Orinda City Council
January 21, 2025

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 Administrative Guidance.

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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

Affordable Housing
Production Policy Options for
TOC Policy Policy Options for HCD Prohousing Designation 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 document or website link that provides the adopted policy or relevant municipal code section. The jurisdiction must also confirm that it meets the minimum requirements established for each policy, which are described in more detail in Appendix A. Local jurisdictions must submit all documents electronically.

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.

For compliance with the TOC Policy, MTC will focus on a jurisdiction’s compliance with the parking standards (Table 12). To support limits on off-street 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 listed below under Complementary Policies for Parking Management, or another policy or program aligned with the intent of the parking management requirement. For policies or programs that are not one of those listed below, a jurisdiction must explain how the policy or program addresses parking demand management in the TOC area.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 development.12
• For parcels on which residential development13 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:
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.
• For parcels on which both residential and commercial development are allowed:
o The sum of the applicable maximum automobile parking per dwelling unit and the applicable maximum automobile parking per 1,000 square feet. o At least the sum of one secure bicycle parking space per dwelling unit plus one secure bicycle parking space per 5,000 occupied square feet for commercial office.
• Allow unbundled parking.14,15
• Allow shared parking between different land uses.16
12 The TOC Policy does not have a requirement related to minimum parking for Tier 4 TOC areas.

However, jurisdictions must comply with applicable state law prohibiting parking minimums, such as AB 2097. 13 Residential developments permitted in commercial zones through AB 2011 should follow the applicable TOC standards for residential development, not commercial development. 14 Unbundling parking means separating the cost of leasing a parking space from the sale or rental price of residential and commercial uses.
15 For jurisdictions in Alameda County or Santa Clara County, AB 1317 (2023) requires unbundled parking in new residential developments with 16 or more units that are issued a certificated of occupancy after January 1, 2025. See California Civil Code Section 1947.1 for more information. 16 AB 894 (2023) requires jurisdictions to allow entities with underutilized parking to share their underutilized parking spaces with the public, local agencies, or other entities, if those entities submit a shared parking agreement. See California Government Code Section 65863.1 for more information.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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)
Parking minimum
requirements not allowed.

Parking maximum of 0.375
spaces per unit or lower.

Parking minimum requirements
not 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
Parking minimum
requirements not allowed.

Parking maximum of 0.5
spaces per unit or lower.

Parking minimum requirements
not 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
Parking minimum
requirements not allowed.

Parking maximum of 1.0
spaces per unit or lower.

Parking minimum requirements
not 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 parking17 space per
dwelling unit.
18 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 cargo and electric bicycles (e-bikes).

Note Regarding AB 2097 and Minimum Parking Standards
The TOC Policy and AB 2097 have similar provisions with respect to parking minimums.

Broadly speaking, AB 2097 prohibits a public agency from imposing or enforcing parking minimums on any residential, commercial, or other development project located within a ½-mile of a major transit stop. For the purposes of TOC Policy compliance, 17 Secure bicycle parking should follow the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals’ Essentials of Bike Parking Guidelines as well as HCD’s forthcoming update to the California Green Building Standards Code, per AB 2863 (2022).
18 For a single building with more than 100 units, the jurisdiction can apply a ratio of one secure bicycle parking space for every four units to the number of units above 100. For example, a 140-unit building would need 110 bicycle parking spaces (100 + 0.25*40).

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

MTC staff will defer to local jurisdictions’ interpretation of applicable state law (i.e., Government Code Section 65863.2) to determine which parcels are subject to the TOC Policy’s parking management requirements. In other words, the parcels in a TOC area that a jurisdiction has determined are subject to Government Code Section 65863.2 must also meet the parking management requirements described in Table 12 above.

AB 2097 has an exemption process where a jurisdiction can impose minimum parking standards. For TOC Policy compliance, MTC encourages, but does not require, jurisdictions to forgo this exemption process.

Complementary Policies for Parking Management
In addition to complying with the off-street parking standards, a jurisdiction must adopt at least one of the policies or programs from MTC/ABAG’s Parking Policy Playbook listed below to address transportation demand management (TDM) and curb management in TOC 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 TOC area or jurisdiction-wide.

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

Vehicle Minimum Parking Standards
A jurisdiction has three options for meeting the TOC Policy’s requirement related to minimum parking standards:

1. Confirmation of Compliance with AB 2097: Local jurisdiction staff can attest that their jurisdiction complies with AB 2097. A jurisdiction that complies with AB 2097 is deemed in compliance with the TOC Policy’s requirement related to minimum parking standards.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

2. Resolution of Compliance with AB 2097: A jurisdiction is encouraged, but not required, to pass a resolution confirming compliance with AB 2097 and stating it will not seek exemptions from AB 2097 for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 TOC areas.19

3. Ordinance to Remove Parking Minimums: A jurisdiction may adopt an ordinance that removes parking minimum requirements for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 TOC areas. This prohibition could also be incorporated into an overlay zone or changes to the jurisdiction’s use table or chapter that is adopted to address the TOC Policy’s parking maximums (see below).

Vehicle Maximum Parking Standards
A jurisdiction must show that its adopted parking maximums cover at least the ½-mile TOC area (if the policy does not apply jurisdiction-wide) and meet the TOC Policy’s standards for the TOC area’s transit tier. If the jurisdiction’s parking maximums are not expressed as parking spaces per unit (e.g., instead there are parking maximums per bedroom), a jurisdiction may propose an alternative method of demonstrating compliance subject to MTC staff approval. This alternative method may include, but is not limited to, proposing an equivalency calculation that translates the local maximum into spaces per unit.

There are two approaches for meeting the TOC Policy’s maximum parking standards:

1. Adopt an overlay zone or updates to a parking use table or chapter: A jurisdiction must have an adopted policy that includes parking maximums for residential and commercial uses that meet TOC standards and that clearly defines the geography to which the standards apply. Defining the geography and maximum parking standards can be done by creating an overlay zone or by amending the jurisdiction’s parking use table or chapter for development within TOC areas. As the TOC Policy parking maximums vary based on a TOC area’s transit tier, a jurisdiction with multiple TOC areas may need to specify several combinations of geography/parking maximums. Optionally, a jurisdiction may choose to include language that removes parking minimum requirements for Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 TOC areas (as described in Option 3, above).

