Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-01-15 e-packet@6:00Wednesday, January 15, 2020 6:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA City Hall , City Manager's Conference Room 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda January 15, 2020Special City Council Special Meeting Agenda NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code of the State of California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco will hold a Special Meeting on Wednesday, January 15, 2020, at 6:00 p.m., at City Hall, City Manager's Conference Room, 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California. Purpose of the meeting: Call to Order. Roll Call. Agenda Review. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS Study session regarding update on conceptual Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan designs and cost estimates (Project # st1801). (Jason Hallare, Senior Engineer) 1. Discussion of Public Art Recommendations from the Cultural Arts Commission and Caltrain Station Public Art (Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager/Director Parks & Recreation) 2. Update on the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study (Bianca Liu, Senior Engineer, Millette Litzinger (AECOM), & Daniel Krause (Caltrain)) 3. Update on the Summer Youth Employment Pilot Program (Leah Lockhart, Human Resources Director) 4. Report regarding an update to Senate Bill 50 (Wiener). (Christina Fernandez, Assistant to the City Manager) 5. CLOSED SESSION Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4): One potential case 6. Adjournment. Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 3/5/2020 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:19-1041 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:1. Study session regarding update on conceptual Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan designs and cost estimates (Project # st1801). (Jason Hallare, Senior Engineer) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends City Council review the proposed Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan (“Project”) conceptual designs and cost estimates and provide direction to staff on next steps. BACKGROUND As highlighted in the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan (“DSASP”),the streetscape of Grand Avenue is dated and improvements are necessary to invigorate the downtown area. As part of the Capital Improvement Program (“CIP”),the City Council approved streetscape master plan designs for Grand Avenue to implement the DSASP vision.Staff contracted SWA Group (“Consultant”)to perform the planning and concept phase of Grand Avenue and to create the construction documents of the Phase 1 portion which is Grand Avenue from Airport Boulevard to Cypress Avenue. In an effort to increase transit ridership and provide safe,convenient access to Caltrain,the Project has studied and included a robust redesign of the Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard intersection.This ties to the underpass connection between the east and west of US-101 from the US-101 off-ramp at Poletti Way to Airport Boulevard at Grand Avenue by the Caltrain Station Enhancement Project (st1603),managed by Caltrain Joint Powers Board.This undercrossing will open up to a plaza at the south east corner of Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard. The intersection redesign will address pedestrian safety and bike route connectivity. DISCUSSION Over the past year,Engineering,Planning,and Parks and Recreation staff have provided design considerations for the Consultant to follow while creating the conceptual designs.The Consultant provided 90%conceptual designs in September 2019 which were presented to the City Manager.The City Manager directed staff to conduct further due diligence on the project and provide cost estimate data for particular design choices. Conceptual Designs and Cost Estimates The Consultant provided two Alternative designs to highlight different visions for the downtown area and a Grand and Airport intersection design.The Consultant provided cost estimates for both Alternatives and the intersection to provide the City with an understanding of the costs associated with different design choices.The cost estimates below are presented as the direct construction cost and with cost escalations up to December 2022.Soft costs such as design,project management,and construction administration are not included,but can be assumed to be an additional 40-50% markup. Alternative A provides a more pedestrian plaza feel to portions of Grand Avenue with a modern industrial appearance.Special roadway paving would be used in front of the City Hall,at the mid-block crossings,and at Cypress to Airport to visually outline areas intended for high pedestrian traffic.The plaza in front of City Hall may be used