving” non-profit eligible for financial assistance.

Commercial Stabilization Policy 4: Small Business Advocate Office Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a single point of contact for small business owners and/or a small business alliance.
1155

Purpose
A jurisdiction’s small business economy is bolstered by technical assistance, educational workshops, advertising and exposure, and the development of a network of neighboring businesses. These types of support could be offered by a jurisdiction or an outside contractor and are best utilized when there is a single point of contact. A jurisdiction may choose this policy to commit to the resilience of their small business community.

Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s small business advocate office policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• Provide a single point of contact for small business owners to connect with a technical support resource. The single point of contact could be a jurisdictional staff member or an outside contractor. Outside contractors could be a staff member of the nearest Small Business Center (SBC) or Small Business Development Center (SBDC)70 In the case of an outside contractor, the jurisdiction must have dedicated staff oversight.
70 SBCs are part of the California Network of Small Business and Technical Assistance Centers, funded by CalOSBA, while SBDCs are part of a nationwide network funded by the U.S. Small Business Administration.
1156

Appendix B: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier
Table 1 lists the jurisdictions in each funding tier and the jurisdiction’s required minimum four-year funding commitment for each policy selected that requires a funding commitment. Note: all Bay Area jurisdictions are listed, although not all jurisdictions have stops/station areas that are subject to the TOC Policy.

Table 1: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier
Jurisdiction
Very
Lowand
LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and
Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3
and
Protection 5
Protection 4
and
Protection 10
Yountville 30 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Calistoga 50 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Ross 54 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Unincorporated
Napa 61 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Colma 69 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Belvedere 77 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Monte Sereno 83 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Sebastopol 86 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Cotati 94 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Portola Valley 115 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Unincorporated
Solano 130 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Cloverdale 141 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Woodside 142 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Atherton 148 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
St. Helena 163 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Dixon 175 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Pinole 190 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Los Altos Hills 197 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Fairfax 235 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Hillsborough 244 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Suisun City 255 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Piedmont 257 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
East Palo Alto 260 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Clayton 267 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
San Pablo 273 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
American Canyon 278 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Half Moon Bay 285 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 1157

Jurisdiction
Very
Lowand
LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and
Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3
and
Protection 5
Protection 4
and
Protection 10
Healdsburg 299 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Tiburon 303 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Sausalito 315 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
Corte Madera 336 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Benicia 339 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000
San Anselmo 398 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000 $150,000 Mill Valley 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Morgan Hill 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Oakley 440 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Larkspur 459 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Albany 486 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Brisbane 500 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Moraga 501 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
El Cerrito 526 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Hercules 542 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Martinez 551 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Orinda 587 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Windsor 607 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Rohnert Park 629 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000 Brentwood 634 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000 $300,000
Emeryville 710 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Saratoga 715 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Newark 732 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Belmont 769 C $3,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Petaluma 787 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Los Altos 789 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Pittsburg 812 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Foster City 819 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Los Gatos 847 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Pacifica 848 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Pleasant Hill 892 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 Novato 898 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Millbrae 906 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Lafayette 943 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Danville 1,028 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Gilroy 1,054 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
Vallejo 1,059 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000
1158

Jurisdiction
Very
Lowand
LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and
Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3
and
Protection 5
Protection 4
and
Protection 10
Vacaville 1,081 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000 $300,000 San Bruno 1,109 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Carlos 1,164 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Menlo Park 1,166 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Campbell 1,186 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000
Napa 1,214 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000
Antioch 1,248 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000
Fairfield 1,256 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated San
Mateo 1279 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000
Unincorporated
Santa Clara 1305 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Richmond 1,325 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000
San Rafael 1,349 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Leandro 1,357 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Union City 1,358 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Burlingame 1,360 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 South San
Francisco 1,373 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated
Sonoma 1,608 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000
Hayward 1,692 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Dublin 1,710 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000
Unincorporated
Marin 1734 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000
Redwood City 1,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Cupertino 1,880 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Santa Rosa 1,919 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated
Alameda 1,972 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Concord 2,036 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Livermore 2,075 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Daly City 2,105 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Alameda 2,239 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Ramon 1,359 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Palo Alto 2,452 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Walnut Creek 2,611 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Milpitas 2,655 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 1159