A local jurisdiction must provide municipal code citations for the adopted overlay zone or parking use table/chapter that clearly demonstrate that the vehicle parking maximums for residential and commercial uses meet TOC thresholds for the TOC area’s transit tier and that those standards apply to, at minimum, the entire ½-mile TOC area.

2. Adopt a parking district, station area cap or other methods that limit parking: Standards may apply to individual projects or may be met through the creation of a parking district that provides shared vehicle parking for multiple land 19 Per TOC policy, a jurisdiction may require parking minimums in Tier 4 TOC areas.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

uses within an area. For example, a specific or area plan may determine an overall total amount of new, off-street 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 or less than the TOC Policy’s parking standards.

For parking districts or other types of area-wide approaches to parking management, a jurisdiction must provide any relevant plans or policies as well as calculations showing the approach will result in creation of the same or less new off-street parking than the TOC Policy’s parking maximum requirements. The calculations could use assumptions about future buildout (e.g., from a recently completed plan and/or EIR) and the parking permitted in the district to allow for a comparison to the TOC Policy parking maximum requirements.

Minimum Bicycle Parking Standards
A local jurisdiction must provide municipal code citations for an adopted overlay zone or parking use table/chapter that clearly demonstrate that the minimum bicycle parking standards for residential and commercial uses meet TOC thresholds for, at minimum, the entire ½-mile TOC area.

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

Complementary Policies for Parking Management
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 policies or programs from the MTC/ABAG Parking Policy Playbook listed above that apply either to the geographic area where the TOC Policy applies or jurisdiction-wide.

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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 TOC areas:
• Adopt a jurisdiction-wide Complete Streets Policy.
• Prioritize implementation of “All Ages and Abilities” active transportation projects on the regional Active Transportation Network, as stated in the MTC Complete Streets Policy20 and/or any relevant Community Based Transportation Plans within the TOC 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, transit agency station access 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,21 with particular focus on access to Equity Priority Communities and other significant origins and/or destinations. 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 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 ½-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. 20 See MTC Resolution No. 4493. 21 This generally equates to a 0.5-mile walk shed and 1.5-mile bike shed.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 2015. If a jurisdiction has updated its CS Policy since 2015, it should submit or include a link to the updated CS Policy.

A jurisdiction submitting a transportation project for regional funding that is located in the public right of way must be compliant with MTC’s updated Complete Streets Policy, Resolution 4493. This requires the submission of a Complete Streets Checklist.

Project Prioritization/Implementation:

To demonstrate that it has prioritized implementation of active transportation projects and/or projects from MTC’s Community-Based Transportation Planning Program within the TOC area, 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 area (and connecting to Equity Priority 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 area, a jurisdiction may submit:
• Adopted active transportation, bicycle or pedestrian plan(s) that include recommended access improvements to/from the TOC area.
• Applicable sections of General Plan Circulation Element that highlight specific elements that guide or inform station access improvements.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 TOC 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 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 TOC 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 TOC 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 TOC areas.

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
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
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

Appendix A: TOC Policy Housing and Commercial
Stabilization Policy Requirements
Affordable housing policies are typically designed for specific income groups. MTC recognizes that different income and rent limits are imposed by different state and federal programs, and it is not the intent of the TOC Policy to create new requirements.

This document generally refers to policies intended to target “lower-income” and/or “moderate-income” households. For reference, state law (Health and Safety Code, section 50079.5) defines “lower-income” as households earning less than 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), and state law (Health and Safety Code, section 50093) defines “moderate-income” as households earning between 80% and 120% 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. Similarly, policies serving lower- and moderate-income households can serve any income group below 120% of AMI.

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:
• Production Policy 1: Inclusionary Zoning
• Production Policy 2: Affordable Housing Funding
• Production Policy 3: Affordable Housing Overlay Zones • Production Policy 4: Public Land for Affordable Housing • Production Policy 5: Ministerial Approval
• Production Policy 6: Public/Community Land Trusts (This policy may fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.) • Production Policy 7: Development Certainty and Streamlined Entitlement Process.

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 TOC areas. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdictionwide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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-income1 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-income households can live in highopportunity neighborhoods where they would otherwise be priced out. Inclusionary 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.2 Requirements for TOC Policy Compliance
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction’s inclusionary zoning policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
1 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. However, the use of the term “lowincome households” in MTC Resolution No. 4530 is assumed to be synonymous with the broader category of “lower-income,” or all households below 80% of AMI. 2 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• 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.
• For rental units, the policy’s affordability requirements must require the income mix of affordable units to average out to 80% of AMI or less, with no affordable rental units available to households above 120% of AMI. For ownership units, the policy’s affordability requirements must require the income mix of affordable units to average out to 120% of AMI or less, with no affordable ownership units available to households above 150% of AMI. 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
o A financial feasibility analysis (completed within 24 months of the date that inclusionary zoning policy was adopted) found that a 15% requirement was not feasible.
• The policy may require more than 15% affordable units.3 • 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. 3 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 has developed 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. MTC has developed a spreadsheet to help determine whether an in-lieu fee is equivalent to at least $100,000 per require 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 that outlines procedures for annual monitoring to ensure residents are income-eligible and rents are consistent with program guidelines.

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:

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding4 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. • Funding must be locally generated.
o Potential local funding sources include 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.
o Jurisdictions may include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries.
o Jurisdictions may include grants from philanthropic organizations or private contributions made by businesses or individuals.
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 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 NOTE: Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • 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). • Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds 4 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an affordable housing project that will be constructed during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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.

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 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

This law includes incentives such as reduced parking requirements and concessions for reduced setbacks and minimum square footage requirements.5 SB 35 (2017) and SB 423 (2023)
SB 35 (2017) dictates that a developer can request a streamlined, ministerial approval process for multifamily developments which include specified levels of affordable 5 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.6
SB 423 (2023) extends SB 35’s streamlined, ministerial approval process for qualifying multifamily developments until January 1, 2036. SB 423 also expands some provisions of SB 35, such as applying SB 35 to previously exempted coastal zone areas that are already zoned for housing.

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 AHOZ policy must offer incentives for projects with at least 15% affordable housing. The policy’s required share of affordable units must exceed any jurisdiction-wide inclusionary zoning requirements and what is otherwise incentivized by state law for any given income category. The policy could incentivize any higher proportion of affordable housing up to and including 100% (e.g., only provide incentives to 100% affordable projects). • 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 streamlining, or modifications to other planning code requirements.

