The URL can be used to link to this page

101-Staff Report.pdf COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408)777-3308www.cupertino.org CITYCOUNCILSTAFFREPORT Meeting: March 1, 2011 Subject ABAG/MTC-SustainableCommunitiesStrategy(SCS)andtheSubregionRegionalHousing NeedsAllocation(SubRHNA)Process. RecommendedAction StaffrecommendsthattheCouncil: 1.Notauthorizecreating/joiningaformal subregionforthe 2014-2022RegionalHousing NeedsAllocation(RHNA) process. Instead, staffrecommendsthattheCity pursueaninformalcollaborative processwithinSanta ClaraCountythatensures several ofthe benefits offorminga subregion(e.g.trading housing allocations,etc.). Description ThepurposeofthisreportistoprovidetheCityCouncilabriefoverviewoftheupcoming ABAG/MTCSustainableCommunitiesStrategy(SCS)andtomakearecommendationwith regardtothecreationofaSubregionfortheupcoming2014-2022RegionalHousingNeeds Allocation(RHNA) process. Discussion SB 375 and the SustainableCommunities Strategy SenateBill375becamelawin2008andisconsideredlandmarklegislationforCalifornia relativetolanduse,transportationandenvironmentalplanning.Itcallsforthedevelopmentofa SustainableCommunitiesStrategy(SCS)inallmetropolitanregionsinCalifornia.Withinthe BayArea,thelawgivesjointresponsibilityfortheSCStotheMetropolitanTransportation Commission(MTC)andtheAssociationofBayAreaGovernments(ABAG).TheSCS integratesseveralexistingplanningprocessesandisrequiredtoaccomplishthefollowing objectives: ·Provideanew25-yearlandusestrategyfortheBayAreathatisrealisticandidentifiesareas toaccommodateall oftheregion’s population,includingallincomegroups;and March 1, 2011Page2 ·Forecastalandusepattern,whichwhenintegratedwiththetransportationsystem,minimizes greenhousegasemissionsfromautomobilesandlighttrucksandismeasuredagainstregional targetestablishedfortheBayAreabytheCaliforniaAirResourcesBoard(CARB). TheSCSisalandusestrategyrequiredtobeincludedaspartoftheBayArea’s25-yearRegional TransportationPlan(RTP).Byfederallaw,theRTPmustbeinternallyconsistent.Therefore,the over$200billiondollarsoftransportationinvestmenttypicallyincludedintheRTPmustalign withandsupporttheSCSlandusepattern.SB375alsorequiresthatanupdatedeight-year regionalhousingneedallocation(RHNA)preparedbyABAGisconsistentwiththeSCS.The SCS,RTPandRHNAwillbeadoptedsimultaneouslyinearly2013.AttachmentA(SCSstaff reporttothePlanningCommissiondatedJanuary25,2011)providesmoredetailsontheSCA process.AttachmentBprovidesatimelinefortheSCS,RTPandRHNA process. RegionalHousingNeeds Allocation PlanningforaffordablehousingintheBayAreaisoneoftheessentialtasksofsustainable development.Theprocessofsettinggoalsforhousinggrowthisanecessaryprecursortothe HousingElementprocess,thisprocessisknownastheRegionalHousingNeedsAllocation (RHNA).TheStateDepartmentofHousingandCommunityDevelopment(HCD)determines housingdemandforeachregionofthestateandprovidestheallocationstotheCouncilof Governments(COGs).ItistheresponsibilityofeachCOGtointurndistributethehousing allocationsamongitsjurisdictions.IntheSanFranciscoBayArea,theallocationdistribution processistheresponsibilityoftheAssociationofBayAreaGovernments,orABAG.TheCOG mustdistributetheallocationinaccordancewiththeCaliforniaGovernmentCodeandmustdo sothroughafairand open public process. The processto updatetheRHNA beganin 20 11: ·TheHousingMethodologyCommitteefortheregionwasappointedinJanuary2011. MeetingswillcontinuethroughSeptember2011.AttheSantaClaraCountylevel,the RHNAMethodologyCommitteeincludetwostafffromcities(SanJoseandMorganHill) andtwoalternates(CupertinoandSunnyvale),anda staffmemberfromSantaClaraCounty. ·CitiesmustdeterminewhethertheywanttoformaSubRHNAgroupbyMarch16,2011.If so,theymustfollowthesametimelineforformulationasthe MethodologyCommittee. ·LocaljurisdictionswillprovideinputpriortotheadoptionoftheRHNAmethodologyby September 2011. ·ThefinalhousingnumbersfortheregionwillbeissuedbytheStateDepartmentofHousing andCommunityDevelopment(HCD)toABAGbySeptember 2011. ·TheDraftRHNAwill bereleasedbyABAGbyspring 2012. ·ABAGwilladopttheFinalRHNAbytheend ofsummer 2012. ·LocalgovernmentswilladdressthenextroundofRHNAintheirnextHousingElement update(2014-2022). ·The distribution of housing needswilltheninformtheDetailedSCSScenarios. March 1, 2011Page3 Housing Element Subregions(Sub RHNA) In2004,AssemblyBill2158wassignedintoeffectbytheGovernor.AB2175added GovernmentCodeSection65584.03todescribepolicyobjectivesoftheallocationexercise, maketheRHNAprocessmoretransparentandtoallowcontiguouslocalgovernmentstoforma subregiontoreceiveanddistributeits share oftheregional housingneed. TheCaliforniaGovernmentCodespecifiesthemethodtobeusedtocalculatethesubregion’s shareoftheRHNAandgivesthesubregiontheresponsibilitytocreateitsownallocation methodology.Thisprocessallowsthesubregiontodetermineeachjurisdiction’sshareofthe RHNAlocallyandrecognizetheuniquenessofeachcommunity.Shouldasubregionfailto