Attachment 19From: Stacy Hatfield [mailto:stacyhatfieldart@gmail.com]
To: Council
Subject: Re: In Favor of North 40
Hello Coucil Members
I feel obligated to inform you of a conversation i had eith avyowns person during the break at the
meeting.
The person aparently is heading the town not city fb page and spoke at the meeting.
He told my husband and myself that the people who will be buying the homes will be multiple
families living in one home. Most likley from cupertino and they wont look like us. ( we are
white)He was trying to sway us to not be in favor of the project using rave as a reason.
It is disturbing that he was bold enough to make a statement such as that with out even knowing
us.
Thsnk you all for your service to our community. You have my support in what ever decision
you make.
Respectfully
Stacy Hatfield
ATTACHMENT 1 9
Markene Smith spoke with Parks and Public Works staff on July 28, 2017 . Ms. Smith has two major
concerns about pedestrian access to/from North 40:
1. Pedestrian access to transit. Light rail is north of 85 and there is no safe pedestrian access to the
station. Lark is unsafe for pedestrians to walk on, especially at the freeway ramps . The only way
to get in and out of North 40 is by car .
2. Pedestrian access to the Los Gatos Creek Trail. She suggested a pedestrian overcrossing from
North 40 to the Trail.
Ms. Smith would like the pedestrian access in the project design be shown and explained . She also asked
these comments be forwarded to the Town Manager and Council. Her contact information is:
Markene Smith, Drakes Bay Avenue, Los Gatos, CA
markene@comcast .net
From: Bob Simmons [mailto:bsimmons @aslcpa .com]
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2017 4 :34 PM
To: Council
Subject: Opposition to the present North 40 development
Dear Council Members,
Although the specific plan for this project was developed many years ago when traffic
conditions were much less of a problem, the present traffic situation in Silicon Valley including
Santa Cruz County has changed dramatically for the worse. This undisputed fact should
require the Town and the developers to significantly scale back the residential and commercial
plans for this site. We congratulate the Council on the moratorium on all development in Los
Gatos until the traffic issues can be resolved .
Bob and Margo Simmons
29 Chestnut Ave
Los Gatos
DISCLAIMER
Pr iv ileged/Confident ial information may be contained in tl1is message and any related atta chmen t s. If you are not
the addressee indicated in this message (or respo nsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not
copy, review, distribute or forward the co ntents of this message to anyone . In such case, you should notify tt1e
se nder by reply e-m ai l and delete this message from you r computer.
Abbott, Stringham & Lynch is a member of Alli nial Global, an assoc iation of lega ll y independent member firms that
does not accept any responsibil ity or liabi lity for the actions or inactions on the part of an y individual member firrr:
o r firms.
Joel Paulson
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Tom Calderwood <tom-calderwood@comcast.net >
Saturday, July 29, 2017 7:21 AM
Joel Paulson
north 40
I support moving forward with the North 40 plan because it;
-provides low income housing
-provides walk vs drive alternative to those who live in the immediate area
-was developed following the process and requirements laid out
-the sellers of the property seem more in touch both with our agrarian past and current community
needsthanthosethatoppose
So much of the recent arguments are distractions. I don't expect the developers to provide transportation
solutions for seniors . If they can't drive and the new location isn't convenient, they can choose not to move in .
Its not safe to live within 1,000 feet of a freeway -well I guess we need to eliminate freeways or buy out all
the existing homes within 1,000 feet, tear them down and convert to park land.
Time to move forward.
Tom Calderwood
Los Gatos
1
Joel Paulson
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Guillermo Hernandez <losgatosdrummer@gmail.com>
Saturday, July 29, 2017 7:46 AM
Joel Paulson
North 40
Great article! Enjoyed reading it. 50 low income units for seniors. What about units for low income Lo s Gatos
residents or below market value?
1
From : "John Shepardson" <shepard sonlaw@me .com>
To: "Marica Sayoc" <MSayoc@losgato sc a.gov>, "Rob Rennie" <RRennie@losgatosca.gov>, "Steven
Leonardis" <SLeonardis@losgatosca.gov>, "Marcia Jensen" <MJensen@losgatosca .gov>, "BSpector"
<BSpector@losgatosca .gov>, "Laurel Prevetti" <LPrevetti@losgatosca.gov>, "Robert Schultz"
<RSchultz@losgatosca.gov>
Subject: No. 40 (AB-2222 Legislative History)
JS
John Shepardson, Esq .
she pa rdsonla w @me.com
59 N. Santa Cruz Avenue, Suite Q
Lo s Gatos, CA 95030
T: (408) 395-3701
F: (408) 395-0112
9' _)tii P.. .......... . ( alel o7"'1 l e~~,..,
LEGIS LAT I VE I~FORMJ\T I O:-.J
Home Bill Information California Law Pu blicati ons Other Resources My Subscript ions My Favori tes
AB-222 2 H ousi ng density bonus. (2013-2014 )
r--· ---------------------~I I
I
I
I
Date Acti on I 09/27/14 Chaptered by Secret ary of St<ite -Chapter 682, Statut es or 2014.
09/27/14 Approv ed by the Governor.
09/08/14 Enrolled and presented to ~he Governor at 3:30 p.m.
08/27/14 Senate amendmi;nts concu rred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes O. Page G570.).
08/27 /14 Assemb ly Rule 77 suspended. (P;ige 6550.)
08/26/1 4 Jn Assembly. Concurrence i n Senat e amendments pending. May be considered o n or after August 28 purs u ~n t to Assemb ly Ru ic 77.
08/26/14 Read third time. Passed. Orden:d t o the As sembly. (Ayes 35. Noe:s 0. Pag e 4854.).
08/25 / 14 Read second time Ordered to third reading .
08/22/14 Read third time and a mended. Ordered to secon d re ad ing.
06/26/14 Read s"cond tim e and amend ed . Ordered to th ird read ing.
05/25 /14 From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 24).
05/17/14 From committee chair, with author's amen dments: Am end, an d r e-refer t o comm itt ee . Read second t ime, a mended, and r e·referrbJ to
Com. on T. & H .
05/11/14 In comr71ittee: Sc:l, first hearing. Hearing ca nceled at the request of author.
06/05/14 Referred to Com. on T. & H.
05/23/14 Jn Senate. Read f irst time . To Com . o n RLS . for assignment.
05/23/14 Re;id third time. Passed . Ord ered to the. Senate. (Ayes 72. Noes 0 . Page 5097 .)
05/1 2/14 Read second time. Ordered to t h ird read i ng.
05/08/l4 From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 8 . Noe s 0 .) (May 7).
I
05/05/14
05/05/14
I
I
05/05/14
05/05/14
I
05/05/ 14
05/01/14
'1 04/23/14
04/22/14
I 04/01/14
03/28/14
0 3/28/14
02/21/14
02/20/14
Re-refe rred to Com. on L. GOV.
(pending r e -referra l to :ne Com . o n L. GOV.)
Joint Rule 5 2(a), file notice su,,pended. (Page 4737.)
Assembly Ru 1e 56 suspended. (Page 4 737 .)
Rea d second tim e and amended.
From committee: Do pass as amended and r <?·refer to Com. on L. GOV. (Ayes 7. Noc~ 0.) (April 30).
Re-referred to Com. o n H. & C.D.
From committee chair, with author's amendments : Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H . & C.D. Read second t ime and amended.
Re-referred to Com. on H. & C.D.
From committee chilir, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on H . & C.D. Read second t ime and •mel'ded .
Referr ed t o Corns . on H. & C.D. and L. GOV.
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23 .
Read first tim e. To print.
I
I
I
I
[ ___________________ , ____________ -·--I
--_I
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Date of Hearing: April 30, 20 14
AB 2222
Page l
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Ed Chau, Chair
AB 2222 (Nazarian) -As Amended: April 22 , 2014
SUBJECT: Housing: Density Bonus.
SUMMARY: Prolu.bits an applicant from receiving a density bonus tmless the propo sed
housing development or condominium project wouk:l maintain the nwnber and proportion of
affordable housing wiits within the proposed development, and increases the required
affordability from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer. Specifically, this bill:
1) Pro.hi.bits an applicant from receiving a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions
if a proposed housing development or condominium project is located on any property that
includes a parcel on which dwelling units have , at any time in the five-year period preceding
the application, been:
a) Occupied by lower-or very low-income households;
b) Subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels
affordable to persons and fumilies of lower-or very low-income; or
c) Subject to any other form of rent or price control through a public entity 's va lid
exercise of its police power.
2) Provides that the above prolu.bition sha ll not apply if the proposed housing development or
condominium project would maintain the nwnber and proportion of affordab le housing units
within the development, as well as include the additiona l set aside of affordab le Wlits under
the density bonus formula.
3) Increases the affordabi lit y requirement of all low-and very low-income units that qualified
an applicant for a density bonus from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer.
EXISTING LAW:
l) Defines "density bonus " as a density increase over the otherwise maximum allowable
residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the local government.
2) Requires all cities and counties to adopt an ordinance that specifies how they will implement
state density bonus law.
3) Requires local governments to grant a density bonus when an applicant for a housing
development of five or more units seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at
least any one of the fo llowing:
a) 10 % of the total units for lower-income households;
b) 5% of the total units for very-low income households ;
c) A senior citiz.en housing development or mobilehome park; and ,
AB 2222
Page 2
d) 10% of the units in a common-interest development (CID) for moderate-income
households.
4) Provides that, when an applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condominium
project agrees to provide at least 33% of the total units of the proposed condominium project
to p ersons and fumilies of low-or moderate-income , or 15 % of the total units of the proposed
condominium project to lower-income households , and agrees to pay for the reasonably
necessary administrative costs incurred by a local government, the local government must
either grant a density bonus or provide other incentives of equivalent financial value.
5) Provides that a local government, when considering an application for approval to convert
apartments to a condominium project, may place reasonable conditions on the granting of a
density bonus or other incentives .
6) Provides that the density bonus for low-, very low-, and moderate-income units mcrease
incrementa I ly according to a set formula.
7) Requires that the applicant agree to continued affordability of all low-and very low-income
unites that qualified the applicant for the density bonus for at lea st 30 years.
8) Provides a 15 % density bonus to the developer of a market-rate housing project who donates
land to a local government that could accommodate housing for very low-income households
equal to at least l 0% of the number of units in the development, subject to certain conditions.
For each one percent increase above the I 0 %, the de nsity bonus increases by 1 % up to a
maximum combined density incre ase of 35%.
9) Requires that applicants receive incentives or concessions unless the local government
makes a written finding , based upon substantial evidence, that
a) The concession or incenti ve is not needed to provide the affordable housing;
b) The concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact on health and safety,
the environment, or an historical resource ; or
c) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal Jaw.
10) Specifies that concessions or incentives may include the following:
a) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of wning code requirements
or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards.
b) Approval of mixed-use wning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial,
office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and
are compatible with the project and the s urrounding area.
AB 2222
Page 3
c) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the local
government that result in identifiable , financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions.
11) Requires local government s to provide applicants with the following number of incentives or
concessions:
a) One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 10% of the total units for
lower-income households , at least 5% for very low-income households, or at least
10% for persons and families of moderate-income in a connnon interest development.
b) Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 20% of the total units
for lower-income households, at least 10% for very low-income household s, or at
least 20% for persons and families of moderate-income in a common interest
development.
c) Three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30% of the total units
for lower-income households, at least 15 % for very low-income households, or at
least 30% for persons and families of moderate-income in a common interest
development.
12) Authorizes an applicant to initiate judicial proceedings if the local government refuses to
grant a requested density bonus , incentive, or concession. If a court finds that the refusal to
grant the request is in violation of density bonus law , the court will awa rd the plaintiff
reasonable attorney's fees and costs.
13) Prolubits a local government from applying any development standard that will have the
effect of precluding the construction of housing that qualifies for a d ensity bonus at the
densities or with the concessions or incentives required by density bonus law.
14) Authorizes a developer to request a waiver or reduction of development s tandards that will
have the effect of physically precluding the construction of housing that qualifies for a
d ensity bonus at the densities or with the concessions or incenti ve s required by density bonus
law.
15) Requires the local government to grant either an additional density bonus or and additiona 1
concession or incentive when the applicant proposes to include a child care facility in or
adjacent to the housing development.
16) Provid es that, upon the developer's request, the local government may not require parking
standards greater than th e following :
d) Zero to one bedrooms: one onsite parking space ;
e) Two to three bedrooms: two onsite parking space s ; and
t) Four or more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.
(Government Code Sections 65915-65915.5)
FISCAL EFFECT: None.
COMMENTS:
AB 2222
P age 4
To help address California's affo rdable housin g shortage, the Legislature enacted density bonus
la w to enco urage the deve lopment of more affordable units . Unde r current law, a city or county
must grant a de nsity bonus, concessions and inc e nti ves, pre scnb ed parking r equirements, as well
as waivers of development standards upon a deve lo pe r's reque st when the d eve lop er includ es a
certain percentage of affordable housing in a hous in g deve lopment proj ect.
Density bonus law was originally enacted in 1979, but ha s been changed numerous times since.
SB 18 18 (Hollingsworth), Chapte r 928, Statutes of 2004, made s ignificant changes to the law,
includin g reducing the numb er of housing units required to be provided a t below market rate in
order to qualify for a density bonus. Deve lop ers are entitled to benefits under the density bonus
law when th ey include as few as one afford a ble housin g unit as part of a n otherwise market-rate
proj ect. A housing proj ect with only 5 % very low-income ho using is entitled to a 20% density
bonus , o ne concession, unlimited waive rs from deve lopment standards, and re duce d parking
stand ards for the entire proj ect.
AB 2222 addresses the preservation of exis tin g affo rdable units . U nder exis ting law , a develo per
propos ing to develop a residentia l project, or an applicant for approval to convert apartments to a
condominium proj ect, qualifies for a density bonus if the proposed project has a s pecific
percentage of units set-aside for affordab le hous in g. This bill would prohtbit an applicant from
receiving a density bonus , incentive, or concession if a proposed housing development or
condominium project is located on property where dwelling units have, at any time in the five -
year period preceding the a pplicatio n, b een occupied by very-low or lower-income households or
subj ect to rent control
However, an applicant may overcome this prohibition by, in addition to the p erc entage of units
already set-as id e for affordable housing under the density bonus formula, replacing all existing
affo rd ab le units w ith units of equivalent affordability and size and/or type. The Committee may
wish to accept amendments , lis ted below und er "Committee Amendments", that provides a 100%
affordable project must only re place all existing afforda ble units. Additiona ll y, AB 2222
increases the required affordability from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer for all
affordable units that qualifi ed an a pplicant for a density bonus .
Purpo se of the bill :
Adequate and affordable housin g is an issue of statewide concern but, according to the author,
the change made to d ensity bonus law by SB 18 18 had the reverse effect and resulted in fewer
afford ab le unit s. AB 2222 ens ures that affordable unit s are preserved when a deve lop er proposes
to demolish a s ite and the new proposal is to replace the prior structure with a new residential
structure by ensuring that the project begins with the same numb er of affo rdable units. AB 2222
also increases the affordability requirement from 30 years to 55 years fo r all affordab le units that
qualifi ed a n applicant for a density bonus , which is consistent with other state and local programs
and promotes the supply of affordable units fo r years to come.
Corrnnittee Amendments:
The Corrnnittee may wish to accept the following amendments:
I) On page 5 , in line 4, strike out "." and insert:
AB 2222
Page 5
unless all of the units in the development are affordable to and occupied by lower-income
households.
2) On page 16, in line 7, strike out "." and insert:
unless all of the units in the development are affordable to and occupied by lower-income
households .
Double referred: If AB 2222 passes this committee, the bill will be referred to the Corrnnittee on
Local Government.
REGISTERED SUPPORT I OPPOSITION:
Support
None on file
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Pre pared by: Rebecca Rabovsky I H. & C.D. I (916) 319-2085
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Date of Hearing: May 7 , 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITIEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, C hair
AB 2222 (Nazarian) -As Amended: May 5 , 2014
SUBJECT: Housing: density b o nus.
SUMMARY: Modifies provision s of d ensity bonus law . Specifically, this bill :
AB 2222
Page I
I) Increases the affordability requireme nt of all low-and very low-income units that qualified
an applicant for a density bonus from 30 years o r longer to 55 yea rs or longer.
2) Prohibits an applicant from receiving a density bonus or any other inc entives or concessio ns
if a proposed housing deve lopment or condominium project is located on any property tha t
includ es a parcel on which dwelling units have, at any time in the five-year period preced ing
the application, been:
a) Occupied by lower-or very lo w-income household s;
b) Subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable
to persons a nd fumilies oflower-o r very low-income; or,
c) Subject to a ny other form of rent o r price contro l through a public entity 's valid exerc1Se
of its police power.
3) Provid es that the prohibition in 2), above , shall not apply if the proposed housin g
d eve lo p ment or condominium project would rep lace the exist in g units w ith at least the same
numb e r ofunits of equivalent siz.e o r typ e, o r both, to be made available for re nt at affo rd ab le
housing costs to, and occupied b y, p ersons and fu milies in the same o r lower income
category in the same propo rtion as the existing affo rda ble units , and e ithe r of the following
applies :
a) The proposed housing development inc lud es the additional r equired set aside of
afford a ble units a t the percentages set forth in exis tin g law ; or,
b) Each unit in the d evelo pment is affordable to , and occupied by, either a low-or very low-
income household.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Define s "density bonus" as a density increase o ver the otherwise maximum allowable
resid ential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the local government.
2) Requires a ll citie s and counties to adopt an ordinance th a t sp ecifies how they w ill implement
state d ensity bonus la w.
AB 2222
Page 2
3) Requires local governments to grant a density bonus when an applicant for a housing
d evelopment of five or more units seeks and agrees to construct a project that will contain at
least any one of the following:
a) I 0% of the total units for lower-income households;
b) 5% of the total units for very-low income households;
c) A senior citizen housing development or mobilehome park; and,
d) 10% of the units in a common-interest development (CID) for moderate-income
households.
4) Provides that, when an applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condominium
project agrees to provide at le ast 33% of the total units of the proposed condominium project
to persons and families of low-or moderate-income, or 15 % of the total units of the proposed
condominium project to lower-income households, and agre es to pay for the reasonably
necessary administrative costs incurred by a local government, the local governme nt must
either grant a density bonus or provide other incentives of equivalent financial va lue .
5) Provides that a local government, when considering an application for approval to convert
apartments to a condominium project, may place reasonable conditions on the granting of a
density bonus or other incentives.
6) Provides that the density bonus for low-, very low-, and moderate-income units mcrease
incrementally according to a set formula.
7) Requires that the applicant agree to continued affordab ility of all low-and very low-income
units that qualified the applicant for the density bonus for at least 30 years .
8) Requires that applicants receive incentives or concessions, unless the local government
makes a written finding, based upon substantia l evidence, that:
a) The concession or inc entive is not needed to provide the affordable housing;
b) The concession or incentive would have a specific adverse impact on heahh and safety,
the environment, or an historical resource; or,
c) The conc ession or incentive would be contrary to state or federa l law.
9) Specifies that concessions or incentives may include the following:
a) A reduction in site d evelopment standards or a modification of zoning code requirements
o r architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards;
b) Approval of mixed -use zo nin g in conjlll1ction with the housing project if commercial,
office, industrial , or o ther land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and
are compatible with the project and the surrotll1ding area.; and,
AB 2222
Page 3
c) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the local
government that result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions .
10) Requires local governments to provide applicants with the following number of incentives or
concessions:
a) One incentive or concession for projects that include at least 10% of the total units for
lower-income households, at least 5 % for very low-income households, or at least 10%
for persons and fumilies of moderate-income in a common interest development;
b) Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 20% of the total units for
lower-income households , at least 10% for very low-income households, or at lea st 20%
for persons and fumilies of moderate-income in a common interest development; and,
c) Three incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 30% of the total units for
lower-income households , at least 15% for very low-income households, or at lea st 30%
for persons and fumilies of moderate-income in a common interest development.
