Santa Barbara County In-Lieu Fee Update Report. Submitted to: The County of Santa Barbara. Submitted by: Bay Area Economics (BAE)

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Santa Barbara County In-Lieu Fee Update Report. Submitted to: The County of Santa Barbara. Submitted by: Bay Area Economics (BAE)"

Transcription

1 Santa Barbara County In-Lieu Fee Update Report Submitted to: The County of Santa Barbara Submitted by: Bay Area Economics (BAE) June 2004

2 Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary...i 2 Introduction Purpose of Report Organization of Report Study Methodology Existing Conditions Current In-Lieu Fee Calculation Formula Proposed Inclusionary Housing Program Market Trends In-Lieu Fee Case Studies Santa Cruz County Monterey County City of Santa Rosa Lessons Learned In-Lieu Fee Analysis Methodology Prototype Projects In-Lieu Fee Basis Options Financial Feasibility Analysis Linking In-Lieu Fee to Size or Sale Price of Market-Rate Unit Updating the In-Lieu Fee Conclusions and Recommendations In-Lieu Fee Basis Small Projects Updating In-Lieu Fee Appendix A: Residential Real Estate Market Trends Appendix B: Affordable Housing Sale Price Calculator Appendix C: Prototype Residential Projects - Baseline Fees Appendix D: Affordability Gap Analysis Appendix E: Option 1 Financial Feasibility Analysis Appendix F: Option 2 Financial Feasibility Analysis Appendix G: Option 3 Financial Feasibility Analysis Appendix H: Application of Fee Basis by Sale Price and Unit Size...91

3 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Purpose of Report The County of Santa Barbara is currently updating the policies and programs outlined in its Housing Element. As part of this process, the County seeks to refine the methodology for calculating the affordable housing in-lieu fee associated with the County s Inclusionary Housing Program. The County contracted with Bay Area Economics (BAE) to review the current in-lieu fee calculation formula, study other methods, and provide options to the County that take into account the growing need for affordable housing in Santa Barbara County and the fee s financial impact on local development projects. In addition, the revised fee should account for varying market conditions in the County s five Housing Market Areas (HMAs), and address the impacts associated with the ongoing construction of large homes over 5,000 square feet. Homes over 5,000 square feet generate a need for service workers, and as single-unit projects are currently not required to participate in the Inclusionary Housing Program. 1.2 Study Methodology The methodology used to prepare this report included the following steps: Initial meeting with County of Santa Barbara staff to review the County s current inclusionary program and issues. Review of background materials including the Housing Element, Housing Element Implementation Guidelines, and other relevant documents. Preparation of case studies of three comparable jurisdictions with inclusionary housing programs and an in-lieu fee option. Consulting with for-profit and non-profit developers, real estate industry representatives, affordable housing advocates, and County staff to discuss case study jurisdictions, options for a new in-lieu fee formula, and assumptions for BAE s analysis. Collection of detailed development costs for residential projects in Santa Barbara County via interviews with the for-profit and non-profit development community and County staff. This data was used to develop sample pro-formas of residential projects in Santa Barbara County, which were then tested for sensitivity to various in-lieu fees. Preparation of Administrative Draft Report. Review of Administrative Draft Report by County. Review of Draft Report by market rate and affordable developers, real estate industry representatives, and affordable housing advocates. Preparation of Final Report. 1.3 In-Lieu Fee Analysis i

4 BAE analyzed three possible bases for the Santa Barbara County in-lieu fee. These fee bases and the associated per unit in-lieu fees are as follows: Option 1: Cost to Build an Affordable Housing Unit. This fee basis includes the total development cost to build an affordable unit off-site, and incorporates all land, hard, and soft costs. South Coast: $442,000 Santa Ynez: $338,000 Santa Maria: $265,000 Lompoc: $292,000 Montecito subarea: $657,000 Option 2: Affordability Gap to Purchase Below-Market Rate Unit. This is the fee basis currently used in Santa Barbara County, and calculates the in-lieu fee as the cost to build an affordable unit less the sale price that a household can afford at each HCD-defined income level. The fee ranges according to the target income group of the unit to be replaced. South Coast: $111,000 to $338,000 Santa Ynez: $7,000 to $235,000 Santa Maria: $37,000 to $161,000 Lompoc: $64,000 to $189,000 Montecito subarea: $325,000 to $553,000 Option 3: Cost to Subsidize the Construction of Affordable Unit. This fee basis calculates the fee basis according to the amount of money the County typically contributes to leverage the construction of an affordable unit. According to the County of Santa Barbara Housing and Community Development Department, the County contributes $80,000 to leverage the construction of an affordable unit in the Lompoc and Santa Maria HMAs and $100,000 in the South Coast and Santa Ynez HMAs. However, these fees typically leverage the construction of units serving very low and low income households. Little to no subsidy is available for moderate and workforce income units. To help counter this issue, the County could set the in-lieu fees for moderate and workforce income units equal to the full cost to construct these units. Assuming the County adopts this approach, referred to in this report as Option 3B, the following fee range would apply: South Coast: $110,000 to $442,000 Santa Ynez: $110,000 to $338,000 Santa Maria: $80,000 to $265,000 Lompoc: $80,000 to $292,000 Montecito: $100,000 to $657, Financial Feasibility Analysis BAE conducted a financial feasibility analysis of each fee basis to assess the fees impact on residential projects in the County. The fees were entered into a series of pro-formas reflecting ii

5 current and planned residential patterns in each HMA. For the purposes of this report, a 10 percent profit as a percentage of development cost is considered acceptable. This analysis found that all the fee basis options achieve the 10.0 percent threshold under the current and planned prototypes. 1.5 Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the advantages and disadvantages of each fee, this analysis suggests Options 2 or 3B would be the most appropriate to use in Santa Barbara County. Both options have a number of drawbacks. Option 2 has decreasing fees for higher income units, which have fewer state and federal subsidy programs available to them, and therefore require more County support. Option 2 also cannot be effectively applied to workforce income units in Lompoc, as these households can afford the full construction cost of an affordable unit. To address these concerns, a single average fee could be used across each income category. Option 3B s primary drawback is that it has lower fees for very low and low income units than Option 2, and therefore generates less funding for these income groups. Nevertheless, both options are financially feasible, vary by HMA, are tied to the cost to build affordable housing in the County, and would be effective increases over the current fee schedule. To address the fact that larger homes generate a greater need for service workers and affordable housing, the County can apply the in-lieu fee according to the size of the market rate units. A standard per unit fee, set to the fee basis, would apply to projects with the typical unit size in an HMA, as described by the prototype projects developed for this report. Developments with smaller or larger homes would pay a lower and higher per unit fee, respectively. This approach incentivizes smaller, more compact development patterns which preserve land for affordable housing and other uses. iii

6 2 Introduction 2.1 Purpose of Report The County of Santa Barbara is currently updating the policies and programs outlined in its Housing Element. As part of this process, the County seeks to refine the methodology for calculating the affordable housing in-lieu fee associated with the County s Inclusionary Housing Program. County of Santa Barbara staff have expressed a need to update the current in-lieu fee calculation system for several reasons: The current formula reflects outdated cost assumptions from 2000, the last time the base fees were updated. Staff report that the existing system requires a significant amount of labor and research to update the fees annually. As a result, fee levels often remain out-of-date, offering unintended incentives for developers to pay the artificially low fees instead of constructing the inclusionary units. Out-of-date fees also fail to keep pace with the County s rapidly escalating home sale prices, which drive up land values and indirectly increase the cost to develop affordable housing. Staff indicate that the current formula does not account for the larger demand for service workers and affordable housing generated by larger luxury homes. The County contracted with Bay Area Economics (BAE) to review the current in-lieu fee calculation formula, study other methods, and provide options to the County that take into account the growing need for affordable housing in Santa Barbara County and the fee s financial impact on local development projects. In addition, the revised fee should account for varying market conditions in the County s five Housing Market Areas (HMAs), and address the impacts associated with the ongoing construction of large homes over 5,000 square feet. Homes over 5,000 square feet generate a need for service workers, and, as single-unit projects, are currently not required to participate in the Inclusionary Housing Program. 2.2 Organization of Report The Santa Barbara County In-Lieu Fee Update Report begins with a review of existing conditions in the County, including the present fee calculation methodology and current residential market trends. Next, the report profiles three other California jurisdictions with in-lieu fee calculation formulas that inform the Santa Barbara County fee update. Finally, the report summarizes the methodology and findings of the in-lieu fee analysis, and outlines various options available to the County. 2.3 Study Methodology The methodology used to prepare this report included the following steps: 1

7 Initial meeting with County of Santa Barbara staff to review the County s current inclusionary program and issues. Review of background materials including the Housing Element, Housing Element Implementation Guidelines, and other relevant documents. Preparation of case studies of three comparable jurisdictions with inclusionary housing programs and an in-lieu fee option. Consulting with for-profit and non-profit developers, real estate industry representatives, affordable housing advocates, and County staff to discuss case study jurisdictions, options for a new in-lieu fee formula, and assumptions for BAE s analysis. Collection of detailed development costs for residential projects in Santa Barbara County via interviews with the for-profit and non-profit development community and County staff. This data was used to develop sample pro-formas of residential projects in Santa Barbara County, which were then tested for sensitivity to various in-lieu fees. Preparation of Administrative Draft Report. Review of Administrative Draft Report by County. Review of Draft Report by market rate and affordable developers, real estate industry representatives, and affordable housing advocates. Preparation of Final Report. 2