Incentives and concessions must result in an actual and identifiable cost reduction for the project.
6 For more information, see this fact sheet on Senate Bill 35 prepared by the City of San Leandro.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• 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.7 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.

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 7 For more information, see the brief “Use of publicly owned property for affordable housing” prepared by Local Housing Solutions.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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:
• 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.
o In the absence of a Housing Element policy/program, 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 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. Though jurisdictions should prioritize affordable housing development on public land within the TOC area, a public lands project does not need to be within the TOC area to receive credit toward TOC Policy compliance. o 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. • If the recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on a public land site is not on land owned by the jurisdiction, the jurisdiction must provide evidence of financial support for the project. Financial support could be a grant/loan to the project or an in-kind contribution in the form of waivers for building permit fees, impact fees, and other fees. At their discretion, MTC staff may allow a jurisdiction to count a non-monetary benefit provided to a project in lieu of financial support. • For both rental and ownership projects, eligible developments on publicly owned land must exceed the Surplus Lands Act requirement to have at least 25% of units affordable to lower-income households earning 80% of AMI or less. Additional affordable units beyond the 25% for lower-income households can target both lower- and moderate-income households earning up to 120% of AMI. 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.
• 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 it has 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/Board of Supervisors.

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.

OR
o An adopted public lands policy that meets the requirements described above. • Evidence (such as an RFQ/RFP) of a recent, ongoing, or planned housing development project on public lands that meets the standards outlined above. o 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 monitoring and advancing the public lands program or project, including anticipated full-time equivalent (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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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.8 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) and SB 423 (2023)
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.

SB 423 (2023) extends SB 35’s streamlined, ministerial approval process for qualifying multifamily developments until January 1, 2036. SB 423 also expands some provisions of SB 35, such as applying SB 35 to previously exempted coastal zone areas that are already zoned for housing.

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.9
8 For more information, see Caltrans’ overview of Chapter 34 - Exemptions to CEQA. 9 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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 to any project where at least 15% of units are deed-restricted affordable housing units.

OR
o Grant ministerial approval for projects whose share of affordable units 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.
10, 11
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.
12, 13
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.14
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.
15 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:
10 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti-Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021). 11 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley.
12 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 13 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ’s. 14 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 15 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding16 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. • Funding must be locally generated.
o Potential local funding sources include commercial linkage fees, housing impact fees (but see note below if the impact fees are part of an inclusionary zoning ordinance), 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. o Jurisdictions may include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on affordable housing projects within its boundaries.
o Jurisdictions may include grants from philanthropic organizations or private contributions made by businesses or individuals.
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 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 6). 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 6.
o NOTE: Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • 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). 16 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• 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 at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a CLT to use for affordable housing production during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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 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.
• 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.
• NOTE: 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 has 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 for 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 fouryear 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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.17 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 17 For more information, see the brief “Streamlined permitting processes” prepared by Local Housing Solutions.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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).

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, unless preempted by state or federal law.
o 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:
• Preservation Policy 1: Funding to Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing • Preservation Policy 2: Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase • Preservation Policy 3: Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) Preservation • Preservation Policy 4: Condominium Conversion Restrictions • Preservation Policy 5: Public/Community Land Trusts (This policy may fulfill either the housing production or preservation requirement, but not both.) • Preservation Policy 6: Funding to Support Preservation Capacity • Preservation Policy 7: Mobile Home Preservation
• Preservation Policy 8: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities (This policy may fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.) H.2.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 TOC areas. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdictionwide 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), 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 funding18 that provides ongoing allocations to the program at or above the level identified in Appendix B. The 18 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 of these funds for the program can be reasonably expected to be approved in subsequent years. The subsequent years’ funding may require H.2.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.
o Potential local funding sources include commercial linkage fees, housing impact fees (but see note below if the impact fees are part of an inclusionary zoning ordinance), 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. o Jurisdictions may also include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on preservation projects within its boundaries. o Jurisdictions may include grants from philanthropic organizations or private contributions made by businesses or individuals.
o When relevant, 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 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 for this policy (Preservation Policy 1). 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 toward satisfying Preservation Policy 1. o NOTE: Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • 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).
• 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 at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an unsubsidized 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

affordable housing preservation project that will be completed during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• The jurisdiction must establish 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 For rental properties, 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.
o All ownership units preserved as affordable housing (e.g., a single-family home acquired by a community land trust) must be sold to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. o 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.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility and financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. These terms must indicate the criteria for borrower eligibility to ensure funding recipients have experience with affordable housing preservation, 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

(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 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.19 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:20
• 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.21
19 Bay Area Housing Element Advocacy Working Group. “Leveraging the Housing Element to Advance Tenant & Community Opportunity to Purchase Policies.”
20 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.” 21 San Jose Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) Proposed Program Summary – January 2023 Update.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• At the time of application for conversion of units, require applicants to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan22 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 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 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.
22 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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 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.23 • At the time of application for conversion of units, require applicants to produce a Tenant Relocation Assistance Plan24 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 23 This is a right under the Subdivision Map Act (Gov Code 66410-66424.6). 24 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.
25, 26
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.
27, 28
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.29
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.
30 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:
25 See Table 1. Literature Review Summary Table in White Paper on Anti-Displacement Strategy Effectiveness (Chapple and Loukaitou-Sideris, 2021). 26 Chapple et al. 2022. Examining the Unintended Effects of Climate Change Mitigation. Institute of Governmental Studies, UC Berkeley.
27 Local Housing Solutions. Land Banks. 28 Center for Community Progress. Land Bank FAQ’s. 29 California Center for Cooperative Development. Housing Co-ops. 30 Yelen, J. 2020. Preserving Affordability, Preventing Displacement. Enterprise Community Partners.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding31 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. • Funding must be locally generated.
o Potential local funding sources include commercial linkage fees, housing impact fees (but see note below if the impact fees are part of an inclusionary zoning ordinance), 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. o Jurisdictions may include county or regional bond funds expended with the jurisdiction’s participation on preservation projects within its boundaries. o Jurisdictions may include grants from philanthropic organizations or private contributions made by businesses or individuals.
o When relevant, 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 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 for this policy (Preservation Policy 5). 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 toward satisfying Preservation Policy 5. o NOTE: Federal and state funding (such as HOME/CDBG or PLHA) that is passed through a jurisdiction is not counted as local funding. • 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed affordable housing preservation funds for CLTs prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count 31 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to a CLT to use for acquiring and preserving an unsubsidized affordable housing property during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• The program’s funds must be reserved for CLTs and/or cooperatives to use for affordable housing preservation.
• The jurisdiction must establish criteria for borrower eligibility that require funding recipients to have experience with affordable housing preservation. • The funding program must establish a standard set of financing terms, including affordability requirements.
o For rental properties, 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.
o All ownership units preserved as affordable housing (e.g., a single-family home acquired by a community land trust) must be sold to lower- and moderate-income households earning 120% of AMI or less. o 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. • NOTE: 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 has a funding program that meets requirements for Preservation Policy 1, and if this program additionally has set asides for public/community land trusts that meet the funding amounts listed in Appendix B, then the program can also receive credit for 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 four-year OBAG cycle would receive credit for both Preservation Policy 1 and Preservation Policy 5 if the program has a set aside for H.2.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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:
• A copy of the program’s eligibility and financing terms if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program. These terms must indicate the eligibility, 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:

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• The jurisdiction must have a dedicated funding program with secured funding32 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 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE).
• The jurisdiction must define eligibility for financial awards to CLTs and CBOs. • Funding for the program can come from any source that allows supporting staff capacity as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a funding program to support preservation capacity 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed funds to support preservation capacity prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to CBO or CLT to support project management staffing during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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. 32 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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. • A copy of the program’s eligibility criteria if they are not included in an ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• 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 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 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 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 areas. If none of the mobile home parks are located within a TOC area, then the jurisdiction must apply its policy jurisdiction-wide.

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 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 Plan33 spelling out 33 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 at the time of application 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 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.
relocated out of, and tenants that experience temporary displacement must be guaranteed protection against unreasonable rent increases upon returning to their unit.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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. 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 lower-income homeowners (including seniors and people with disabilities) with making repairs or modifications to their residences.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

o The program must limit funding to owner-occupied homes that are the homeowner’s primary residence, which includes mobile homes where the mobile home owner rents the lot beneath the home.
o Funding for the program can come from any source that allows home rehabilitation as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals. o Funding recipients must be below 80% of AMI.
o The program must define other eligibility requirements for receiving a loan or grant, eligible uses for funds, and minimum/maximum loan or grant amounts. 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 a document outlining details that must be included in such a plan if a jurisdiction is selecting the amnesty program for unpermitted units.
• The home rehabilitation program’s eligibility requirements and 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:
• Protection Policy 1: “Just Cause” Eviction
• Protection Policy 2: No Net Loss and Right to Return to Demolished Homes • Protection Policy 3: Legal Assistance for Tenants
• Protection Policy 4: Foreclosure Assistance
• Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program
• Protection Policy 6: Rent Stabilization
• Protection Policy 7: Preventing Displacement from Substandard Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement Activities (This policy may fulfill either the housing preservation or protection requirement, but not both.)
• Protection Policy 8: Tenant Relocation Assistance
• Protection Policy 9: Mobile Home Rent Stabilization
• Protection Policy 10: Fair Housing Enforcement
• Protection Policy 11: Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 TOC areas. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdictionwide 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 which tenants are not at fault. Accordingly, research identifies just cause eviction as a policy with high potential to prevent residential displacement.34 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 state law 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) and SB 567 (2023) 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. SB 567 (2023) modified the protections provided by AB 1482 by creating new requirements for landlords seeking to carry out two types of “no-fault” evictions: evictions for substantial remodels of units and owner move-in evictions. SB 567 also makes landlords who violate the Tenant Protection Act liable in civil court for damages and provides mechanisms for the Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel to enforce the law.
34 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 statewide just cause protections 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 state law can be found in California Civil Code Section 1946.2(b). 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 provided by state law 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 types from these 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.35 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 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, to the extent permitted by state or federal law. These provisions require replacing all demolished units with units of equivalent size36 and replacing demolished protected units with units affordable to low-income households.37 • Include all right of return provisions in the Housing Crisis Act with no sunset date, to the extent permitted by state or federal law. These provisions require providing 35 For more information on “protected units” defined by state law, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(F)(vi). 36 State law defines equivalent size as containing at least the same number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
37 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

displaced lower-income tenants with relocation assistance and right of first refusal to a comparable unit at an affordable rent.38
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”39 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 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 funding40 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 The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to 38 For more information on relocation assistance and right of refusal provided to lower-income households, see California Government Code Section 66300(d)(2)(D). 39 “Right to counsel” extends the right to an attorney, required in criminal procedures, to tenants in eviction trials, which are civil procedures.
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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a tenant legal assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on tenant legal assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows tenant legal assistance as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a tenant legal assistance 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed legal assistance funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a program occurring during the relevant fouryear OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for legal assistance services during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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 contracted or will contract with one or more legal services organizations.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about legal services for residents.
• 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 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.

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.

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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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 funding41 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 The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on foreclosure assistance and $70,000 on a rental assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on foreclosure assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows foreclosure assistance as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a foreclosure assistance 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed foreclosure assistance funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for foreclosure assistance services during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).
41 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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 contracted or will contract with one or more foreclosure assistance organizations.
• A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about foreclosure assistance for residents.
• 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 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.

Protection Policy 5: Rental Assistance Program
Description from TOC Policy Resolution: Provide a dedicated funding source and program for rental assistance to low-income42 households.

Purpose
42 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. However, the use of the term “lowincome households” in MTC Resolution No. 4530 is assumed to be synonymous with the broader category of “lower-income,” or all households below 80% of AMI.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.43 For these reasons, rental assistance programs providing lowincome tenants with emergency funds for rent are effective at preventing eviction and stopping displacement.44 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.

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 funding45 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 The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a rental assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on rental assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows rental assistance as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
43 Badger, Emily. (2019). Many Renters Who Fact Eviction Owe Less than $600. The New York Times. 44 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
45 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a rental assistance 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed rental assistance funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for rental assistance during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• 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 contracted or will contract with one or more rental assistance providers.
• A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about rental assistance available for residents.
• 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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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 preventing displacement and promoting neighborhood stability, particularly when paired with condominium conversion restrictions and just cause eviction regulations. 46 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.47 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.48 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
AB 1482 (Tenant Protection Act of 2019) and SB 567 (2023) 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. SB 567 (2023) makes landlords who violate the Tenant Protection Act liable in civil court for damages 46 Chapple, K. et. al. (2022). Housing Market Interventions and Residential Mobility in the San Francisco Bay Area. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
47 PolicyLink. “Rent Stabilization.”
48 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

and provides mechanisms for the Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel to enforce the law.