Jurisdiction
Very
Lowand
LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and
Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3
and
Protection 5
Protection 4
and
Protection 10
Pleasanton 2,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 San Mateo 2,800 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000 $450,000 Unincorporated
Contra Costa 3,266 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Berkeley 3,854 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Mountain View 4,370 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Santa Clara 4,525 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Sunnyvale 4,677 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Fremont 5,736 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000 $500,000 Oakland 10,261 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 San Jose 23,775 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 San Francisco 32,881 G $20,000,000 $6,000,000 $500,000 $750,000 1160
Overview of the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission’s
Transit Oriented Communities
(TOC) Policy
City Council Meeting
September 17, 2024
1161
Background
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
o Planning, financing, coordinating transportation for
Bay Area
o 2021: MTC and ABAG Adopted Plan Bay Area 2050
 30-yr Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable
Communities Strategy
o 2022: MTC Adopted the TOC Policy
 Helps Implement Plan Bay Area 2050
 “Voluntary”
1162
TOC Policy Goals

1. Increase the overall housing supply by increasing the density for new residential projects. Prioritize affordable housing in transit-rich areas.

2. In areas near regional transit hubs, increase density for businesses and commercial development.

3. Prioritize bus transit, active transportation, and shared mobility (bike and ped) within and to/from transit-rich areas, located more than 1/2 mile from transit stops or stations; and

4. Support and build partnerships to create equitable transit-oriented communities within the San Francisco Bay Area.
1163
Funding
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
Flexible funds to MTC for
investments in roads,
highways, transit, and bike
and pedestrian projects.

MTC distributes funds to
local agencies through
different Programs
MTC
One Bay Area Grant
(OBAG)
MTC Program to guide
distribution of FHWA funds
City of Dublin has received
$1.13 million in last 3
OBAG cycles
OBAG 4- Requires TOC
Compliance by 2026
Other Funding
Alameda County
Transportation
Commission
Comprehensive
Investment Plan (CIP) may
include TOC compliance
requirements in the future
1164
Valley Link Rail Extension
o Funding for Valley Link
tied to TOC Policy
compliance
o MTC commitment letter
1165
TOC Policy Overview - Station Areas
West Dublin
BART Station
Dublin / Pleasanton
BART Station
1166
TOC Policy Overview – Transit Tier
• Dublin served by one
BART line (Blue line)
• TOC Policy Tier 3
• Tier defines required
TOC policy standards
1167
TOC Policy Overview – 4 Elements

1. Density and Intensity Standards (Station Areas)

2. Affordable Housing and Commercial Stabilization
Policies (Citywide)

3. Parking Management (Station Areas)

4. Access and Circulation (Citywide)
1168
TOC Policy Overview
• Requires further analysis of impacts by staff
• What constitutes compliance for MTC?
– 85% compliance
– MTC TOC Policy does not define compliance
– MTC plans to provide technical assistance to help
jurisdictions develop policies (end of 2024)
– Maintain Standards with flexibility to be determined
(2025)
1169
Density and Intensity Standards
TOC Standards Tier 3 TOC
Standard
West Dublin BART Station Area (DDSP) Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station Area
(Transit Station)
Minimum Residential
Density (units/acre)
50 TOD 30 25.1
Retail 22
Village None
Maximum Residential
Density (units/acre)
75 TOD 85 None
Retail None
Village 15
Minimum Office Intensity
(FAR)