8 3 Existing Conditions This section describes the current in-lieu fee calculation formula used by the County of Santa Barbara, and presents current housing market data for the County as a whole, as well as the South Coast, Santa Ynez, Santa Maria, and Lompoc HMAs Current In-Lieu Fee Calculation Formula In-Lieu Fee Overview Under the County of Santa Barbara s current Inclusionary Housing Program (adopted in 1993), for-sale residential project that create five or more new units must reserve a portion of the total units for households earning up to 110 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). 2 Each HMA has a particular set of inclusionary options ranging from five to 20 percent of the total number of units in a project and targeting various income levels. For the following types of projects, a developer may pay fees, develop the units off-site, or propose a combination of both options in-lieu of providing the inclusionary units on-site: Residential developments on properties designated or zoned at densities of 4.6 or fewer units per acre. Lot-sale subdivision applicants creating five or more lots. All projects in the Santa Maria and Lompoc HMAs. Projects that generate the need for three or fewer affordable units based on the maximum inclusionary requirement for that particular HMA. Should the developer choose to satisfy the inclusionary requirements through the in-lieu fee, the County places the collected fees in its Affordable Housing Trust Fund, and directs the funds towards the development of affordable units or special needs facilities. Fees must be used within the HMA in which they are collected In-Lieu Fee Calculation Methodology The base in-lieu fees are set according to the difference between the average development cost of an affordable unit in a particular HMA and the maximum affordable sale price of a two-bedroom unit. The maximum affordable sale price is set by the County, based on state HCD-defined income limits and standard financing terms. Per unit base fees were last updated in 2000, using the average inclusionary requirement for a particular HMA in the calculation. The following shows the current per unit base fees by HMA: 3 1 The Cuyama HMA is exempt from the County s Inclusionary Housing Program and in-lieu fees, as its affordable housing needs are currently being met. 2 The County s AMI for various household sizes is set annually by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). 3 The Cuyama HMA is meeting the affordable housing need in all income categories and therefore has no inclusionary requirement. 3

9 South Coast HMA (based on 12.5 percent requirement) - $74,115 Santa Ynez HMA (based on 12.5 percent requirement) - $37,342 Santa Maria HMA (based on 7.5 percent requirement) - $53,150 Lompoc HMA (based on 5.0 percent requirement) - $44,380 To determine the total in-lieu fees for a project, the following formula applies: [Total Units in Project] x [Average Inclusionary Requirement for HMA] x [Base In-Lieu Fee] = Total In-Lieu Fee The following demonstrates the application of the in-lieu fee formula in each HMA, using a 30- unit project as an example: South Coast HMA 30 units x 12.5% x $74,115 = $277,931 Santa Ynez HMA 30 units x 12.5% x $37,342 = $140,033 Santa Maria HMA 30 units x 7.5% x $53,150 = $119,588 Lompoc HMA 30 units x 5.0% x $44,380 = $66,570 The County allows a reduction of in-lieu fees for projects with fewer than 13 units. This policy permits smaller projects to pay between 20 and 90 percent of the applicable base fee, reflecting the County s approach to providing affordable housing while assisting developers of smaller residential projects. In cases where the inclusionary requirement results in a fractional unit (e.g., 15% of 30 units leads to 4.5 affordable units), the developer may round up the required number of units to the nearest whole number or pay a pro-rated in-lieu fee for the fractional unit. 3.2 Proposed Inclusionary Housing Program Although this study only addresses a small component of the County s inclusionary housing program, the program s requirements do impact the assumptions used in-lieu fee analysis found later in this report. As such, this section briefly outlines the proposed changes to the County s inclusionary housing program, as found in the Housing Element Appendix E. In the South Coast and Santa Ynez HMAs, for-sale residential developments of two or more net new lots or units must reserve: Five percent of units for very low income households; Five percent of units for low income households; 10 percent of units for moderate income households; and 10 percent of units for workforce households. 4 4 Very low income = Up to 50% of AMI, Low income = 51 to 80% of AMI, Moderate income = 81 to 120% of AMI, Workforce income 121 to 200% of AMI 4

10 At each income level, developers may donate land instead of providing the units on-site. In addition, payment of in-lieu fees would be allowed to satisfy the requirements for very low and low income units. Developers would be required to show infeasibility to pay the fees for moderate and workforce units. A density increase is proposed for building moderate and/or workforce units on-site. In the Santa Maria and Lompoc HMAs, the same requirements apply for very low, low, and moderate income households. However, no workforce-serving units are required, as the market is currently meeting this need. The inclusionary housing program requirements have not yet been finalized and potential for change still exists. This in-lieu fee update will be considered by decision makers in conjunction with the proposed inclusionary program requirements. For the purposes of this analysis, the proposed inclusionary housing requirements as set forth by the Housing Element Appendix E are assumed. 3.3 Market Trends This section analyzes residential market trends as a general indicator of the need for affordable housing in Santa Barbara County. Housing price data also offers a view on the health of the local market and the relative price differences between each HMA, which both serve as useful benchmarks when assessing the financial feasibility of residential development projects in Section 5. More detailed tables regarding sale prices and rents in the County and each HMA are contained in Appendix A. Table 1 contains a distribution of all full and verified home sales in Santa Barbara County for two sample periods: September/October 2002 and September/October Home sale data is reported by First American Real Estate Solutions (FARES), a private subscription service that compiles County Assessor s data. 5 Santa Barbara County as a whole saw an increase in the median sale price for single-family homes between the 2002 and 2003 sample periods, with prices increasing 17 percent over the year from $310,000 to $361,500. At the same time, however, in looking at full and verified sales, volume dropped 18 percent between sample periods. As shown in Table 1, condominium sales in Santa Barbara County showed even greater price increases. The median sale price for condominium units in the County increased 46 percent between 2002 and 2003, to $382,000. Unlike with single-family homes, the number of condominiums sold actually increased from 130 to 137 between sample periods. Although the extreme price difference between the sample periods is at least partly due to some sampling error, these trends suggest a growing market for condominiums as single-family home values escalate 5 County Assessor s data for home sales in Santa Barbara County showed significantly lower median prices than California Association of Realtors (CAR) data for similar time periods. This inconsistency may be attributable to the fact that BAE only included full and verified sales in this analysis, which could exclude higher-priced homes. As a result, comparisons between FARES and CAR data prove problematic. 5

11 beyond the reach of many households. Although condominiums in most areas command lower sale prices than single-family homes, almost 60 percent of the condominiums sold in the County during this sample period were located in the high-cost South Coast HMA. In contrast, almost 70 percent of single-family home sales occurred in the more low-cost Santa Maria and Lompoc HMAs. As a result, the median price for condominiums in the County actually exceeded the median price for single-family homes during the 2003 sample period. County market trends generally parallel statewide trends between 2002 and Home sale prices in California saw a 15 percent increase over the year, while sales volume fell 3.9 percent from mid-2002 to mid The County s strong and rapidly escalating sale prices point to the growing need for affordable housing in the area and suggest that market rate residential developments can absorb a greater inlieu fee and inclusionary requirement. In addition, the data shows the need for an in-lieu fee which keeps pace with increasing values, and can be updated relatively easily on an annual basis. 6 As reported by the California Association of Realtors Mid-Year Housing Report,

12 Table 1: Home Sales in Santa Barbara County, September and October 2002, 2003 (a) Single Family Residences Number % of Number % of of Units Total of Units Total Less than $200, % Less than $200, % $200,000 to $299, % $200,000 to $299, % $300,000 to $399, % $300,000 to $399, % $400,000 to $499, % $400,000 to $499, % $500,000 to $599, % $500,000 to $599, % $600,000 to $699, % $600,000 to $699, % $700,000 to $799, % $700,000 to $799, % $800,000 to $899, % $800,000 to $899, % $900,000 to $999, % $900,000 to $999, % $1,000,000 to $1,999, % $1,000,000 to $1,999, % $2,000, % $2,000, % Total % Total % Median Sale Price $310,000 Median Sale Price $361,500 Average Sale Price $375,041 Average Sale Price $465,967 Avg. Square Feet (b) 1,463 Avg. Square Feet (c) 1,499 Avg. Price per SF (b) $ Avg. Price per SF (c) $ Condominiums Number % of Number % of of Units Total of Units Total $100,000 to $200, % $100,000 to $200, % $200,000 to $299, % $200,000 to $299, % $300,000 to $399, % $300,000 to $399, % $400,000 to $499, % $400,000 to $499, % $500,000 to $599, % $500,000 to $599, % $600,000 to $699, % $600,000 to $699, % $700,000 to $799, % $700,000 to $799, % $800, % $800, % Total % Total % Median Sale Price $261,250 Median Sale Price $382,000 Average Sale Price $324,569 Average Sale Price $398,055 Avg. Square Feet (d) 1,156 Avg. Square Feet (e) 1,185 Avg. Price per SF (d) $ Avg. Price per SF (e) $ Notes: (a) Represents all full and verified Home sales in Santa Barbara County from September to October 17, (b) Includes only records where square footage was available (281 of 547 records) (c) Includes only records where square footage was available (270 of 450 records) (d) Includes only records where square footage was available (38 of 130 records) (e) Includes only records where square footage was available (37 of 137 records) Sources: First American Real Estate Solutions, 2003; BAE, 2004.