for special events such as outdoor booths or festivals.Alternative A as presented is estimated to City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:19-1041 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:1. cost $18.5_million and $20.9_million with the added playground, paseo, and intersection scopes. Alternative B focuses on pedestrian safety at the existing intersections and mid-block crossings while providing a warmer industrial feel.Special paving will be provided at intersections and mid-block crossings.Alternative B as presented is estimated to cost $15.7_million and $18.5_million with the added playground,paseo,and intersection scopes. The Grand and Airport intersection revises the lane configurations and provides an enhanced pedestrian and bicycle crossing for Airport Boulevard.The design allows for bike lanes along Airport Boulevard to cross and for a dedicated cycle track along Grand Avenue for the most efficient and safe connection.A traffic study was performed by Fehr &Peers to support the lane reconfiguration and turning movements for the pork chop island removal.The costs for the intersection vary depending on the Alternative design chosen;the costs for the intersection are included in the costs above. Future Constraints & Issues The current level of the Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan does not address ADA grading at entrances to the existing storefronts.Due to the running slope along Grand Avenue,ADA entrances at each store entry will be a hurdle the Project will need to address during the Phase 1 construction documents and set the standard for the rest of the Master Plan. Parking along Grand Avenue will be reduced by 21 street spaces.The change from angled to parallel parking was vetted through the DSASP;however,until the parking spaces are removed physically,the community may not understand the full impact.The City is currently studying and obtaining conceptual designs for the Downtown Parking Garage 2 at the City Hall lot’s Maple Avenue frontage which may be able to offset the loss of parking along Grand Avenue. The City’s Green Infrastructure goals regarding stormwater treatment are an ongoing difficulty for the City to comply with.The revised streetscape could include stormwater treatment within the landscaping portions of the street.Additional stormwater treatment measures within the street will increase the cost of landscape,but would be less expensive and fit in better when installed at the same time as the new Grand Avenue streetscape than installed at a later time. Construction Financing Options The Phase 1 construction of the Project is included in the FY 2019-2021 CIP as a future allocation of City Infrastructure Reserves.However,there are no currently planned future allocations for the construction of the rest of the Grand Avenue Streetscape.The City may pursue grants to assist in funding the full construction of the Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan.Examples of possible grants would be SB1 State-Local Partnership Program grant for complete streets improvements or the Transportation Development Act grant for bicycle and pedestrian capital projects. Next Steps Staff recommends the continuation of design development after community meetings to obtain community feedback on aesthetic direction.After doing so,staff can complete the Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan design and proceed with Phase 1 construction documents. CONCLUSION Staff is seeking City Council direction on continuing to advance conceptual designs of the Grand Avenue City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:19-1041 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:1. Streetscape Master Plan. Attachments: 1.Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan - 90% Concept Designs 2.Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard Intersection - 50% Concept Designs 3.Grand Avenue Streetscape Master Plan - Cost Estimates City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90%2019.07.09 GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 3 of 9 2019.07.09 Scope Master Plan Scope Phase I Construction Scope Grand & Airport Traffic Study Scope South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 4 of 9 2019.07.09 Schedule Grand Ave Master Plan Schedule *Kick-off Kick-off Jan 2018Civil Aerial Survey 50% Concept presentation 90% Concept presentation Community MeetingCouncil Meeting & Approval Phase I Construction Documents beginCivil Field Survey Construction Documents Construction Documents CompleteAnalysisField visit/ Data GatheringConcept Presentation/ Charette Final Concept PresentationConcept Development Traffic Analysis Technical MemorandumCivil Survey/ Design City Approvals Caltrans Approvals Construction Documents Construction 2021? * Tasks beyond this phase are not currently