2.0 TOD None .25
Retail None
Village None
Maximum Office
Intensity (FAR)

4.0 TOD 2.5 .80
Retail 2.0 (Retail District)

2.5 (Retail Core)
Village 0.35
1170
Affordable Housing & Commercial Stabilization
City must adopt Citywide policies across the following four categories to demonstrate TOC Policy compliance:
o Production (minimum of 2 out of 7 polices)
o Preservation (minimum of 2 policies out of 8 polices) o Protection (minimum of 2 polices out of 11 polices)
o Commercial Stabilization (minimum of 1 policy out of 4 policies)
1171
Production
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 7 Policies)
Policy
No
TOC Policy Requirement Notes / Consideration
1 Inclusionary
Housing
15% of units for new
residential developments
be deed restricted for
low-income households
Existing Inclusionary Zoning
Ordinance qualifies. (HE Program B.4:

Inclusionary Zoning Regulations)
4 Public Land for
Affordable Housing
Reuse of Publicly owned
land for affordable and
mixed - income housing
City is working with Alameda County
Surplus Authority to provide
affordable housing at the Transit
Center Site. (HE Program B.16:

Publicly Owned Land)
1172
Preservation
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations Policy
No
TOC Policy Requirement Notes /Consideration
4 Condominium
Conversion
Restrictions
Units converted to condominiums be
replaced 1:1 with comparable rental
units unless purchased by current
long-term tenants or converted
permanently to affordable housing
with tenant protections
Condominium Ordinance
(DMC 8.54) to be updated to
include 1:1 replacement of
converted units, no funding
requirement / requires staff
time.
8 Preventing
Displacement
from
Substandard
Conditions and
Associated
Enforcement
Activities
Minimize risk of displacement caused
by substandard conditions, through
local code enforcement activities.

Minimum funding
commitment. Minor Home
Improvement Grant with
Alameda County provides up
to $5,000/yr per household.

City would need to increase
funding to $10,000/yr
1173
Protection
(Minimum of 2 Policies out of 8 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations Policy
No.

TOC Policy Notes
1 Just Cause Eviction Protection Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 3 Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $300,000 4 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $300,000 5 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $300,000 6 Rent Stabilization Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions
and Associated Code Enforcement Activities
Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. Cannot be used if using Preservation Policy 8.
8 Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 9 Mobile Home Rent Stabilization No Mobile Homes in Dublin 10 Fair Housing Enforcement Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 11 Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Requires staff, consultant time, and resources. 1174
Commercial Stabilization
(Minimum of 1 Policy out of 4 Policies)
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations Policy
No.

TOC Policy Requirement Notes / Consideration
4 Small Business
Advocate Office
Provide a single point of
contact for small business
owners/ alliance
City currently provides this service
through the Economic
Development Department
1175
Parking Management
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations TOC Policy –Tier 3
Policy Parking
Requirement
Existing Parking
Requirement -
West Dublin BART
Station Area (i.e.,
DDSP)
Existing Parking
Requirement -
Dublin/Pleasanton Bart
Station Area (i.e., Transit
Center)
Min. Residential
and Commercial
Parking
No Minimum No Minimum No Minimum (Per requirements
of AB 2097)
Max. Residential
Parking
1 Space per unit No Maximum No Maximum
Max.

Commercial
Office Parking

2.5 Spaces per 1,000
SF
None None
1176
Access and Circulation
• Select at least 2 policies Minimum Requirements Considerations TOC Requirement Notes / Considerations
Adopt a Complete Streets Policy Adopted Complete Streets Policy in 2012 (Reso No. 199-12) Prioritize Implementation of Active
Transportation Projects in Station
Areas
DDSP, PDA: Transit Center Dublin Crossing, PDA: Town Ctr.

CIP- Downtown: Grid Street Network and Golden Gate Dr.

Gap Analysis and Improvement
Program for Station Areas
LAVTA Long Range Transit Plan (March 2024)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Identify Mobility Hub Opportunities in
Station Areas
LAVTA Tri-Valley Hub Network Integration Study (2021)
City of Dublin Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (2023) Climate Action Plan
Local Roadway Safety Plan
1177
Next Steps
• Implement policies committed to through the
Housing Element
• Staff to return to City Council
– Discuss policy considerations
– Request budget adjustments for technical analysis
and consultant services
1178
Questions
1179