12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Under the prior version of the law, also known as the Housing Accountability Act (HAA), cities were prohibited from downzoning sites or approving projects at less density than identified in their Housing Element, but there were no regulations regarding approving projects at different affordability levels than identified in the site inventory. Under SB 166, if the approval of a development project results in fewer units by income category, the jurisdiction must identify additional sites to accommodate the RHNA obligation lost as a result of the approval (including re-zoning of sites if insufficient capacity exists in the inventory). In the last cycle, the City's inventory identified sites yielding a total number of housing units above that strictly needed to meet the RHNA9. This approach was strategic, to provide a buffer in the event some sites did not remain viable over the course of the Housing Element period. As an important related note, as allowed by the State's "default density" provisions, most of the high-density housing sites were counted as producing exclusively very low- and low-income units. Given that actual projects constructed typically provide only a portion of their units at below-market rates, if the City pursues a similar zoning strategy in this next cycle, it may be advisable to develop a secondary list of sites that would be eligible for re-zoning if and when necessary, to meet future no net loss requirements. In addition to new housing legislation that has been passed over the past few years that has impacted Housing Element updates and local planning law, the State is continuing to look at new housing legislation that could yet further affect the site inventory analysis and assumptions about production in the next cycle. Other Strategic Considerations Given these challenges, some of the key strategic and policy considerations that will need to be part of the Housing Element sites analysis and selection process, include: • Housing Densities: The minimum density considered by the State to produce low- and very low-income units (in communities such as Pleasanton) is 30 DUA. In the prior Housing Element, the majority of high-density sites were zoned at this density, with a few sites at 40 DUA. In this cycle, it may be beneficial to consider zoning more sites at, or even above, 40 DUA. As has been seen with recent developments in Pleasanton, projects built at 30 DUA or less will generally be surface-parked; whereas projects at and above 40 DUA can support integrated, structured parking, leaving more of the site available for on-site open space and amenities. Sites zoned at higher densities would yield more units, thus requiring less land to be rezoned and may offer more favorable site design outcomes. Accordingly, the City may wish to consider zoning selected sites (for example, sites located with a half mile of BART) at densities above 40 DUA, assuming the projects could be designed in a manner that met community standards and expectations, and impacts appropriately mitigated. • Secondary/Contingency List: Given the provisions of SB 166, the City may wish to consider creating a secondary or contingency list of sites to be considered for re-zoning, if and when needed, to address No Net Loss provisions. 9 The total RHNA was 2,067 units,whereas the inventory listed sites available to provide 3,243 units, a buffer of I,176 units. Housing Element Update Planning Commission 11 of 13