Tag Archives: RHNA numbers

CEQA, Housing, Politics

LA rezoning could displace tenants from rent-controlled units

By  TRD Staff : therealdeal – excerpt

New building incentives would put rent-stabilized buildings at risk of demolition…

ACT-LA coalition’s Laura Raymond; mayor Karen Bass

A Los Angeles plan to rezone multifamily housing could put tenants in rent-controlled apartments on the curb.

A Citywide Housing Incentive Program ordinance to be heard by the City Council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee on Tuesday would supercharge building incentives for developers while displacing tenants in older units, the Los Angeles Times reported.

The proposed legislation would give builders a break on height and parking if they include a certain percentage of affordable units and the property is near transit, a major street and jobs and schools.

Projects that are 100 percent affordable would be eligible for incentives across a wider part of the city.

The incentives would apply in single-family zones only if a property is owned by a public agency or a faith-based organization, which accounts for 1 percent of the city’s single-family lots, according to the Times.

Instead, most of the parcels that fall under the proposed development incentives are in residential neighborhoods zoned for apartments…(more)

RELATED:

Audit finds flaws in state’s housing allocation goals
SANDAG Board of Diretors Meeting (March 22, 2024)

deregulated housing bills, Housing

The State’s RHNA Housing Quota days are numbered

By Bob Silvestri : marinpost – excerpt

The State’s unrealistic, dysfunctional housing regulations demand that cities and counties “build” more housing, even though 98% of California’s cities and counties don’t build any housing: never have/never will. But, for all the anti-NIMBY, gavel pounding, and stomping of feet the state’s “trickle-down-the market will solve everything” approach has been an utter failure.

Let me repeat that. The state’s approach to increasing affordable housing has been an utter failure.

New ideas have been suggested but the state continues to double down on failure. A day of reckoning is approaching.

Over the past 15 years that the state has added regulations on top of regulations, penalties on top of penalties, and even resorted to having a special task force suing municipalities for Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) compliance, California housing production today (about 1 new house for every 656 people with a population of 39.4 million) is worse, on a per capita basis, than it was when all this started with the passage of SB 375 in 2008 (about 1 new home built for every 610 people in 2008 with a population of 36.3 million). And it’s a lot less than we were building 40 years ago (about 1 new home per 265 people with a population 23.8 million).

In other words, we’re building less housing today than 40 years ago…(more)

Housing

State demands SF figure out how to fund enough affordable housing

If their plan is inadequate, the city could lose local control and funds
If you think approving a project in San Francisco is difficult, try approving a plan encompassing 82,000 units. That’s how much the state is mandating San Francisco to build within eight years, and city planners are attempting to meet the 2031 goal while balancing the interests of marginalized communities. One major problem looms: Money.

“The resources aren’t there to get to what we are being asked to do by the state,” said Planning Director Rich Hillis at a Planning Commission meeting Thursday.

That’s a problem. Thanks to new laws, localities that fail to submit plans that meet the state’s requirements could lose local control on projects and affordable housing funding…(more)

Even the SF Planning Commissioners are feeling pinched now. Too much demand on cities to grow beyond our capacity.
Too many questions remain unanswered and we are getting tired of the constant stress and pressures. Are we to understand that not only is the city required to entitle thousands of new units of housing (This somewhat depends on property owners bringing projects to be entitled) but, cities must now pay to build the housing, or sell bonds to pay? Does this mean that to live in this state we must agree to rising taxes, housing costs, gas prices, food and utility prices? When do the voters revolt and what does that look like?