11) Authorizes an applicant to inrtiate judicial proceedings if the local government refuses to
grant a requested density bonus , incentive , or concession. If a court finds that th e refusal to
grant the request is in violation of density bonus law, the court will award the plaintiff
reaso nable attorney's fees and costs.
12) Prolubits a local government from applying any development standard that will have the
effect of precluding the construction of housing that qualifies for a density bonus at the
densities or with the concessions or incentives required by density bonus law.
13) Authorizes a developer to request a waiver or reduction of development standards that will
have the effect of physically precluding the construction of housing that qualifies for a
density bonus at the densities or with the concessions or incentives required by density bonus
law.
FISCAL EFFECT: None
COMMENTS:
1) Background on density bonus. To help address California's affordable housing shortage,
the Legislature enacted density bonus law to encourage the development of more affordable
units. Under current law, a city or county must grant a density bonus, concessions and
incentives, prescnbed parking requirements, as well as waivers of development standards
upon a developer's request when the developer includes a certain percentage of affordable
housing in a housing development project.
Density bonus law was originally enacted in 1979 , but has been changed numerous times
since. SB 1818 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 928 , Statutes of2004, made significant changes to
the law, including reducing the number of housing units required to be provided at below
market rate in order to qualify for a density bonus. Developers are entitled to benefits under
the d ensity bonus law when they include as few as one affordable housing unit as part of an
otherwise market-rate project. A housing project with only 5% of very low-income housing
AB 2222
Page 4
is entitled to a 20% density bonus, one concession, unlimited waivers from development
standards, and reduced parking standards for the entire project.
2) Purpose of this bill. This bill makes a mnnber of changes to density bonus law. First, this
bill increases the affordability requirement ofall low-and very low-income units that
qualified an applicant for a density bonus from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer.
Also , the bill prolubits an applicant from receiving a density bonus or any other incentives or
concessions if a proposed housing development or condominium project is located on any
property that includes a parcel on which dwelling units have, at any time in the five-year
period preceding the application, been occupied by lower-or very low-income households,
subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to
persons and fumilies of lower-or very low-income, or subject to any other form of rent or
price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power. This prolubition
shall not apply if the proposed housing development or condominium would replace the
existing units with at least the same number of units of equivalent size or type, or both, to be
made available for rent at affordable housing costs to, and occupied by, persons and fumilies
in the same or lower income category in the same proportion as the existing affordable units ,
in specified instances.
This bill is author-sponsored.
3) Author's statement. According to the author, "Adequate and affordable housing is an issue of
statewide concern. Yet, the change made to the density bonus law by SB 1818 had the
reve rs e effect and has resulted in fewer affordable units .... buildings that were built pre-
SB 1818 that are proposed to be demolished and replaced may now qualify for a density
bonus under the new SB 1818 structure .
"SB 1818 inadvertently created a loophole whereby developers that propose to de"molish pre-
SB 1818 buiklings are not required to begin the new project with the same nwnber of
affordable units . As a resuh, a new project may resuh in less affordable units than previously
existed on the parcel
'This bill addresses the loophole created by SB 1818 and ensures that affordable units are
preserved when a development proposes to demolish a site and the new proposal is to replace
the outdated structure with a new residential structure by ensuring that the project begins
with the same number of affordable units. Additionally, this bill increases the classification
of affordability from 30 years to 55 years. This change is consistent with other state and
local programs and ensures that affordable units remain affordable. AB 2222 will preserve
and promote the supply of affordable units for years to come ."
4) Arguments in support. None on file.
5) Arguments in opposition. None on file .
6) Double-referral. This bill was heard by the Housing and Community Development
Committee on April 30, 2014, and passed with a 7-0 vote.
REGISTERED SUPPORT I OPPOSITION :
Support
N o ne on fil e
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by: De bbie Mic hel /L. GOV. /(916) 319-3958
AB 2222
P age 5
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN
Analysis by : Mark Stivers
Hearing date: June 24, 2014
SUBJECT:
Density bonus Jaw
DESCRIPTION:
BILL NO: AB 2222
AUfHOR: NAZARIAN
VERSION: 6/17/14
F1SCAL: NO
This bill generally makes an applicant ineligible for a density bonus if the proposed housing
development will displace units that are affordable to , or occupied by, lower income household s.
ANALYSIS:
Given California's high land and construction costs for housing, it is extreme ly difficult for the
private market to provide housing units that are affordable to low-and even moderate-income
household s. Public subsidy is often required to fill the financial gap on affordable units . Density
bonus law (referred to below as the traditional density bonus) allows public entities to reduce or
even elirnina te subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more total
units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local z.oning in exc hange for affordable
units. Allowing more total units permits the developer to spread the cost of the affordable units
more thinly over the market-rate units. The idea of density bonus law is to cover at lea st some of
the financing gap of affordable housing with regulatory incentives rathe r than additiona I subsidy.
Under existing law, if a developer proposes to construct a housing development with a specified
percentage of affordable units, the city or county must provide all of the following benefits :
• A density bonus
• Incentives or concessions (hereafter referred to as incentives)
• Waiver of any development standards that prevent the developer from utili zing the d ensity
bonus or incentives
• Reduc ed parking standards
To qualify fo r the bene fits of this provision, a proposed housing development must meet one of
the following criteria: 1) include at least 5 % of the units affordable to very lo w -income
household s, 2) include at least 10% of the units affordable to low-income households, 3) include
at least 10% of the units in a for-sale common-interest development affordable to moderate-
income households, or 4) b e a se nior housing development. Units affordable to lower income
households must remain affordable for 30 years, and for-sale units affordable to moderatc-
income household s must be s ubj ect to an equity sharing agreement that returns a proportionate
share of a ppreciation to the local governments upon resa le of the home . If one of these four
options is met, a develope r is entitled to a base increase in density for the project as a whole
(referred to as a density bonus) and one regulatory incentive. At higher levels of affordability,
AB 2222 (NAZARIAN) Page 2
the develop er is entitled to a s liding scale of density bonuse s, up to a max imum of 35% of the
maximum z.o ning density and up to three incentives.
While a local gove rnment is not required to provide financial assistance or fee waivers, the
inc entive s a local government must grant include any of the followin g :
• A reduction in site development sta ndards
• A modific a tion of z.oning code requireme nts (including a reduction in setbacks, square
footage requirements , or parking spaces, or architectural des ign requirements that exceed the
minimum building standard s)
• Approval of mixe d use z.o ning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office,
industria I, o r other land uses will reduc e the cost of the housing development, and if such
non-residential uses are compatible with the project
• Other regulato ry ince nti ves or concessions that result in identifiable, financia ll y suftkient,
and actual cost reductions
A local government may not apply development standards that preclud e the d ens ity bonus or
incentives from being used unless waiving such standards would have a s ignificant, adverse
impact upon public health, public safety, or the environment.
In addition, parking requirements are ca pped for density bonus deve lopments . A city or county
may not require more than o ne parking s pace per studio or one-bedroo m unit, two parking s paces
per two -o r three-bedroom unit, or two and o ne-half park ing sp aces per four-bedroom or larger
unit . In addition, a d evelop e r may meet the se stand ards with uncovered spaces o r tandem
parking. These p a rking cap s a re automatic . A develop er may request further parking reductions
by using one of the incentives to which the development is entitled.
A similar section o f Jaw (re ferred to here as the conversion density bonus) requires a local
governme nt to grant a develop er a d ensity bo nus of25% or other incentives of equivale nt
financial va lue if the deve lo per is converting apartments to condominiums and agrees to make at
least 33% of the units affordable to low -or moderate-income househo ld s or 15 % of the units
affo rdable to lo w -income households.
This bill , with res pect to both the traditional density bo nus and the conversion d ensity bonus
statutes, makes an applicant ineli g ible for a density b o nus or the incenti ves d escrib ed above if the
proposed housing development is loc a ted o n a parcel from which d we lling unit s have , at any
time in th e p revious five years, been occup ied by lo w-income househo ld s, been s ubj ect to a
recorde d covenant or Jaw that restricts rents to levels a ffordable to low-income household s, o r
been subj ect to any local rent-control o rdinanc e, unless the proposed housing development
re places these units.
At a minimum, the replacement units must b e of equivalent siz.e o r type and affordable fo r 55
years to the same or lower income category as the units to be replaced. The replac e ment units d o
no t count towards the quali fying p ercentages for the d ensity bonus (i.e., the d ens ity bonus units
are in addition to the re placement units), unJess the proposed proj ect will already be l 00%
a ffordable to low-income household s. The number of units the d evelo per must rep lac e is
calculated as fo llows:
AB 2222 (NAZARIAN) Page 3
• For developments occupied on the date of application, the developer must replace all units
occupied by lower-income households at the same or lower level of affordability.
Unoccupied units within the development are replaced in the same proportion as the
occupied units .
• For developments vacated or demolished within the five-year p e riod preceding the
application, the developer must provide a number of units at the same or lower level of
affordability that is equivalent to the highest number of units affordable to or occupied by
low-income households as existed in that five-year period. If the incomes of the former
residents were unknown, then one-half of the replacement units must be affordable to very
low-income households and one-half to low-income households .
The bill further provides that all affordable ownership units that qualify a development for a
density bonus shall be subject to an equity sharing agreement, as opposed to a resale restriction.
Lastly, the bill clarifies that, other than through the incentive or concession provisions described
above, the granting of a density bonus does not require the waiver of a local ordinance or
provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose of the bill. According to the author, density bonus law is intended to encourage
private developers to increase the supply of affordable housing. Because the law does not
require replacement of existing affordable units, however, a density bonus project may result
in fewer affordable units than previously existed on the parcel This bill seeks to correct this
unintended consequence by requiring that density bonus projects start with the same number
of affordab le units before calculating the bonus. This will ensure an overall increase in
affordable housing.
2. Equity sharing for homeownership units. Current law provides that lower-income
homeownership units in a density bonus project must remain affordable to and occupied by
lower income households for 30 years. As a result, a homebuyer who later seeks to resell is
limited in whom he or she may sell to and in the price he or she may ask. This creates
complicated sales and often results in the homebuyer seeing little to no price appreciation,
except for whoever owns the property at year 30 and may sell the home at full market value
for a windfall profit. Moreover, local governments rarely monitor these requirements , and
many cases exist of the homeowner simply receiving a windfall profit at sale prior to year 30.
Moderate-income density bonus units, on the other hand, are subject to an equity sharing
agreement, whereby the homeowner may later sell the home at any price to any buyer , but
must repay to the local government the initia 1 price break he or she received as well as a
proportionate share of appreciation. While the original unit is no longer affordable, the city
must reuse these proceeds to assist another homeowner buy a home. As a result, the equity
sharing model is administratively simpler and ensures perpetual affordability, as opposed to
30-year affordability. This bill places all density bonus homeownership units under the
equity sharing model
3. Technical amendments.
• On page 5, line 31, after "development" insert ", exclusive of a manager's unit or units,"
AB 2222 (NAZARIAN) Page 4
• On page 6 , lines 1-2, strike "this paragraph" and insert "subparagraph (A)"
• On page 6, line 25, after the period insert "All replacement calculations res ulting tn
fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number."
• On page 18, line 4, after "development" insert ", exclusive of a manager's unit or units ,"
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 72-0
L Gov: 8-0
H&CD: 7-0
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the conunittee before noon on Wednesday,
June 18, 2014.)
SUPPORT: Association of Regional Center Agencies
Western Center on Law and Poverty
California Rural Legal As sistance Foundation
Studio City Neighborhood Council
Councilmember Mike Bonin, City of Los Angele s
City of Los Angeles
Coalition ofEconornic Survival
Public Counsel
Women Organizing Resources , Knowled ge, and Services
OPPOSED: None received.
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE
Office of Senate Floor Analyses
1020 N Street, Suite 524
(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478
THIRD READING
Bill No : AB 2222
Author: Nazarian (D)
Amended: 6/26/14 in Senate
Vote : 21
AB 2222
SENATE TRANSPORTATION &HOUSING COMMITTEE : 11-0, 6124114
A YES : DeSaulnier, Gaines , Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso, Lara, Liu, Pavley,
Roth, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/23 /14 -See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Density bonus laws
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill makes an applicant ineligible for a density bonus if the
proposed housing development will displace units that are affordable to , or
occupied by, lower income households .
ANALYSIS: Given California's high land and construction costs for housing, it
is extremely difficult for the private market to provide housing units that are
affordable to low-and even moderate-income households. Public subsidy is often
required to fill the financial gap on affordable units . Density bonus law (referred
to below as the traditional density bonus) allows public entities to reduce or even
eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more
total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning in
exchange for affordable units . Allowing more total units permits the developer to
spread the cost of the affordable units more thinly over the market-rate units. The
idea of density bonus law is to cover at least s ome of the financing gap of
affordable housing with regulatory incentives rather than additional subsidy.
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 2
Under existing law, if a developer proposes to construct a housing development
with a specified percentage of affordable units, the city or county must provide all
of the following benefits :
1. A density bonus.
2. Incentives or concessions (hereafter referred to as incentives).
3. Waiver of any development standards that prevent the developer from utilizing
the density bonus or incentives.
4 . Reduced parking standards.
To qualify for the benefits of this provision, a proposed housing development must
meet one of the following criteria: (1) include at least 5% of the units affordable to
very low-income households, (2) include at least 10% of the units affordable to
low-income households, (3) include at least 10% of the units in a for-sale common-
interest development affordable to moderate-income households, or (4) be a senior
housing development. Units affordable to lower income households must remain
affordable for 30 years, and for-sale units affordable to moderate-income
households must be subject to an equity sharing agreement that returns a
proportionate share of appreciation to the local governments upon resale of the
home. If one of these four options is met, a developer is entitled to a base increase
in density for the project as a whole (referred to as a density bonus) and one
regulatory incentive. At higher levels of affordability, the developer is entitled to a
sliding scale of density bonuses, up to a maximum of 35% of the maximum zoning
density and up to three incentives.
While a local government is not required to provide financial assistance or fee
waivers, the incentives a local government must grant include any of the following:
1. A reduction in site development standards.
2. A modification of zoning code requirements (including a reduction in setbacks,
square footage requirements, or parking spaces, or architectural design
requirements that exceed the minimum building standards).
3 . Approval of mixed use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if
commercia~ office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the
housing development, and if such non-residential uses are compatible with the
project.
CONTINUED
4. Other regulatory incentives or concess ions that result in identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions.
AB 2222
Page 3
A local government may not apply development standards that preclude the density
bonus or incentives from being used unless waiving such standards will have a
significant, adverse impact upon public health, public safety, or the environment.
In addition, parking requirements are capped for density bonus developments. A
city or county may not require more than one parking space per studio or one-
bedroom unit, two p·arking spaces per two-or three-bedroom unit, or two and one-
half parking spaces per four-bedroom or larger unit. In addition, a developer may
meet these standards with uncovered spaces or tandem parking. These parking
caps are automatic. A developer may request further parking reductions by using
one of the incentives to which the development is entitled.
A similar section oflaw (referred to here as the conversion density bonus) requires
a local government to grant a developer a density bonus of 25% or other incentives
of equivalent financial value if the developer is converting apartments to
condominiums and agrees to make at least 33% of the units affordable to low-or
moderate-income households or 15% of the units affordable to low-income
households.
This bill, with respect to both the traditional density bonus and the conversion
density bonus statutes, makes an applicant ineligible for a density bonus or the
incentives described above if the proposed housing development is located on a
parcel from which dwelling units have, at any time in the previous five years , been
occupied by low-income households , been subject to a recorded covenant or law
that restricts rents to levels affordable to low-income households , or been subject
to any local rent-control ordinance, unless the proposed housing development
replaces these units.
At a minimum, the replacement units must be of equivalent size or type and
affordable for 55 years to the same or lower income category as the units to be
replaced. The replacement units do not count towards the qualifying percentages
for the density bonus (i.e., the density bonus units are in addition to the
replacement units), unless the proposed project will already be 100% affordable to
low-income households. The number of units the developer must replace is
calculated as follows:
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page4
1. For developments occupied on the date of application, the developer must
replace all units occupied by lower-income households at the same or lower
level of affordability. Unoccupied units within the development are replaced
in the same proportion as the occupied units.
2 . For developments vacated or demolished within the five -year period preceding
the application, the developer must provide a number of units at the same or
lower level of affordability that is equivalent to the highest number of units
affordable to or occupied by low-income households as existed in that five-
year period. If the incomes of the former residents were unknown, then one-
half of the replacement units must be affordable to very low-income
households and one-half to low-income households.
This bill further provides that all affordable ownership units that qualify a
development for a density bonus shall be subject to an equity sharing agreement, as
opposed to a resale res triction. Lastly, this bill clarifies that, other than through the
incentive or concession provisions described above, the granting of a density bonus
does not require the waiver of a local ordinance or provis ions of a local ordinance
unrelated to development standards.
Background
Equity sharing for homeownership units. Existing law provides that lower-income
homeownership units in a density bonus project must remain affordable to and
occupied by lower income households for 30 years. As a result, a homebuyer who
later seeks to resell is limited in whom he/she may sell to and in the price he/s he
may ask. This creates complicated sales and often results in the homebuyer seeing
little to no price appreciation, except for whoever owns the property at year 30 and
may sell the home at full market value for a windfall profit. Moreover, local
governments rarely monitor these requirements , and many cases exist of the
homeowner simply receiving a windfall profit at sale prior to year 30.
Moderate-income density bonus units, on the other hand, are subject to an equity
sharing agreement, whereby the homeowner may later sell the home at any price to
any buyer, but must repay to the local government the initial price break he/she
received as well as a proportionate share of appreciation. While the original unit is
no longer affordable, the city must reuse these proceeds to assist another
homeowner buy a home. As a result, the equity sharing model is administratively
simpler and ensures perpetual affordability, as opposed to 30-year affordability.
This bill places all density bonus homeownership unit s under the equity s haring
model.
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 5
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No
SUPPORT: (Verified 6/26114)
Alliance for Community Transit -Los Angeles
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
City of Los Angeles
Coalition ofEconomic Survival
Councilmember Mike Bonin, City of Los Angeles
Public Counsel
Studio City Neighborhood Council
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Women Organizing Resources, Knowledge, and Services
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, "The overall purpose
of the density bonus law was to encourage developers to build affordable housing
by requiring local municipalities to provide developers incentives to do so.
However, developers are not required to begin the new project with the same
number of affordable units. Specifically, developers are not required to preserve
affordable units. As a result, a new project may result in less affordable units than
previously existed on the property.
"Adequate and affordable housing is an issue of statewide concern. Yet, the
density bonus law has had the reverse effect and has resulted in fewer affordable
units .
"AB 2222 corrects this issue by requiring proposedhousing projects to preserve
affordable units and requires any other price or rent control requirements to be met.
"Additionally, the change in affordability for rental units will ensure these units
remain affordable for a longer period of time . AB 2222 will preserve and promote
the supply of affordable units for years to come."
ASSEMBLYFLOOR : 72-0, 5/23/14
A YES : Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta,
Bradford , Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Chavez, Chesbro ,
Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle , Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines , Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Grove, Hagman, Hall, Hold en , Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Linder, Logue,
Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 6
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, John A . Perez, Quirk, Qurrk-Silva,
Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams , Yamada, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Daly, Harkey, Roger Hernandez, Mansoor, V.
Manuel Perez, Waldron, Vacancy
JA:d 6/27114 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION : SE E ABOV E
**** END ****
SENATE RULES COMMITTEE
Office of Senate Floor Analyses
1020 N Street, Suite 524
(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) 327-4478
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2222
Author: Nazarian (D)
Amended: 8/22/ 14 in Senate
Vote: 21
AB 2222
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE: 11-0, 6/24/14
A YES: DeSaulnier, Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso, Lara, Liu, Pavley,
Roth, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 72-0, 5/23 /14 -See last page for vote
SUBJECT: Density bonus laws
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill makes an applicant ineligible for a density bonus if the
proposedhousing development will displace units that are affordable to, or
occupied by, lower income households.