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.
• 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 rent stabilization ordinance must limit maximum annual rent increases to be less than those allowed under state law (see Relevant State Laws section above for more information).49
• 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.50
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. 49 The maximum annual rent increases allowed under state law are defined in California Civil Code Section 1947.12, 50 While state law provides some mechanisms for enforcement by the Attorney General and/or city attorney if a landlord raises rent in excess of the legally allowed increase, local administrative bodies like rent boards can provide more easily accessible processes for tenants to dispute rent increases that exceed legally allowed maximums.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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. Offer grants or interest-free loans to landlords to repair substandard or other dangerous/inadequate conditions in exchange for anti-displacement protections for tenants.
o Funding for the program can come from any source that allows repairs of residential units as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals. 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. o As a condition of receiving the grant or loan, 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.
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 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. o The tenant has the right to reoccupy the unit after repairs are complete.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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.
o The tenant has the right to reoccupy the unit after repairs are complete.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• The rehabilitation grant/loan program’s eligibility requirements and financing terms if a jurisdiction is selecting this option.
• A template of the tenant habitability plan or a document outlining details that must be included in such a plan if a jurisdiction is selecting this option.

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 region’s renters are extremely low-income and make less than 30% of AMI.51 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.
51 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.52 • 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 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 52 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

increasingly being acquired by speculative investors.53 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 areas. If none of the at-risk mobile home parks in a jurisdiction are located within a TOC area, then the jurisdiction must apply this policy jurisdiction-wide.

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:
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.
53 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.”54 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.55 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 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. 54 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.
55 For more information on disparities in housing needs, see ABAG’s Housing Needs Data Packets.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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/program must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding56 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 The required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four Protection policies requiring funding, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a tenant legal assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on fair housing enforcement. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.
• Funding for the program can come from any source that allows fair housing enforcement as an eligible use of funds. Potential funding sources could include, but are not limited to, local housing trust funds, county funds, state and federal funds passed through the jurisdiction, grants from philanthropic organizations, and private contributions from businesses or individuals.
56 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• Jurisdictions that have an existing balance in a fair housing enforcement 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).
• Jurisdictions that have committed fair housing enforcement funds prior to submitting final documentation for TOC Policy compliance may count expended funds toward the required total so long as at least one of the following conditions is met:
o The funds are used to support a project or program occurring during the relevant four-year OBAG cycle (e.g., funds are committed to an organization to use for legal assistance services during the OBAG 4 cycle sometime between 2026 and 2030).

AND/OR
o The funds are expended after January 1, 2025.
• A jurisdiction must contract with one or more fair housing service providers to serve its constituents and provide fair housing enforcement. Alternatively, the jurisdiction can establish its own fair housing testing and enforcement program with staff who conduct fair housing testing on a regular basis,57 investigate complaints of discrimination, provide information to tenants and landlords, and refer cases to the State Department of Fair Employment and Housing.58 • The jurisdiction must make information available for the public on its website regarding the fair housing services available to assist residents.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• Documents demonstrating the jurisdiction has contracted or will contract with one or more fair housing enforcement organizations, if applicable. • A link to a website where the jurisdiction has made information available about fair housing services for residents.
• 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 57 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.
58 The City of Santa Barbara has a Fair Housing Enforcement Officer on staff who completes these actions.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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.

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.59 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.60 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 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. 59 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. 60 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 policy must meet the following minimum requirements:
• The tenant anti-harassment policy 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 policy must state that the city or county attorney as well as the impacted tenant may bring a civil action or request an injunction in response to harassment. • The policy must establish penalties for landlords found to be in violation, including fines, attorneys' fees, and punitive damages. The policy shall also define a violation of the ordinance as an affirmative defense for a tenant in an eviction proceeding.
• The policy 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, 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
To comply with the TOC Policy, a jurisdiction must adopt at least one of the commercial stabilization policies listed below:
• Commercial Stabilization Policy 1: Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay Zone • Commercial Stabilization Policy 2: Small Business and Non-Profit Preference Policy
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

• Commercial Stabilization Policy 3: Small Business and Non-Profit Financial Assistance Program
• Commercial Stabilization Policy 4: Small Business Advocate Office 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 TOC areas. Jurisdictions may choose to apply policies beyond the TOC area(s), which could include the entirety of the jurisdiction (i.e., adopting a jurisdictionwide policy). See Section 2 of the guidance document for more information about these requirements.

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.61 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.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit a copy of the policy’s eligibility criteria and description of protections and/or benefits provided, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program. 61 Planetizen Planopedia. “What is an Overlay District?” H.2.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 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.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit a copy of the policy’s eligibility criteria and preference details, if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.

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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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:
• Jurisdictions must define “small business” and “community-serving non-profit” to establish the minimum requirement to quality for financial assistance. • The jurisdiction must have a program with secured funding62 that provides financial assistance to stabilize small businesses and non-profits located in the TOC 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.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the eligibility criteria and program details if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• 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 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.

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.

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 62 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 of these funds for the program 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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)63 In the case of an outside contractor, the jurisdiction must have dedicated staff oversight.

Submitting Additional Required Documentation
In addition to the standard submission requirements, a jurisdiction must submit:
• A copy of the eligibility criteria and program details if they are not included in the ordinance or other documents establishing the program.
• If an outside contractor is used as the point of contact, a description of the jurisdiction’s approach for oversight of the contractor. 63 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.

H.2.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

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 TOC areas.

For the policies in the Protection category, the required funding amount by tier can be split among any two of the four policies, but the jurisdiction will only receive credit toward one policy. For example, a Tier A jurisdiction could choose to spend $30,000 on fair housing enforcement and $70,000 on a rental assistance program, for a total of $100,000. Alternatively, the jurisdiction could spend $100,000 on a single policy, such as rental assistance. In either scenario, the jurisdiction would receive credit toward one policy for meeting the $100,000 funding threshold for Protection policies.