13 4 In-Lieu Fee Case Studies This section profiles the inclusionary housing and in-lieu fee programs for three other California jurisdictions. BAE selected case studies with varying in-lieu fee formulas that would inform the County of Santa Barbara s fee update process. BAE also included case studies of jurisdictions with housing markets comparable to Santa Barbara County. Specifically, BAE selected Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties because both areas face rapidly escalating home values, and encompass areas with distinct housing market conditions. Santa Rosa s in-lieu fee program was included because it calculates the fee according to the size of the market rate unit. This strategy may help address Santa Barbara County staff s concerns regarding the impact of large luxury homes on the need for affordable housing. Table 2 summarizes these case studies. 4.1 Santa Cruz County Measure J, approved by Santa Cruz County voters in 1978, requires all residential projects in the County to reserve 15 percent of units for low and moderate income households. As a result of this law, approximately 750 units of affordable housing have been constructed in unincorporated Santa Cruz County. In-lieu of constructing the inclusionary units on-site, developers may pay a fee for each affordable unit required. As shown below, the in-lieu fee is based on the average price of the market rate units. Average Sale Price of Market Rate Units Per Unit In-Lieu Fee (as % of average sale price) Up to and including $600,000 40% $600,001 to $999,999 45% $1 million or more 50% For projects using the in-lieu fee alternative, the minimum fee shall be no less than $200,000 per whole affordable unit. In addition, fractional units must pay a pro-rated amount based on the inlieu fee for a complete unit. This in-lieu fee calculation formula was implemented two years ago when the County found that housing prices had escalated dramatically, thereby driving up land values and the cost to produce affordable housing. Basing the in-lieu fee on the sale price of market rate homes allows for the fee to adjust as market rate sales prices rise. In addition, a sale-price based fee helps account for the County s varying housing markets. To pay the in-lieu fees, residential developers must set up an escrow account during the predevelopment stage, based on the estimated prices of the market rate units in the project and the resulting in-lieu fees. As sales occur on market rate units and the actual price is determined, the fee is calculated and paid out of the escrow account. Fees are re-calculated and paid as market rate unit sales occur. The escrow account assures the County that the project maintains adequate 8

14 reserves for in-lieu fees, and allows developers to pencil in that cost into their pro-formas early in the development process. As another alternative to constructing the inclusionary units on-site, developers may purchase an existing unit in the County and re-sell it at an affordable sale price. The County requires a similar number of bedrooms as the units in the market rate project. County staff, based on their own calculations, report that this option is more financially attractive to developers, and still leads to the provision of the same number of affordable units as if they had been constructed on-site. As a relatively new system, County staff report that no developer has opted to use either the inlieu fee or the replacement unit approach. Since these programs inception, developers have either provided the affordable units on-site or dedicated land to non-profits for the construction of affordable housing. County staff indicate that the developer s decision on whether to build the affordable units on-site is often based on the nature of the market rate units. For example, developers of high-end projects often choose an alternative to construction because they feel the affordable units negatively impact the marketability of luxury homes. 4.2 Monterey County Since 1980, the County of Monterey has required all new residential development to comply with the County s Inclusionary Housing Program, which requires at least 15 percent of units be reserved for low and moderate income households. Between 1980 and 2000, the program generated a total of 777 affordable units. The County s Inclusionary Housing Program allows projects with three to four units to satisfy their requirements through payment of an in-lieu fee. In addition, while projects with five or more units must typically produce the inclusionary units on-site, in rare and limited circumstances, a project with five or more units may meet its inclusionary obligations by paying in-lieu fees. To do so, the developer must conclusively demonstrate that provision of on-site inclusionary units is infeasible due to specific characteristics of the development site or other factors. Until recently, developers were not required to construct inclusionary units on-site, and most opted to pay the in-lieu fee instead. As a result, between 1980 and 2000, the County collected $5.3 million in in-lieu fees, which were directed to the County s Affordable Housing Trust Fund for the subsidy of other affordable housing projects. The current requirement reflects the County s new desire to prioritize the construction of affordable units alongside market rate units. Since 1980, the County has updated its fee calculation system a number of times, and is currently in the process of revising its fees once more. The new fee calculation system is based on the difference between the cost of developing a market rate home and the sale price affordable to a four-person household earning 100 percent of AMI. Base fees are calculated for a five-unit project, and the per unit fees derived from this calculation are applied to a project s total number 9

15 of units to determine the total in-lieu fee. Projects with three to four units pay a pro-rated fraction of the base fee. To take into account the wide variation in land costs in Monterey County, two separate in-lieu fees are used; one covers the Greater Monterey Peninsula and Coast Planning Areas, and the other accounts for the remaining Planning Areas. Development costs are calculated assuming a cost of $182/square foot which includes all hard and soft costs, but excludes land. In the Greater Monterey Peninsula and Coast Planning Areas, land costs are assumed to represent 50 percent of the development cost. In all remaining Planning Areas, land costs are assumed to comprise 30 percent of development cost. Although per unit fees must still be finalized, County staff expect the fees for the Greater Monterey Peninsula and Coast Planning Areas to fall around $100,000 per unit, and fees for other Planning Areas to be approximately $40,000 to $50,000 per unit. County of Monterey staff plan to update the new in-lieu fee annually, but have not yet established a system for this process. The update would require revising the affordable sale price, as well as the construction cost of market rate homes. For the former, the County can simply revise mortgage financing assumptions and calculate the affordable home price for households at each HCD-defined income level. HCD income limits are released on an annual basis. For the latter, County staff report that they may update construction cost assumptions based on interviews with the local development community, or simply apply an inflation index to costs and conduct a more detailed update every four or five years. 4.3 City of Santa Rosa The City of Santa Rosa s Housing Allocation Plan (HAP) was first established in It has undergone several revisions since then, with most of the changes designed to expand the original plan s ability to provide affordable housing. The program has shown limited success at producing actual affordable units; in 11 years, just over 60 affordable ownership units and 26 rental units are directly attributable to HAP. However, the City has collected several million dollars through in-lieu fees which have subsidized the financing and construction of affordable units by local non-profit housing developers. The HAP allows for inclusionary units to be located on- or off-site. If the allocated units are to be located on-site, 15 percent of the total project must be reserved as affordable housing. If the allocated units are to be located off-site, the requirement rises to 20 percent. The HAP does not specify a minimum project size trigger for the construction of inclusionary units. Even small projects are required to contribute to the program by paying the in-lieu fee. City staff do not report any issues regarding the application of the in-lieu fee to small projects. However, it should be noted that Santa Rosa s in-lieu fees are relatively low, and may therefore be effectively absorbed by small projects. An in-lieu fee option is also available for projects of less than 15 gross acres. Historically, almost all developers with projects under fifteen acres (which includes most of the projects in Santa 10

16 Rosa) have chosen to pay the in-lieu fee. A percentage of the in-lieu fee must also be paid for fractional affordable units. In the summer of 2002, the fee schedule was adjusted to its current format, which is based on the difference between the cost to build an affordable unit and the sale price affordable to various HCD-defined income levels. This difference is considered the maximum fee that can be charged. The maximum fee is then applied according to a sliding scale to the square footage of the average market rate unit in the project. Larger units pay closer to the maximum fee amount, and smaller units pay a smaller percentage of the maximum fee. In practice, units under 900 square feet have no fee attached to their construction. Units of 910 square feet are charged a fee of $0.82 per square foot, and the scale slides up to a maximum of $7.35 per square foot for homes that are larger than 4,500 square feet. Staff report that fees typically range from about $8,500 to $10,000 per unit for single-family homes, which comprise the bulk of new development in the city. The in-lieu fees are adjusted annually according to the percent change in the Engineering News- Record Construction Cost Index for San Francisco. The collected in-lieu funds are available only for the development of housing in Santa Rosa that are affordable to low and very low income households. The City has had significant success in applying in-lieu fees toward the construction of affordable rental units. From 1999 to 2002 alone, subsidies of $3.9 million dollars collected from in-lieu fees were distributed to non-profit developers, accounting for 48 percent of the total subsidies used to construct 410 affordable rental units. Despite this success, City staff report that the use of in-lieu fees in this manner tends to encourage the construction of projects that are solely targeted as affordable housing, thereby geographically concentrating lower income households rather than dispersing inclusionary units throughout market rate projects. This situation sometimes results in more focused community opposition to the construction of affordable housing. However, staff indicate that non-profit developers are generally in favor of for-profit developers opting to pay in-lieu fees because it augments the total amount of subsidies available to affordable housing construction by non-profit developers. 4.4 Lessons Learned The basis for an in-lieu fee is typically linked to the cost to house a low income household. In-lieu fees are meant to replace an on-site unit, and should therefore reflect the cost for a household to purchase a unit or the cost to construct, or subsidize the construction of, an affordable unit. Each of these possible fee bases implies a different fee amount, which Santa Barbara County should consider as it sets its own in-lieu fee. A number of strategies exist for annually updating the in-lieu fee, assuming the fee basis requires current cost data. First, a jurisdiction may develop a streamlined system for regularly interviewing members of the development community, including lenders and non-profit developers, to update costs and other necessary assumptions. Using a simple static pro-forma, the jurisdiction could then input revised assumptions to estimate the current cost to develop an affordable housing unit. 11