in contract 6 weeks per contract 12 weeks per contract Caltrain Station & Intersection improvements complete Grand Ave & Airport Intersection Schedule PLANNING CONTEXT Existing Conditions + Future Growth South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 6 of 9 2019.07.09 100% 2,059 GRAND AVE IS ACCESSIBLE WITHIN A 15 MINUTE WALK. NEW UNITS Development Context0’ 40’ 80’ 160’ 94 69 46 38 81 97 157 195 260 283 294 445 5 m i n . W a l k i n g D i s t a n c e South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 7 of 9 2019.07.09 Hisense - 200 Linden Ave 488 Linden Avenue 150 Airport Blvd Cadence Phase 2 - 405 Cypress Ave 255 Cypress Ave 7 S. Linden Avenue Cadence Phase 1 - Airport & Miller Ave 200 Airport Blvd 124 Airport Blvd & 100 Produce Ave Development Context Renderings South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 8 of 9 2019.07.09Development Context Caltrain Station South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 9 of 9 2019.07.09Existing Building Character South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 10 of 63 2019.07.09Existing Conditions DOWNTOWN STATION AREA SPECIFIC PLAN Starting Vision South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 12 of 63 2019.07.09Vision for Grand Avenue South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 13 of 63 2019.07.09Vision for City Hall South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 14 of 63 2019.07.09Grand Avenue + Downtown Public Realm Vision Elements PROTECT Grand avenue scale and character IMPROVE public environment of streets and open spaces ENHANCE the unique character of Downtown REVITALIZE Downtown businesses CREATE an attractive and vibrant pedestrian environ- PROVIDE flexible open space for special events ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS Specific Plan + Proposed South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 16 of 63 2019.07.09Specific Plan Parking Study 163 141 Vetted through the approval of the DSASP South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 17 of 63 2019.07.09Proposed Parking Space Count Existing: 163 Specific Plan: 141 Design Approach: 142 0’ 40’ 80’ 18 12 19 14 04 17 22 21 13 02 160’ PENDING TRAFFIC STUDY South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 18 of 63 2019.07.09Specific Plan Intersection Study: Airport Boulevard South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 19 of 63 2019.07.09Conceptual Airport Boulevard Intersection Options0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ Retain Porkchop (modify existing) Northbound lanes: 4/3 Southbound lanes: 4/3 + bike or Extend Caltrain Plaza Northbound lanes: 3/3 + bike Southbound lanes: 3/3 + bike PENDING TRAFFIC STUDY South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 20 of 63 2019.07.09Specific Plan Street Study: Grand Avenue Section Improvements Existing - Angled Parking Proposed - Parallel Parking Vetted through the approval of the DSASP South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 21 of 63 2019.07.09 15 ft 8 ft 6 ft 22 ft Street trees A Parallel parking Section A Bike lane 6 ft 8 ft 15 ft Proposed Grand Avenue Section Improvements0’ 4’ 8’ 16’ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 22 of 63 2019.07.09Parking Meters 2-3 multi-space parking meters per street segment Airport CypressLindenMapleWalnutSpruce22 total meters PLANT MATERIALS South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 24 of 63 2019.07.09Planting Trees Melaleuca quinuenerviaCarpinus betulus Pistacia chinensis Acer rubrum ‘Bowhall’Lagerstroemia indica ‘Natchez”Acer pseudoplatanus Platanus racemosa Olea europaea ‘Swan Hill”Magnolia grandiflora Nyssa sylvatica ‘Haymanred’Nyssa sylvatica ‘Haymanred’ Shrubs , Grasses, and Ground Covers Calamagrostis foliosa Chondropetalum tectorum Festuca ‘Elija Blue’Juncus patens ‘Elk Blue’Leymus condensatus Lomandra longifolia ‘Platinum Beauty”Achillea millefolium Dymondia margaretae Stachys byzantina Artemisia ‘Powis Castle’Salvia sonomensis SpringFall ALTERNATE A South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 26 of 63 2019.07.09Concept Diagram 0’ 40’ 80’ 160’ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 27 of 63 2019.07.09Illustrative Master Plan ENLARGEMENT PLAN B ENLARGEMENT PLAN AENLARGEMENT PLAN C Special Roadway Paving City Hall Plaza + Bus stop Playground Paseo + Bocce Caltrain Plaza Special Roadway Paving Bus stopBus stopBus stop Special Roadway Paving 0’ 40’ 80’ 160’ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 28 of 63 2019.07.09 Extended curbStreet furnishing FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Street tree Extended curbStreet furnishing Mid-block crossing Specialty paving Specialty pavingCrosswalk Enlargement Plan A 0’ 40’ 80’ 160’ Specimen tree Entry Signage South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 29 of 63 