Table 1: Jurisdictions by Funding Tier
Jurisdiction
Very Lowand LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Yountville 30 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Calistoga 50 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Ross 54 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Unincorporated
Napa 61 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Colma 69 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Belvedere 77 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Monte Sereno 83 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Sebastopol 86 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Cotati 94 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Portola Valley 115 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Unincorporated
Solano 130 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Cloverdale 141 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Woodside 142 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Atherton 148 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
St. Helena 163 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Dixon 175 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Pinole 190 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Los Altos Hills 197 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Fairfax 235 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Hillsborough 244 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

Jurisdiction
Very Lowand LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Suisun City 255 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Piedmont 257 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
East Palo Alto 260 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Clayton 267 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
San Pablo 273 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
American Canyon 278 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Half Moon Bay 285 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Healdsburg 299 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Tiburon 303 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Sausalito 315 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Corte Madera 336 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Benicia 339 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
San Anselmo 398 A $1,000,000 $500,000 $100,000
Mill Valley 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Morgan Hill 413 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Oakley 440 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Larkspur 459 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Albany 486 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Brisbane 500 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Moraga 501 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
El Cerrito 526 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Hercules 542 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Martinez 551 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Orinda 587 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Windsor 607 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Rohnert Park 629 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Brentwood 634 B $1,400,000 $600,000 $200,000
Emeryville 710 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Saratoga 715 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Newark 732 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Belmont 769 C $3,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Petaluma 787 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Los Altos 789 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pittsburg 812 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Foster City 819 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Los Gatos 847 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pacifica 848 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Pleasant Hill 892 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

Jurisdiction
Very Lowand LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
Novato 898 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Millbrae 906 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Lafayette 943 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Danville 1,028 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Gilroy 1,054 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Vallejo 1,059 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
Vacaville 1,081 C $2,000,000 $700,000 $200,000
San Bruno 1,109 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Carlos 1,164 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Menlo Park 1,166 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Campbell 1,186 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Napa 1,214 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Antioch 1,248 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Fairfield 1,256 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
San Mateo 1279 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Santa Clara 1305 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Richmond 1,325 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Rafael 1,349 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
San Leandro 1,357 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Union City 1,358 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Burlingame 1,360 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
South San
Francisco 1,373 D $3,000,000 $900,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Sonoma 1,608 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Hayward 1,692 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Dublin 1,710 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Marin 1734 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Redwood City 1,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Cupertino 1,880 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Santa Rosa 1,919 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Alameda 1,972 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Concord 2,036 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Livermore 2,075 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Daly City 2,105 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Alameda 2,239 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
H.2.a
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy)

Jurisdiction
Very Lowand LowIncome
RHNA Tier
Production 2
and Production 6
Preservation 1
and
Preservation 5
Protection 3,
Protection 4,
Protection 5, and
Protection 10
San Ramon 1,359 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Palo Alto 2,452 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Walnut Creek 2,611 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Milpitas 2,655 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Pleasanton 2,758 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
San Mateo 2,800 E $4,000,000 $1,200,000 $300,000
Unincorporated
Contra Costa 3,266 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Berkeley 3,854 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Mountain View 4,370 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Santa Clara 4,525 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Sunnyvale 4,677 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Fremont 5,736 F $8,000,000 $2,400,000 $400,000
Oakland 10,261 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000
San Jose 23,775 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000
San Francisco 32,881 G $40,000,000 $8,000,000 $1,000,000 H.2.a
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: MTC Administrative Guidance: Transit-Oriented Communities Policy (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Communities Policy) H.2 Overview of MTC’s TransitOriented Communities Policy & Orinda's Compliance Status
City Council
January 21, 2025
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Agenda
Agenda
• Overview of the MTC TOC Policy
• Orinda status with TOC policy
Actions
• Receive direction on policies/programs that City Council determines would be appropriate to consider
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented TOC Overview
Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy
• Adopted in 2022, a voluntary program that advances
implementation of Plan Bay Area and identifies criteria in various categories (e.g., parking standards or minimum zoning)
• Goal: protect regional transportation investments by encouraging appropriate densities, parking controls, affordable housing and station access
• Compliance is voluntary
Why be Consistent with TOC?
• Prioritization for One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) funds
• Support increased densities committed to in the Housing Element H.2.b
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented One Bay Area Grant (OBAG)
MTC program to distribute region’s share
of transportation funding
Past three funding cycles
• MTC has distributed over $941 million
• Orinda has received just under $1.3 million
directly and just under $700,000 as part of a
regional effort
• Next funding cycle scheduled for 2026
• TOC consistency will be a meaningful factor
“Future One Bay Area
Grant (OBAG) funding
cycles will consider
funding revisions that
prioritize investments
in transit stations
areas that are subject
to and compliant with
the TOC Policy.”
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Projected TOC Policy Compliance Chart
TOC Policy Compliance
Jurisdictions
Key Features
• Compliance tiers* establish
eligibility by jurisdiction
• Set-aside incentive for top tier
TOC Policy Compliance Tiers
Non-Compliant
Jurisdictions
Eligible for limited
planning funds
Substantially
Compliant
Jurisdictions
Eligible for most
funding
Compliant
Jurisdictions
Eligible for all
funding, including
set-aside
Non-TOC
Jurisdictions
Eligible for most
funding
*Requirements under development, to be
informed by ongoing partner outreach
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Past Orinda OBAG Projects
Projects Awarded OBAG Funds • 2015 Orinda Sidewalk Improvements • $100,000 • 2015 Ivy Street Preservation • $552,000 • 2019-2020 Orinda Way Pavement Rehabilitation • $620,000 Total $1,272,000
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Other MTC/OBAG Funding
Regional Projects Awarded
• 2023 CCTA Smart Signals Project
• $657,038 to Orinda
Technical Assistance Awarded
• 2022-2023 PDA Grant – BART station Memorandum of Understanding • $200,000
Total $857,038
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented TOC Station Area
The TOC policy applies to areas
within 1/2-mile of existing and
planned rail stations, bus rapid
transit stops, and ferry terminals.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented TOC Compliance Requirements

1. Density
• Required minimum and maximum densities for new housing and office development.

2. Affordable Housing/Commercial Stabilization Policies • Jurisdiction chooses policies from a menu of policy Options: 2 Production, 2 Preservation, 2 Protection & 1 Commercial.

3. Parking Management
• Parking maximums for residential and commercial development. • Requirements for bicycle, shared, unbundled parking, and TDM or curb management.