17 As a less labor intensive method, cost indexes such as the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index or indexes from the R.S. Means Square Foot Costs Estimating Manual may be used to revise the fees annually. To assure that the in-lieu fee accurately reflects local costs and market dynamics over time, a jurisdiction can perform a more detailed cost analysis every three to five years or in conjunction with Housing Element updates. A fee system like the one used by the County of Santa Cruz does not necessarily require annual updates. This approach allows simple in-lieu fee calculations for both the County and developer. However, this methodology is not directly linked to a specific in-lieu fee basis (i.e., the cost to replace the lost affordable unit), and therefore lacks a certain measure of precision over time. Given Santa Barbara County staff s concerns regarding the ease of updating the fee and its ability to keep track with local housing sale prices, staff should consider using a construction cost index to update its fees annually. As a drawback, this method would not account for increasing land costs, a major factor in the County s housing markets. A more detailed fee update can be done in concert with Housing Element updates. The City of Santa Barbara has adopted an alternate approach to its in-lieu fee that avoids the challenge of annually updating unit development costs. The City sets the in-lieu fee according to the difference between (1) the development cost of a market rate condominium unit and (2) the affordable sale price to a low income household. The development cost of an affordable unit is simply set as the median sale price of a condominium unit in the City less 15 percent to reflect the developer s profit. While this methodology is less accurate than the methods described in this report, it is significantly easier to research and update. Using the market rate sale price as a measure for calculating in-lieu fees is feasible. However, this strategy does require additional steps, such as the possible creation of an escrow account during the entitlement process and the regular re-calculation of fees as market rate sales occur. The City of Palo Alto, which uses a sale price-based fee, includes a written agreement of the fee in a project s conditions of approval and subdivision agreement. Fees are collected at close of escrow and sent to the City by the escrow companies. County staff should weigh the pros and cons of this approach. A sale price-based approach does adjust for rising home prices and housing market variations. City of Palo Alto staff also report that the City occasionally receives greater fees than estimated for a particular project as sale prices rapidly escalate. However, this system does create a significant amount of additional labor for staff, depending on the number of residential developments occurring at any given time and how quickly they build out and sell units. Staff must track each project to assure that fees are collected as sales occur. In-lieu fees can also be based on the size of market rate units in the development. The City of Santa Rosa s program demonstrates one way of basing the in-lieu fee on the 12

18 average size of the market rate units in a project. The City of Santa Barbara also adopted a similar approach in its recently established inclusionary housing ordinance. This approach incentivizes the construction of smaller, more compact units, which can help preserve land for affordable housing and other uses. Creative options to on-site construction or in-lieu fee payments can offer developers more flexibility in fulfilling their inclusionary housing requirements. Santa Cruz County s replacement unit program, for example, achieves the goal of creating more affordable units, while apparently providing a more financially attractive strategy for developers. However, any alternatives to on-site construction, including the payment of in-lieu fees, compromises the social benefits of mixing market rate and affordable units. In addition, as noted by City of Santa Rosa staff, projects dedicated exclusively to affordable housing can encounter stronger neighborhood opposition, leading to a possible loss of affordable units. This finding suggests that Santa Barbara County should use in-lieu fees strategically, and balance the goals of creating mixed-income communities, providing as many affordable units as possible, and targeting deeper levels of affordability. Payment of in-lieu fees should be encouraged only if it achieves another positive impact. For example, allowing payment of in-lieu fees for very low and low income units can help leverage more construction by non-profit developers serving households well below Area Median Income. This benefit helps compensate for the fact that non-profits typically build below-market-rate projects that do not necessarily promote mixed income communities. Jurisdictions with varying housing markets should adjust their in-lieu fees to account for this trend. Monterey County, like Santa Barbara County, experiences much higher housing values in coastal areas. The County s in-lieu fee system recognizes this trend, and adjusts for higher land prices in the coastal areas. Likewise, Santa Cruz County s sale-price sensitive fees account for diverse market conditions throughout the County. Santa Barbara County s current Inclusionary Housing Program already takes its varying HMAs into account. The revised in-lieu fee program should also do the same. 13

19 Table 2: Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee Models Jurisdiction Year Enacted/ Updated In-Lieu Fee Permitted In-Lieu Fee Calculation Per Unit In-Lieu Fee Fees Raised Santa Barbara Co. 1981/2000 Properties zoned 4.6 or fewer units/acre Lot-sale subdivision applicants creating 5 or more lots All projects with up to 10% inclusionary requirement Projects that generate up to 3 inclusionary units Fractional units Development Cost of Affordable Unit - County-Specified Sale Price of Affordable Unit = In-Lieu fee Santa Ynez - $37,342 Lompoc - $44,380 Santa Maria - $53,150 South Coast - $74,115 Montecito - $357,335 Also varies by total number of units in project. Developments with fewer than 13 units have reduced fees. $1.9 million Santa Cruz Co. 1980/2003 Developer always has option to pay in-lieu fee. Also applies to fractional units % * Average Sale Price of Market Rate Units in Project = In-Lieu Fee Percentage varies according to sale prices of market rate homes in project. More costly homes require a higher percentage. Minimum of $200,000/unit. Minimum fee applies to projects utilizing the in-lieu fee alternative instead of constructing affordable units. $1.0 million since 2000 Monterey Co. 1980/2002 Typically only permitted in projects of 3-4 units, as of Also applies to fractional units. Development Cost of Average Market Rate Unit - County- Specified Sale Price of Affordable Unit] = In-Lieu Fee County in process of updating fee schedule. Anticipate $20,000 to $30,000 per unit in non-coast areas. Up to $100,000 in Coast areas. $5.3 million City of Santa Rosa 1992/2002 Permitted for projects smaller than 15 gross acres. This includes most projects in the City. Based on size of market rate units. Fee applied on a per sq.ft. basis. Sliding scale from $0 for projects up to 900 sq.ft. to $33,075 for 4,500 sq.ft. units. $3.9 million from 1999 to 2002 Applies to fractional units. Source: BAE, 2004.

20 5 In-Lieu Fee Analysis This section describes the methodology and findings of BAE s in-lieu fee analysis. It includes a description of three options for an in-lieu fee basis, the various pros and cons associated with each, and the resulting fees generated by each approach. In addition, prototype residential projects based on current and planned development in each of the HMAs are tested for financial sensitivity to the various fee options. 5.1 Methodology Meet with stakeholders. BAE met with County staff and members of the for-profit and non-profit development community to review their concerns, explore their reactions to various fee calculation methods, and discuss the assumptions associated with each of the residential prototypes developed for this analysis. Develop options for in-lieu fee basis. BAE, based on the case studies presented earlier in this report and additional research, formulated three alternative methods for calculating inclusionary housing in-lieu fees in Santa Barbara County. As part of this step, BAE also calculated the actual fees that would result from each of the three methodologies. Prepare residential development prototypes. BAE formulated a series of pro-formas representing current and expected development projects in the Santa Barbara County HMAs. BAE designed these models in consultation with local developers, industry representatives, and County staff. Developers and staff provided financial details associated with specific projects, which BAE then combined with independent research to construct a generic prototype. To determine appropriate market rate sale prices for the prototype projects, BAE interviewed local developers and conducted independent research of comparable projects in the County. Affordable sale prices were based on 2003 income limits, as defined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and standard financing terms. 7 Appendix B contains the affordable sale price calculations. Test prototypes for financial feasibility. As a final step, BAE tested each of the residential development prototypes for financial sensitivity to the various in-lieu fee options. This analysis seeks to determine if profit margins can be maintained at acceptable levels for each project type under the various in-lieu fee options. 7 Under the proposed inclusionary housing program, the County of Santa Barbara sets maximum sale prices for inclusionary units according to the following limits for each income category: Very low income 50% of AMI Low income 75% of AMI Moderate income 110% of AMI Workforce income 160% of AMI 15

21 5.2 Prototype Projects BAE developed two residential prototypes for each of the South Coast, Santa Ynez, Santa Maria, Lompoc HMAs and for the Montecito subregion. Table 3 presents development details for these prototypes, and Appendix C contains the full baseline pro-formas reflecting current in-lieu fees. The Cuyama HMA was excluded from this analysis, as little residential development is anticipated in this area, and the County s current and proposed inclusionary housing requirements do not include it. The first set of prototype projects ( current prototypes ) in each HMA reflects the type of development currently occurring in the County. The second set of prototypes ( planned prototypes ) models the type of development the County anticipates seeing in each of the HMAs, based on recent trends and changes to County housing policy. Specifically, the County aims to achieve greater residential densities throughout Santa Barbara County, in recognition of the area s dwindling land resources, the need for additional market rate and affordable units, and the environmental and social benefits associated with more compact development patterns. Note that in Montecito, no significant change in the development pattern is anticipated due to the geographic and service constraints in this area. Therefore, the planned prototype is identical to the current prototype. Unit density, sizes, market rate sale prices, and per unit land costs vary between current and planned prototypes. Market rate sale prices were assumed to be 10 percent lower for the planned prototypes, which have smaller unit sizes than the current prototypes. While actual projects contain a range of unit types, differing in the number of bedrooms, amenities, and price, the proformas in this analysis present an average number of bedrooms and price for each prototype. Please note that all analyses are in 2003 dollars. The prototypes reflect the County s Inclusionary Housing Program in two key ways. First, since the Program does not require inclusionary and market rate units to be identical, each prototype has varying cost assumptions for the market rate and affordable units. Secondly, the prototypes reflect the County s density increase policy, which allows developers who construct moderate and workforce income units on-site to receive a 20 percent density increase. In effect, the increase augments the site s total density, and allows developers to spread land costs across a greater number of units. The description of each residential prototype below contains the base number of units and base density, i.e., the project characteristics prior to the density increase. Table 3 summarizes the total number of units and total density for each prototype. It is important to note that while BAE made all attempts to develop sound assumptions, the analyses carry a margin of imprecision relative to specific real projects. On- and off-site improvement costs, construction costs, fees/permit costs, and unit configurations will vary from project to project. For these illustrative pro-formas, BAE estimated costs for a typical project through interviews with local developers and review of applicable County fee/permit schedules. 16

