On September 29, 2017, Governor Brown signed into law a 15-bill housing package. A few of the key components, including approval streamlining, are summarized below. The housing package did not include AB 915, which would have authorized the City and County of San Francisco to impose local inclusionary requirements on bonus units created under the State Density Bonus Law. San Francisco adopted legislation in August that imposes inclusionary housing requirements on bonus units in the form of a fee, and the Legislature’s failure to pass AB 915 creates uncertainty about its enforceability.
Barring any last-minute surprises, the Board of Supervisors will finally adopt compromise inclusionary housing legislation on July 18th that would, as shown in our summary comparison chart, make many major changes to the City’s existing program. The key provisions of the legislation affecting large projects with 25 or more residential units can be found in our prior blog post on this topic.
Recent noteworthy changes, including an important change to existing grandfathering protections for certain pipeline projects, are summarized below.
The Land Use and Transportation Committee of the Board of Supervisors is now scheduled to consider compromise inclusionary housing legislation on June 12th, following a continuance at the Committee’s June 5th hearing. As shown in our summary comparison chart, the legislation would generally retain existing grandfathering protections as to the total percentage of affordable units for certain pipeline projects, but would make many other major changes to the City’s existing program.
As reported in our prior blog post, Assemblymember Phil Ting (D – San Francisco) introduced amendments to the State Density Bonus law (AB 915) that would specifically require all local jurisdictions to impose their local inclusionary housing requirements on density bonus units, unless the jurisdiction expressly exempts them by ordinance.
We reported in December that State Senator Scott Wiener marked his first day in state office by introducing legislation (SB 35) to address barriers to housing production. Senator Wiener has introduced amendments to SB 35 that would create a streamlined, ministerial (i.e., not triggering CEQA) approval process for certain infill projects in localities that (1) fall short on regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) production goals, or (2) fail to provide annual housing production reports to the State for two consecutive years before the infill project’s application. SB 35 has been passed by the Senate Transportation and Housing Committee, and is now before the Governance and Finance Committee for further consideration.
Assemblymember Phil Ting (D – San Francisco) introduced new amendments to the State Density Bonus law on March 15, 2017 that would specifically require local jurisdictions to impose their local inclusionary housing requirements on density bonus units, unless the jurisdiction expressly exempts them by ordinance.
On February 7th, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the implementing ordinance for San Francisco’s Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. Pending the Mayor’s approval, the TDM Program will take effect in March. What does this mean for project sponsors?
Developers must now incorporate TDM features into their projects, chosen from a menu of options in the City’s adopted TDM Program Standards. As the number of on-site parking spaces proposed for a project increases, developers must include more TDM features such as bicycle parking and amenities, car-share parking, and vanpool programs.
Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) space is a hot commodity in San Francisco. Over the past few years, numerous organizations, policymakers, and elected officials have been engaged in efforts to preserve existing and create new PDR, community, and arts spaces, particularly in SoMa. Supervisor Kim, who previously sponsored the moratorium on conversion of PDR space in SoMa that expired in October, has sponsored Proposition X for the November ballot. Prop X would impose a conditional use and on-site replacement requirement for many new projects or changes of use that displace PDR, Institutional Community, or Arts Activities uses.
Members of the Board of Supervisors have proposed two important Propositions for the November ballot that would amend the City Charter and shift authority over certain City agencies and Departments from the Mayor’s Office to the Board of Supervisors.
On August 4, the San Francisco Planning Commission took two actions to move forward the establishment of a citywide Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program designed to shift San Franciscans out of cars and onto sidewalks, bicycles and public transit. The Planning Commission recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve an ordinance creating the citywide TDM Program, and simultaneously adopted TDM Program Standards to take effect if the Board of Supervisors approves the TDM Program ordinance.