4. Transit Station Access and Circulation
• Comply with Complete Streets Policy, prioritize active transportation. • Complete an access gap analysis and identify opportunities for Mobility Hubs.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

1. Density
Policy Requirement Status Proposed DPP Standards
Residential Density Minimum 25+ None 20
Residential Density Maximum 35+ 5.4 27
Commercial Office Density Minimum 2.0+ FAR 0.0 0.0 FAR
Commercial Office Density Maximum 4.0+ FAR 1.0 1.5 FAR
A jurisdiction must meet the following four density standards:

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

2. Production Housing Policies
A jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the following policies:

Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Inclusionary Housing Orinda Staff have released a Request for Proposal for development of an Inclusionary Housing ordinance.
2 Affordable Housing Funding Funding commitment of $1.4 million 3 Affordable Housing Overlay Zones Requires incentives beyond State law 4 Public Land for Affordable Housing Minimal qualifying public land in Orinda with examples of development to meet this policy
5 Ministerial Approval Housing Element program for projects with 20%+ affordable housing.
6 Public/Community Land Trusts Funding commitment of $1.4 million 7 Development Certainty and Streamlined
Entitlement Process
Requires staff, consultant time, and resources to determine effects of vested development rights.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

2. Preservation Housing Policies
A jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the following policies:

Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Funding to Preserve
Unsubsidized Affordable Housing
Funding commitment of $600,000
2 Tenant/Community Opportunity to Purchase Limited applicability in current downtown; would be for future protections. No funding requirement.
3 Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Preservation No SROs in Orinda 4 Condominium Conversion Restrictions Limited applicability in current downtown; would be for future protections. No funding requirement.
5 Public/Community Land Trusts No significant opportunities for community land trusts. Funding commitment of $600,000
6 Funding to Support Preservation Capacity 4-year funding commitment for a dedicated project manager at an organization engaged in preservation
8 Preventing Displacement from Substandard
Conditions and Associated Enforcement
Activities
Variable funding commitment. Amnesty program to waive fines/fees for property owners with unpermitted units, or a low- or no interest loan grant program ($10K minimum per loan/ grant)
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

2. Protection Housing Policies
A jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the following policies:

Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 “Just Cause” Eviction Requires Staff, consultant time, & resources. 2 No Net Loss and Right to Return to
Demolished Homes
Requires Staff, consultant time, & resources.
3 Legal Assistance for Tenants Funding Commitment of $200,000 4 Foreclosure Assistance Funding Commitment of $200,000 5 Rental Assistance Program Funding Commitment of $200,000 6 Rent Stabilization Requires Staff, consultant time, & resources. 7 Preventing Displacement from Substandard
Conditions and Associated Code Enforcement
Activities
Variable funding commitment. Amnesty program to waive fines/fees for property owners with unpermitted units, or a low- or no interest loan grant program ($10K minimum per loan/ grant).
8 Tenant Relocation Assistance Requires Staff, consultant time, and resources. 10 Fair Housing Enforcement Requires Staff, consultant time, & resources. $200,000 funding commitment
11 Tenant Anti-Harassment Protections Requires Staff, consultant time, & resources.

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

2. Commercial Stabilization Policies
A jurisdiction must adopt at least two of the following policies:

Policy TOC Policy Notes
1 Small Business and Non-Profit Overlay Zone 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 H.2.b
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

3. Parking
A jurisdiction must comply with all of the following policies:

Tier 3 Policy Parking Requirement Existing
Requirements
Potential DPP/Orinda Municipal Code (OMC) Changes
Minimum Residential and Commercial Parking
No minimum Varies by use No minimum per requirements of AB 2097. This should be clarified within the Objective Design Standards and addressed in OMC 17.16.4 – Off-street parking and loading spaces required
Maximum Residential Parking
≤ 1 space per unit No maximum 1 space maximum per unit codified within the Objective Design Standards Maximum Commercial Office Parking
≤ 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet None Could be carried out through Objective Design Standards Minimum Residential Bicycle Parking
≥ 1 secure space per unit None 1 secure space per unit codified within the Objective Design Standards and/or in OMC

17.16.6 – Bicycle Parking
Minimum Commercial Office Bicycle Parking
≥ 1 secure space per 5,000 square feet 5% of the required automobile parking
1 secure space per 5,000 s.f. codified within the Objective Design Standards and/or in OMC17.16.6 – Bicycle Parking
Unbundled Parking
Allow parking spaces to be leased separately from sale or rental price of residential and commercial uses
Not explicitly
prohibited
Explicitly state in Objective Design Standards and/or in OMC 17.16.4 – Off-street parking and loading spaces required
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented

4. Station Access and Circulation
Policy Status
Adopt a jurisdiction-wide Complete Streets Policy Adopted 2012, updated 2014 Prioritize implementation of active transportation
projects in TOC area(s)
City recently applied for the RM3 grant. The project will study a multimodal path along Moraga Way that will connect the south side of Orinda and Moraga to Orinda BART.

City is preparing a feasibility study for trail alignments that will connect the Wilder community to the Downtown and Orinda BART by providing bike/ped access.

Complete an access gap analysis and capital improvement program for station access
ConnectOrinda - 2018
Identify Mobility Hub planning and implementation
opportunities in TOC area(s)
Bike, Trails, and Walkways Master Plan - 2011
ConnectOrinda - 2018
Downtown Precise Plan - 2023
A jurisdiction must comply with all the following policies:

H.2.b
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented Discussion and Recommended Action
Discussion:
• Technical assistance supports staff and consultant work • TOC compliance enables us to remain competitive for OBAG funds, MTC PDA technical assistance funds, and potentially other regional resources
Recommended Action Today:
• Provide direction to staff on potential policies/programs that City Council determines would be appropriate to consider
H.2.b
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: MTC TOC Presentation Jan 21 2025 (3499 : MTC Transit-Oriented City Council
Staff Report
Agenda Item: H.3
Date: January 21, 2025
Department: City Clerk
AGENDA TITLE: City Council Committee Appointment/Liaison List for 2025 RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the remainder of Appointment/Liaison List as proposed or amended.

BACKGROUND:

At the January 7, 2025 meeting, the City Council discussed and approved liaison appointments to the various City Commissions and Committees and to other groups and agencies.

Because the City Council also discussed proposed changes to its Subcommittees as a separate agenda item, the selection by the Mayor of City Council appointments to those Subcommittees was planned for their next meeting.

During the discussion of liaison appointments, it was decided to put off the selection of liaison to the Chamber of Commerce pending the selection of appointments to the City Council Subcommittees.

Additionally, the liaison to the Cal Shakes Theater had been inadvertently omitted from the appointments list. The discussion and selection for this liaison position was also continued to the next meeting.

DISCUSSION:

The attached list shows the recommendations made by Mayor Malkani for the remainder of appointments. These recommendations are highlighted in yellow.