22 Table 3: Prototype Projects by Housing Market Area South Coast Santa Ynez Santa Maria Lompoc Montecito PROTOTYPE DETAILS Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Base Units (Including Affordable) Additional Mkt Rate Units (w/ Density Increase) (a) Total Units Base Density (Units/Acre) Total Density (with Density Increase) (Units/Acre) Development Size (Acres) Average Number Bedrooms Average Market Rate Unit Size (sq.ft.) 2,000 1,700 2,000 1,700 2,000 1,700 2,000 1,700 3,000 3,000 Average Affordable Unit Size (sq.ft.) 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Market Rate Sale Price $950,000 $800,000 $600,000 $540,000 $525,000 $472,500 $510,000 $459,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 South Coast Santa Ynez Santa Maria Lompoc Montecito DEVELOPMENT COSTS (b) Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Current Planned Land Per Unit $250,000 $225,000 $175,000 $150,000 $100,000 $100,000 $140,000 $125,000 $450,000 $450,000 Market Rate Building Costs/sq.ft. $100 $103 $68 $70 $65 $68 $65 $68 $120 $120 Affordable Building Costs/sq.ft. $55 $58 $55 $58 $55 $58 $55 $58 $55 $58 On and Off-Site Costs/Unit Permit & Fees/Unit Other Soft Costs (c) $50,000 $30,000 20% $45,000 $14,500 20% $45,000 $21,000 20% $45,000 $6,500 20% $50,000 $30,000 20% Total Development Cost Per Mkt Rate Unit $637,485 $609,179 $453,714 $419,197 $406,722 $394,681 $434,653 $405,468 $1,124,831 $1,124,831 Notes: (a) 20 percent density bonus assumed in South Coast and Santa Ynez HMAs, 10 percent in Santa Maria and Lompoc HMAs. (b) See individual prototype pro formas in Appendices for sources of cost data. (c) Percentage of hard costs, site costs. (d) All figures in 2004 dollars. Source: BAE, 2004.

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES JULY 2005 Department of Grants & Community Investment 1110 West Capitol Avenue West Sacramento, CA 95691 Phone: (916) 617-4555 Fax: (916) 372-1584

More information

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEM I-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Council Meeting Date: June 3, 2014 Agenda Item #: I-1 INFORMATIONAL ITEM: Update on Multi-City Affordable Housing Nexus Study and Impact Fee Feasibility

More information

Agenda Re~oort PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS TO INCLUSIONARY IN-LIEU FEE RATES

Agenda Re~oort PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS TO INCLUSIONARY IN-LIEU FEE RATES Agenda Re~oort August 27, 2018 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THROUGH: Finance Committee FROM: SUBJECT: William K. Huang, Director of Housing and Career Services PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED ADJUSTMENTS

More information

Financial Analysis of Bell Street Development Potential Final Report

Financial Analysis of Bell Street Development Potential Final Report Financial Analysis of Bell Street Development Potential Final Report February 25, 2008 Prepared for: County of Santa Barbara TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction... 1 II. Key Findings Regarding Bell Street

More information

Dr af t Sant a Bar b ar a Count y Housing Elem ent

Dr af t Sant a Bar b ar a Count y Housing Elem ent 6. LAND INVENTORY AND QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVE I n t r o d u c t i o n This chapter includes two important components of the Housing Element: (1) the land inventory and analysis, and (2) the quantified objective

More information

Summary of Findings & Recommendations

Summary of Findings & Recommendations Summary of Findings & Recommendations Minneapolis/St. Paul Region Mixed Income Housing Feasibility, Education and Action Project Background In 2015 and 2016, the Family Housing Fund and the Urban Land

More information

DRAFT REPORT. Residential Impact Fee Nexus Study. June prepared for: Foster City VWA. Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc.

DRAFT REPORT. Residential Impact Fee Nexus Study. June prepared for: Foster City VWA. Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc. DRAFT REPORT Residential Impact Fee Nexus Study June 2015 prepared for: Foster City VWA Vernazza Wolfe Associates, Inc. Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 4 Introduction... 4 Background... 4 Report

More information

Financial Analysis of Proposed Affordable Housing Program City of Burlingame

Financial Analysis of Proposed Affordable Housing Program City of Burlingame Financial Analysis of Proposed Affordable Housing Program City of Burlingame For many years, new housing development in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the growing demand for housing. This is particularly

More information

CITY OF BELMONT INCLUSIONARY ZONING AND IMPACT FEES

CITY OF BELMONT INCLUSIONARY ZONING AND IMPACT FEES CITY OF BELMONT INCLUSIONARY ZONING AND IMPACT FEES City Council Hearing January 10, 2017 TONIGHT S MEETING Actions to Date Recap Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Recap Nexus Study and Impact Fee Results

More information

APPENDIX D ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING POLICY ALTERNATIVES

APPENDIX D ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING POLICY ALTERNATIVES APPENDIX D ECONOMIC & PLANNING SYSTEMS BELOW MARKET RATE HOUSING POLICY ALTERNATIVES Economic & Planning Systems Real Estate Economics Regional Economics Public Finance Land Use Policy D RAFT MEMORANDUM

More information

Modifying Inclusionary Housing Requirements: Economic Impact Report. Office of Economic Analysis Items # and # May 12, 2017

Modifying Inclusionary Housing Requirements: Economic Impact Report. Office of Economic Analysis Items # and # May 12, 2017 Modifying Inclusionary Housing Requirements: Economic Impact Report Office of Economic Analysis Items #161351 and #170208 May 12, 2017 Introduction Two ordinances have recently been introduced at the San

More information

Barbara County Housing Element. Table 5.1 Proposed Draft Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs

Barbara County Housing Element. Table 5.1 Proposed Draft Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs Table 5.1 Proposed Draft Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs Goal 1: Enhance the Diversity, Quantity, and Quality of the Housing Supply Policy 1.1: Promote new housing opportunities adjacent to

More information

Provide a diversity of housing types, responsive to household size, income and age needs.

Provide a diversity of housing types, responsive to household size, income and age needs. 8 The City of San Mateo is a highly desirable place to live. Housing costs are comparably high. For these reasons, there is a strong and growing need for affordable housing. This chapter addresses the

More information

M EMORANDUM. Attachment 7. Steve Buckley and Margot Ernst, City of Walnut Creek. Darin Smith and Michael Nimon, EPS

M EMORANDUM. Attachment 7. Steve Buckley and Margot Ernst, City of Walnut Creek. Darin Smith and Michael Nimon, EPS Attachment 7 M EMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Steve Buckley and Margot Ernst, City of Walnut Creek Darin Smith and Michael Nimon, EPS Affordable Housing Fee Update Considerations; EPS #151080 Date: March

More information

Briefing Book. State of the Housing Market Update San Francisco Mayor s Office of Housing and Community Development

Briefing Book. State of the Housing Market Update San Francisco Mayor s Office of Housing and Community Development Briefing Book State of the Housing Market Update 2014 San Francisco Mayor s Office of Housing and Community Development August 2014 Table of Contents Project Background 2 Household Income Background and

More information

DRAFT Inclusionary Housing Survey. Prepared for San Francisco s Technical Advisory Committee

DRAFT Inclusionary Housing Survey. Prepared for San Francisco s Technical Advisory Committee DRAFT Inclusionary Housing Survey Prepared for San Francisco s Technical Advisory Committee San Jose Background San Jose s current inclusionary housing ordinance passed in January of 2012 and replaced

More information

City of Palo Alto (ID # 6490) Finance Committee Staff Report

City of Palo Alto (ID # 6490) Finance Committee Staff Report City of Palo Alto (ID # 6490) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/16/2016 Summary Title: Residential/Commercial Impact Fee Studies Title: Commercial and Residential

More information

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLYING WITH THE CITY OF SAN JOSE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS. July 1, 2007

GUIDELINES FOR COMPLYING WITH THE CITY OF SAN JOSE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS. July 1, 2007 GUIDELINES FOR COMPLYING WITH THE CITY OF SAN JOSE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING POLICY IN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS July 1, 2007 Index I. Introduction II. Inclusionary Housing Compliance Plan III. Income Limits