Senate Floor Amendments of8/22/14 (1) allow replacement units to be either
rental or for-sale units; (2) count the replacement units towards the density bonus;
and (3) exempt applications for density bonuses submitted before January 1, 2015.
ANALYSIS: Given California's high land and construction costs for housing, it
is extremely difficult for the private market to provide housing units that are
affordable to low-and even moderate-income households. Public subsidy is often
required to fill the financial gap on affordable units. Density bonus law (referred
to below as the traditional density bonus) allows public entities to reduce or even
eliminate subsidies for a particular project by allowing a developer to include more
total units in a project than would otherwise be allowed by the local zoning in
exchange for affordable units. Allowing more total units permits the developer to
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 2
spread the cost of the affordable units more thinly over the market-rate units . The
idea of density bonus law is to cover at least some of the financing gap of
affordable housing with regulatory incentives rather than additional subsidy.
Under existing law, if a developer proposes to construct a housing development
with a specified percentage of affordable units, the city or county must provide all
of the following benefits:
1. A density bonus .
2. Incentives or concessions (hereafter referred to as incentives).
3 . Waiver of any development standards that prevent the developer from utilizing
the density bonus or incentives.
4 . Reduced parking standards.
To qualify for the benefits of this provision, a proposed housing development must
meet one of the following criteria: (1) include at least 5% of the units affordable to
very low-income households, (2) include at least 10% of the units affordable to
low-income households, (3) include at least 10% of the units in a for-sale common-
interest development affordable to moderate-income households, or (4) be a senior
housing development. Units affordable to lower income households must remain
affordable for 30 years, and for-sale units affordable to moderate-income
households must be subject to an equity sharing agreement that returns a
proportionate share of appreciation to the local governments upon resale of the
home. If one of these four options is met, a developer is entitled to a base increase
in density for the project as a whole (referred to as a density bonus) and one
regulatory incentive. At higher levels of affordability , the developer is entitled to a
sliding scale of density bonuses , up to a maximum of35% of the maximum zoning
density and up to three incentives .
While a local government is not required to provide financial assistance or fee
waivers, the incentives a local government must grant include any of the following:
1. A reduction in site development standards.
2. A modification of zoning code requirements (including a reduction in setbacks,
square footage requirements, or parking spaces, or architectural design
requirements that exceed the minimum building standards).
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 3
3. Approval of mixed us e zoning in conjunction with the hous ing project if
commercial, office, industrial, or other land uses will reduce the cost of the
housing development, and if such non-residential uses are compatible with the
project.
4. Other regulatory incentives or concessions that result in identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions.
A local government may not apply development standard s that preclude the dens ity
bonus or incentives from being used unless waiving such standards will have a
significant, adverse impact upon public health , public safety, or the environment.
In addition, parking requirements are capped for density bonus developments. A
city or county may not require more than one parking space per studio or one-
bedroom unit, two parking spaces per two-or three-bedroom unit , or two and one-
half parking spaces per four-bedroom or larger unit. In addition, a developer may
meet these standards with uncovered spaces or tandem parking. These parking
caps are automatic . A developer may request further parking reductions by using
one of the incentives to which the development is entitled.
A similar section oflaw (referred to here as the conversion density bonus) requires
a local government to grant a developer a density bonus of25% or other incentives
of equivalent fmanc ial value if the developer is converting apartments to
condominiums and agrees to make at least 33% of the units affordable to low-or
moderate-income households or 15% of the units affordable to low-income
households.
This bill, with respect to both the traditional density bonus and the conversion
density bonus statutes, makes an applicant ineligible for a dens ity bonus or the
incentives described above if the proposed housing development is located on a
parcel from which dwelling units have, at any time in the prev ious five years, been
occupied by low-income households , been subject to a recorded covenant or law
that restricts rents to levels affordable to low-income households, or been subject
to any local rent-control ordinance, unless the propo sed hous ing development
replaces these units.
At a minimum , the replacement units must be of equivalent size or type and
affordable for 55 years to the same or lower income category as the units to be
replaced . Allows the replacement units to count toward s the density bonus . The
number of units the developer must replace is calculated as follows:
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 4
1. For developments occupied on the date of application, the deve loper must
replace all units occupied by lower-income households at the same or lower
level of affordability. Unoccupied units within the development are replaced
in the same proportion as the occupied units.
2. For developments vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding
the application, the developer must provide a number of units at the same or
lower level of affordability that is equivalent to the highest number of units
affordable to or occupied by low-income household s as existed in that five-
year period. If the incomes of the former residents were unknown, then one-
half of the replacement units must be affordable to very low-income
households and one-half to low-income households.
This bill further provides that all affordable ownership units that qualify a
development for a density bonus shall be subject to an equity sharing agreement, as
opposed to a resale restriction . This bill clarifies that, other than through the
incentive or concession provisions described above, the granting of a density bonus
does not require the waiver of a local ordinance or provisions of a local ordinance
unrelated to development standards. Lastly, this bill exempts applications for
density bonuses submitted before January 1, 2015, from the bill's provisions.
Background
Equity sharing for homeownership units . Existing law provides that lower-income
homeownership units in a density bonus project must remain affordable to and
occupied by lower income households for 30 years. As a result, a homebuyer who
later seeks to resell is limited in whom he/she may sell to and in the price he/she
may ask. This creates complicated sales and often results in the homebuyer seeing
little to no price appreciation, except for whoever owns the property at year 30 and
may sell the home at full market value for a windfall profit. Moreover, local
governments rarely monitor these requirements , and many cases exist of the
homeowner simply receiving a windfall profit at sale prior to year 30.
Moderate-income density bonus units, on the other hand, are subject to an equity
sharing agreement, whereby the homeowner may later sell the home at any price to
any buyer, but must repay to the local government the initial price break he/she
received as well as a proportionate share of appreciation. While the original unit is
no longer affordable, the city must reuse these proceeds to assist another
homeowner buy a home. As a result, the equity sharing model is administratively
simpler and ensures perpetual affordability, as opposed to 30-year affordability.
CONTINUED
AB 2222
Page 5
This bill places all density bonus homeownership units under the equity sharing
model.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/22/14)
Alliance for Community Transit -Los Angeles
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
City of Los Angeles
Coalition ofEconomic Survival
Councilmember Mike Bonin, City of Los Angeles
Public Counsel
Studio City Neighborhood Council
Venice Community Housing Corporation
Western Center on Law and Poverty
Women Organizing Resources , Knowledge, and Services
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author, "The overall purpose
of the density bonus law was to encourage developers to build affordable housing
by requiring local municipalities to provide developers incentives to do so .
However, developers are not required to begin the new project with the same
number of affordable units. Specifically, developers are not required to preserve
affordable units. As a result, a new project may result in less affordable units than
previously existed on the property.
"Adequate and affordable housing is an issue of statewide concern. Yet, the
density bonus law has had the reverse effect and has resulted in fewer affordable
units.
"AB 2222 corrects this issue by requiring proposedhousing projects to preserve
affordable units and requires any other price or rent control requirements to be met.
"Additionally, the change in affordability for rental units will ensures these units
remain affordable for a longer period of time. AB 2222 will preserve and promote
the supply of affordable units for years to come."
CONTINUED
ASSEMBLYFLOOR: 72-0, 5/23 /14
AB 2222
Page 6
A YES: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano , Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta,
Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos , Chau, Chavez, Chesbro ,
Conway, Cooley, Dababneh, Dahle, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Frazier, Beth Gaines , Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Grove, Hagman, Hall, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine , Linder, Logue,
Lowentha~ Maienschein, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, John A. Perez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva,
Rendon, Ridley-Thomas , Rodriguez, Salas , Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner,
Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk , Williams, Yamada, Atkins
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bonilla, Daly, Harkey, Roger Hernandez, Mansoor, V.
Manuel Perez, Waldron, Vacancy
JA:d 8/25114 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/O PPOSITION : SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2222 (Nazarian)
As Arrended August 22 , 2014
Majority vote
ASSEMBLY: 72 -0 (May 23, 2014)
Original Committee Re ference: H. & C.D.
AB 2222
Page 1
SENATE: 35 -0 (August 26 , 2014)
SUMMARY: Prolu.bits an applicant from receiving a density b o nus unless the proposed housin g
development or condomin ium project would , at a minimum, maintain the number and proportion
of affordable hous ing units within the pro posed deve lo pment. Specifically, this bill:
I) Prolu.bits an a pplicant from receiving a density b o nus or any other incentives or concessions
if a proposed housing d evelopment o r condominium project is proposed on any property that
include s a parcel or p arcels on which rental dwellin g units are or, if the dwelling units ha ve
been vacated or demolished in the five-year period preceding the applicatio n, b een:
a) Occupied by very low-or low-income hous e hold s;
b) Subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable
to persons and fumilies of very low-or lo w-income ; or
c) Subject to any o ther form o frent or price control through a public ent ity 's valid exerc ise
of its police power.
2) Provides that a d eve lop e r may overcome the above prolu.bition if the proposed housin g
development or condominium project wo uld repla ce the existing afforda ble units with at lea st
the same numb er and type of affordable units and e ithe r of the follow in g applies:
a) For mixed-income hous ing , the development must includ e additiona l affo rdab le units at
the percentage required by existing density bonus law , inclusive of the units replaced
pursua nt to this bill; o r,
b) For 100% affordable developments a ll units, except for the manager's unit o r units , are
occupied b y either very low-or low-income households.
3) De fines ''replace," for purposes of re plac in g units affo rda ble to or occup ied b y lower income
households, as meaning:
a) For developments occupied o n the date of application, the developer must provide at least
the same numb er of units of equivalent size o r type, or b oth, to be made availa b le for
affordable rent or ownership to , and occupied by, p ersons and fumilies in the same o r
lower inc ome catego.ry. Unoccupied units within the d eve lopment are re p laced in the
same proportion as th e occupied units .
b) For d evelopments vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the
application, the d eveloper must provide a numb e r of unit s availab le for re nt or ownership ,
affordable to persons and fumilies in the same or lower income category, that is
AB 2222
Page 2
equivalent to the highest munber of units affordable to or occup ied by low-income
house hold s as existed in that five-year period. If the incomes of the former residents are
unknown, then one-half of the replacement llllits must be affo rdab le to very low-income
households and one-half to low-income households.
4) Provides that rental replacement units must be subject to a recorded affordabili ty restriction
for at least 55 years.
5) Increases the affordability requireme nt of all very low-and low-income rental units that
qualified an a pplicant for a d ensity bonus from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer.
6) Provides that affordable ownership units that qualify a development for a density bonus must
be subject to an equity sharing agreement, as opposed to a resale restriction.
7) Clarifies that, other than through the incentive or concession provisions lUlder density bonus
law, the granting of a density bonus does not require the waiver of a local ordinance or
provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standard s.
8) Provides that this bill does not apply to applicants for density bonuses with applications
submitted to, or processed by, a local goverrurent before January I, 2015.
The Senate amendments:
l) Clarify that a density bonus applicant is prohibited from receiving a density bonus or any
other incentives or concessions if a proposed housing de velopment or condomin ium project
is located on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which affordable rental
dwelling units existed at any time in the five-year period preceding the application, including
units that have since been vacated or demolished.
2) Clarify that a manager's unit or units is not collllted towards determining whether a project is
l 00% affordable for purposes of overcoming th e prohibition on density bonus on sites where
affordable rental housing has existed within the five-year period preceding the application.
3) Define the term "replace," for purposes of replacing units affordable to or occupied by lower-
income households , as meaning:
a) For developments occupied o n the date of application, the developer must provide a t least
the same numb er of units of equiva lent siz.e or type, or both, to b e made available for
affordable rent or ownership to, and occupied by, persons and families in the same or
lower income category. Unoccupied units within the development are repla ced in the
same proportion as the occupied llllits.
b) For deve lopments vacated or demolished within the five-year period preceding the
application, the develo per must provid e a numb er of units availab le for rent or ownership ,
affordable to persons and families in th e same or lower income category, that is
equivalent to the highest number of units affordable to or occupied by low-income
households as existed in that five-year period. If the incomes of the former residents are
unknown, then one-half of the replacement units must be affordable to very low-income
household s and one-half to low-income households.
AB 2222
Page 3
4) Provide that rental replacement units must be subject to a recorded affordability restriction
for at least 55 yea rs.
5) Provide that, for mixed-income housing developments, replacement tmits cotmt towards the
density bonus formula.
6) Provide that affordable ownerslrip tmits that qualify a development for a density bonus must
be subject to an equity s haring agreement, as opposed to a resale restriction.
7) Clarify that, other than through the incentive or concession provisions under density bonus
law, the granting of a density bonus does not require the waiver of a local ordinance or
provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
8) Provide that this bill does not apply to applicants for d ensity bonuses with applications
submitted to, or processed by, a local government before January I, 2015.
FISCAL EFFECT: None
COMMENTS: To help address California's affordable housing shortage, the Legislature enacted
density bonus law to encourage the development of more affordable units. Under current law, a
city or county must grant a density bonus , concessions and incentives, prescnbed parking
requirements, as well as waivers of development standards upon a developer's request when the
d eveloper includes a certain percentage of affordable housing in a housing d evelopment project.
Density bonus law was originally enacted in 1979, but has been changed numerous titres since .
SB 1818 (Hollingsworth), Chapter 928, Statutes of 2004, made significant changes to the law,
including reducing the number of housing units required to be provided at below market rate in
order to qualify for a density bonus. Developers are entitled to benefits under the density bonus
law when they include as few as one affordable housing unit as part of an otherwise market-rate
project. A housing project with only 5 % very low-income housing is entitled to a 20% density
bonus, one concession, unlimited waivers from development standards, and reduced parking
standards for the entire project.
This bill addresses the preservation of existing affordable rental and ownership units . Under
existing law, a developer proposing to develop a residential project, or an applicant for approval
to convert apartments to a condominium project, qualifies for a d ensity bonus if the proposed
project has a specific perce ntage of units set-aside for affordable housing. This bill would
prohibit an applicant from receiving a density bonus, incentive, or concession if a proposed
housing development or condominium project is located on property where dwelling tmits have,
at a ny time in the five-year period preceding the application, been occupied by very low-or low-
income households or subject to rent control. This includes units and projects that have s ince
been vacated or d emolis hed.
However, an applicant may overcome this prohibition by replac ing, as specified, the affordable
unit s with renta l or ownership tmits of equivalent affordability and size and/or type, as well as
either providing an additional set-aside of affordable housing tm.its tmder the density bonus
formula (inclusive of the replacement units) or developing a 100% affordable proj ect. This bill
also increases the required affordability from 30 years or longer to 55 years or longer for all
affordable rental units that qualified an a pplicant for a density bonus , and requires replacement
AB 2222
Page 4
rental units to be subject to a recorded affordability restnctJon for at least 55 years. If the units
that qualified an applicant for a density bonus are affordable ownership units, as opposed to
rental units, they must be subject to the equity sharing model rather than a resale restriction.
Under existing law, only moderate income affordable ownership units are subject to the equity
sharing model
This bill also clarifies that, other than through the incentive or concession proVJSJOns under
density bonus law , the granting of a density bonus does not require the waiver of a local
ordinance or provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
Lastly, this bill does not apply to applicants for density bonuses with applications submitted to,
or processed by, a local government before January 1, 2015.
Analysis Prepared by: Rebecca Rabovsky I H. & C.D. I (916) 319-2085
FN: 0005515
Home
l°';J~ d . <'~uJo?<'Jfj «~--
L EG I S I .A T I VF. f~FO RM A TION
B ill Informati on Ca li fornia La w Pubhcat1ons Other Reso urces My S ubscri ptions My Favorites
AB-2222 Housing density b onus. (2013-2 014)
Date Result Location Ayes Noes NVR Motion
08/27/14 I (PASS) Assembly Floor 78 0 AB 2222 NAZAR I AN Concurrence in Senate Amendments
Ayes: Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bl oom, Bocanegra, Boni lla, Banta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Chavez, Chesbro, Conway, Cool ey, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Fraz ier,
Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Roger Hernandez, Holden, Jon es,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Under, Logue, Lowenthal, Ma1enschein, Mansoor, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuch1, Nazarian,
Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea , John A. Perez, V. Manuel Perez, Quirk , Qu irk-Silva, Rendon, Rid ley-Thomas, Rodriguez,
Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wa gner, Waldron , Weber, Wieckowski, Wi lk, Williams, Yamada, Atkins
Noes:
No Votes Recorded: Harkey
08/26/14 (PASS) Senate Floor 35 0 5 Assembly 3rd Read ing AB2222 Nazarian By DeSaulnier
Ayes: Anderson, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, Corbett, Correa, DeSaulnier, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Galg1ani , Hernandez, Hill,
Hue so, Huff, Jack son, Knight, Lara, Leno, Lieu, Liu, Mitchell, Manning, Mor rel l, Nielsen, Pad il la, Pavl ey, Roth, Steinberg, Torres,
Vidak, Wa lters, Wolk, Wyland
Noes:
No Votes Recorded: Cald e ron, De Leon, Hancock, Wright, Yee
06/2 4/14 (PASS) Se n Transportation and Housing 11 0 0 Do pass as amended .
Ayes: Beall, Cannella, DeSaulnier, Gaines, Galgiani, Hueso, La ra, Liu, Pavley, Roth, Wy la nd
N oes:
No V o t es Recorded :
I 05/23/14 (PASS) Assembly Floor 72 0 7 AB 2222 NAZARIAN Assembly Third Reading
Ayes : Achadjian, Alejo, Allen, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Ca lderon,
Campos, Chau, Chavez, Chesbro, Conway, Coo ley, Dababneh, Dahle, Dickinson, Donnel ly, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Beth
Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Grove, Hagman, Hall, Holden, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Levine,
Linder, Log ue , Lowenthal, Maienschein, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson,
Perea, John A. Perez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridl ey-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas , Skinner, Stone, Ting, Wagner, Weber,
Wi eckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yam ada, Atkins
Noes:
No Vo t es Recorded: Bonilla, Da l y, Harkey, Roger Hernandez, Mansoor, V. Manuel Pe re z, Waldron
05 /07/14 (PASS) Asm Local Govemment 8 0 Do pass.
Ayes: Achadjian, Alejo, Bradford, Gordon, Levine, Melendez, Mulhn, Rendon
Noes:
No V o t es Recorded: Waldron
04/30/14 (PASS) Asm Housing and Community
Devel opment
7 0 0 Do pa ss as amended and be re-referr ed to the Committee on Local
Government.
Ayes: Brown, Chau, Beth Guines, Gordon, Maienschein, Quirk-Sil va, Yamada
Noes:
No V otes Recorde d :
I
I
i
I
I
I
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
9.J~ /fl . (__.auloP11rn-.
LEGIS LATIVE I~FORMAT I ON
Home Bill Information Cal ifornia La w Pub li cations Othe r Resou rces My Subscriptions My Favorites
AB -222 2 H ousi n g d e nsity bo nu s . (2013-2014)
r-------------~
Current Versio n : 09/27/14 -Chaptered Compared to Version : 09/27/14 -Ch a pte_red
Ass e mbly B ill N o . 2222
CHAPTE R 682
" v Compare Vers ion s 0
An act to amend Sections 65 9 15 and 65915.5 of the Governm ent Cod e , relati ng to ho us ing .
[ App roved b y Go vernor September 27, 20 14 . Filed w ith Secr etary of State
September 27, 20 14. ]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2222, Nazarian . Housin g dens ity bonus .