2019.07.09Enlargement Plan B0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ Catenary lights Street tree Catenary lights Street furnishing Specimen treeBus stop Street furnishing Catenary lights Catenary lights Play structure SeatingSeating Bus stop Pop-up cafe Paseo tree Bocce Specialty paving South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 30 of 63 2019.07.09 Flexible stage area Plaza Bus enclosure Event plaza Bus stop Street furnishingSeating Catenary lights Street tree Removable bollards Specimen tree Specimen tree Terraced seatingLawn terraces Sloped lawn Enlargement Plan C0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 31 of 63 2019.07.09Entry from Airport Boulevard Entry signage Specimen tree Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike Lanes Unit Paving Sidewalk Class I bike lanes Existing street lamp South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 32 of 63 2019.07.09Grand and Cypress Graphic Street Name Historic Street LampsContemporary FurnishingsBollards Concrete Flush intersection Unit Paving Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike Lanes Unit Paving Sidewalk South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 33 of 63 2019.07.09Typical Streetscape Unit pavers Landscape buffer 45° bike parking Dedicated bike lane Unit Paving Parking & Bike LanesConcrete Sidewalk 9’-10’5’Unit Paving Strip South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 34 of 63 2019.07.09Grand and Linden Intersection Street name Bus stop with Shelter Cafe seating Specimen tree Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike Lanes Asphalt Street Concrete Sidewalk South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 35 of 63 2019.07.09 Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike Lanes Asphalt Street Small Paseo Extended curb planter with seating Raised crosswalk Art mural South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 36 of 63 2019.07.09 Unit Paving Unit Paving Sidewalk Parklet Landscape buffer Extended curb planter with seating Trash receptacles Raised high-visibility crosswalk Dedicated bike lane Parallel parking South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 37 of 63 2019.07.09 Play structure Art muralCatenary lights Pop-up cafe Large Paseo South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 38 of 63 2019.07.09 Play structure Art muralCatenary lights Large Paseo South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 39 of 63 2019.07.09 Event plaza and street Street name Bollards Shaded bus stop Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike Lanes City Hall Plaza South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 40 of 63 2019.07.09 Extasi bench Escofet Connect 2.0 Bus Shelter Landscape Forms Ride Bike Rack Landscape Forms Harpo Bench Santa Cole Intergral Color Top Cast Finish Concrete Precast Concrete Unit Paving - Pedestrian - Crosswalks - Street - Bike lanes Open Pillars Streetlife Rama Area Light - Supplementary lighting if required Landscape Forms - Pedestrian Materials and Furnishing Collection ALTERNATE B South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 42 of 63 2019.07.09Illustrative Master Plan0’ 40’ 80’ 160’ ENLARGEMENT PLAN B ENLARGEMENT PLAN AENLARGEMENT PLAN C Bus stopCity Hall strolling garden Paseo + playground Paseo + ping pong Caltrain Plaza Bus stop Bus stopBus stop Special pavingSpecial pavingSpecial paving Special paving South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 43 of 63 2019.07.09Enlargement Plan A0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ FUTURE DEVELOPMENT Street tree Specimen tree Specimen tree Mid-block crossing(existing location) Symetrical Tree Layout Unit Paving Crossing Specialty paving South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 44 of 63 2019.07.09 Mid-block crossing(New location) Mid-block crossing(existing location) Enlargement Plan B0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ Paving bandsStreet tree Playground Paving bandsBus stop Seating Seating Bus stop Ping Pong Art mural South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 45 of 63 2019.07.09 Mid-block crossing(existing location) Specimen tree Bus stop Bus stop SeatingStreet tree Paving bands SeatingStreet tree Strolling garden Enlargement Plan C0’ 16’ 32’ 64’ South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 46 of 63 2019.07.09Entry from AIrport Boulevard Entry signage Class I bike lane Unit paving crosswalkUnit paving sidewalk Unit Paving CrosswalkUnit Paving Sidewalk Planters South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 47 of 63 2019.07.09 Dedicated bike laneLandscape buffers Typical Intersection Curbed intersection Special paving Unit Paving Crosswalk, & Intersection South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 48 of 63 2019.07.09 Landscape planters Dedicated