More information

JOBS HOUSING NEXUS ANALYSIS

JOBS HOUSING NEXUS ANALYSIS APPENDIX E EXECUTIVE SUMMARY JOBS HOUSING NEXUS ANALYSIS Jobs Housing Nexus Analysis Report Prepared for the City of San Mateo Prepared by Kayesr Marston Associates, Inc. February 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

More information

HOUSING IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY

HOUSING IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY HOUSING IMPACT FEE NEXUS STUDY SUBMITTED TO City of Salinas January 2016 Prepared by VERNAZZA WOLFE ASSOCIATES, INC. www.vernazzawolfe.com 2909 Shasta Road Tel: (510) 548-8229 Berkeley, California 94708

More information

Memo to the Planning Commission HEARING DATE: APRIL 21, 2016 Closed Session

Memo to the Planning Commission HEARING DATE: APRIL 21, 2016 Closed Session Memo to the Planning Commission HEARING DATE: APRIL 21, 2016 Closed Session BACKGROUND Date: April 21, 2016 Subject: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW Staff Contact: Kate Conner (415) 575-6914

More information

TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS

TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS STEPS IN ESTABLISHING A TDR PROGRAM Adopting TDR legislation is but one small piece of the effort required to put an effective TDR program in place. The success of a TDR program depends ultimately on the

More information

Public Review Draft. January 2007

Public Review Draft. January 2007 Lee County, Florida SUPPORT STUDY: AFFORDABLE HOUSING METHODOLOGY January 2007 Public Review Draft Submitted by: CLARION ASSOCIATES, LLC 1526 East Franklin Street, Suite 102 Chapel Hill, NC 27514 (919)

More information

Memo to the Planning Commission JULY 12TH, 2018

Memo to the Planning Commission JULY 12TH, 2018 Memo to the Planning Commission JULY 12TH, 2018 Topic: California State Senate Bill 828 and State Assembly Bill 1771 Staff Contacts: Joshua Switzky, Land Use & Housing Program Manager, Citywide Division

More information

Housing & Community Engagement Study Session

Housing & Community Engagement Study Session Housing & Community Engagement Study Session Santa Cruz City Council June 27, 2017 Tonight s Agenda 1. Staff Presentation Basic Demographics & Profile of Housing in Santa Cruz Community Engagement Plan

More information

City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016

City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016 City of Salinas Nexus Studies Overview and Summary February 2016 1) Introduction The City of Salinas is looking at ways to increase the supply of affordable housing in Salinas. The City already has a successful

More information

ATTACHMENT B DRAFT NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS ANALYSIS. Prepared for City of Sonoma. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

ATTACHMENT B DRAFT NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS ANALYSIS. Prepared for City of Sonoma. Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. ATTACHMENT B DRAFT NON-RESIDENTIAL NEXUS ANALYSIS Prepared for City of Sonoma Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. February 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION... 1 Purpose... 1 Analysis Scope...

More information

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA LETTER

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA LETTER BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA LETTER Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 123 E. Anapamu Street, 2 nd Floor Barbara, CA 93101 (805) 568-2240 Agenda Number: Department Name: Community Services Department No.:

More information

4.13 Population and Housing

4.13 Population and Housing Environmental Impact Analysis Population and Housing 4.13 Population and Housing 4.13.1 Setting This section evaluates the impacts to the regional housing supply and population growth associated with implementation

More information

Developing an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance

Developing an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Developing an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance Key Considerations August 18, 2006 Dwayne Marsh Senior Associate, PolicyLink Inclusionary Zoning: An Important Affordable Housing Tool Requires or encourages

More information

Staff recommends the City Council hold a public hearing, listen to all pertinent testimony, and introduce on first reading:

Staff recommends the City Council hold a public hearing, listen to all pertinent testimony, and introduce on first reading: CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING JANUARY 16, 2018 SUBJECT: INITIATED BY: MULTI-FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS ZONE TEXT AMENDMENTS: AMEND MINIMUM DENSITY REQUIREMENTS FOR R3 AND R4 DISTRICTS; AMEND THE DENSITY BONUS

More information

COLDSTREAM (PC-1) INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PLAN

COLDSTREAM (PC-1) INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PLAN COLDSTREAM (PC-1) INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PLAN A. Overview The proposed affordable housing strategy for PC-1 has evolved over time to reflect changes in the marketplace, including the loss of redevelopment

More information

10 Affordable Housing Measuring and Monitoring Guidelines

10 Affordable Housing Measuring and Monitoring Guidelines Clause 10 in Report No. 11 of Committee of the Whole was adopted, without amendment, by the Council of The Regional Municipality of York at its meeting held on June 25, 2015. 10 Affordable Housing Measuring

More information

Filling the Gaps: Active, Accessible, Diverse. Affordable and other housing markets in Johannesburg: September, 2012 DRAFT FOR REVIEW

Filling the Gaps: Active, Accessible, Diverse. Affordable and other housing markets in Johannesburg: September, 2012 DRAFT FOR REVIEW Affordable Land and Housing Data Centre Understanding the dynamics that shape the affordable land and housing market in South Africa. Filling the Gaps: Affordable and other housing markets in Johannesburg:

More information

CITY OF SAN MATEO BELOW MARKET RATE (INCLUSIONARY) PROGRAM

CITY OF SAN MATEO BELOW MARKET RATE (INCLUSIONARY) PROGRAM CITY OF SAN MATEO BELOW MARKET RATE (INCLUSIONARY) PROGRAM I. INTENT It is the intent of this resolution to establish requirements for the designation of housing units for moderate, lower, and very low

More information

Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual

Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Amended and Adopted by City Council May 5, 2015 Resolution No. 15-037 City of Cupertino Housing Division Department of Community Development

More information

Key findings of the study include:

Key findings of the study include: C I T Y O F C A M B R I D G E Community Development Department IRAM FAROOQ Assistant City Manager for Community Development MEMORANDUM To: Richard Rossi, City Manager From: Iram Farooq, Assistant City

More information

bae urban economics June 25, 2017 Councilmember Kate Harrison City of Berkeley 2180 Milvia Street Berkeley, CA Dear Councilmember Harrison:

bae urban economics June 25, 2017 Councilmember Kate Harrison City of Berkeley 2180 Milvia Street Berkeley, CA Dear Councilmember Harrison: bae urban economics June 25, 2017 Councilmember Kate Harrison City of Berkeley 2180 Milvia Street Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Councilmember Harrison: At your request, BAE Area Urban Economics, Inc. ( BAE )

More information

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 415 INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 415 INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM AMENDMENTS TO SECTION INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM ADOPTION HEARING DATE: APRIL, 0 Project Name: Inclusionary Affordable Housing Program (Sec ) Case Number: 0-000PCA

More information

SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS STUDIES. Prepared for: City of Albany. Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS STUDIES. Prepared for: City of Albany. Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEXUS STUDIES Prepared for: City of Albany Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. December 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION...

More information

Therese Trivedi, ABAG ; Migi Lee, CHS Deliverable 5 Final Report

Therese Trivedi, ABAG ; Migi Lee, CHS Deliverable 5 Final Report AECOM 150 Chestnut Street San Francisco, CA 94111 www.aecom.com 415 955 2800 tel 415 788 4875 fax Memorandum To Lori Trevino, Redevelopment Manager City of El Cerrito Pages 65 CC Subject Therese Trivedi,

More information

Draft for Public Review. The Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan

Draft for Public Review. The Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan Draft for Public Review The Market and Octavia Neighborhood Plan San Francisco Planning Department As Part of the Better Neighborhoods Program December 00 . Housing People OBJECTIVE.1 MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL

More information

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Stakeholder Working Group November 12, 2015 Urban Economics Oakland Impact Fee Stakeholder Working Group November 12, 2015 INTRODUCTIONS 1 Agenda Introductions

More information

Date: January 9, Strategic Housing Committee. IZ Work Group. Legacy Homes Program

Date: January 9, Strategic Housing Committee. IZ Work Group. Legacy Homes Program City of Whitefish 418 E 2 nd Street PO Box 158 Whitefish, MT 59937 Date: January 9, 2019 To: From: Subject: Strategic Housing Committee IZ Work Group Legacy Homes Program At our meeting, we are going to

More information

4. HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND AFFORDABILITY

4. HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND AFFORDABILITY 4. HOUSEHOLD INCOME AND AFFORDABILITY The analysis of the Household and Affordability section relied primarily on data from the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), California Tax

More information

REPORT BY THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT THE MAPPING OF MANDATORY INCLUSIONARY HOUSING (MIH) AND THE EAST HARLEM REZONING

REPORT BY THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT THE MAPPING OF MANDATORY INCLUSIONARY HOUSING (MIH) AND THE EAST HARLEM REZONING CONTACT POLICY DEPARTMENT MARIA CILENTI 212.382.6655 mcilenti@nycbar.org ELIZABETH KOCIENDA 212.382.4788 ekocienda@nycbar.org REPORT BY THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT THE MAPPING OF MANDATORY

More information

Affordable Housing Bonus Program

Affordable Housing Bonus Program Affordable Housing Bonus Program August 2015 Stakeholder Input Kearstin Dischinger, Menaka Mohan, & Paolo Ikezoe San Francisco Planning Department San Francisco Housing Context STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW

More information

Affordable Housing Bonus Program. Public Questions and Answers - #2. January 26, 2016

Affordable Housing Bonus Program. Public Questions and Answers - #2. January 26, 2016 Affordable Housing Bonus Program Public Questions and Answers - #2 January 26, 2016 The following questions about the Affordable Housing Bonus Program were submitted by the public to the Planning Department

More information

RE: Recommendations for Reforming Inclusionary Housing Policy

RE: Recommendations for Reforming Inclusionary Housing Policy Circulate San Diego 1111 6th Avenue, Suite 402 San Diego, CA 92101 Tel: 619-544-9255 Fax: 619-531-9255 www.circulatesd.org September 25, 2018 Chair Georgette Gomez Smart Growth and Land Use Committee City

More information

Trends in Affordable Home Ownership in Calgary

Trends in Affordable Home Ownership in Calgary Trends in Affordable Home Ownership in Calgary 2006 July www.calgary.ca Call 3-1-1 PUBLISHING INFORMATION TITLE: AUTHOR: STATUS: TRENDS IN AFFORDABLE HOME OWNERSHIP CORPORATE ECONOMICS FINAL PRINTING DATE:

More information

HOUSING OPPORTUNITY ORDINANCE

HOUSING OPPORTUNITY ORDINANCE Planning and Building Agency Planning Division 20 Civic Center Plaza P.O. Box 1988 (M-20) Santa Ana, CA 92702 (714) 647-5804 www.santa-ana.org HOUSING OPPORTUNITY ORDINANCE Sec. 41-1900. Sec. 41-1901.

More information

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER RE: INCLUSIONARY HOUSING

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER RE: INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DALY CITY REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 17.47 RE: INCLUSIONARY HOUSING The City Council of the City of Daly City, DOES ORDAIN as follows:

More information

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Jane Micallef, Director, Department of Health, Housing & Community Services

Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council. Submitted by: Jane Micallef, Director, Department of Health, Housing & Community Services Office of the City Manager ACTION CALENDAR October 16, 2012 To: From: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Christine Daniel, City Manager Submitted by: Jane Micallef, Director, Department of

More information

bae urban economics In-Lieu Fee Study for Compliance with City of Los Angeles Measure JJJ Affordability Gaps Study

bae urban economics In-Lieu Fee Study for Compliance with City of Los Angeles Measure JJJ Affordability Gaps Study bae urban economics In-Lieu Fee Study for Compliance with City of Los Angeles Measure JJJ Affordability Gaps Study March 13, 2017 bae urban economics San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC

More information

Nonresidential Development Housing Linkage Fee Nexus Study

Nonresidential Development Housing Linkage Fee Nexus Study Administrative Draft Report Nonresidential Development Housing Linkage Fee Nexus Study Prepared for: City of Walnut Creek Prepared by: Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. March 22, 2016 EPS #151080 Table

More information

Executive Summary PLANNING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM

Executive Summary PLANNING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM Executive Summary PLANNING CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM ADOPTION HEARING DATE: APRIL 27, 2017 EXPIRATION DATE: MAY 28, 2017 Project Name: Case Number: Inclusionary Affordable

More information

INCLUSIONARY ZONING GUIDELINES FOR CITIES & TOWNS. Prepared for the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund By Edith M. Netter, Esq.

INCLUSIONARY ZONING GUIDELINES FOR CITIES & TOWNS. Prepared for the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund By Edith M. Netter, Esq. INCLUSIONARY ZONING GUIDELINES FOR CITIES & TOWNS Prepared for the Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund By Edith M. Netter, Esq. September 2000 Massachusetts Housing Partnership Fund Two Oliver Street

More information

City of Oakland Programs, Policies and New Initiatives for Housing

City of Oakland Programs, Policies and New Initiatives for Housing City of Oakland Programs, Policies and New Initiatives for Housing Land Use Policies General Plan Update In the late 1990s, the City revised its general plan land use and transportation element. This included

More information

ORDINANCE NO

ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AMENDING TITLE 24 OF THE SANTA CRUZ MUNICIPAL CODE, THE ZONING ORDINANCE, BY AMENDING CHAPTER 24.16 PART 3, DENSITY BONUS PROVISIONS FOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS BE IT ORDAINED

More information

Analysis of the Financial Viability of New Purpose- Built Rental Housing at Transit-Oriented Locations in Metro Vancouver

Analysis of the Financial Viability of New Purpose- Built Rental Housing at Transit-Oriented Locations in Metro Vancouver Analysis of the Financial Viability of New Purpose- Built Rental Housing at Transit-Oriented Locations in Metro Vancouver Main Report August 2017 Prepared for: Metro Vancouver By: Table of Contents Summary...

More information

MONTE SERENO HOUSING ELEMENT

MONTE SERENO HOUSING ELEMENT MONTE SERENO 2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP Understand Housing Element goals and requirements Share critical time lines and actions Solicit your ideas Identify ways for you to be involved

More information

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development. Development Plan & Policies

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development. Development Plan & Policies The Town of Hebron Section 3 2014 Plan of Conservation and Development Development Plan & Policies C. Residential Districts I. Residential Land Analysis This section of the plan uses the land use and vacant

More information

Housing Affordability in Lexington, Kentucky

Housing Affordability in Lexington, Kentucky University of Kentucky UKnowledge CBER Research Report Center for Business and Economic Research 6-29-2009 Housing Affordability in Lexington, Kentucky Christopher Jepsen University of Kentucky, chris.jepsen@uky.edu

More information

07/16/2014 Item #10E Page 1

07/16/2014 Item #10E Page 1 MEETING DATE: July 16, 2014 PREPARED BY: Jeff Murphy DEPT. DIRECTOR: Jeff Murphy DEPARTMENT: Planning & Building CITY MANAGER: Gus Vina SUBJECT: City Council consideration and possible action and/or staff

More information

CITY OF WEST SACRAMENTO BOOK OF FEES. Description Authority Effective Date. HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAM Ordinance 14-4 May 30, 2014

CITY OF WEST SACRAMENTO BOOK OF FEES. Description Authority Effective Date. HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAM Ordinance 14-4 May 30, 2014 CITY OF WEST SACRAMENTO BOOK OF FEES Description Authority Effective Date HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAM Ordinance 14-4 May 30, 2014 Background The Housing Element of the General Plan of the City of West Sacramento

More information

MEMORANDUM ADDENDUM. Dan Moye, Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City, Missouri

MEMORANDUM ADDENDUM. Dan Moye, Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City, Missouri MEMORANDUM ADDENDUM TO: FROM: Dan Moye, Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City, Missouri Fran Lefor Rood, SB Friedman Development Advisors Direct: (312) 424-4253; Email: frood@sbfriedman.com DATE:

More information

SANTA ROSA IMPACT FEE PROGRAM UPDATE FINAL REPORT. May Robert D. Spencer, Urban Economics Strategic Economics Kittelson & Associates

SANTA ROSA IMPACT FEE PROGRAM UPDATE FINAL REPORT. May Robert D. Spencer, Urban Economics Strategic Economics Kittelson & Associates SANTA ROSA IMPACT FEE PROGRAM UPDATE FINAL REPORT May 2018 Robert D. Spencer, Urban Economics With: Strategic Economics Kittelson & Associates City of Santa Rosa Impact Fee Program Update TABLE OF CONTENTS

More information

Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Review of Recommendations. Planning and Development Department Community Development Division March 10, 2015

Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Review of Recommendations. Planning and Development Department Community Development Division March 10, 2015 Affordable Housing Advisory Committee Review of Recommendations Planning and Development Department Community Development Division March 10, 2015 History of the State Housing Initiatives Partnership Program

More information

INCENTIVE POLICY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

INCENTIVE POLICY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVE POLICY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PREPARED BY: CITY OF FLAGSTAFF S HOUSING SECTION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OCTOBER 2009 2 1 1 W e s t A s p e n A v e. t e l e p h o n e : 9 2 8. 7 7 9. 7 6

More information

Final Report Funding Affordable Housing Near Transit in the Bay Area Region. May prepared for: The Great Communities Collaborative

Final Report Funding Affordable Housing Near Transit in the Bay Area Region. May prepared for: The Great Communities Collaborative Final Report Funding Affordable Housing Near Transit in the Bay Area Region May 2017 prepared for: The Great Communities Collaborative TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS... 2 TABLE OF TABLES... 3 TABLE

More information

UNDERSTANDING THE 2017 HOUSING BILLS Bay Area Planning Directors Association

UNDERSTANDING THE 2017 HOUSING BILLS Bay Area Planning Directors Association UNDERSTANDING THE 2017 HOUSING BILLS Bay Area Planning Directors Association May 4, 2018 Goldfarb & Lipman LLP 1300 Clay Street, 11 th Floor Oakland, California 94612 (510) 836-6336 goldfarb lipman attorneys

More information

A Closer Look at California's New Housing Production Laws

A Closer Look at California's New Housing Production Laws A Closer Look at California's New Housing Production Laws By Chelsea Maclean With the statewide housing crisis at the forefront of the California Legislature's 2017 agenda, legislators unleashed an avalanche

More information

Housing Affordability Research and Resources

Housing Affordability Research and Resources Housing Affordability Research and Resources An Analysis of Inclusionary Zoning and Alternatives University of Maryland National Center for Smart Growth Research and Education Abt Associates Shipman &