The Planni n g and Zoning La w requ ires, when a developer of housing proposes a housing development within
the jurisd iction of the local government, that the city, county, or city and cou n ty provide the deve loper wi t h a
density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housi ng units or the
donation of land with i n the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified
percentage of un its for v ery low, low-, o r moderate-income households or qualifying res idents.
Existing law requ ires continued affordabil ity for 30 years or longer, as specified, of all very lo w and low-income
units that qualified a n applican t for a density bonus.
This b il l instead would require con tinued affordabi lity for 55 years or longer, as specif ied, of all very low and
low-inco me rental un its t h a t q ua lified an appl icant for a dens ity bonus . This bill would also include very low
and low-income persons among the initial occupants of for-sale units. T his bill also wou ld prohibit an applicant
from receivi ng a density bonus unless the proposed housing development would, for units subject to certai n
affordabil it y requ irements that were occupied b y qualifying persons on the date of application , provide at least
the same number of units of equivalent size or type, or bot h, to be made available for rent at affordable
housin g costs to, and occupied by, pe rso ns and famil ies in the same or lower in come category as those
hou se holds in occupancy. For those subject types of units that have been vacated or demol ished at t he t i me of
application, t his bill would condition a density b o nus upon at least the same number of u nits of equivalent size
or type, or both, as existed at the highpoi nt in the preceding 5 years being made ava il ab le at affordable rent
or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and famil ies in the same or lower in come category as
those persons and famil ies in occupancy at that time, if known.
Existing law also requires a ci ty, county, or city and county to grant a density bonus or o ther incenti ves, as
specified, when an app licant for app rova l to convert apartments to a condominium project agrees, among
othe r thin gs, to provide a specified percentage of units for low-or moderate-i ncome persons and fami li es or
for lower income households, as defined.
This bill also would prohibit an applicant from receiving a density bonus unless the proposed condominium
project would replace the existing affordable units with at least the same number of affordable units of
equivalent size or type, or both, and the proposed development, inclusive of the units replaced pu r suant to the
requirements described above, contains affordable units according to specified percentages or consists entirely
of affordable units.
Vote: majority App_ropriation: no Fisca l Committee: no Local Prog ram: no
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 65915 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65915. (a) When an applicant seeks a density bonus for a housing development within, or for the donation of
land for housing within, the jurisdiction of a city, county, or city and county, that local government shall
provide the applicant with incentives or concessions for the production of housing units and child care facilities
as prescribed in this section. All cities, counties, or cities and counties shall adopt an ordinance that specifies
how compliance with this section will be implemented. Failure to adopt an ordinance shall not relieve a city,
county, or city and county from complying with this section.
(b) (1) A city, county, or city and coun ty shall grant one density bonus, the amount of which shall be as
specified in subdivision (f), and incentives or concessions, as described in subdivision (d), when an ap plicant
for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a hous ing development, excluding any units
permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to this section, that w ill con ta in at least any one of the
fo llowing:
(A) Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for lowe r income households, as defi ned i n Section
50079 .5 of the Health and Safety Code.
(B) Five percent of the total units of a housing development for very low income households, as defined in
Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C) A senior citizen housing development, as defined in Se ct ions 51.3 and 51.12 of the Civil Code, or
mobilehome park that limits residency based on age requirements for housing for older persons pursu ant to
Section 798.76 or 799.5 of th e Civil Code.
(D) Ten percent of the total dwelling un it s in a common i nterest development as defined in Section 4100 of the
Civil Code for persons and fami li es of moderate income , as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety
Code, provided that all units in the development are offered to the public fo r purchase.
(2) For purposes of calculating the amount of the density bonus pursuant to subdivi sion (f), the applicant who
requests a density bonus pursuant to this subdivision shall elect w hethe r the bonus shall be awa rded on the
basis of subparag raph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1).
(3) For the purposes of th is section, "total un its" or "total dwelling u nits" does not include u nits added by a
density bonus awarded pursuant to this section or any local law granting a greater density bonus.
(c) (1) An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, continued affordability
of al l very low and low-income rental units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus for
55 years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing ass istance program,
mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program. Re n ts for t he lower income density bonus uni ts shall
be set at. an affordable rent as defined in Section 50053 of the Healt h and Sa f ety Code.
(2) An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure that, the i nitial occupant of
all for-sale units that qualified th e applicant for the award of the density bonus are persons and families of
very low, low, or moderate income, as required, and that the units are offered at an affordabl e ho using cost,
as that cost is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code. The local government sha ll enforce
an equity sharing agreement, un less it is in conflict with the requirements of anot her pub lic funding source or
law. The following apply to the equity sharing agreement:
(A) Upon resa le, the seller of the unit shall retain the value of any improvements, the downpayment, and the
seller's proportionate share of appreciation. The local government shall re capture any in itia l subsidy, as
defined in subparagraph (B), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in subparagraph (C),
which amount shall be used within five years for any of the purposes described in subdivision (e) of Section
33334.2 of the Health and Safety Code that promote home ownership.
(B) For purposes of this subdivision, the local government's initial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market
value of the home at the time of initial sa le minus the initial sale price to the moderate-i ncome household,
plus the amount of any downpayment assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the market value is
lower than the initial market value, then the value at the time of the resale shal l be used as the init ial market
value.
(C) For purposes of this subdivision, the local government's proportionate share of appreciation shall be equal
to the ratio of the local government's initial subsidy to the fair market value of the home at the t ime of initial
sale.
(3) (A) An applicant shall be inelig i ble for a dens ity bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this
section if the housing development is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parcels on which
ren tal dwelling units are or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five -year period
preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to
levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of ren t or
price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lo wer or very low
income households, unless the proposed housing development replaces those units, and either of the following
applies:
(i) The proposed housing developmen t , inclus ive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, contains
affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (b).
(ii) Each unit in the development, exclusive of a manager's unit or un its, is affordable to, and occupied by,
either a lower or very low income household.
(B) For the purposes of this paragraph, "replace" shall mean either of the following:
(i) If any dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) are occupied on the date of application, the proposed
housing development shall provide at least the same number of units of equivalent size or type, or both, to be
made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupi ed by, persons and families in the
same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. For u noccupied dwelling units described in
subparagraph (A) in a development with occupied units, the proposed housing development shall provide uni ts
of equivalent size or type, or both, to be made available at affordable rent or affo r dable housi ng cost to, and
occupied by, persons and families in the same or lower income category in the same proportion of affordability
as the occupied units. All replacement calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next
whole number. If the replacement units wi l l be rental dwelling units, these uni t s shal l be subject to a recorded
affordability restriction for at least SS years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced
shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(ii) If all dwelling units described in subparagraph (A) have been vacated or demolished within the five-year
period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same numb er of
units of equivalent size or type, or both, as existed at the highpoint of those units in the five-year period
preceding the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied
by, persons and families in the same or lower income category as those persons and famili es in occupancy at
that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and fam ilies in occupancy at the highpoint is not known ,
then one-half of the required un its shall be made avai la ble at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and
occupied by, very low income persons and fam ili es and one-half of the required units shall be made available
for rent at affordable housing costs to, and occupied by, low-income persons and families. All replacement
calculations resu lting in fractional units shall be ro unded up to the next whole number. If the replacement
units will be rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordability res t riction for at least
SS years. If the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(C) Paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) does not apply t o an applicant seeki ng a density bonus for a proposed
housing development if their application was submitted to, or processed by, a city, county, or city and co unty
before January 1, 201S.
(d) (1) An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may s ubmit to a city, county, or ci ty and
county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to th is
secti on, a n d may request a meeting w ith the city, county, or city and county. The city, county, or c ity and
county shall grant the concess ion or i ncentive requested by the applicant un less the ci ty, county, or city and
county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A) The concession or i ncentive is not required in order to p r ovide for affordable housing costs, as defined i n
Section 50052.5 of the Hea lth and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted u nits to be set as specified in
s ubd ivisi on (c).
(B) The concessio n or incentive would have a speci fic adverse impact, as defin ed in parag raph (2) of
subdivision (d ) of Section 65589.5, upo n public health and safety or the physical environment or on any real
property that is listed in the California Register of Hi storical Resources and for which there is no feasible
method to satisfactorily m itigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without re ndering the development
unaffordable to low-and moderate-income households.
(C) T he concession or i ncentive would be contrary to state or federal law.
(2) The applicant sha ll receive the fol lowi ng number of incentives or concessions:
(A) One incenti ve or concession for projects that include at least 10 percent of the t otal units for lower income
household s, at least 5 percent for very low income hou seholds, or at least 10 percent for persons and families
of moderate income in a common inte res t development.
(B) Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at le ast 20 pe rcent of the tota l units for lower
incom e households, at least 10 percent fo r very low income ho useholds, or at least 20 percent for persons and
families of modera te in come in a common i nter est development.
(C) Three incentives or concessions for projects that includ e at least 30 percen t of the total u ni t s for low er
i n com e households, at lea st 15 percent for very low income households, o r at least 30 percent for persons an d
families of moderate income in a co mmon i nterest development.
(3) T he applicant may in itiate j u dicial proceedings if th e city, co u nty, or city and county refuses t o grant a
req u ested densi ty bonus, incentive, or con cession. If a co urt finds that the refusa l to grant a requested density
bonus, incentive, or concession is in v iolation of this sect ion, the court s ha ll award the plaintiff reasonable
attorney's fees and cos t s of s u it. Noth ing in this subdivision shall be in terprete d t o require a local government
to grant an i n ce ntive or concession that has a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (d) of Sectio n 65589.5, upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and for whi ch there is no
fe asible method t o sa tisfactori ly mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. Nothing i n th is subdivision sh all
be interpret ed to re quire a local govern ment to grant an incentive or concession that would have an adve rs e
impact on any real property that is l isted in the California Register of Historical Re sources . The city, co unty, or
ci t y and county shal l establ ish procedures for carrying out this secti o n , that shall incl u de legislative body
approval of th e means of compliance with this section.
(e) (1) In no case may a city, county, or ci ty and co u nty apply any development standard that wi l l have the
effect of physical ly precluding the construction of a development meeti ng the criteria of s u bdivision (b) at the
densities o r with the concessions or incentives permitted by t his sec tion . An applicant may submit t o a city,
county, or city and co unty a proposal fo r the waiver or re du ction of developm ent standards that will have the
effect of physically precluding the constru ction of a development meeting t he criteria of su bdivision (b) at the
densities or with the concessions or i ncentives permitted under this section, and may request a meeting w ith
the city, co unty, or c ity and co unty. If a co urt finds that th e r efu s al to grant a waiver or red uction of
developmen t standards is in violation of this section, the court shall award the plaintiff reason able attorney's
fees and costs of su it. Nothing in this subdivision sh all be interpreted t o require a local government to waive or
re duce development standards if the waive r or red u ct ion would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined i n
paragraph (2) of s ubdivisi on (d) of Section 65589.5 , upon health, safety, o r t he physical env i ron ment, and for
which t here is no feasible method to s atisfactori ly mitigate or avoid the speci fic adverse impact. Nothing i n this
subdivision shall be interpreted t o require a local government to wa ive or red uce development standards that
would have an adverse impact on any real property that is l isted in the Cal ifornia Registe r of Histori cal
Reso u rces, o r to g rant any wai ver or re du ction that would be con trary to sta te or fe dera l law.
(2) A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards pursuant to this subdivision shall neither
reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to
subdivision (d).
(f) For the purposes of this chapter, "density bonus" means a density increase over the otherwise maximum
allowable residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to the ci ty, county, or city and
county. The applicant may elect to accept a lesser percentage of density bonus. The amount of density bonus
to which the applicant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage of affordable
housing units exceeds the percentage established in subdivision (b).
(1) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the
density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
Percentage Low-Income Units
10
11
12
13
14
15
17
18
19
20
Percentage Density Bonus
20
21.5
23
24.5
26
27.5
30.5
32
33.5
35
(2) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the
density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
Percentage Very Low Income Units Percentage Density Bonus
5 20
6 22.5
7 25
8 27.5
9 30
10 32.5
11 35
(3) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the
density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of senior housing units.
(4) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b),
t he density bonus shal l be ca lculated as follows:
Percentage Moderate-Income Units Percentage Density Bonus
10 5
11 6
12 7
13 8
14 9
15 10
16 11
17 12
18 13
19 14
20 15
21 16
22 17
23 18
24 19
25 20
26 21
27 22
28 23
29 24
30 25
31 26
32 27
3 3 28
34 29
35 30
36 31
37 32
38 33
39 34
40 35
(5) All density calcu lations resulting in fraction al units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. T he
granting of a density bonus shal l not be interpreted, in and of itself, to require a general plan amendment,
local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approva l.
(g ) (1) When an applicant for a te ntative subdivision map, parcel map, or other residential development
approval donates land to a city, county, or city and county in accordance with this subdivision, the applicant
shall be entitled to a 15-percent increase above the otherwise maximum allowable residential density for the
entire development, as follows:
Percentage Very Low Income Percentage Density Bonus
10 15
11 16
12 17
13 18
14 19
15 20
16 21
17 22
18 23
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
(2) Th is increase shall be in addition to any increase in density mandated by subd i vision (b), up to a maximum
combined mandated density increase of 35 percent if an applicant seeks an increase pursuant to both this
subdivision and subdivision (b). All density calculations resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the
next whole number. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to enlarge or diminish the authority of a city,
county, or city and county to require a developer to donate land as a condition of development. An applicant
shall be eligible for the increased density bonus descri bed in this subdivision if all of t he fo l lowing cond it ions
are met:
(A) The applicant donates and transfers the land no later than the date of approva l of the final s ubdi vision
map, parcel map, or residentia l development application.
(B) The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land bei ng transferred are sufficient to permi t
constructi on of units affordable to very low income households i n an amoun t not less than 10 percent of the
number of residential units of the proposed development.
(C) The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient s ize to permit development of at l east 40
unit s, has the appropriate general plan designation, is appropriately zoned with appropriate development
standards for development at the density described in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2,
and is or will be served by adequate publ ic facilities and infrastructure.
(D) The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals , other than b ui lding pe r mits, necessary for
the development of the very low income housing units on the transferred land, not later than the date of
approva l of the final subdivisi on map, parcel map, or residential development application, except that the local
government may subject the propos ed development to subsequent design review to the extent autho r ized by
subdivision (i) of Section 65583.2 if the design is not reviewed by the local government prior to the time of
transfer.
(E) The transferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed restriction ensuring continued
affordability of the units consistent with paragraphs (1) and (2) of subd ivision (c), which sha ll be r eco r ded on
the property at the time of the transfer.
(F) T he land is transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the local agency. The
local agency may require the applicant to identify and transfer the land to the deve loper.
(G) The transferred land shall be within the boundary of the proposed development or, if the local agency
agrees, w i thin one-quarter mile of the boundary of the proposed development.
(H) A proposed source of funding for the very low income un its shal l be identified not later than the date of
approval of the final subd ivisi on map, parcel map, or residential development application.
(h) (1) When an applicant proposes to construct a housi ng development that co nforms to the requirements of
subdivision (b) and includes a child care facility that will be located on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent
to, the project, the city, county, or city and county shall grant either of the following:
(A) An additional density bonus that is an amount of square feet of residential space that is equal to or greater
than the amount of square feet in the child care faci lity.
(8) An additional concession or incentive that contributes s ignificantly to the economic feasibili t y of t he
construction of the child care facility.
(2) T he city, county, or city and county shall require, as a condition of approvi ng the housing development,
that the following occur:
(A) The child care facility shal l remain in operation for a period of time that is as long as or longer than the
period of time during which the density bonus units are required to remain affordable pursuant to subd iv i sion
( c).
(8) Of the children who attend the c hild care facility, the children of very low income households, lower income
households, or fam i lies of moderate income shall equal a percentage that is equal to or greater than the
percentage of dwelling units that are required for very low income households, lower income households, or
families of moderate income pursuant to subdivision (b).
(3) Notwithstanding any requirement of this subdivision, a city, county, or city and county shall not be
required to provide a density bonus or concession for a child care facility if it finds, based upon substantia l
evidence, that the community has adequate child care facilities.
( 4) "Child care facili ty," as used in this section, means a child day ca re facil ity other than a family day care
home, including, but not li mited to, infant centers, preschools, extended day care fac i lities, and schoolage
child care centers.
(i) "Hou sing development," as used in this section, means a development proj ect for five or more residen t ial
units. For the purposes of this section, "housing development" also includes a subdivision or common interest
development, as defined in Section 4100 of the Civil Code, approved by a city, county, or city and coun ty and
consists of residential units or unimproved residen t ial lots and either a project to substantia ll y rehabilitate and
convert an existing commercial building to residential use or the substantial rehabi litation of an existing
multi fam ily dwel ling, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 65863.4, where the result of the r ehabilitation
would be a net increase in available residential units. For the purpose of calculating a density bonus, the
residential units shall be on contiguous sites that are the subject of one development application, but do not
have to be based upon individual subdivision maps or parcels. The density bonus shall be permitted in
geograph ic areas of the housing development other than the areas where the units for the lower income
households are located .
(j) (1) The granting of a concession or incentive shall not be interpreted, in and of itself, to req uire a general
plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval. T his
provision is declaratory of existing law.
(2) Except as provided in subdivisions (d) and (e), the granting of a densit y bonus shall not be interpreted to
require the waiver of a local ordinance or provisi ons of a local ordinance unrelated to development standards.
(k) For th e purposes of this chapter, concession or incentive means an y of the fol low ing:
( 1) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code req ui rements or architectura l
design requirements that exceed the minimum building stand ard s approved by the California Building
Standards Commission as provided in Part 2 .5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Hea lth
and Safety Code, including, but not lim ited to, a reduction in setback and square footage requ irements and in
the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that wo u ld otherwise be required that results in identifiable, financially
sufficient, and actual cost reductions.
(2) Approval of mixed-use zoning in conjunction with the housing project if commercial, office, industrial, or
other land uses will reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or
other land uses are compatible with the housing project a nd the existing or planned development in the area
where the proposed housing project will be located.
(3) Other regul atory incentives or concessions proposed by the developer or the city, county, or city and
county that result in identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost redu ct ions.
(I) Subdivision (k) does not limit or require the provision of direct financial incentives for the housing
development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city a n d county, or the
waiver of fees or dedication requ i rements.
(m) Th is section shall not be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or app lication of
the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources
Code).
(n) If permitted by loca l ordinance, nothing i n th is section sha ll be construed t o prohi b it a c ity, cou n ty, or city
an d county from granting a densi ty bonus greater than what is described i n this sectio n for a dev elopment
that meets the requ i rements of this section or from granting a proporti onately low er density bo nus t han w hat
is required by this section for developments that do not meet the requi r ements of this sect ion.
(o) For purposes of th is sectio n, the fo ll owi ng defini t io n s shall apply:
( 1) "Development standard" includes a site or construction condition, includ ing, but not limited to, a he ig h t
limitation, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space requi r ement, or a parking ratio t hat
applies to a r esi den tial development pursuant to any ord i nance, general pla n e lement, specific plan, cha rter, or
other loca l cond ition, law, poli cy, resol ution, o r regulation.
(2) "Maximum allowable residential density" means the density allowed u nder the zon i ng ordi nance and la nd
use element of the general plan, or if a range of density is permitted, means the maximum al l owab le density
for the specific zoning range and land use element of the general plan applicable to the project. W here the
dens ity al lowed under the zoning ordinance is inconsistent w ith the dens ity allowed under t h e land use
element of the general plan, the genera l p lan density shall preva i l.
(p) (1) Upon the request of the developer, no city, county, or city and county shall r equire a vehicu lar pa r k ing
ratio, inclusive of hand icapped and guest parking, of a development meeting the criter ia of subd iv isi on (b ),
that exceeds the follow i ng ratios :
(A) Zero to one bedroom: one ons ite parking space.
(B) Two to three bedrooms: two onsite parking spaces.
(C) Four and more bedrooms: two and one-ha lf parking spaces .
