Our town has officially submitted a Draft Housing Element for RHNA Cycle 6 (2023-2031). Like most compromises, everyone has something to be unhappy about (and mostly forgets the pieces they should be happy about). The plan as filed is designed to be compliant with State requirements. However, some aspects are likely to generate push back from the California HCD.
In this article we discuss why having a compliant housing plan is a good idea, and the issues our Draft plan may run into before it is ultimately approved.
For background, here is the short version of what is required of our housing plan to be compliant with State laws:
You can read more background on the constraints for, and process for developing, a Draft Housing Plan
Why we need to have a Compliant Housing Element
Not having a compliant plan opens the door to developers. Much has been made about whether or not PV should ignore RHNA and “pay the fine” but that is the least of the problems with that approach.
Housing group sues six Southern California cities over failure to plan for housing. (prnewswire.com)
Loss of Local Control —
The very thing people opposed to filing a compliant plan are worried about
The group charged with allocating RHNA units in the Bay Area is the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). They don’t mince words in their description of the downsides of non-compliance: Consequences of Non-Compliance with Housing Laws.pdf (ca.gov)
“Potential consequences of lawsuits include: mandatory compliance within 120 days, suspension of local control on building matters, and court approval of housing developments”
“Proposed developments in localities that have not yet made sufficient progress towards their allocation of the regional housing need are now subject to less rigorous “ministerial” approvals in order to hasten the production of housing and bring a jurisdiction into compliance with its state-determined housing need allocation.”
Developers can sue if projects are delayed — Under SB35 and SB330, also known as the Housing Accountability Act.
Southern California’s RHNA cycle is ahead of ours, and some cities are still wrestling with lawsuits over their previous cycle plan. Here are just a couple of lawsuit quagmires that have ensued:
State Cracks Down on SF Housing Gridlock
Pustilnikov files for 2,320 housing units, hotel, office complex, park at AES
Individuals and Housing Activists Can Sue
Clovis loses legal challenge, will be forced to zone and plan for low-income housing
And yes, there are fines
There is also a sizeable direct financial cost in the form of fines, which can be $100,000/month. Our town could also be responsible for paying not just our own legal fees, but those of the Plantiffs who sue us.
Benefits of Having a Compliant Housing Plan
Per ABAG and HCD, here are some of the possible benefits:
Potential Compliance Issues with our Submitted Draft Housing Plan
1. Inadequate “Buffer”
The California HCD recommends that jurisdictions propose a plan with a 20% “buffer” to address the very-real possibility that not all the planned projects will go forward (in our case, in addition to typical issues, we’ll also be getting updated fire maps that might rule out some planned locations, and seismic, septic, sewer, steep slopes, water, and financial viability are all potential stumbling blocks. Our Draft plan includes a 16% buffer, which might be an issue.
2. Reliance on ADUs and JADUs
Like nearly every small town in our area, we are trying to meet as many of our required 253 new housing units as possible through aggressive planning for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs). HCD has become fairly skeptical of ADU projections and, while we have good data to back up our estimates, there is no guarantee they will be accepted. Another issue with ADUs is that it is tricky to claim them as long-term low-income housing without a long-term commitment by the owner that they will be used that way — at which point they give up some control over their property.
3. Very-low-income housing concentrated in one area at the entrance to town
HCD would prefer that our 70+ very-low-income housing (less than $70K/year for a family of four) be distributed throughout town. However, the only way to get a developer to construct housing that can be rented for that amount is to create high-density (20 units/acre seems to be the floor for most non-profit affordable housing developers) developments. So there is a limit to how distributed our units can be. But we might get asked to plan for some of them in a location other than our new “Gateway District” (from Ford Park down to the town border near Ladera).