Bike Lanes Unit Paving Crosswalk, Intersection & Bus stop Unit Paving Sidewalk Street Overview Cafe SeatingBus stop South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 49 of 63 2019.07.09Typical Streetscape Experience Mid-block crosswalk Parallel parking Bike rackPaving Bands/ Parking access Unit Paving Bands to Access Parking Unit Paving Sidewalk South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 50 of 63 2019.07.09 Unit Paving Sidewalk Crosswalk to Small Paseo Paving Bands/ Parking accessSeatingWider Sidewalks/ Cafe Seating 10’-12’Planting Buffer South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 51 of 63 2019.07.09 Seperated Bike lane Art mural Ping PongSpill out dining Unit Paving Crosswalk, Street, & Bike LanesAsphalt Street, Bikelane, & Parking Small Paseo South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 52 of 63 2019.07.09 Seat walls PlaygroundArt mural Unit Paving Sidewalk Large Paseo South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 53 of 63 2019.07.09 Emerson Bike Rack Landscape Forms Ashbery Area Light - Supplementary lighting if required Landscape Forms Precast Concrete Unit Paving Timber Seating Custom Poe Little Receptacle Landscape Forms Melville Bench Landscape Forms California Round QCP Materials and Furnishing Collection South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90% Page 54 of 63 2019.07.09 ALTERNATE A ALTERNATE B NEXT STEPS Feedback from the City Airport Blvd Traffic Study 100% Master Plan CYPRESS AVE.Airport Blvdbetween Baden Ave & Miller AveFigure 1N.T.S.CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. Airport Blvd U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp U.S. 101 SB Off-Ramp U.S. Highway 101 Cypress Ave Baden AveGrand AveMiller AveCaltrain StationPlazaA CB Legend Existing Bikeway Planned Bikeway Proposed Bikeway Proposed Motor Vehicle Travel Lane & Turning Movement Existing Bus Stop Proposed Bus Stop Enhanced Crosswalk New shuttle bus stop for “last mile” connectvity from Caltrain station to employement centers Typical bikewaytreatementClass IV SeparatedBikewayTypical bikewaytreatementProtected Intersection Typical bikewaytreatementRaisedCrossbikeRemove NB through lane Remove SB through lane Concept B | One-way Separated Bikeways Remove NB left Convert SB left to SB thru Section A Concept B | One-way Separated Bikeways.2 EXISTING 76 Gas Station NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUND AIRPORT BOULEVARD CONCEPT 76 Gas Station NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUND AIRPORT BOULEVARD Concept B | One-way Separated Bikeways.2 EXISTING 76 Gas Station WESTBOUNDEASTBOUND GRAND AVENUE CONCEPT 76 Gas Station WESTBOUNDEASTBOUND GRAND AVENUE Section B Concept B | One-way Separated Bikeways.2 EXISTING Peet’s Coffee NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUND AIRPORT BOULEVARD Section C CONCEPT Potential street tree planting opportunity within bikeway buffer zone if adequate horizontal separation from existing gas main is achieved. Feasibility to be verified with SWA and City. Peet’s Coffee NORTHBOUNDSOUTHBOUND AIRPORT BOULEVARD SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN OWNER: City of South San Francisco Engineering Department Date: 12/22/2019 1430 SSF Grand Ave Master Plan Estimate 20191222 Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp Cover Page 1 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN Table of Contents:Page No. A) PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION 3 B) BASIS OF ESTIMATE 4-6 C) ESTIMATE GRAND SUMMARY 7 D) ESTIMATE SUMMARY - BASE SCOPE 8 E) ESCALATION CALCULATION 9 F) BASE ESTIMATE DETAILS 10-11 G) OPTIONS ESTIMATE DETAILS 12-15 H) QUERIES 16 ATTACH. - ESTIMATOR PROFILE 17 Date: 12/22/2019 Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp Cover Page 2 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN A) PROJECT CONTACT INFORMATION OWNER: City of South San Francisco Engineering Department 400 Grand Ave South San Francisco, CA 94080 Prepared for: SWA Group 530 Bush Street, 6th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Attention: Daniel Cunningham, Associate Email: dcunningham@swagroup.com Phone: 1-415-293-1503 Prepared by: M LEE CORPORATION Construction Management & Consulting 601 Montgomery Street, Suite 2040 San Francisco, CA 94111 Attention: Martin Lee, PE, CPE, CQS Certified Professional Estimator Email: mlee@mleecorp.com Phone: 1-415-693-0236 Date: 12/22/2019 Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp A) Project Contact Information Page 3 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN B) BASIS OF ESTIMATE Date: 12/22/2019 1 Basis of Estimate: This Estimate is based on the following: 1.1 South San Francisco Grand Avenue Master Plan 90%, a total of 63 sheets, dated 7/9/2019 1.2 South San Francisco Grand Avenue Alternate A Streetscape Master Plan, a total