(2) I f the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a whole number, the
number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of th is subdivision, a developmen t may
provide "onsite parki ng " through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but n ot th rough onstr eet pa r k i ng.
(3) T his subd i vision shall appl y to a developmen t that meets the requ irements of su bdivis ion (b ) b ut only at
the request of the applicant. An applicant may request parking incentives o r concess ions beyond t hose
provided in this subdivision pursuant to subdivision (d).
SEC. 2. Section 65915.5 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65915.5 . (a) When an applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condomi ni um p r oject agrees t o provide
at least 33 percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project to pe rso ns and fam i lies of low or
moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code , or 15 percent of the total u n its
of the proposed condomi ni um project to lower income households as defined in Section 50079.5 of t he Hea lth
and Safety Code, and agrees to pay for the reasonab ly necessary admini strative costs incur red by a c ity,
county, or city and county pursuant to this section, the city, county, or city and county sha ll eithe r (1) g rant a
density bonus or (2) provide other incentives of equivalent fi n ancial va l ue. A city, county, or city and county
may place such reasonab le conditions on t h e granting of a density bon us o r other incentives of equ ivalent
financial value as it finds appropriate, i ncluding, but not limited to, conditions which assure continued
affordability of units to subsequent purchasers who are persons and families of low and mode rate i ncome or
lower i ncome households.
(b ) For purposes of th is sectio n, "density bonus " means an increase i n un its of 25 percent over the n umber of
apartments, to be provided within the existing structure or structures proposed for conve rsion.
(c) For purposes of this section, "other incentives of equivalent financial value" shall not be construed to
require a city, county, or ci ty and county to provide cash transfer payments or other monetary compensation
but may include the red u ction or waiver of req ui rements which the c ity, county, or city and county might
otherwise apply as conditions of conversion approval.
(d) An applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condominium project may submi t to a city, county, or
city and county a prel iminary proposal pursuant to this section prior to the submittal of any formal req uests
for subdiv is ion map approvals. The city, county, or city and county shall, withi n 90 days of receipt of a written
proposal, notify the applicant in writing of the manner i n which it will comply w ith this section. T he city,
county, or city and county shall establish procedures for carrying out this section, which shall incl ude
legislative body approval of the means of compl iance with this section.
(e) Noth ing in th is section shall be construed to require a city, county, or city and county to approve a p r oposal
to convert apartments to condominiums.
(f) An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or other incentives under this section if the apartments
proposed for conversion constitute a housing development for which a density bonus or other incentives were
provided under Section 65915.
(g) An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this
section if the condominium project is proposed on any property that includes a parcel or parce ls on which
rental dwelling un its are or, if the dwelling units have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period
preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordi nance, or law that restricts rents to
levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income ; subject to a ny other form of rent or
price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or occ up ied by lower or very low
income households, unless the proposed condominium project repl aces those units, as defined in
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of s ubdivision (c) of Section 65915, and either o f t he following app lies:
(1) The proposed condominium project, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to subparag r aph (B) of
paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65915, contains affordab le units at the pe rcentages set forth in
subdivision (a).
(2) Each unit in t he development , exclusive of a manager's un it or units, is affordable to, and occupied by,
either a lower or very low income household.
(h) Subdivision (g) does not apply to an applicant seeking a density bonus for a proposed hous ing
development if their application was submitted to, or processed by, a city, county, or city and county before
. January 1, 2015 .
L. ·--· -------·------------------------·-----.• _i
Home
r
J2'_) ~ ; c_.ati.lo7<rJ~~~
LEGISLATIVE I'.'-.1FORMJ\TION
Bill Information California Law Pubhcat1ons Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites
AB-2222 H ousing densi ty bonus. (2013·2014 )
SECTIO N 1. Section 65915 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65915. (a) f±7 -When an app licant seeks a density bonus for a housing development within , or for the donation
of land for housing within, the jurisdiction of a c ity, county, or city and cou n ty, that local government sh a ll
comply with this section. A city, county, or city and county provide the applicant with incentives or concessions
for the production of housing units and child care facilities as prescribed in this section. All cities, counties, or
cities and counties sha ll adopt an ordinance that specifie s how compl iance wi th this section wi ll be
implemented. Failure to adopt an ordinance shall not re lieve a c ity, county, or city a nd county from complying
with this section.
(2) A local government shall not condition the submission, review, or approva l of an appl ication pursuant to
this chapter on the preparation of an additiona l report or stud'; that is not otherwise required by state law,
including this section. Th is subdivision does not proh i bit a local government from requiring a n a pplicant to
provide reasonable documentation to establish el igibi l ity for a requested density bonus , incentives or
concessions, as described in subdivision (d), waivers or reductions of development st anda r ds, as de s~
subdivision (e), and parldng ratios, as described in subdivision (p).
(3) In order to provide for the e><pedit i ous processing of a density bonus application , the l oca l go .... ernment
shall do all of the following:
(A) Adopt procedures and timelines for processing a elensity bonus application.
(B) PFOviele a list of all documents anel in formation rec:iuired to be submitted w ith the elens ity bonus application
in order for the dens ity bonus applicati on to be deemeel complete. This li st sh all be con sis t ent Y>'ith this
chapter.
(C) Notify the applicant for a density bonus whether the application is complete in a manner consistent with
Se ction 659'13.
(b) (1) A city, county, or city and county shall grant one density bonus, the amount of which sh al l be as
specified in subdivision (f), anel, if rec:iuested by the applicant anel consistent ·n·ith the appl icable rec:iui rem ents
of t hi s section, and incentives or concessions, as described in subd ivision (d), waivers or reducti ons of
de'<'e lopment standards , as elescribeel in subd ivis ion (e), and parking ratios, as described in subd i'v'ision (p),
when an appl icant for a housing development seeks and agrees to construct a housing development,
excluding any units permitted by the density bonus awarded pursuant to this section, t hat w ill contain at least
any one of the following:
(A) Ten percent of the total units of a housing development for lower in come households, as defined in Section
50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code .
(B) Five percent of the total units of a hous ing development for very low income households, as defi ned in
Section 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(C) A sen ior c it izen housing development, as defined in Sections 51.3 and 51.12 of t he Civil Code , or a
mobilehome park that li m its res idency based on age requirements for housi n g for olde r pe rsons pursuant to
Section 798.76 or 799.5 of the Civil Code.
(D) Ten percent of the total d welling units in a common interest elev eloprnent, developmen t as defined in
Section 4100 of the Civil Eeee, Code for persons and famil ies of moderate income, as defined in Sect ion
50093 of the Health and Safety Code, provided that all units in the development arc offered to the public for
purchase.
(E) TeA 19erceAt of the total uAits of a housiAg devclo19meAt for traAsitioAal foster youth , as dcfiAed iA SectioA
66025.9 of the EducatioA Code, disabled vctcFaAS, as dcfiAed iA ScctioA 18541, or homeless 19ers0As, as
defiAed iA the federal Mcl<iAAey VeAto Homeless AssistaAce Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 11301 et seq.). TAc uAits
described in this sub19aragra19h shall be subject to a recorded affordability restrictioA of 55 years aAd shall be
19rovided at the same affordability level as very low iAcomc uAits.
(2) For purposes of calculating the amount of the density bonus pursuant to subdiv ision (f), aR the appl ica nt
who requests a density bonus pursuant to this subdivision shall elect whether the bonus sha ll be awarded on
the basis of subparagraph (A), (B), (C), f&h-or fE1 (0) of paragraph (1).
(3) For the purposes of this section, "total units" or "total dwell i ng units" docs not incl ude units added by a
density bonus awarded pursuant to this section or any local law granting a greater density bonus.
(c) (1) An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure, t'Ae-continued
affordability of all very low and low-income rental units that qualified t he appl icant for t he award of the density
bonus for 55 years or a longer period of time if required by the construction or mortgage financing assistance
program, mortgage insurance program, or rental subsidy program. Rents for the lowe r income density bonus
units shall be set at an affordable rent as defined in Section 50053 of the Hea lth and Safety Code.
(2) An applicant shall agree to, and the city, county, or city and county shall ensure that, the initia l occupant of
all for-sale units that qualified the applicant for the award of the density bonus arc pe r sons and families of
very low, low, or moderate incom e, as required, and that the units arc offered at an affordable housing cost,
as that cost is defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code. The local government shall enforce
an equity sharing agreement, unless it is in conflict with the requirements of another publ ic funding source or
law. The following apply to the equity sharing agreement:
(A) Upon resale, the seller of the unit shall retain the va lue of any improvements, the downpaymcnt, and the
seller's proportionate share of appreciation. The local government shall recapture any in i t ial subsi dy, as
defined in subparagraph (B), and its proportionate share of appreciation, as defined in subpa ragraph (C),
wh ich amount shal l be used within five years for any of the purposes described in subdivision ( c) of Section
33334.2 of the Hea lth and Safety Code that promote home ownership.
(B) For purposes of this subdivision, the local government's i nitial subsidy shall be equal to the fair market
val u e of the home at the time of initial sale minus the initial sale price to the moderate-income household,
plus the amount of any downpaymcnt assistance or mortgage assistance. If upon resale the ma r ket va lue is
lower than th e initial market value, th en the value a t the time of the resale sha ll be used as the initial market
value.
(C) For purposes of this subdivision, the local government's proportionate share of appreciation sha ll be equal
to the ratio of the local government's initial subsidy to the fair market value of the home at the t ime of i n itial
sale.
(3) (A) An applicant shall be inel igible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concessions under this
section if the housing development is proposed on any property that includ es a parcel or parce ls on which
rental dwelling units arc or, if the dwelling un its have been vacated or demolished in the five-year period
preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restri cts rents to
levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of ren t or
price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower or very low
income households, unless the proposed hou sing development replaces those un its, and eithe r of the following
applies:
(i) The proposed housing development, inclusive of the units replaced pursuant to this paragraph, co ntains
affordable units at the percentages set forth in subdivision (b).
(ii) Each unit in the development, exclusive of a manager's unit or units, is affordable to, and occupied by,
either a lower or very low income household.
(B) For the purposes of this paragraph, "replace" shall mean either of the following:
(i) If any dwell i ng units described in subparagraph (A) are occupied on the date of application, the p roposed
housing development shal l provide at least the same number of units of equ ivalent size or type, or both, to be
made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and fa m il ies in the
same or lower income category as those households in occupancy. If the income category of the household in
occupancy is not known , it shall be rebuttably p r esumed that lower income r enter househ olds occup i ed t h ese
un its in the same proportion of 10·1;er income rente r ho useholds to a ll renter households w it hin the jurisdictio n,
as determined by the most recentl y available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Bevelopment's Comprehen s ive --Het!s+~effiaf>ility Strategy database. For unoccupied dwe ll ing units
described in subparagraph (A) in a development with occupied units, t he proposed housi ng de v elopment sha ll
provide un its of equivalent s ize or type, or both, to be made availab le at affor dable rent o r affordable housing
cost to, and occupied by, persons and fami l ies in the same or lower income category as the last household in
occupancy. If the income category of the last household in occupancy is not known , it shal l be r ebuttably
presumed that lower income renter household s occupied these units in the in the same proportion of !ewer
income renter households to all rente r households within the jurisdiction , as d etermined b·; the most recently
available data from the United States Department of Housing and Urban De·velopment's Compre h ens i ve
Housing Affordabil ity St ra t egy database. affordability as the occupied un i ts. All replacement calculations
resulting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement unit s wi ll be
rental dwelling units, these units shall be subject to a recorded affordabil ity r estriction for at least SS years. If
the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to pa r agraph (2).
(ii) If all dwelling uni ts described in subparagraph (A) have been vacated or demolished with in t h e five-year
period preceding the application, the proposed housing development shall provide at least the same number of
units of equivalent size or type, or both, as existed at the highpoint of those units i n the five-year pe ri od
preced i ng the application to be made available at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied
by, persons and famil ies i n the same or lower income category as those persons and fam ilies in occupancy at
that time, if known. If the incomes of the persons and fami lies in occupancy at the highpoi nt is not k n own ,~
shall be rebuttably presumed that low income and very low i ncome renter households occupied these units i n
the same proportion of l ow income and then one-half of the required units shall be made a va i lable at
affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and occupied by, very low income renter households to a l!
reftter households within the jurisdiction, as determined by the most recently avai lable data from the Uni ted
States Department of Housing and Urban Development's Comprehens ive Hous ing Affordabil ity Strategy
elatabase. persons and families and one-half of the required un its shall be made available for rent at
affordable housing costs to, and occupied by, low-income persons and fam ili es. All replacement calculations
resu lting in fractional units shall be rounded up to the next whole number. If the replacement units will be
rental dwelling units, these units sha ll be subject to a recorded affordabil ity restriction for at least SS years . If
the proposed development is for-sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to pa ragraph (2).
(C) i:>Jotw ithstanding subparag r aph (B), for any dwelling unit described in subparagraph (A) that is or was,
with i n the five year peri od preced ing the application , subject to a form of re nt or price co n trol throug h a local
go1i·ernment's val id elEercise of its police power and that is or was occup ied by persons or fami'ies aboYe lower
income, the city, county, or city and county may do either of tlw following:
(i) Require that the replacement units be made avai lable at affordable rent or affordable housing cost to, and
occupied b·;, low i ncome persons or fami lies . If the rep lacement units will be rental dwelling units, t h ese un its
shall be subject to a r ecorded affordability restriction for at least SS years . If the proposed developme nt is fo r
sale units, the units replaced shall be subject to paragraph (2).
(i i) Require that the units be replaced i n compliance with the jurisdiction's rent or price control ord inance,
pro'>lided that each unit described i n subparagraph (A) is r eplaced. Unless otherwise required by the
jurisdiction 's rent or price control ordinance , these units shal l not be subject to a reco rded a ffo r dabili ty
restrictien.
(D) For purposes of this paragraph, "equivalent size" means that the rep l acement units conta in at least the
same total number of bedrooms as the units being replaced.
(C) ~Paragraph (3) Subparagraph (A) of subdivision (c) does not apply to an applicant seeking a density
bonus for a proposed housing development if his or her their applica t ion was submitted t o, or p r ocessed by, a
city, county, or city and county before January 1, 201S.
(d) (1) An applicant for a density bonus pursuant to subdivision (b) may submit to a city, county, or city and
county a proposal for the specific incentives or concessions that the applicant requests pursuant to this
section, and may req uest a meeting with the c ity, county, or city a n d county. The city, county, o r city and
county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the app li cant unless the city, county, o r c it y and
county makes a written finding, bas ed upon substantial evidence, of a ny of the fo ll owing:
(A) The concession or incentive €lees is not result iA idrntifiable aAd actual cost reductioAs , coAsisteAt with
subdi·visioA (I<), required in order to p r ovide for affordable ho using costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of
the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).
(B) The concession or incentive wo uld have a specific, specific adverse impact, as defined i n paragraph (2) of
subd ivision (d) of Section 65589.5, u pon public health and safety or the physica l environment or on any real
property that is l isted i n the California Register of Historical Resou rces and fo r which t here is no feas ible
method to satisfactoril y mitigate or avoid the specific, specific adve r se impact wit hout rendering the
deve lopment unaffordable to low incoffie low-and moderate-income households.
(C) T he concession or incentive would be contra ry to state or federal law.
(2) The appl ican t shall receive the following n um ber of i ncentives or concessions:
(A) One incenti ve or concession for projects that include at least 10 percent of the total units for lower income
households, at least 5 percent for very low income households, or at least 10 percent fo r pe r sons a nd fam ilies
of moderate income in a common in terest development.
(B) Two incentives or concessions for projects that include at least 20 percent of t he total units for lower
income households, at least 10 percent for very low income households, or at least 20 pe rcent for pe r sons and
fam i lies of moderate income in a common interest development.
(C) Three i ncen t ives or concess ions for projects that include at least 30 percent of the total units for lowe r
income households, at least 15 percent for very low income households, or at least 30 pe r cen t fo r pe r sons and
fam ilies of moderate income in a common interest dev elopmen t.
(3) The applicant may i nitiate judicial proceedings if the city, county, o r city and county refuses t o gra nt a
requested density bonus, incen t ive, or concession. If a court f inds that t he refusal to grant a r equested density
bonus, i ncentive, or concession is in v iolation of th is section, the court sha ll award t he pla in t iff reasonable
attorney's fees and costs of suit. Nothing i n this subdivision shall be interpreted to r equire a local government
to grant an incenti ve or concession that has a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (d ) of Section 65589.5, upon health, safety, or the physical e nv i ronment, and fo r w h i ch t here i s no
feasi b le method to satisfactorily mitigate o r avoid the specific adverse impact. Noth ing in this subd i v ision sha l l
be interpreted to require a loca l government to grant an incentive or concession that wou ld have an advers e
i mpact on any real property that i s listed in the California Register of Hist orica l Resou r ces . The city, county, or
ci ty and county sha ll establish procedures for carrying out this section, that sh all i nclude legislative body
appr oval of the means of compliance with this section.
(4) The city, county, or ci ty and county shall bear the burden of proof for the deni al of a requested concession
or incentive .
(e) (1) In no case may a city, coun ty, or ci ty and co unty apply any development standard th at wi ll have the
effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting t he criteria of subdivision (b) at the
densities or with the concess ions or incentives perm itted by th is secti on. An appl icant may submit to a ci ty,
county, or city and county a proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will ha v e t he
effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeti ng the cri teria of subd iv is ion (b) at t h e
densities or with the concess ions or i ncentives perm itted under this secti o n , and may request a meetin g w ith
the city, county, or city and county. If a court finds that the refusa l to grant a wa iver or r eduction of
development standards is in violation of this section, the court sha ll awa r d the plaintiff reasonable attorney's
fees and costs of suit. Nothing in this subdivision shall be interpret ed to requi re a loca l government t o waive or
reduce development stand ards if the waiver or reduction wou ld have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in
paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon health , safety, or the physica l environment, and for
which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid t he specific adverse impact . Nothing i n this
subdivision shall be interpreted to require a local government to waive o r reduce development standards that
would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical
Resources, or to grant any waiver or reduction that would be contrary to state or federal la w.
(2) A proposal for the waiver or reduction of development standards pursuant to this subdivision shall neither
reduce nor increase the number of incentives or concessions to which the applicant i s entitled pursuant to
subdivision (d).
(f) For the purposes of this chapter, "density bonus" means a density increase over the otherwise maximum
allowable ~ residential density as of the date of application by the applicant to t he city, county, or city and
county, or, if elected by the applicant, county. The applicant may elect to accept a lesser percentage of
density incre ase , including, but not limited to , no increase in density. bonus. T he amount of density
mcrease bonus to which the appl icant is entitled shall vary according to the amount by which the percentage
of affordable housing units exceeds the percentage estab lished i n subdivision (b).
(1) For hous ing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the
density bonus shall be calcu lated as follo w s:
Percentage Low-Income Units
10
11
12
13
14
I 15
17
18
119
20
Percentage Density Bonus
20
21.5
23
24.5
26
27.5
30.5
32
33.5
35
(2) For ho using developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of subdivi sion (b), the
density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
Percentage Very Low Income Units Percentage Density Bonus
5 20
6 22.5
7 25
8 27.5
9 30
10 32.5
11 35
(3) fA-1 -For housing deve lopments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) of subdiv ision
(b), the density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of senior housing units.
(B) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (E) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b), the
density bonus shall be 20 percent of the number of the type of units gi'o'ing rise to a density bonus under that
subparagraph.
(4) For housing developments meeting the criteria of subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b),
the density bonus shall be calculated as follows:
Percentage Moderate-I ncome Units Percentage Density Bonus
10 5
11 6
12 7
13 8
14 9
15 10
16 11
17 12
18 13
19 14
20 15
21 16
22 17
23 18
24 19
25 20
26 21
27 22
28 23
29 24
30 25
31 26
3 2 27
33 28
34 29
35 30
36 31
37 32
38 33
39 34
40 35 _J
(5) All density calculations resulting in fractional u nits shall be rounded up to t he next who le number. The
granting of a density bonus shall not require, or be interpreted, in and of itself, to requi r e a gene r al plan
amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zoning change, or other discretionary approval.