More information

TOWN OF LOS GATOS BELOW MARKET PRICE HOUSING PROGRAM GUIDELINES

TOWN OF LOS GATOS BELOW MARKET PRICE HOUSING PROGRAM GUIDELINES TOWN OF LOS GATOS BELOW MARKET PRICE HOUSING PROGRAM GUIDELINES I. Purpose A. Purpose: The overall purpose of the Below Market Price (BMP) Housing Program is to provide the Town of Los Gatos with a supply

More information

HILLS BEVERLY. Planning Commission Report. City of Beverly Hills

HILLS BEVERLY. Planning Commission Report. City of Beverly Hills BEVERLY HILLS 1 City of Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 TEL, (310) 4854141 FAX. (310) 8584966 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: February 14, 2013 Subject:

More information

Our Focus: Your Future 2007 YEAR END HOUSING MONITORING AND SUBDIVISION STATUS REPORTS

Our Focus: Your Future 2007 YEAR END HOUSING MONITORING AND SUBDIVISION STATUS REPORTS Town of Fort Erie Community & Development Services Our Focus: Your Future Prepared for Council-in-Committee Report No. CDS-011-08 Agenda Date February 4,2008 File No. 350204/350308 Subject 2007 YEAR END

More information

Planning Commission February 12, 2015

Planning Commission February 12, 2015 Planning Commission February 12, 2015 Proposal: AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORDINANCE UPDATE - Citywide - PLN2015-00145 - To consider a Zoning Text Amendment to update the Affordable Housing Ordinance (Fremont

More information

Analysis of Infill Development Potential Under the Green Line TOD Ordinance

Analysis of Infill Development Potential Under the Green Line TOD Ordinance Analysis of Infill Development Potential Under the Green Line TOD Ordinance Prepared for the Los Angeles County Second Supervisorial District Office and the Department of Regional Planning Solimar Research

More information

SJC Comprehensive Plan Update Housing Needs Assessment Briefing. County Council: October 16, 2017 Planning Commission: October 20, 2017

SJC Comprehensive Plan Update Housing Needs Assessment Briefing. County Council: October 16, 2017 Planning Commission: October 20, 2017 SJC Comprehensive Plan Update 2036 Housing Needs Assessment Briefing County Council: October 16, 2017 Planning Commission: October 20, 2017 Overview GMA Housing Element Background Demographics Employment

More information

MEMORANDUM. Trip generation rates based on a variety of residential and commercial land use categories 1 Urban form and location factors the Ds 2

MEMORANDUM. Trip generation rates based on a variety of residential and commercial land use categories 1 Urban form and location factors the Ds 2 MEMORANDUM Date: September 22, 2015 To: From: Subject: Paul Stickney Chris Breiland and Sarah Keenan Analysis of Sammamish Town Center Trip Generation Rates and the Ability to Meet Additional Economic

More information

The Impact of Market Rate Vacancy Increases Eleven-Year Report

The Impact of Market Rate Vacancy Increases Eleven-Year Report The Impact of Market Rate Vacancy Increases Eleven-Year Report January 1, 1999 - December 31, 2009 Santa Monica Rent Control Board April 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary 1 Vacancy Decontrol s Effects on

More information

Housing as an Investment Greater Toronto Area

Housing as an Investment Greater Toronto Area Housing as an Investment Greater Toronto Area Completed by: Will Dunning Inc. For: Trinity Diversified North America Limited February 2009 Housing as an Investment Greater Toronto Area Overview We are

More information

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study

Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Impact Fee Nexus & Economic Feasibility Study Stakeholder Working Group December 10, 2015 Urban Economics Agenda Follow Up From Last Meeting Proposals Presentation Proposals Discussion Wrap Up 1 Oakland

More information

2018 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT

2018 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 2018 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT Upper Arkansas Area Council of Governments 3224-A Independence Road Cañon City, Colorado 81212 The Upper Arkansas Area Council of Governments (UAACOG),

More information

Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis

Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis March 14 th, 2013 Jeremy Holm Manager, Current Planning Regional District of Nanaimo 6300 Hammond Bay Road Nanaimo, B.C. V9T 6N2 Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis The Regional District of Nanaimo

More information

Response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Affordable Housing Crisis Density Is Our Destiny

Response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report Affordable Housing Crisis Density Is Our Destiny September, 2018 Honorable Patricia Lucas Santa Clara County Superior Court 191 North First Street San Jose, CA 95113 Re: to the Santa Clara County Report Affordable Housing Crisis Density Is Our Destiny

More information

Filling the Gaps: Stable, Available, Affordable. Affordable and other housing markets in Ekurhuleni: September, 2012 DRAFT FOR REVIEW

Filling the Gaps: Stable, Available, Affordable. Affordable and other housing markets in Ekurhuleni: September, 2012 DRAFT FOR REVIEW Affordable Land and Housing Data Centre Understanding the dynamics that shape the affordable land and housing market in South Africa. Filling the Gaps: Affordable and other housing markets in Ekurhuleni:

More information

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND AMENDING CHAPTER 6A OF THE WOODLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING

ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND AMENDING CHAPTER 6A OF THE WOODLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WOODLAND AMENDING CHAPTER 6A OF THE WOODLAND MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING The City Council of the City of Woodland does hereby ordain as follows:

More information

Detroit Inclusionary Housing Plan & Market Study Preliminary Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study Executive Summary August, 2016

Detroit Inclusionary Housing Plan & Market Study Preliminary Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study Executive Summary August, 2016 Detroit Inclusionary Housing Plan & Market Study Preliminary Inclusionary Housing Feasibility Study Executive Summary August, 2016 Inclusionary Housing Plan & Market Study Objectives 1 Evaluate the citywide

More information

Table of Contents. Appendix...22

Table of Contents. Appendix...22 Table Contents 1. Background 3 1.1 Purpose.3 1.2 Data Sources 3 1.3 Data Aggregation...4 1.4 Principles Methodology.. 5 2. Existing Population, Dwelling Units and Employment 6 2.1 Population.6 2.1.1 Distribution

More information

Implementing Small Area Fair Market Rents (SAFMRs) in the HCV Program. Plano Housing Authority Case Study

Implementing Small Area Fair Market Rents (SAFMRs) in the HCV Program. Plano Housing Authority Case Study Implementing Small Area Fair Market Rents (SAFMRs) in the HCV Program Plano Housing Authority Case Study 1 Contents Background...2 Motivations for Implementing SAFMR...2 Market conditions...2 Strategic

More information

Welcome to The Inclusionary Zoning Toolbox. An APA session sponsored by Zoning Practice

Welcome to The Inclusionary Zoning Toolbox. An APA session sponsored by Zoning Practice Welcome to The Inclusionary Zoning Toolbox An APA session sponsored by Zoning Practice Zoning Practice. Used by planners to inform, inspire, and implement smarter landuse practice. American Planning Association

More information

City Center Market-Rate Housing Study

City Center Market-Rate Housing Study City Center Market-Rate Housing Study OVERVIEW The City of Bellingham, with the assistance of students from Western Washington University, conducted a study of market-rate rental housing during April and

More information

SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORDINANCE UPDATE. Prepared for: City of Hayward. Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.

SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORDINANCE UPDATE. Prepared for: City of Hayward. Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. SUMMARY, CONTEXT MATERIALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AFFORDABLE HOUSING ORDINANCE UPDATE Prepared for: City of Hayward Prepared by: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. October 31, 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I.

More information

This document prepared for the City of Santa Rosa

This document prepared for the City of Santa Rosa This document prepared for the City of Santa Rosa David Guhin, Planning & Economic Development Director Clare Hartman, Deputy Director Planning William Rose, Supervising Planner Planning Development Review

More information

Expectations for including affordable housing in rezoning applications o 15% of units or o comparable contributions cash

Expectations for including affordable housing in rezoning applications o 15% of units or o comparable contributions cash AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROFFER POLICY Planning Commission Work Session September 15, 2015 Staff Report prepared by Ron White, Chief of Housing Purpose The work session is intended to focus on the proffer policy

More information

Ontario Affordable Housing Calculator Users Guide

Ontario Affordable Housing Calculator Users Guide Ontario Affordable Housing Calculator Users Guide There are a number of different ways to get help using the Affordable Housing Calculator. 1. How To Videos A series of videos that walk the user through

More information

APPENDIX A. Market Study Standards and Requirements

APPENDIX A. Market Study Standards and Requirements APPENDIX A Market Study Standards and Requirements Section 42(m)(1)(A)(iii) of the IRS Code and Section IV(A)(2) of the 2018 Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) require market studies for all low-income housing

More information

PLANNING DIRECTOR BULLETIN

PLANNING DIRECTOR BULLETIN This Bulletin outlines how the Planning Department administers streamlined approval for affordable and supportive housing. PLANNING DIRECTOR Streamlined Approval Processes for Affordable and Supportive

More information

Terms of Reference for Town of Caledon Housing Study

Terms of Reference for Town of Caledon Housing Study 1.0 Introduction Terms of Reference for Town of Caledon Housing Study The Town of Caledon is soliciting proposals for a comprehensive Housing Study. Results of this Housing Study will serve as a guiding

More information