of 3 sheets, dated 6/25/2017 1.3 South San Francisco Grand Avenue Alternate B Streetscape Master Plan, a total of 3 sheets, dated 6/25/2017 1.2 Alternate A updated drawings with notes, a total of 2 sheets, dated 6/25/2017 1.3 South San Francisco Grand Avenue Alternate B Streetscape Master Plan, a total of 3 sheets, dated 6/25/2017 1.4 Clarifications from design team 1.5 Response to queries 1.6 Incorporation of comments from the draft estimate 2 General Scope of Work The general scope is to renovate Grand Ave in South San Francisco with the following major components: 2.1 Improve roadways for vehicles, bicycle, pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks 2.2 Provide public open spaces (as additive options) The scope of work includes paving, site furnishings, landscaping, site utilities, and lighting. 3 Exclusions The estimate specifically excludes the following items: 3.1 Permit and plan check fees 3.2 Administration costs such as bidding, advertising and contract award 3.3 Professional fees for architect, engineers, consultants, construction management and other soft costs 3.4 Costs for third party testing and inspections 3.5 Hazmat abatement, if any 3.6 Per designer/planner instruction, the following scopes are specifically excluded: City Hall lawn/strolling garden, except at the corner of Grand and Maple City Hall Plaza Airport Blvd (Note: Intersection at Airport Blvd & Grand Ave is included as an Additive Option) Traffic signalization 3.7 Pop-up café at paseo, to be provided by retailer It is assumed that the above items, if needed, are included elsewhere in the owner's overall project budget. 4 Assumptions & Qualifications 4.1 The work will be done in multiple phases during normal work hours. 4.2 Based on one construction general contract. 4.3 An allowance for construction contingency has been included at the Estimate Summary level. Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp B) Basis of Estimate Page 4 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN B) BASIS OF ESTIMATE Date: 12/22/2019 4.4 The estimate is based on estimated prices current as of December 2019, with four to five responsible and responsive bids under a competitive bidding environment for a fixed price lump sum contract (a fair market condition). Note: Experience indicates that fewer bidders may result in higher bids, and conversely more bidders may result in more competitive bids. Therefore it is important to obtain as many bids as possible. The following table provides a general guideline for probable impacts due to number of bids: 1 bid +20% to +50% 2-3 bids +10% to +20% 4-5 bids 0% to +10% 6-7 bids 0% to -10% 8 or more bids -10% to -20% 4.5 The following is a list of some items that may affect the cost estimate: Modifications to the scope of work or assumptions included in this estimate Unforeseen sub-surface conditions Any specified item of equipment, material, or product that cannot be obtained from at least three different sources Any other non-competitive bid situations 4.6 Unit costs include costs for material, labor, equipment, sales tax, and installing contractor's markup. Labor costs are based on prevailing wages for San Francisco County. 4.7 A cost escalation at 6.0% per year to the assumed mid-point of construction is included as a markup at the summary level of the estimate. 4.8 The estimate represents M Lee Corp's opinion of probable construction costs based on current market conditions and the assumptions and qualifications in this Basis of Estimate. 4.9 Client acknowledges that our estimating service is consistent with and limited to the standard of care applicable to such services, which is that we provide our services consistent with the professional skill and care ordinarily provided by consultants practicing in the same or similar locality under the same or similar circumstances. The estimate is intended to be a determination of fair market value for the project construction. Since we have no control over market conditions, costs of labor, materials, equipment and other factors which may affect the bid prices, we cannot and do not warrant or guarantee that bids or ultimate construction costs will not vary from the cost estimate. We make no other warranties, either expressed or implied, and are not responsible for the interpretation by others of the contents herein the cost estimate. 4.10 It should be noted that the cost estimate is a "snapshot in time" and that the reliability of this opinion of probable construction cost will inherently degrade over time. Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp B) Basis of Estimate Page 5 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN B) BASIS OF ESTIMATE Date: 12/22/2019 4.11 This estimate has been prepared based on preliminary design information. It should be updated when more detailed project information is available. 