(g) ( 1) When a n applicant for a tentative subdivision map, parcel map, or other residential development
approval donates land to a city, county, or city and county in accordance with th is subdivision, the applicant
shall be entitled to a 15 -percent increase above the otherwise maximum al lowable r esidential density for th e
entire development, as follows:
Percentage Very Low Income Percentage Density Bonus
10 15
11 16
12 17
13 18
14 19
15 20
16 21
17 22
18 23
19 24
20 25
2 1 26
22 27
23 28
24 29
25 30
26 31
27 32
28 33
29 34
30 35
(2) This increase shall be in add it ion to any increase in density mandated by subdivision (b), up to a maxi mum
co mbined mandated density i ncrease of 35 percent if an appl icant seeks an increase pursua nt to both t his
subdivi sion and subd ivi sion (b). All density ca lculati ons resu lting i n fractiona l units s ha ll be rounded up to the
next whole number. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to enlarge or dimin ish the authority of a city,
county, or c ity and co unty to req uire a developer to d onate land as a condition of development. An appl icant
shall be el ig i ble for the increased density bonus described in th is subdiv is ion if al l of the followi ng conditions
ar e met:
(A) The appl ica n t donates and transfers the land no later than t he date of approv al of the final s u bdivision
map, parce l map, or residentia l development app lication.
(B) The developable acreage and zoning classification of the land being t ransferr ed a r e sufficient to perm it
construction of units affordable to very low inco me h o usehold s in an amount not less than 10 percent of t he
number of residential units of the propose d development.
(C) The transferred land is at least one acre in size or of sufficient size to perm it development of at le ast 40
u ni ts, has the appropriate general plan designation , is appropriately zoned w ith appropriate development
sta ndards for development at t h e density described in paragraph (3) of subdivi sion (c) of Se ction 65583.2,
and is or will be served by adequate public facilities and infrastructure.
(D) The transferred land shall have all of the permits and approvals, oth e r than bui lding permits, necessa ry for
the development of the very low income housing units on the transf erred l and, not la t e r th a n the date of
approva l of the final subdivision map, parcel map, or residential development appl icati on, except that the local
government may subject the proposed development to s ubsequent des ig n review to the extent authorized by
subd iv ision (i) of Section 65 583.2 if the design is not reviewed by the loca l government prior to t he time of
transfer.
(E) The t ransferred land and the affordable units shall be subject to a deed, restriction ensuring continued
affordability of the units consistent with paragraph s (1) and (2) of subdi vi sion (c), which s ha ll be r ecorded on
t he property at the t i me of the transfer.
(F) The land is transferred to the local agency or to a housing developer approved by the local agency. The
local agency may requ i re the app licant to identify and transfer the land to the developer.
(G) The transferred land sha l l be wi th in the boundary of the proposed development or, if th e loca l agency
agrees, within one-qu arter mile of the boundary o f the proposed development.
(H) A proposed source of fu nding for the very low income units shall be identified not later than the date of
approval of the final s u bdivision map, parce l map, or residential development application.
(h) (1) When an applicant proposes to construct a housing development that confo r ms to the req u irements of
subdivision (b) and includes a child ca r e faci lity that wi l l be loca ted on the premises of, as part of, or adjacent
to, the project, the ci ty, co u nty, or city and county sha ll grant either of the following :
(A) An additional density bonus that is a n amount of square feet of residential space that is eq ua l to or greater
tha n the amount o f square feet in the child care facility.
(B) An additiona l concession or incen t ive that contributes significantly to the economic feas i bi li ty o f the
construction of the child care facility.
(2) Th e city, co u nty, or city and county shall require, as a condition of approvi ng the housing development,
that the following occur:
(A) The child care facility shall remain in operation for a period of time that is as long as or longer than the
peri od of time during which the density bonus units are requi r ed to remain affordable pursuant to subdivisi on
( c).
(B) Of the chi ldren who attend the ch ild care fa cility, the children of very low income hou seholds, lower income
hou seholds, or fam il ies of moderate income shall equal a percentage that is equal to or greater than th e
percentage of dwelling u nit s that are required for very low incom e households, lo wer inco me households, or
famil ies of moderate income pursu ant to subdivis ion (b).
(3) Notwi t hstand ing any requ irement of thi s subd ivi s ion , a c it y, county, or city and co u nty shall not be
req u ired to provide a density bonus or concession fo r a child care facility if it f i nds, based upon substantial
evidence, that t he comm u nity has adequate <;hild care faci l ities.
( 4) "Child care fa ci l ity," as u sed in this section, means a child day care facility other than a family day care
home, i ncluding, but not lim it ed to, infan t cen ters, p reschools, exte nded day care facilities, a nd schoolage
child ca re cent e rs .
(i) "Hou s ing development," as u sed in this section, means a development project for five or more res idential
units , incl ud ing mixed use developments. u nits. For the purposes of this se ction, "housing development" also
includes a subdivision or common i nterest development, as defined i n Section 4100 of the Civil Code ,
approved by a ci t y, co unty, or c ity and county and consists of residential u nits or unimproved r es identia l lots
and either a pr oject to s ubstan t ial ly rehabi l ita t e and convert an existing com merci al building to residential use
or th e s u bstantial re habilitation of an existing m u ltifami ly dwelli ng, as defined in s ubd ivision (d ) of Section
6586 3 .4, where the result of th e re habi litation would be a net in crea se in ava ilable re s idential units. For th e
purpose of calculating a density bonus, the residential unit s shal l be on contig u ous sites that are the s ubject of
on e development application, but do not have to be based u pon individual subd ivision maps or pa rcel s. T he
density bon u s sha l l be perm itted in geographic areas of the housing development other than t he areas where
the units for the lower income hou seholds are located.
(j) ( 1) The granting of a concession or incentive shall not r equ i re or be interpreted, in and of itself, to requi re
a general plan amendment, local coastal plan amendment, zon ing change, study, or other di scret ionary
approval. For purposes of this subdi v ision, "study" does not include reaso na b le documentation to establish
el igibi lity for the concess ion or i nceAtive or to demonstrate that th e incentive or concession meets the
definition set forth in subdi ~·ision (I(). This provision i s d eclaratory of existing law.
(2) Except as provided in subdivisions (d ) and (e), the granting of a density bon u s shal l not requ ire or be
interpreted to requ ire the waiver of a local ordinance o r . provisions of a local ordinance unrelated to
development standards .
(k) For the purposes of th is c hapter, co ncession or incentive m eans any of the follow i ng:
( 1) A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zon ing code requirements or architectural
design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the Ca li fornia Bui l d ing
Standards Commission as provided i n Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health
and Safety Code, including, but not limited to, a reduction in setback and square footage req uirements and in
the ratio of vehicular parking spaces that would otherwise be required that results in identifiable identifiable,
financially sufficient, and actual cost reductions, to provide for affordabl€-Aeusing costs, as defined in Section
50052.S of the Hea l th and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision
f€r. reductions.
(2) Approva l of mixed-use zoning i n con junction with the housing proj ect if commercial, office, industrial, o r
other land uses wil l reduce the cost of the housing development and if the commercial, office, industrial, or
other land uses are compatible with the housing project and the existi ng or planned development in the area
where the proposed housing project wi ll be located.
(3) Other regulatory incentives or concessions proposed by the develope r o r the city, county, or city and
county that result in identifiable identifiable, financially sufficient, and actual cost ~ons to provi de for
affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safet·; Code, or for rents for the
targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c). reductions.
(I) Subdivision (k) does not limit or require the provision of direct financia l incentives for the housing
development, including the provision of publicly owned land, by the city, county, or city and county, o r the
waiver of fees or dedication requirements.
(m) This section does not shall not be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or
application of the California Coasta l Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000 ) of the Pub li c
Resources Code).
(n) If permitted by local ordinance, nothing in this section shall be cons tru ed to proh i bit a city, county, or c ity
and county from granting a density bonus greater than what is described in this section for a development
that meets the requirements of this section or from granting a proportionately lower density bonus than what
is requ i red by thi s section for developments that do not meet the requirements of thi s section.
(o) For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:
( 1) "Development standard" includes a site or construction condition, incl ud i ng, but not limited to, a height
lim ita tion, a setback requirement, a floor area ratio, an onsite open-space req ui rement, or a parking ratio that
applies to a residential development pursuant to any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter, or
other local condition, law, pol icy, reso l ution, o r regulation.
(2) "M ax imum allowable residential density" means the density allowed under the zoning ordin a n ce and land
use element of the general plan, er,-or if a range of density is permitted, means the maximum a llowable
density for the specific zoning range and land use element of the general plan app l icable to the project. Whe re
the density allowed under the zon i ng ordinance is inconsistent with the density allowed under the land use
element of the general plan, the general plan density shall prevail.
(p) (1) E:>ccept as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3), upon Upon the request of the developer, a no city,
county, or city and county shall Aet-requ i re a v ehicu lar parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest
parking, of a development meeti ng the criteria of subdivisions (b) and (c), subdivision (b), that exceeds the
following ratios:
(A) Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space.
(B) Two to three bedrooms: two onsite park in g spaces.
(C) Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces .
(2) Piotwithstanding paragraph (1), if a development includes the ma)(imum percentage of low income or very
low income units provided for in paragraphs (1) and (2) of subdivision (f) and is located within one half mile of
a major transit stop, as defined in subdi\J'ision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and there is
tffiobstructed access to the major transit stop from the development, then , upon t~equest of the de\J'elf>j3ef;
a city, county, or city and county shall not impose a vehicular parl<ing ratio, i ncl usi\J'e of handicapped and guest
parking, that e><ceeds 0.5 spaces per bedroom. For purposes of th is subdivision, a deve lopment shall have
unobstructed access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the major transit stop w i thout
encountering natural or constructed impediments.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), if a developFAent consists solely of rental units, e><clusive of a manager's
unit or units, with an affordable housing cost to lower incoffie faffiilies , as prov ided in Section 50052.5 of the
Health and Safety Code, then , upon the request of the developer, a city, county, or city and county sha ll not
impose a veh icular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds the following
ffltte-s-:-
(/\) If the development is located within one half mile of a major transit stop, as defined in subdivision (b) of
Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from
the development, the ratio shall not e><ceed 0.5 spaces per unit.
(B) If the development is a for rent housing development for individuals who are 62 years of age or older that
complies with Sections 51.2 and 51.3 of the Civil Code, the ratio shall not elcceed 0.5 spaces per unit. The
delfelopment shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access , with in one half mile, to fi>ced bus
route serlfice that operates at least eight times per day.
(C) If the development is a special needs housing development, as defined in Section 51312 of the Health and
Safety Code, the ratio shall not exceed 0.3 spaces per unit. The development shall ha·ve either paratransit
service or unobstructed access , ""'ithin one half mile, to fixed bus route ser.·ice that operates at least eight
times per day.
f41 (2) If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other th an a whole number, the
number shall be rounded up to the next whole number. For purposes of this subdivision, a development may
provide onsite parl<ing "onsite parking" through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through
onstreet parking.
f-51 (3) This subdivision shall apply to a development that meets the requirements of subdiv isions subdivision
(b) and (c), but only at the request of the applicant. An appl icant may request parking incentives or
concessions beyond those provided in this subdivision pursuant to subdivis ion ( d).
(6) This subdivision docs not preclude a city, county, or city and county froFA red ucing or eliminating a parking
requirement for devclopffient projects of any type in any location.
(7) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (3), if a city, count·;, cit~· and county, or an independent consultant
has conducted an areawide or jurisdictionwidc parking study in the last seven years, then the city, county, or
city and county may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in paragraph
(1), based upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited to, an
analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the
potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of maFket rate and subsidized
developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for lo'* income and 11eFy low income individuals, including
seniors and special needs indtvffitffi+S-:-The cit·y, ceunty·, or c ity and county shall pay the costs of any new study.
=Ffte-city, county, or city and county shall make findings, based on a parking study completed i n conformity
with this paragFaph, supporting the need foF the higher parking ratio.
(8) A request pursuant to this subdivision shall neither reduce nor increase the number of incentives or
concessions to which the applicant is entitled pursuant to subdi'v'ision (d).
(°ft} Eac h compon ent of any density calculation, including base density and bonus density, resulting in fractional
ttA+ts shall be separately rounded up to the next whole number. The Legislature finds and declares that this
provision is declaratory of e><isting law.
(r) This chapter shall be interpreted liberally in favo r of producing the ma><imuffi number of total housing units.
SEC . 2 . Section 65915.5 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65915.5. (a) When an applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condominium project agrees to provide
at least 33 percent of the total units of the proposed condominium project to persons and families of low or
moderate i ncome as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code, or 15 percent of the total u nits
I
of the proposed condominium project to lower i ncome households as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Hea lth
and Safety Code, and agrees to pay for the reasonabl y necessary adm i n istrative costs i ncurred by a city,
co unty, or c i ty and county pursuant to this section, the city, county, or c ity and county shall eithe r (1 ) grant a
density bonus or (2) prov ide other incentives of equivalent financia l value. A city, county, or ci ty and county
may place such r easonable conditions on the granting of a density bonus or other incentives of equ ivale nt
financial value as it finds appropriate, including, but not limited to, conditio ns which assure continued
affordabi li ty of units to subsequent purchasers who are persons and families of low and moderate income or
lower income households.
(b) For purposes of this section, "dens ity bonus" means an increase i n units of 25 percent over the n umber of
apartments, to be provided w ithi n the existing structure or structures proposed for conve r si on.
(c) For purposes of this section, "other incentives of equivalent financial v alue " shall not be const r ued to
require a city, county, or city and county to provide cash transfer payments or other monetary compensation
but may include the reduction or waiver of requirements wh ich the city, co unty, or city and county m ight
otherwise apply as conditions of conversion approval.
(d) An applicant for approval to convert apartments to a condominium project may submi t to a city, county, or
city and county a preliminary proposal pursuant to this section prior to the submittal of any formal requests
for subdivision map approvals. The city, coun ty, or city and county shall, within 90 days of receipt of a w ritten
proposal, notify the applicant in writi ng of the manner in which it will comply with this section. T he city,
county, or city and county shall establish procedures for carrying out this section, whi ch sha ll inclu de
legislative body approval of the means of compliance with th is section.
( e) Nothi ng in th is sect ion shall be constr ued to require a city, county, or city and county to approve a proposa l
to convert apartments to co ndomi niums.
(f) An applicant shall be ineligible for a density bonus or other incentives under this section if the apartments
proposed for conversion constitute a housing development for which a dens ity bonus or other in ce ntives were
provided under Section 65915.
(g) An applicant sha ll be ineligible for a density bonus or any other incentives or concess ions under this
section if the condominium project is proposed on a ny property that i ncludes a pa r ce l or pa rce ls on which
rental dwelling uni ts are or, if the dwell ing units have been vacated or demolished i n the fi v e-year period
preceding the application, have been subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that res tricts rents to
levels affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to any other form of rent or
price control through a public entity's valid exercise of its police power; or occupied by lower o r very low
incom e households, unless the proposed condominium project replaces those units, as defin ed in
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (3) of subd ivi sion (c) of Section 65915 , and eith er of the fo ll owin g applies:
(1) The proposed condominium project, inclusive of t he un its replaced pu r sua n t to subparagraph (B) of
paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65915, contains affordable units at t h e percentages set forth in
subdivision (a).
(2) Each un it in the development, exclusive of a manager's unit or u n it s , is affordable to, and occup ied by,
either a lower or very low incom e household.
I (h) Subd ivision (g) does not apply to an applicant seek ing a dens it y bon us for a proposed housing
j devel opment if their application was submitted to, or processed by, a c ity, county, or c ity and cou nty before
I
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
!
i
I
I
I
I
!
I
' I _ ____ J 1 January 1, 2015. L _____ _
~---------------
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank
Home
t A ~?! _.._ .J r • • (a e 01~1z,,t-r~ ...
./LEGISLATIVE INFO R .t\1ATION
Bill Information Californ ia Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites
AB-2222 Housing density bonus. (2013-2014 )
Se n ate: 1st Cmt 2nd 3rd 2nd 3 r d Pass Chp
Assembly: 1st Cm t 2nd Cmt 2nd 3rd Pass Pass
Bill Status
Measure: ' A B-2222
Lead Authors: , Nazarian (A)
Principal Coauthors:
Coauthors: ----·------------------------------
Topic:
31st Day in Print:
Title:
House Location:
Chaptered Date:
Last Amended Date:
Type of Measure
Housing density bonus.
03/23/14
An act to amend Sections 6sg15 and 6S 9 15.5 of the Government Code, relating to housing.
, Secretary of State
09/27/14
08/22/14
-----·-------··---·---
Inacti ve Bill -Chaptered
Majority Vote Required
Non -Appropriation
Non-Fisca l Committee
Non-State-Mandated Local Program
Non-Urgency
Non-Tax levy
' Last s History Actions
09/27 /14
09/27/14
-----------
Action
Chaptered by Secretary o f State -Chapt er 682, Statutes of 2014.
Appr oved by the Governor.
09/08/14 Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 :30 p .m.
08/27/14 , Senat e a m endments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enro lling . (Ayes 78. Noes 0 . Page 6 570. ).
-08/27/14 Asse mbly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 6550.)
Joel Paulson
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
>
>Dear Sirs ,
>
kevin lynch <kevinlynch624@ icloud.com >
Saturday, July 2 9, 2017 12:12 PM
Joel Paulson
Fwd : North 40
> I admit that I should understand more about the specifics of the proposed North 40 development. I
understand that the developers claim that their $Smillion investment will actually ease traffic congestion.
Have to say that I'm more than a little bit skeptical. I travel from my home on Azalea Way from Los Gatos Blvd
down Lark to Winchester every day and I can't imagine how this development will be anything but a disaster
given the already clogged streets in our town!
>
> I'd encourage you to push back vigorously unless we are convinced that our roads can handle this project. As
much as I love Los Gatos, I believe that if it gets much worse, it may be time to find a more livable town in the
Bay Area .
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Kevin Lynch
> 16201 Azalea Way
>
> Sent from my iPhone
1
Joel Paulson
From: John Eichinger <J ohn@Eichinger.com>
Saturday, July 29, 2017 6:51 PM Sent:
To:
Cc:
Joel Paulson ; BSpector; Marico Sayoc ; Marcia Jensen; Steven Leo nardis; Rob Rennie ;
Noth40Comment@losgatosca.gov
Subject:
teaguelg@gmail.com; rmoses@cbnorcal.com; jpeterson@bayareanewsgroup.com
"Objective" reasons why the North 40 does not meet the Specific or General Plans as to
Affordability
Attachments: In co me_Requi rements_for _North_ 40 _Purchase. pdf
Council Members,
Thank you for your service to our great town. I do not envy you the task you have regard i ng the North 40.
Please take a few minutes to read this email and the attachment.
My email from August 10th, 2016 to the Council is threaded below. Please also see my re v ised estimates of the
"affordability (not)" of the proposed North 40 project.
The North 40 project proposed by the developers does not meet the objectives of the Specific Plan for many objective
reasons . One of the main objectives is AFFORDABILTY!
Since I was not able to attend the judicial hearings I will assume that affordability was not discussed or presented to the
Judge .
Here is a link to the North Forty Specific Plan
http://www. losgatosca .gov /DocumentCenter /View /154 72
On Page 26 (1-26) of the North Forty Specific Plan it specifically states:
The North Forty Specific Plan will be based on the following general guidelines:
• Provide for a variety of residential housing types, both rental-and owner-occupied. A minimum of 20 % of the
units shall be affordable to households at the moderate income level or below
On Page 29 (1-9) of the North Forty Specific Plan it specifically states:
1.5.4 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone and Design Guidelines
The Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHOZ) accommodates for affordable housing for owner occupied and/or
rental for low, very low, and extremely low income households.
