5 - Laserfiche WebLink

Planning Commission Page 9 of 10 AB 2334 (Wicks) This bill would modify State Density Bonus law to additional height (up to three additional stories, and 33 feet), and unlimited density for 100 percent affordable housing projects4 when located in “very low vehicle miles traveled (VMT) areas” as defined. Similar provisions exist today in State law for projects located within 1/2 miles of major transit but would expand the applicability of those provisions to these additional “low VMT” areas. The bill defines “Very low VMT area” as an urbanized area where the existing residential development generates vehicle miles traveled per capita that is below 85 percent of either regional VMT per capita, or city VMT per capita. Impacts and Implications The above-noted existing provisions of State Density Bonus law were used by the recently approved project at 4884 Harrison Street to achieve much higher height and density than allowed by its zoning. Should similar projects be proposed within areas determined to be “Very low VM,T” they would similarly be able to take advantage of the additional height and density allowed by AB 2334. The extent to which additional areas of Pleasanton would meet the definition would depend on the geography used for comparison. It is noted that use of a Countywide VMT per capita baseline would yield relatively fewer “low VMT” areas than if a citywide VMT per capita baseline is used, since Pleasanton, citywide, has a high VMT per capita compared to Alameda County as a whole.5 Given the community concern over the Harrison Street project, the potential for there to be more qualifying areas to receive these height and density bonuses is of significant concern. However, such concern is also tempered to some degree by the fact that a project also has to be 100 percent affordable to qualify, which will likely limit the number of such applications. CONCLUSIONS As noted, many of these laws are complex and still relatively new, meaning that they are untested through real-world project applications and interpretations. It has typically been the case that more clarity on particular laws emerges over time. And, as for past legislation, HCD has issued guidance to assist local jurisdictions with implementation – that guidance is still pending for the 2022 legislation. In terms of local actions, staff is working to revise application materials and handouts to reflect the recent body of State law, and to adjust its review procedures to reflect those requirements. Staff is not, at this time, recommending adoption of a local ordinance for implementation of AB 2011 and SB 6 - the law is still untested and with adoption of the ODS, staff believes the City is in a relatively good position to regulate new projects that may come forward under AB 2011 or SB 6 to the extent permissible by State la w. Looking forward, housing legislation remains a priority at the State level, with a large number of new housing bills proposed in the 2023 legislative session. As part of its legislative platform, the City Council has developed positions on many of these bills and has or will submit 4 At least 80% affordable to lower-income households, and no more than 20% affordable to moderate-income households. 5 It is noted that the bill states that either a City or county per capita baseline may be used but is not specific as to wheth er it is the City, or the developer, who “selects” the relevant baseline.