4.12 Abbreviations used in the estimate: CIP = cast in place CY = cubic yard (E) = existing EA = each GSF = gross square foot LF = linear foot LS = lump sum MTH = month SF = square foot Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp B) Basis of Estimate Page 6 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN C) ESTIMATE GRAND SUMMARY Date: 12/22/2019 Description Alternate A Alternate B Base Scope $18,534,000 $15,639,000 Add Option 1: Playground $1,172,000 $1,250,000 Add Option 2: Paseo $419,000 $407,000 Add Option 3: Intersection $821,000 $1,165,000 Notes: 1) The above are construction costs escalated to assumed midpoint of construction, December 2022 2) The above costs do not include soft costs. 3) Based on 4 to 5 competitive bids. 4) It is important to read the attached "Basis of Estimate" and "Estimate Details" for assumptions, exclusions, qualifications and scope of work Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp C) Estimate Grand Summary Page 7 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN D) ESTIMATE SUMMARY - BASE SCOPE Date: 12/22/2019 Item Item Description Estimated Cost $ Alternate A Estimated Cost $ Alternate B 1 Site Demolition/Preparation 737,398 726,373 2 General Site Work, Paving and Walks 5,038,268 3,815,079 3 Site Furnishings 243,000 243,000 4 Landscaping 511,212 568,264 5 Site Utilities 468,160 468,160 6 Site Lighting 537,600 537,600 Direct Estimated Cost 7,535,638 6,358,476 Markups (compounded): Design Phase Estimating Contingency 30.0% 2,260,691 1,907,543 General Conditions 18.0% 1,763,339 1,487,883 General Contractor OH&P 8.0% 924,773 780,312 Insurance and Bonds 2.5% 312,111 263,355 Total Estimated Construction Cost in December 2019 $ 12,796,552 10,797,569 Allow for Phasing Premium 10.0% 1,279,655 1,079,757 Total Estimated Construction Cost in December 2019 $ including phasing premium 14,076,207 11,877,326 Escalation to Midpoint of Construction @ 6%/year 19.7% 2,773,013 2,339,833 Total Estimated Construction Cost, Escalated 16,849,220 14,217,159 Construction Contingency 10.0% 1,684,922 1,421,716 Total Estimated Construction Cost, Escalated with Construction Contingency 18,534,142 15,638,875 Work Area 203,580 GSF 203,580 GSF $/GSF $91/GSF $77/GSF Notes: 1) The above are construction costs escalated to assumed midpoint of construction, 2) The above costs do not include soft costs. 3) Based on 4 to 5 competitive bids. 4) It is important to read the attached "Basis of Estimate" and "Estimate Details" for assumptions, exclusions, qualifications and scope of work Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp D) Base Estimate Summary Page 8 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUE PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COST BASED ON 90% MASTER PLAN E) ESCALATION CALCULATION Date: 12/22/2019 Date of estimate pricing 12/4/2019 Start construction 7/1/2020 End construction 7/1/2025 Duration 1826 days Duration 61 months Date of estimate pricing to start 210 days 1/2 of construction period 913 days Day of estimate pricing to mid-point 1123 days 37 months Mid-point of construction 12/31/2022 Escalation per year for escalation 6.0% Total escalation to mid-point 19.70% Prepared for: SFRPD Prepared by: M Lee Corp E) Escalation Calculation Page 9 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANF) BASE ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $Alternate AAlternate BAlternate AAlternate B11Site Demolition/Preparation2Survey and field verify (E) condition LS 9,600.00 1 1 9,600 9,600 3Protect in place (E) traffic signal EA 450.00 8 8 3,600 3,600 4Misc. temporary protection of existing, allow LS 1,900.00 1 1 1,900 1,900 5 Remove (E) street light for refurbishment & re-installationEA 1,600.00 48 48 76,800 76,800 6Remove (E) parking meters EA 83.00 163 163 13,529 13,529 7Remove (E) traffic island LF 25.00 441 - 11,025 - 8Remove (E) curb & gutter LF 8.30 6,001 6,001 49,806 49,806 9Remove (E) AC paving SF 0.91 115,564 115,564 105,163 105,163 10Remove (E) concrete paving SF 2.20 68,915 68,915 151,613 151,613 11Remove (E) planting strip SF 1.30 4,295 4,295 5,584 5,584 12Remove (E) trees EA 860.00 132 132 113,520 113,520 13Misc. site demolition, allow LS 10,000.00 1 1 10,000 10,000 14Fine grading, allow GSF 0.91 203,580 203,580 185,258 185,258 15161Subtotal - Site Demolition/Preparation737,398 726,373 1718192General Site Work, Paving and Walks20 Aggregate base, say 6" thick CY 67.00 3,540 3,385 237,180 226,795 21 Precast concrete unit paving, 80mm thick w concrete bans on either sideSF 32.00 106,313 79,231 3,402,016 2,535,392 22 Concrete pavingSF 16.00 47,640 1,682 762,240 26,912 23AC pavingSF 5.00 37,192 101,850 185,960 509,250 24Curb & GutterLF 40.00 5,217 5,247 208,680 209,880 25Painting (green) for bike lanes, both sidesLF 16.00 5,000 5,000 80,000 80,000 26StripingSF 1.00 37,192 101,850 37,192 