While these guidelines do not currently apply to the Specific Plan Area, relevant guidelines have been carried
forward and are contained within this Specific Plan . The adoption of the Specific Plan does not preclude future
possibilities of the Town identifying portions of the site as an Affordable Housing Overlay Zone .
On Page 45 (2-11) of the North Forty Specific Plan it specifically states:
Section 2.5.2.b
1
The maximum height is 45 feet for a hotel and/or a mixed-use and/or m ix ed-income development including a
m inimum of 40% extremely low, very low, or low income affordable housing units.
On Page 60 (2 -26) of the North Forty Specific Plan it spec ifically states :
Se ct i on 2 .7 .3.b&c
b. There shall be a ma ximum of 270 residential units. This is a ma ximum, not a goal, and includes the affordable
housing units required and the existing units .
c. Affordable housing (Below Market Price housing) requirements shall be met pursuant to Town Code .
On Page 291 of the North Forty Specific Plan it specifically states:
2
The General Plan EIR provides general guidelines for the current North 40 Specific Plan Process :
Provide at least 150 units of housing affordable to households at the moderate income level or below.
Appendix C of the North Forty Specific Plan offers a summary of unmet needs of the Town of Los Gatos that include
residential product types that respond to emerging needs of the senior, empty nester, and young adult population. The
word "Affordable" is repeated several times.
In my email of August 10, 2016 (following) I repeated the developer's statements that the units they are proposing will
be offered for sale in price ranges from $900,000 to $1,500,000.
As a mortgage broker here in town I am very well qualified to provide an analysis of the affordability of homes .
In my email, I stated the income levels needed to purchase units priced at $900,000 to $1,500,000 as follows:
A $900,000 purchase price requires a typical annual income of $141,600.
A $1,500,000 purchase price requires a typical annual income of $222,000.
In my analysis last August I utilized a mortgage interest rate of 3.75%. Typical rates for jumbo loans are currently
4.25%. I also underestimated the HOA fees that the developer will be charging. I had assumed $200 per month and a
more realistic figure based upon their other projects would be at least $600 per month for HOA fees . When making this
adjustment the revised income levels needed to purchase units priced at $900 ,000 to $1,500,000 as follows:
A $900,000 purchase price will require a typ ical annual income of $158,640.
$5,179,47 per month.
A $1 ,500,000 purchase price will require a typical annual income of $224,400.
$7,419.89 per month.
These are after cash downpayments of $180,000 and $300,000 respectively!
The above economic facts are OBJECTIVE facts that can be presented to the Judge as to why the proposed North 40
project does NOT meet the affordability requirements of both the Specific and the General plans of Los Gatos.
In addition, all but the 49 rental units within the North 40 project do not meet the State of California definition of
affordable housing. Please refer to the links in the threaded email below that I recommend staff research and report on .
9A!iU ClfT~ C t>IJl'lt; ht•e•nelj l w 2345<l 263:.0 30150 33500 36200 33900 111550 «BO
~'llOl'l Ve,., t ow loxonu:~ 39 100 44650 502.50 55800 ~lOO &l7'>0 692n') 73 700
N:as M1en111n Income .. u.w. inccme ~9400 67$'00 76400 E•l9CO 9 165'() S34~l> 10525-0 l U 050
$1tr7 ,100 Uedl•lnc-74 9 $0 S!JJOO 9r..400 101·100 115650 124 '1>0 ?l2aot.l 141 ~~0
M;o derate tncomr 19950 10 2&00 1.! 5'.SO 129SOO n•oo 1J 90SO \59150 169WO
As a Realtor and a mortgage broker in town I certainly would enjoy more "inventory", but not at the degradation of life
as we know it, the exasperation of an already horrible traffic situation, etc, etc, etc. This afternoon at 2pm on a Saturday
it took me 40 minutes to get from my office on Los Gatos Blvd near Van Meter School to my home near the OMV .
The speakers from various organizations who spoke at the council meeting last Monday in favor of affordable housing in
Los Gatos have been conned by the developers whose only interest is profit.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this analysis.
Please present it to the Judge.
John
John Eichinger , CEO / Broker
3
Victoria Capital Mortgage Company
Victoria Properties
455 Los Ga tos, Blvd., Suite 100
Los Gatos, CA 95032
408-39 1-6550
~J:Y.l'.t..Y.l®o.~<ilM9..tl.g~11J
BRE : 0 1360756 NM LS: 364036
From: John Eichinger [mailto:John@Eichinger.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 10:25 AM
To: 'bspector@losgatosca.gov'; 'msayoc@losgatosca .gov'; 'mjensen @losgatosca.gov'; 'sleonardis@losgatosca .gov';
'rrennie@losgatosca.gov'; 'Noth40Comment@losgatosca.gov'
Cc: 'teaguelg@gmail.com'; 'rmoses@cbnorcal.com'; 'lokrij@comcast.net'
Subject: "Affordability" of the proposed North 40 Townhouses -NOT ! ! !
Council Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to speak last night, and thank you for your service to our great town.
I would like to offer the following as a clarification of the numbers that I quoted in my comments and to repeat my
statement that the proposed project will NOT be offering "affordable" hous ing.
The developer ha s stated that the units they are proposing will be offered for sale in price ranges from $900,000 to
$1,500,000.
Following are th e financial requirements to purchase homes in those price ranges :
$900,000 purchase price
20% down payment = $180,000
Loan principal and interest at 3.75% = $3,334.43 per month
Taxes (at 1.25% of purchase price): $11,250 annually $937.50 per month
In surance (estimate): $100 per month
HOA fees (estimate): $200 per month
Total Pill = $4,571.93
In order to obtain this jumbo loan with a 43% DTI (debt to income ratio mandated to lenders by the CFPB (Consumer
Finance Protection Bureau)) and assuming the borrower(s) has NO OTHER Monthly obligations, the borrower(s) would
need a monthly income of $10, 700 which eq uate s to an annual income of $128,000.
If we were to assume a typical $3 00 monthly car payment and about $200 monthly credit card debt the borrower(s)
would need a monthly income of $11,800 which equates to an annual incom e of $141,600
$1,500,000 purchase price
20% down payment= $300,000
Loan principal and interest at 3.75% = $5 ,557.39 per month
Taxes (at 1.25% of purchase price): $18,750 annually $1,562.50 per month
In surance (estimate): $100 per month
HOA fee s (estimate): $200 pe r month
4
Total PITI = $7,419.89
In order to obtain this jumbo loan with a 43 % DTI (debt to income ratio mandated to lenders by the CFPB (Consumer
Finance Protection Bureau)) and assuming the borrower(s) has NO OTHER Monthly obligations, the borrower(s) would
need a monthly income of $17,300 which equates to an annual income of $207,600.
If we were to assume a typical $300 monthly car payment and about $200 monthly credit card debt the borrower(s)
would need a monthly income of $18,500 which equates to an annual income of $222,000
As I stated last night, this is N OT affordable housing.
If the town/developer is thinking that this project will satisfy any California mandated requirement for affordable
housing , then I feel that it will significantly fall sho rt of any standard necessary.
Some links for Staff to report on:
http://ww w. hcd .ca .gov/housing-po licy-deve l opme nt/hou si ng-resou rce-cente r /re po rts /state/i ncnote . htm I
http:(/www.hcd.ca.gov/housi ng-po licy-de velopment/hou sin g-resou rce-ce nter/report s/s t ate/inc2k16.pdf
http://www.hcd .ca .gov/housing-po licy-deve l opment/housing-re source-cen te r/plan/he/ca plan law affd hs g0506.pdf
co ... ty illt;OllOll Number al Penons ;,.. ltau-ld
C..OOfY 1 2 3 ' 5 ' 1 I
S.01<1 ci.•• Col.!ll!Y E•l•£"'°"1\> lOlo< '3'5Cl 26800 301 j(J 33500 36200 38!i00 41550 '14150
4-Pe<~cn V~(Y W., l<lCOOl l' 39 100 ""16 50 soi so 55800 W300 &t7<;!) ci9ZOO 73700
N ea MN1311 lllC!lml! !Jlll. lrll:cme 594Ct0 6 7!>00 7~00 849CJJ 9 16SO 9S~S.O l05 2SIJ 112050
$1 11f,100 Medl111 l11t-?~~5Q •~700 96400 tottoo U~G'!;.? 12 .. ao :12800 l4l :l~O
l.1o derotr lncorno S!l<):.0 10 1f>OO .1156!.0 12 8'>00 138300 1490SD 159350 Hc9fAlO
As I stated last night, despite whatever deal the deve loper has made with LGUSD, there is NO other land in Los Gatos
available for a suitable school , and busing children to Lexington from the North 40 is somewhat unconscionable . This
development should have a mandatory set-aside of 6 acres for a future schoo l as Roy Moses suggested in his comments .
I missed saying last night that it is a huge oversight to approve any "Phase 1" without first seeing what the deve loper w i ll
propose for "Phase 2". These 40 acres should be considered as a whole, not piecemealed which will only help the
developer to maximize profits at the expense of the town. As I have stated before, a boxer needs to not only analyze
the left jab coming at him, but needs to also be defensively aware of the right hook that is on its way. Let 's have the
town see the full plans, not only half of it. We all would like to see what is behind the curtain. The Specific Plan was
developed for the whole site , not phase s.
This project, as proposed, will add to the profitability of a multi-national corporation, pad the pocket of the 66th richest
man on the planet, and negatively impact our town forever. While the owners of the property certainly have the right
to develop it, they cannot be allowed to negatively impact all the citizens in Los Gatos .
Please let me know if I can be of any assistance to answer any questions.
Thank you again for your service!
John
John Eich inger, CEO / Broker
Victoria Capital Mortgage Company
Victoria Properties
455 Los Gatos, Blvd., Suite 100
Los Gatos, CA 95032
408-39 1-6550
www yictoriaCapitalMortgaae com
BRE : 013607 56 NMLS: 364036
5
6
Income Requirement for purchasing a North 40 Townhome
The developer has stated that the units they are proposing will be offered for sale in price ranges from
$900,000 to $1,500,000.
Following are revised financial requirements to purchase homes in those price ra nges:
$900,000 purchase price
20% down payment = $180,000
Loan principal and interest at 4.25 % = $3,541.97 per month
Taxes (at 1.25% of purchase price): $11,250 annually $937.50 per month
Insurance (estimate): $100 per month
HOA fees (estimate): $600 per month
Total PITIH = $5,179.47 per month
In order to obtain this jumbo loan with a '43 % DTI (debt to income ratio mandated to lenders by the
CFPB (Consumer Finance Protection Bureau)) and assuming the borrower(s) has NO OTHER monthly
obligations, the borrower(s) would need a monthly income of $12,050 which equates to an annual
income of $144,600.
If we were to assume a typical $300 monthly car payment and about $200 monthly credit card debt
the borrower(s) would need a monthly income of $13,220 which equates to an annual income of
$158,640
$1,500,000 purchase price
20% down payment = $300,000
Loan principal and interest at 4.25% = $5,903.28 per month
Ta xes (at 1.25% of purchase price): $18,750 annually $1,562.50 per month
In surance (estimate): $100 per month
HOA fees (e stimate): $200 per month
Total PITIH = $7,419.89per month
In order to obtain this jumbo loan with a 43 % DTI (debt to income ratio mandated to lenders by the
CFPB (Consumer Finance Protection Bureau)) and assuming the borrower(s) has NO OTHER Monthly
obligations, the borrower(s) would nee d a monthly income of $17,550 which equates to an annual
income of $210,600.
If we were to assume a typical $300 monthly car payment and about $200 monthly credit card debt
the borrower(s) would need a monthly in co me of $18,700 which equates to an annual income of
$224,400.
$900,000 Purchase
PITIH Only
""'"~
Loir Program j
cc Seen!rio I
Q;gr.ior
Prooeo.or
r IJSDA.''lHS
r oo....
k1ccnio 0..oh
Booe lnc j
Oved"1e
Ben..
~
OMdood
tlet liont
ou ....
Ollw
Tola!
p Prmary
r ~"IY
r r..-
Gro.. R<.t ,---
Oce Rin i--·.
eo..-Co~ l 12.050.IY.l r-r-r-r-1 r-r--r-r-r-r-r--r-r::--
j 12.~.oo r-
PITIH and typical other monthly debts
'--5<.rwnay
U-f'rogaml
cc Scemtio I 1SSGMOO Noi1h tO l'l.wd1aoe
p mtMlg
,-Seccnd ~g
I HELOC
TQllll
f »ii5Q.OO r-r==: r= r-
~-
r-r-
I 'iUi5o:OO
V~1e
~vu I soo .ooo
s.s Plice 1 900.oco
0own Pmt I 2t1 ooo 1. t 1 su.000.oc
L"lln""' I 720,000
w/ Mii' FF j 720 000
"HA~ lo¥l I r-
e.;-..
l.IY [00000 ~
S::LlY I 80.000 z
I22 1 C2 983 \
~I mm :.
~ I 3.5-11 .s; r-
w a I '37.50
~w-aji"MOO rer-
H 0 Aue<: )60030
0ther I r-Olh<r froml.iob
Tttal I s.m.d NegOtth Row
s.1¥ f>mp
Oh«Proo
Tota'Othtr Pnt
r ... c.n.ru Rell Nole Rllle 1 4250 • Tet:n.fuo fi60' f365" nths
r CaSi-O.& Re!i
Oi!grl.alcr r ~
:::::J r CcnctuctaH'""' /'wf'IM I 9GO.DOO m j ll0.000 1;
p,,,.;.,..... ::::J r or... r-So1et F\lce J 1 !J00,000 QJY I eoooo i.
°"""' f'nt l 20.00} '.<. j l lro.00000 Tu2 I Js.179 • o;; Com...,_. :;; Prirnory o;; Fnl Mtg
1..-Jd I 720.000 b!2ll I C2 961 ~. r ra' r Seconcfo<t r Seccnd r.ag
I VA r iiv...ir...t r HEl OC w/MlP .f'F I 120.000
I US0'1RHS ~11n : I FHA Moxloen I i---
r C!tlor O<x>Rate '4 OM~
QM Dole ond lln,.
hccrr>e Do!..i. Elcpentes Olher Cl>lgalais
~ TOlll ~~ jc ... Payment sf JOO()() a....1nc! 1 nm.oo 'i322000 m jc.dearos s l 200.00
Owortioe i-~el m.50 sl a.....-j p ~ J!oo.00 sj
Cc:rrms-. I ~lgns fr 8 sl ll-Adond ,--HOMsoc: I 600.00 sr-Not Rer1 J ~ r-°""'"""' Ltllil r--Oltw r-[ 5.179 47 Negc.h Row r ~ Totlll r--Qr.,., s.bi Proo
T<Uf L 13,22000 O!hor Prop
Tttal Otlw f'nt
$1 ,500,000 Purchase
PITIH Only
loon~
LDlrl ~
_CCScm !
~ ,._
>I ~
r Nto.
r vA
r US!WRHS
r Olhor
-0....
~
°"""'"" --~
rMdoncf
NeiRIA
Olhor
Ghr
Taul
-.--~~
I r Ho c:.ti-0.t 11c1i
js1 .soo.ooo North 40 IVcnMe r Caoh-O<t iw
I r ~ ..:J r ~ ,.. ....... f1:SOO:OOO IJY ' 80.000 ...
rut 8iDOO:.
IllQ 429ii7 ...
.l1:illlim 42.57:.
i 3 r Ohor:r --s.."""" I i.500.ooo
~ "*"-1
r Secondoly
r __..
Gro. Roni r-
Occ Role r--!.
llom>w • t a.., ..... I 11.sso.oo
L I 1--f
I I
I ,-
j r--r-r-
I
17..560 00 r-::-
w fft ltg
r -1411 r HELOC
QM Fnlng
QM Ollo Md Time
T°"" j 17.550 00 r-
i---:-.-:
J r-r-r--r-
jill5000
c.r..., llftt I 20.000 ... t JOO.ooo.oc
'-'..... j 1.200.00C
~
~~ r-
~ e J ·w .so
P' e.JJ!oD.00
i.tg 1n11 r ~r-
H 0 lctoc rsoo.oo
~ r-Olhorm u.c r 7.540 71 Neg Ca'1 Flow Tcbll
s..;~
atw"""' TCllll Ol!wl'tt
$ $r--.r-
$
sr-
r-r e r-
PITIH and typical other monthly debts
~~
r FHA
r VA
r USOMIHS
r ""'-
-0.0
a-n:]
0-..
lien.-
c.c--.
[Mjnj
Net R"'1
Otnor
Ol-w
Td31
P' """-" r 11o c..t.<M Rd\
Jnsoo.ooo Noo:11 •o ~ r ea.nru R<!i
3 ~~ rn I ao.ooc '4
Cl.1Y j ao ooo 7: '---'-'--~-3-.. r atw:
~ PTNrv.
r Secondlry r ...._....
Go. AorC ---
Ck<: Rite r--~
ea-~ I 1a.100.oo ,-
r-
i--r-r-r--r--r-r-r-
I i a.70000 r-
! QMmdlng
QMo.&-.dlr.IO
Tolll I 1a.70000
1-
1-:-:
r--' r-r-r-r-
I 18.'lll>OO
Solool'llce ~ °"""' ,... 1 20.IJOO '(. J 300.ooooo
1.oan -.. I 1.200.cm
Il!ll. j4032S ...
IdSl!I I 42.!99 ..,
.1 .... Ff I 1.200.000
FHAMe>c Loan I r-
~ Olhor~
~~ jc .. ,,_. sl 300.00
r-:!Adic...i. sJ 200.00
~~~ { sr-
~ e floo.00 r--sr--
Mgi-.Jr e r-f s j--
H 0 !woe !600'00 I sr-
Other l r-Othricmlab r-
I 7,5'0.?8 NovedlAow ,-ei
Tolll r-s.ci Prop 00..,....., r-
TetlllOll..-Pmt I 50000
From : John Shepardson <shepardso nlaw@m e .co m>
Date: July 29, 2017 at 10:00:25 PM PDT
To: co uncil @lo sgatosca.gov , Robert Schultz <RSchultz @lo sgatosca .gov>, LPrev etti@losgatosc a.gov
Subject: N. 40 (AB 2222)
It appears BY LAW that the developer must provide equivalent size or type affordable housing.
MUST BE EQUIVALENT IN SIZE, TYPE, OR BOTH .
Are existing units low income? Does the developer have a duty to determine? Town? Can that
i nformation be obtained now if presently unknown?
·1f low income, proceed, if not end of discussion .
Is project subject to the law? Application received after law went i nto effect? If yes, proceed . If not,
end of discussion.
Are the proposed individual units equivalent in size? If yes, satisfied condition. If not, equivalent in
type? If yes, satisfied. If not, law applies, and the consequences of noncompliance apply.
Does Town waive possible noncompliance?
From City of LA:
The replacement units must be equivalent in size, type, or both and be made available at affordable
rent/cost to, and occupied by, households of the same or lower income category as those meeting the
occupancy criteria. Prior to the issuance of any Director's Determination for Density Bonus and
Affordable Housing I ncentives, the Housing and Community Investment Department (HCIDLA) is
responsible for providing the Department of City Planning, along with the applicant, a determination
letter addressing replacement unit requirements for i ndividual projects.
Sent from my iPhone
16090 Shannon Road
Los Gatos, CA 95032
July 27. 2017
Los Gatos Town Council:
Many studies have revealed the health hazards created by building housing c lose to freeways.
The location of the North 40 project concerns us a great deal. The env ironmental impact
studies (financed by the developer) were conducted during a low-traffic time of day (low traffic
will probably never exist at this locat ion due to proximity of medical cent ers and freeways,
along with the infamous highway 17 and its beach traffic). T hey were also conducted at a
d ifferent location.
