1 / 30

CEQA’s Impact on Housing Production

CEQA’s Impact on Housing Production. 2018 Survey of California’s Cities and Counties Preliminary Findings. Does CEQA Impact Housing Production?. Many policy studies have cited opinions that CEQA is a major cause of lagging housing production in California.

rod
Télécharger la présentation

CEQA’s Impact on Housing Production

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CEQA’s Impact on Housing Production 2018 Survey of California’s Cities and Counties Preliminary Findings

  2. Does CEQA Impact Housing Production? Many policy studies have cited opinions that CEQA is a major cause of lagging housing production in California. However, long-term permit data shows a more complex story… CEQA

  3. Does CEQA Impact Housing Production?Summary of Prior Studies

  4. 2018 Survey Overview Survey Process Survey drafted by The Housing Workshop Reviewed by subcommittee of AEP Sent to every city and county in CA (541 jurisdictions) Distributed by email, with 2 follow up emails + direct contact with about 50 of the larger cities Presenting preliminary results today, will write more detailed report in next month If anyone here works for a city not yet responding, and would like to do so, please let us know Purpose of Survey • Seeks to measure: • How does CEQA review affect overall housing production for both market-rate and affordable units in California? • How does CEQA review affect the timing of housing project approvals? • Are available streamlining methods being used? • How could CEQA be further refined to increase housing production?

  5. Survey Respondents 29Cities & Counties representing… 25% of 2018 CA population (9.76 million) 32%of CA housing permits since 2010

  6. Respondents by Population(per 2018 CA Department of Finance estimate) < 100,000 Santa Monica Foster City Chico Mountain View Napa City Santa Barbara City Chino Merced Watsonville Monterey Loyalton > 250,000 San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Long Beach Irvine Riverside 100,000 - 250,000 Santa Barbara County Fremont Fontana Elk Grove Corona Santa Maria Modesto Moreno Valley Oxnard Santa Rosa Salinas

  7. Respondents by Housing Production2010 - 2017 Production Index = Permitted Housing Units 2010 – 2017 as % of 2010 Units

  8. Summary of DataProjects & Units by Type of Review a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  9. Summary of DataDistribution of Projects & Units by Type of Review a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  10. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewDetail by Production Level a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  11. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewDistribution by Production Level a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  12. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewDetail for Above Average Production Cities a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  13. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewMarket-Rate & Affordable Units a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  14. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewMarket-Rate and Affordable Units a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  15. Units by Type of CEQA ReviewStreamlining Exemptions a) Streamlining/Other Exemptions refers to: CP/SP Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15183 and 15152 / Govt Code 65457; Affordable Housing Streamlining Exemption govt Code 15194; Infill Exemption CEQA Guidelines 15332 and 15183.3 / PRC 21094.5; and Transit Priority Project PRC 21155.1. b) Other Types of Review include addendums to previous EIRs.

  16. Use of Streamlining/Other Exemptions Reasons Why Not Used (or not used more often): No applicant has requested it. Few projects qualify. Sometimes applicant wants “bullet-proof” EIR even if another method would apply. Affordable exemption size limit prevents use (city has larger affordable projects).

  17. Use of Community Plans/Specific Plans for Streamlined CEQA Review(Per CEQA State Guidelines §15183, §15152, or Government Code §65457) % of GP Residential Buildout Potential in CP/SPs

  18. Withdrawn Projects/Units7 Jurisdictions Reported Withdrawn Projects22 Reported None Withdrawn

  19. Reasons for Project Withdrawal More of this… Less of this… No respondents cited unavoidable adverse environmental impacts.

  20. Typical Time Periods for Environmental Review Weighted Average Time By Type of Review 29 Respondents

  21. Opinion Questions

  22. Opinions: Constraints on Housing Production

  23. Opinions About CEQA Quotes from Cities: Yes “The CEQA process increases the cost and time for development review. It affects housing production because there is uncertainty with what will arise from the public process.” No “Not seeing an impact on housing due to CEQA. The market for new residential housing is continuing to increase.” MixedReaction “CEQA adds time and cost to the development of housing projects, yet it has not affected the production of market-rate or affordable housing within our community. “

  24. Opinions About CEQA Quotes from Cities: Yes “We think the new package of state legislation will facilitate the development of additional housing.” No “It is a common sentiment among jurisdictions that while the 2017 housing legislation bills were well intentioned, they stripped jurisdictions of local control and has subsequently created increasing ill-will between local jurisdictions and the State.” NA/Too Soon “Environmental preservation is increasing being put aside to promote the building of new housing, but it is going to take more than offering streamlining CEQA procedures to get developers interested in affordable housing.”

  25. Opinions: One Change to CEQA to Increase Housing Below Avg. Production Broader exemptions for affordable housing. Promote more of the infill provisions under CEQA. Allow parcels up to 10-acres to qualify for infill exemption Change cumulative impact analysis requirements as applied to individual projects. Don't take the public out of the process, that only breeds resistance and bad feelings. Allow housing to be exempt from CEQA, but use the classical statutory/categorical exemption structure. Above Avg. Production • Add more exemptions. • Create clear categorical exemption for stand-alone multifamily housing on Housing Element site with zoning. • Make litigators bear the cost, dedicate judges to hear cases • Exempt higher density housing in already high density areas • CEQA is fine.

  26. Opinions: One Non-CEQA Change to Increase Housing Below Avg. Production Bring back Redevelopment (5 respondents). Increase funding for affordable housing. (4 respondents). Create state LIHTC similar to impact of federal program. Reduce development standards on higher density housing. Reduce or waive parking requirements near transit. Provide for more ministerial approvals for smaller projects. Reduce fees (3 respondents). Above Avg. Production • Bring back Redevelopment (4 respondents). • Increase funding for affordable housing (2 respondents). • Eliminate Prop 13. • Reduce development standards. • Increase options for by-right approval (esp. for 100% affordable) • State oversight of inclusionary ordinances. • One jurisdiction noted that increased housing production isn’t always desirable if jurisdiction is already meeting RHNA.

  27. Findings Many cities and counties are successfully using MNDs or Streamlining/ Exemptions to expedite housing projects (which take less time to process than EIRs). • 38% of units in survey were reviewed by MND. • 29% of units in survey were reviewed by Streamlining/Other Exemptions. EIRs were completed for only 4.4% of projects and often in above-average production cities, which were still producing more housing than the state average. EIRs are disproportionately high for affordable housing projects. Why are cities not using the affordable housing exemption more frequently? Among the barriers to increased housing production in CA, CEQA is not a major cause. • Cost to build, lack of available sites, and for financing for affordable housing were the primary reasons cited.

  28. Policy Changes

  29. Conclusion Is CEQA a major barrier to new housing production in CA? CEQA may have a modest impact on housing production in some jurisdictions, while not in others. There are certainly ways to continue to improve the law. Next Steps: Finish Phase 1: Collect data from more large cities (e.g., San Jose, San Diego) Phase 2: Project Case Studies • We need to put the “time” and “cost” issues in perspective – how much time, and how much cost? • Challenging b/c will need enough cases to form empirical evidence

  30. Study Authors THEHOUSINGWORKSHOP Janet Smith-Heimer, MBA janetsmithheimer@gmail.com 707.847.3098 Urban Math Jessica Hitchcock, MCP urbanmathgeek@gmail.com 510.919.8900

More Related