Staff recommends that the City Council discuss the Mayor’s proposed appointments and finalize the selections.

ATTACHMENTS:

A. City Council Appointment List 2025 with Highlighed New Recommendations Respectfully Submitted by:

Sheri Smith
City Clerk
Prepared By: Sheri Smith, City Clerk
H.3
Packet Pg. 237
Approved by:

H.3
Packet Pg. 238
ORGANIZATION 2024 Appointment
2025
Recommendation COUNCIL RESPONSIBILITY MEETINGS
Mayors' Community Liaison Group Mayor Mayor Mayor facilitates meeting w/ community leaders 2nd Wednesday, 8:30am Lamorinda Mayors' Meeting Mayor Mayor Mayor serves as Council representative bimonthly breakfast meeting Mayors' Conference (Contra Costa County) Mayor Mayor
Mayor serves as conference delegate; all Council
invited to attend 1st Thursday, 6:30 pm
COMMISSION and COMMITTEE Liaisons: Attend Some Meetings and Report to Council.

Art in Public Places Committee (APPC) Janet Riley Janet Riley See Commission Charge 3rd Monday, 3:30pm Finance Advisory Committee (FAC) Inga Miller Cara Hoxie See Commission Charge 4th Wednesday, 6pm Historic Landmarks Committee (HLC) Janet Riley Janet Riley See Commission Charge 4th Tuesday, 3pm Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) Latika Malkani Cara Hoxie See Commission Charge 2nd Wednesday, 7pm Planning Commission (PC) Brandyn Iverson Brandyn Iverson See Commission Charge 2nd & 4th Tuesday, 7:00 pm Supplemental Sales Tax Oversight Commission Latika Malkani Latika Malkani See Commission Charge Quarterly Traffic Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) Brandyn Iverson Brandyn Iverson See Commission Charge 3rd Monday, 7:00 pm Library Parcel Tax Oversight Committee Janet Riley Janet Riley See Commission Charge meets twice a year Affordable Housing Sub-Committee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson
Brandyn Iverson
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Library Facility Steering Committee
Darlene Gee
Janet Riley
Darlene Gee
Janet Riley Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed City/School 2x2 Committee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson
Brandyn Iverson
Cara Hoxie Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee
meets 4 times a year outside of
summer break
Wilder Subcommitee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson
Brandyn Iverson
Cara Hoxie Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Action
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets as needed Fire Prevention 2x2 with MOFD
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets quarterly Downtown Revitalization and Planning Subcommittee
Inga Miller
Brandyn Iverson
Brandyn Iverson
Cara Hoxie Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets quarterly Infrastructure Subcommittee
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani
Darlene Gee
Latika Malkani Attend Meetings as Council Subcommittee meets monthly OTHER AGENCIES: Attend Some Meetings; Report to Council Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Mayor Mayor
Attend 2 meetings; serve as City's voting
delegate. two meetings annually
Central Contra Costa Solid Waste Authority Board
(CCCSWA)
Inga Miller
Janet Riley
Janet Riley
Darlene Gee
Attend monthly regular board meeting; serve on
1-2 board committees w/ monthly meeting last Thursday, 3:00 pm Contra Costa County Transit Authority (CCCTA)
Amy Worth
Darlene Gee (alt)
Amy Worth
Darlene Gee (alt) Attend monthly board meeting 3rd Thursday, 9:00 am Lamorinda School Bus Program (LSBP JPA)
Brandyn Iverson
Darlene Gee (alt)
Brandyn Iverson
Cara Hoxie (alt) Attend monthly JPA meetings 2nd Monday, 9:30 am CITY OF ORINDA - CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENTS 2025
COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEE:

H.3.a
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: City Council Appointment List 2025 with Highlighed New Recommendations (3509 : City League of CA Cities Voting Delegate (LOCC)
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Serve as City's voting delegate at annual
conference one meeting annually
-League of CA Cities East Bay Division Delegate
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Mayor
Vice Mayor
Attend monthly dinner meetings; open to all
Council members 3rd Thursday, 6:00 pm
SouthWest Area Transportation Committee (SWAT)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt) Subgroup of CCTA. Attend Monthly Meetings 1st Monday, 3:00 pm -Lamorinda Project Management Committee
(LPMC)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Meets as needed after SWAT meeting/ subgroup
of SWAT 1st Monday as needed
-Lamorinda Fee and Financing Authority (LFFA)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Darlene Gee
Brandyn Iverson
(alt)
Meets as needed after SWAT meeting/ subgroup
of SWAT 1st Monday as needed
COUNCIL LIAISON WITH CITY PARTNERS:

Serve as Primary Contact Person for Council;
Attend Some Meetings; Report to Council
Acalanes Unified High School District (AUHSD) Inga Miller Cara Hoxie " " 1st/3rd Wednesday, 7:30 pm Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Darlene Gee Darlene Gee " " 2nd/4th Thursday, 9am Chamber of Commerce Latika Malkani Cara Hoxie " " 3rd Wednesday at 4pm East Bay Municipal Water Utility District (EBMUD) Inga Miller Cara Hoxie " " 2nd/4th Tuesday, 1:15 pm East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) Latika Malkani Latika Malkani " " 1st/3rd Tuesday, 2:00 pm Friends of Orinda Creeks Inga Miller Janet Riley " " 4th Wednesday, 8:00 am Libraries-
-Friends of Orinda Library Janet Riley Janet Riley " " 3rd Wednesday, 9:15 am -Library Regional Board Janet Riley Janet Riley " " meets as needed Moraga-Orinda Fire District Darlene Gee Darlene Gee " " 3rd Wednesday, 7:00pm Orinda Association (OA) Latika Malkani Latika Malkani " " 2nd Monday, 7:30 pm Orinda Historical Society Janet Riley Janet Riley " " quarterly Orinda Seniors Advisory Committee Latika Malkani Cara Hoxie " " 1st Tuesday Orinda Teen Advisory Committee Brandyn Iverson Brandyn Iverson " " 1st Monday Orinda Union School District (OUSD) Brandyn Iverson Brandyn Iverson 2nd Monday, 4:00 pm Orinda/Tabor Sister City Committee Darlene Gee Latika Malkani " " 4th Thursday Cal Shakes Theater Janet Riley Janet Riley " "
H.3.a
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: City Council Appointment List 2025 with Highlighed New Recommendations (3509 : City