We feel that the site is not appropri ate for housing and ask that you deny the request.
At the very least, please insist that environmental studies be conducted on the s i te at peak
traffic hours in order to better assess the impact on the health of the residents.
Thank you for (our consideration .
/}, /h -;xl'~/7 J \ -Lfu'J~ /r/{ __ Y-~/O ? ~
Audrey ~ams MD
i~yt~.4~
Clycfe Nagakura -"
....... '-rn; .. .mui::• :u~neu :a r e corrcemeo nean:n profession3ls ana Los Gatos residents. We request that tne
Los Gatos Town Counttl vote to deny the "North 40" project as it is tutTentty proposed . We a sk that
the Town obtain and submit updated obiective data on the project's impact on the hea1th of the
Community and its impact on the current intolerable traffit situation.
Name
i.3 ~f<?t'" le
4 .. ___________ _:_--=-------,---------
5 . ___________________ ---:-____ __..__
6. _______ :--=--:-~~------...,---:-
]·-------.,...-------~--..,........,._--
s._.....;..__ ___ ,....__--_;......_..;;~---...,..__---
9 . ___ ----.::...---------=":------
10. __ ~------;...___...---------
11. ___________ ...--_,.---....,...----
12 ._~-----::-:'---~:-------:-=----
We the undersigned are concerned health professionals and Los Gatos residents. We request that the
Los Gatos Town Council vote to deny the "North 40" proj ect as it is currently proposed. We ask that
the Town obtain and submit updated objective data on the project's impact on the health of the
Community and its impact on the current intolera ble traffic situation .
Name Address
12 . __________________ _
13. _________________________________ _
14. _______________ _
15 . _________________________________ _
We the undersigned are concerned health professionals and
Los Gatos residents . We request that the Los Gatos Town
Council vote to deny the "North 40" project as it is currently
proposed. We ask that the Town obtain and submit updated
objective data on the project 's impact on the health of the
Community and its impact on the current intolerable traffic
situation.
Name Signature
Address
1 . Albert F Ka is er
156fi0 Shannon Heights Rd.
Los Gatos. CA. 95032
5 . ------------------------
6. ------------------------
We the undersigned are concerned health professional s and Lo s Gatos resi dents. We request that t he
Los Gatos Town Council vote to deny the "North 40" project as it is currently proposed. We ask that
the Town obtain and submit updated objective data on the project's impact .on the health of the
Community and its impact on the current intolerable traffic situation.
Name Signature Address
1 . h 1-t /1 'tJt. V rt-Sq I 'LM,~ bh 1SS~Q Dt4JW.J.1.1 h ,, l
;:....:; ' ·-• (, I ~ f
2.
3. '
'
I ' !
' 4. .
' i
5. I !
6 l
I
7 I !
'
8
'I
9
!
' ' 10
1 1. I
I
I
1 2. j
' '
'
1 3 . '
i
4. ! ; 1
I
I
I
1 5. I
' I
;
i
! I I I I I
' i
I
!
From: Mike O'Neil [mailto :mikeoneil@me.com]
Sent : Sunday, July 30, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Council
Subject: Concerns
Council,
With the current debate over the N40 continuing, I like to express my deepest concern over the
congestion. I am a life long resident and have never seen such traffic related issues .
Blocking the N Santa Cruz ramp may have decreased traffic going downtown it has certainly
made everything else worse surrounding the downtown core area . I am almost forced to stay at
home rather than sit in an hour long line to take my kids to the park. Things have to change .
With the looming N40 coming it is only going to get worse . I understand the legal issues
currently being debated, but I'm at a loss as to how this could have got passed the initial
planning phase .
Common sense would show that the area couldn 't handle such a project. The Valley Fair Mall
had to spends billions to rework the on ramps, off ramps, and surface streets which barely
helped the traffic. Is this what we want in our town?
I hope that the council does everything in their power to have no intensification of use to our
streets . The town does not have the infrastructure to handle it. It poses a public safety issue for
police and fire response the day-to-day cost the the quality of life to the citizens is not
acceptable. This project is only going to help those that line their pocket with money who could
care less how this effects our town.
Please work through this project. As I see no way to fix this once it's built.
Regards
Mike O'Neil
Sent from my iPhone
To :
From :
Re :
Date :
Town Council and Staff
Markene Smith
N40 Application
Augu st 1, 2017
Please deny the N40 Phase I Application . The Application fails to comply with the goals and policies
contained in the Land Use, Transportation, and Va sona light Rail Elements of the General Plan .
Unless disapproved, the project will have specific, adverse impacts on public health and safety .
As promi sed at the July 24 Town Council meeting, I've included proposed Cond ition s for Approv al.
Land Use Element
Policy
LU-11.6 Incorporate multi-modal links from the North Forty area to the Va sona Li ght Rail stati on
into the North Forty Specific Plan .
Findings: While multi-modal paths are proposed INSIDE the N40 development, the Application and
Map provide NO pedestrian connection from the N40 area to the Va son a Light Ra il
station.
The N40 area remains surrounded by pedes trian barriers -including Lark Avenue, Los
Gatos Boulevard, SR -17, free way on-off ramps, and Highwa y 85 .
There is no safe pedes trian connection across SR-1 7 to the Los Ga tos Creek trail-so no
safe route to sch ools, parks, activities, stores, Netflix, or transit.
Transportation Element
Policy
TRA -1.1 Development shall not exceed transportation capacity.
Findings:
TRA-2 .6
If approved, t he N40 Phase I Application will deny Los Gatos residents use and
enjoyment of our n eighbor hood streets.
Street improvements such as curb c uts, sidewalks, bus stop turnouts, bu s shelters,
light pol es, traffic signal s, ben ch es, and trash containers shall be plann ed as an
integral part of development projec t s to en sure safe movement of p eople and
vehicle s and minimize di sruption to th e streetscap e.
Wh er e are th e above specified p edes trian street improvem ents?
TRA -3.6 Pede stri an and bi cycle sa fety shall not be compromi sed to improve or maintain th e
level of service of an inte r sec tion.
M ark ene Smith Page 1 of 9
Fact :
TRA-3. 7
TRA-3.8
TRA-3.1 0
Markene Smith
The Application re quires WIDENING Lark Avenue, from four to six lanes. But widening
Lark and LG Blvd will increase capacity, demand, congestion, speed, and cra s hes. Big -
b lock, m ulti-la n e streets are h a rder for to cro ss, and easier fo r traffic to speed on.
85% of pedes trian collisions with cars traveling 40 miles per hour result in d e ath.
{Source: Robert No land, "Traffic Fatali t ies and Injuri es," cit ed in Catherine Lutz and
Anne Lutz Fernandez, "Carjacked," chapter 9, note 19.}
All traffic reports shall include analy ses of nearby uses with unusual or unique traffic
generation factors or peak hours (e.g. pre -s chools, faith communities, private club s,
quasi-public uses).
N40 traffic re ports failed to analyze Pedes trian Le ve l of Service (LOS) for n e arby us e s
with unus ual or unique traffic g e n e ration factors or peak hours -including schools,
faith communities, private clubs (e g . JCC and Swim & Racquet Club) and quas i-public
uses (Netflix campus).
New development shall be required to upgrade public improvements on project
frontages to me et current Town standards.
Proposed upgrades to Lark Avenue, SR-17 and freeway extensions do not provide
safe, walkable, connections for p e des trians of all ages and ability levels .
Avoid major increases in street ca pacity unless necess ary to remedy sev er e traffic
con ges tion o r criti cal nei ghborhood traffic problems and all other options, such as
d emand man ag ement and alt ern ative modes, have b een exhaus t e d . Wher e ca pacity
is increased, improvements shall balance the need s of motor vehicle s with those of
ped estrian s and bicycli st s.
"Walking is the most fundamental form of transportation and is a vital for tran sit
access."-VTA Pedestrian Program
But th e application provides no safe pedestrian connection along Lark Ave from Lo s
Gatos Blvd to the Lo s Gatos Creek trail, the nex us that links pedes trians of all ages to
sch ools , parks, s tores, and downtown .
The Ve s ting Tentative Map, if approved, would prevent constru ction of a pedestrian
bridge over S R-1 7. A row of condominiums blocks access. A p edestrian bridge will
require a 200-foot easem ent setba ck a long the project's SR -17 frontag e, from Lark
Ave nue to proposed senior h ous ing near the cen t e r of th e N40. Map s hows 50-foo t
SR-1 7 s etback.
Yuki owns th e land o n both sid es of th e freeway north of Lark Avenue. VTA grants
co uld help fund a pedestrian bridge.
Page 2 of 9
TRA-3 .12
TRA-3 .13
TRA-3 .14
TRA -4.4
TRA-5
TRA -5.1
TRA-8.8
Markene Smith
The maximum level of mitigation measures shall be required for transportation
impacts adjacent to sensitive receptors, including residences , schools, and hospitals.
All major development proposals shall be required to include a detailed, verifiable
transportation demand management (TDM) program for consideration by the Town
during the review of the development application.
TOM plans, with accompanying designs, shall be prepared and submitted
concurrently with application. Map shall include detailed, verifiable TOM and
pedestrian infrastructure.
Application includes discounted transit passes, which are useless, application area
includes no walkable connection across SR-17 to VTA light rail. Seniors already
receive Clipper Card Senior Discount passes, which can be used on all regional buses
and trains. There is no current, or planned direct bus route between the N40 and
Winchester Light Rail station.
Minimize opportunities for regionally-generated traffic to cut through Los Gatos.
N40 EIR improvements will INCREASE regional cut-through traffic, because
algorithms direct drivers to widest available arterial streets. Once Lark Avenue and
SR-17 extensions exceed capacity, the increased traffic will flow through Los Gatos
streets.
The Planning Commission and Town Council shall review all new or modified
connections with Highway 17 within the Town.
Additional SR-17 lanes will increase traffic and jeopardize pedestrian safety.
To ensure the Los Gatos streets are safe for all users, including drivers, cyclists , and
pedestrians.
Reduce traffic speeds via design strategies rather than relying on enforcement.
Application requires no traffic calming, pedestrian safety zones .
Where feasible and appropriate, all new projects that are near existing transit
services and/or destinations such as shopping areas, community centers, senior
housing and medical facilities shall be required to provide covered and partially
enclosed shelters consistent with Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
(VTA) Standards that are adequate to buffer wind and rain, and have at least one
bench at each public transit stop.
Required bus shelters do not appear on the N40 Application and Vesting Tentative
Map.
Page 3 of 9
TRA-9 .1
TRA 9.2
TRA -9.5
TRA-9 .6
TRA -12.2
TRA -12.5
Marke ne Sm it h
Make land use decision s that encourage walking, bicycling, and public tran sit u se.
How does Application connect N40 pedestrians to destinations on the other s ide of
SR-17?
Encourage bicycling and walking as energy con serving, non-polluting alternatives to
automobile travel.
Alternative transportation means shall be required whenever the traffic generated
by a development would result in a significant increase in air pollution, traffic
congestion , or noi se.
Require development proposal s to i nclude amenities that encourage alternate fo r ms
of tran sportation that reduce pollution or traffic conge stion as a benefit to the
commun ity (e .g. bicycle lockers/racks, showers, dedicated van-pool or car-pool
parking areas, dedicated shuttle serv ices, innovat ive bus shelter designs.
Where on Application Maps, are these required "street furn iture " amenities?
Trails should be safe , continuou s, i nterconnected and designed for pedestrian s ...
and be compatible with regional trail plan s.
N40 Application multi-modal trails fail to provide p edes trian s require d "s afe
continuou s, interconnected" passage acro ss Lark Ave nue, SR -17 on/off ramps, or
across Los Gatos Boulevard.
During development the Town should en sure that the linkage from trai ls to t r ai ls,
and from trails to road s is given priority.
The application fails to provide r re quire d p edestrian linkage from tra ils inside t he
N40 to trails, roads or walkways outs id e the develo pment.
Pa ge4 of 9
Markene Smith
I O S GA T OS TO W N OF"1 ERA L P L A 'I
Z J!O C.F t• F i.E MF.KT t -HT <:. \ V A S'N A l u
------1 C,lTownllound.,.y c:•, Sphf:re of Influ ence
•-' Water Body
I
\_ __
Pages of 9
Vasona Light Rail Element
Policy
Development should be community-, pedestrian-and transit-oriented .
Policy
VLR-1 .3
VLR-1.5
VLR -5.1
VLR -5.3
Goal
VLR-5
Actions
VLR-5 .1
VLR-5 .2
VLR-7.2
Goal
VLR -8
Po l icy
VLR-8 .2
VLR -8.3
Markene Smith
Future development shall contribute financially to support transit services that link
the Vasona Light Rail with the rest of Los Gatos.
Project applicants shall demonstrate how their projects meet the specific go a ls and
policies of the Vasona Light Rail Element.
Projects developed in the Vasona Light Rail area shall contribute to a pedestrian /
bicycle bridge over Los Gatos Creek.
Development in the Vasona Light Rail area shall be designed and oriented to take
advantage of the amen ities offered by Los Gatos Creek and to preserve watersheds,
riparian habitats and wildlife corridors.
To provide opportunities for the Vasona Light Rail area to addre ss the recreat ional
and open space needs of the Town .
Deve lop a pedestri an/bi cycle bridge over Los Gatos Creek through development
fees, grants, and other means ava ilable to the Town . Establish in-li eu fees for new
projects that will fund a pedestrian/bicycle bridge over Los Gatos Creek.
Provide a tra i l connecti on for pedestrians and bi cyclists to the Los Gatos Creek Tra i l
along the east side of Los Gatos Creek, north of Lark Avenue.
Development may be phased with the completion of the Vasona Light Ra i l. In no
case may development exceed transportation capacity.
To limit the adverse impacts of development within the Vasona Light Rail ar ea .
Development projects in the Va sona Ligh t Rail area shall i ncor porate design features
to buffer dwelling units from the vi sual and noise impacts of Highway 17 and
Highway 85.
Req uire a noise study for all development applications within the Vasona light Rail
area, identifying degrees of i mpact and noise attenuation measures, if necessa r y, to
mitigate noise impacts on residenti al neighborhoods .
Page 6 of 9
Action
VLR-8 .2
Goal
VLR-9
Policy
VLR-9.1
VLR-9.3
VLR-9.4
VLR-9.5
Ma rk ene Smi t h
Explore methods of financing infrastructure improvements in the Va son a Light Rail
area.
To reduce traffic impacts of residential development within the Vasona Light Rail
area by taking advantage of mass transit opportunities.
Residential development proposals within the Vasona Light Rail area shall address
how they take advantage of mass transit opportunities .
Development in the Vasona Light Rail area shall provide Transportation Alternative
programs or facilities that help link development and mass transit. These programs
may include providing bicycle racks, shower and locker facilities, transit passes to
employees, etc. In -lieu fees or other funding mechanisms may be required to
provide a shuttle for the area .
Facilities developed for the Vasona Light Rail station shall be safe, convenient, and
attractive for bicycle and pedestrian use.
Promote the development of mass transit links between Los Gatos Boulevard,
particularly any development on the North Forty site, and the planned Vasona Light
Rail station.
Page 7 of 9
Condition of Approval No. 112 (edit)
112. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS (INTERSECTIONS OF LARK A VENUE AND
NORTHBOUND CALIFORNIA STATE ROUTE 17 ON-RAMPS) The Applicant shall coordinate
with the Town of Los Gatos and Caltrans to design and install the following improvements:
a. Modify the intersection of Lark A'renue and the northbound California State Route 17 on
ramps to add a second right turn lane feeding the northbound California State Route 17 on
ramp. The '.vestbound approach shall consist of two (2) through lanes , two (2) 200 foot right
turn lanes, and a preserved five (5) foot space for a future bike lane.
It is neither reasonable nor safe to require pedestrians to walk across unprotected, multi-
lane freeway on-and off-ramps in order to reach community amenities-including pre-
schools (Yavneh Day School), private and quasi-public clubs (!CC, Swim & Racquet
Club), walkways (Los Gatos Creek Trail), employers (Netflix), and transit (Vasona Light
Rail station)-located across SR-17 from the N40, on the northwest side of Lark Avenue.
b. Relocate existing sig nal interconnection and fiber optic cables and conduits along Lark
Avenue from Los Gatos Boulevard to Ca lifornia State Route 17 northbound ramps.
c. Construct a pedestrian crosswalk to allow for the crossing of Lark Avenue immediately east of
the northbound California State Route 17 on -and off-ramps.
Pedestrians who cross to the south side of Lark A venue here will find themselves on a
narrow sidewalk immediately east of the SR-17 on-off ramps, between Classic Car Wash
and SR-17 In order to reach schools, parks, and all downtown destinations, pedestrians
must walk across the two unprotected, multi-lane freeway on/off ramps on the south side
of Lark.
d. Transition from three (3) to four (4) westbound lanes immediately west of 'A' Street.
Transition from three (3) to four (4) westbound lanes starting immediately west of 'A ' Street
Markene Smith Page 8 of 9
Proposed Conditions for Approval
1. The first developer shall dedicate a public-access easement extending a minimum of
two hundred (200) feet from the SR -17 property line, between Lark Avenue and
Highway 85. No residence s shall be built within this ea sement buffer zone.
2 . To absorb air pollution, cool temperatures, and dampen sound levels, California native
oak trees shall be planted in the SR-17 freeway ea sement.
3 . The first develope r shall fund a pedestrian bridge over SR 17 to provide a safe walk
route to and from Addison Penzak Jewish Community Center, Lo s Gatos Swim and
Racquet Club , Los Gatos Creek Trail, Netflix, and VTA light rail. Developer shall work with
VT A Pedestrian Program , w hi ch helps plan for and fund speci fi c pedestrian infrastructure
projects, includ in g pedestrian br id ges a nd tunnels , and pedestrian access to transit.
4 . A multi-use pede strian path shall be constructed along the SR -17 project frontage
easement. The path shall enable walkers and bicycli st s to acce ss the pede strian bridge
from Lark Avenue and from all three N40 Specific Plan Districts.
5 . To prov id e s pace fo r the easement, w hile maintaining d esired d e ns it y, h ous ing sh a ll b e
s pread throug h out all three distri cts. Hous ing sha ll b e located be tween the ex is ting Los
Gatos Boulevard c ommercial district a nd th e SR-1 7 easeme nt buffe r zone , between Lark
A venue a nd High way 85 .
6 . Buildings m ay b e hi g her in the Northern Dis trict, near the SR-17 /High way 85 cl overleaf,
be ca u se in this locatio n, v iews m ay be less ob structed.
7 . The firs t d evelop er s ha ll provide d e di cated carpool, bi cycl e storage, s huttle ser v ice, a nd
rides h are drop-off, and safe, s helte r ed bus stop s and pic k up zon es within the N 4 0 proj e ct
ar ea . D evelope r 's Vesting Te nta tive Map s mus t s how the phys ical s ize and locatio n of
the se required T rans p ortatio n D em a nd M a nagement (TOM) structures a nd zone s.
8. Develop er fees sha ll help fun d the VT A L ig ht Ra il e xte ns ion t o V ason a Sta t io n.
9. Deve lo p er contributi o ns to p edestrian a nd trans it infras tructure s ha ll be in prop ortion to
the s ize a nd imp act o f the proj ect. A r easonable trans it impact fee sh a ll be agre e d upo n b y
the parties, or set at fi ftee n p ercent (15%) o f th e ow ner-inve st or/d evelop er purchase price.
For exam p le, if inve st or/d evelo per contract s to pay l and own er $100 millio n t o con tro l
develo pment r ig hts, Town of Los Gato s sha ll r equire a $15 millio n develop er fe e, w hich
s h a ll b e set aside t o fu nd required ped estri an a nd tran sit infrastru c ture.
Markene Smith Page 9 of 9
This Page
Intentionally
Left Blank