developamethodology,theAssociation ofBayAreaGovernments(ABAG),thelocalCOG,will distributethefinalRHNA numberstoeachjurisdiction based upon itsmethodology. SantaClaraCounty SubRHNA OnFebruary9,2011,theCMAconsideredarecommendationfromtheSantaClaraCounty PlanningOfficials(SCCAPO)thatrecommendscollaborationbetweenthecitiesintheCounty andbeginstofosteranappropriatestructurethatmaybeusedforthenexthousingcycle(2022- 2030)todevelopaformalsubregionalRHNA.Therecommendationwasbasedonconcerns aboutstaffingandavailablefinancialresourcestodevelopaSubRHNAmethodologyunderthe timeconstraints ofStatelaw. Theinformal subregionalcooperationandcollaborationwould: ·Utilizeexistingforumsforcommunicationand participation(e.g.,CitiesAssociation,City Managers’Association,SCCAPO,HousingActionCoalition,etc.). ·Pilotmechanismsforengagementandcollaboration. ·Providean opportunityfora unified voicerepresentingtheSouthBayattheHousing MethodologyCommittee,ABAGBoardmeetings,and otherforums. ·Maintaintheability ofcontiguousjurisdictionstotradeRHNA numbers ·Utilizethe samemethodologyasABAG(SCCAPO did notexpressa desiretocreateits own methodology). ·Facilitatefuturecollaboration sharingHousing Elementconsultants,analysesand policies, and potentiallyresultingin sharedreviewbytheCaliforniaHousingandCommunity Development(HCD)Department. OnFebruary 10, 2011, theCitiesAssociationBoard unanimouslyacceptedarecommendation fromtheCity Managers’Association(CMA)andtheSantaClaraCountyPlanningOfficials (SCCAPO)to notestablishaformal subregioninthecurrentRHNA process, butinstead,as suggested, pursueaninformalcollaborativeprocessthatensures several ofthe benefits of forminga subregion,e.g.tradingallocations. Themotionwas unanimously passedwithan amendmenttofurtherresearchthe definition of“contiguous”asitappliestotradingallocations amongstcitiesinSCC. March 1, 2011Page4 Pros and Cons ofthe Sub RHNA Process Thetable belowliststheprosandcons offorminga subregion underSection of 65584.03 ofthe CaliforniaGovernmentCode. Table 1 ProsCons ·Morelocalcontrol/self-determination.·Subregionisresponsibleandaccountablefor allocationand distribution. ·Better placementof housingand·Timeand staffresourceconcernsto protection ofcommunitycharacter.complete newmethodology. ·OpportunityfortheCountyto show·Needto determine structureand processfor leadership.development ofmethodology,including stakeholderinvolvement. ·Opportunityto strengthenPlanning· Officials organization(SCCAPO)as policyadvisory bodytoCityManagers’ AssociationandCitiesAssociation. ·Moreflexibilityto negotiateandtrade·Citiesthatwanttotrade housingwith other units.citiesmayhavetoallocateresources (infrastructure, services)and/orfunding. ·Note: Some oftheseitemscan be done without a subregion(e.g.,trades, purchasing sewercapacity/water supply)(althoughthese trades haveconstraintsthatwould not apply in a subregion). Staffisfollowing up on whethertradeswould be allowed between non-contiguousjurisdictions. ·Fostercollaborationandcoordination.·Notallcitiesmight participate. ·Could strainrelationships betweencitiesin theCounty. ·HCDmayofferconsistentandtimely·Couldtakelongerto getagreement on the review ofall oftheCounty’sHousingcorrectformat oftheHousing Elements. Elements. ·Couldleadtoreducedcostsifcities·Will need someallocation ofmoneyto begin decideto usethesameconsultant(inthepreliminaryanalysis/outreachas necessary. second phase)to preparehousing ·Monitoringa separateallocationsystemand elements, or shareresources/coordinate processwouldrequireconsiderable staffand on policies/etc. fundingresources. Thesub-regionmay still end up with sameABAGmethodology and/orallocation. March 1, 2011Page5 Table 1 ProsCons ·Couldleadtograntsforaffordable·Unclearastowhatgrantsarecurrently housing outreachandeducation.availablefor suchwork. ·Safetynet – useABAGRHNA·Lack ofagreement on anallocationsystem individuallyifallocation system doesn’tcould be seenasafailure. work. NextSteps EventhoughaSubRHNAisnotrecommendedatthistime,itappearsthatmostoftheSanta ClaraCountycitieswillcollaborateduringtheRHNAallocationandHousingElementprocess. ThiscollaborationcouldcomeintheformofhiringaconsultanttopreparetheHousing ElementsforalltheSantaClaraCountyjurisdictions,transferringofRHNAallocations,etc. Thefollowingareimmediate stepsintheRegionalHousingNeedsAllocation(RHNA)timeline: •January 2011:Appointment ofRHNA MethodologyCommittee. •March 16, 2011:Final decision on whetherto participateinSubRHNA process. •February-August2011:Participationandreviewofhousingmethodology(ABAGand/or subregional),includinglocalagencyinput. _____________________________________ Preparedby:AartiShrivastava,Director ofCommunityDevelopment ApprovedforSubmissionby:DavidW.Knapp,CityManager Attachments: A.ABAG/MTC–SCSstaffreporttothePlanningCommissiondatedJanuary25,2011(no attachments) B.TimelinefortheSCS,RTPandRHNA process.