101,850 27 Main street sign "GRAND AVE" LS 75,000.00 1 1 75,000 75,000 28 Misc. street signage and striping, allow LS 50,000.00 1 1 50,000 50,000 29302Subtotal - General Site Work, Paving and Walks5,038,268 3,815,079 31Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpF) Base Estimate DetailsPage 10 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANF) BASE ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $32333Site Furnishings34 Site furnishings, allow LS 150,000.00 1 1 150,000 150,000 35 Parking meter station EA 1,500.00 22 22 33,000 33,000 36 Bus stopEA 20,000.00 3 3 60,000 60,000 37383Subtotal - Site Furnishings243,000 243,000 3940414Landscaping42Planting StripSF 23.00 11,738 14,192 269,974 326,416 43 Tree, say 36" box EA 1,300.00 94 88 122,200 114,400 44 Tree, say 48" box EA 2,600.00 10 9 26,000 23,400 45 Bark mulch over planting, say 3" thick, allow SF 1.70 11,738 14,192 19,955 24,126 46 Irrigation, allowSF 3.50 11,738 14,192 41,083 49,672 47 Tree bubblersEA 250.00 104 97 26,000 24,250 48 Planting maintenance, allow MTH 2,000.00 3 3 6,000 6,000 49504Subtotal - Landscaping511,212 568,264 5152535Site Utilities54 Site drainage, allow GSF 2.00 203,580 203,580 407,160 407,160 55 Connect parking meter to (E) electrical line EA 500.00 22 22 11,000 11,000 56 Allow for site utilities work LS 50,000.00 1 1 50,000 50,000 57585Subtotal - Site Utilities468,160 468,160 5960616Site Lighting62 Refurbish and reinstall (E) street lights EA9,200.00 48 48 441,600 441,600 63 Concrete footingEA1,200.00 48 48 57,600 57,600 64 Connect to (E) electrical line EA800.00 48 48 38,400 38,400 65666Subtotal - Site Lighting537,600 537,600 Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpF) Base Estimate DetailsPage 11 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANG) OPTIONS ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $Alternate AAlternate BAlternate AAlternate B11Add Option 1: Playground2 Deduct From Base Scope3None- - 45 A) Deduct Subtotal- - 67 Add8 Demo (E), allowSF 2.00 7,228 7,228 14,456 14,456 9 Play Structure, allowLS 200,000.00 1 1 200,000 200,000 10 Catenary LightsLS 20,000.00 1 - 20,000 - 11 Concrete PavingSF 18.00 2,024 - 36,432 - 12 Unit PavingSF 35.00 1,586 3,704 55,510 129,640 13 Playground safety surfacingSF 38.00 2,216 1,669 84,208 63,422 14 Concrete seat wall, say 2' WLF 300.00 - 179 - 53,700 15 Concrete seat wall with planter, say 3' WLF 400.00 94 - 37,600 - 16 Planting stripSF 23.00 1,443 1,725 33,189 39,675 17 Tree, say 36" boxEA 1,300.00 - 5 - 6,500 18 Tree, say 48" boxEA 2,600.00 - 1 - 2,600 19 Bark mulch over planting, say 3" thick, allow SF 1.70 1,443 1,725 2,453 2,933 20 Irrigation, allowSF 4.00 1,443 1,725 5,772 6,900 21 Tree bubblersEA 250.00 - 6 - 1,500 22 Planting maintenance, allow MTH 500.00 3 3 1,500 1,500 2324 B) Add Subtotal476,664 508,370 2526 C = B-A: Net Direct Cost476,664 508,370 27 Add Markups146%695,706 741,982 28291Total - Add Option 1: Playground1,172,370 1,250,352 30 Carried to Grand Summaryrounded-off1,172,000 1,250,000 31Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpG) Options Estimate DetailsPage 12 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANG) OPTIONS ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $Alternate AAlternate BAlternate AAlternate B322Add Option 2: Paseo33 Deduct From Base Scope34None- - 3536 A) Deduct Subtotal- - 3738 Add39 Demo (E), allowSF 2.00 3,582 3,582 7,164 7,164 40 Bocce, 60'x13'LS 39,000.00 1 - 39,000 - 41 Catenary LightsLS 20,000.00 1 - 20,000 - 42 Ping pong tableEA 10,000.00 - 1 - 10,000 43 Concrete PavingSF 18.00 - 304 - 5,472 44 Unit PavingSF 35.00 1,526 1,933 53,410 67,655 45 Concrete seat wall, say 2' WLF 300.00 - 92 - 27,600 46 Planting stripSF 23.00 1,395 1,294 32,085 29,762 47 Tree, say 36" boxEA 1,300.00 6 4 7,800 5,200 48 Tree, say 48" boxEA 2,600.00 - 1 - 2,600 49 Bark mulch over planting, say 3" thick, allow SF 1.70 1,395 1,294 2,372 2,200 50 Irrigation, allowSF 4.00 1,395 1,294 5,580 5,176 51 Tree bubblersEA 250.00 6 5 1,500 1,250 52 Planting maintenance, allow MTH 500.00 3 3 1,500 1,500 53- - 54 B) Add Subtotal170,411 165,579 5556 C = B-A: Net Direct Cost170,411 165,579 57 Add Markups146%248,720 241,668 58592Total - Add Option 2: Paseo419,131 407,247 60 Carried to Grand Summaryrounded-off419,000 407,000 61Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpG) Options Estimate DetailsPage 13 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANG) OPTIONS ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $Alternate AAlternate BAlternate AAlternate B623Add Option 3: Intersection63Airport Blvd and Portion of Grand Ave from Airport Blvd to Cypress St64Deduct65 Deduct From Base Scope66 Aggregate base, say 6" thick CY67.00 271 270 18,157 18,090 67 Precast concrete unit paving, 80mm thick w concrete bans on either sideSF 32.00 10,554 7,585 337,728 242,720 68 Concrete pavingSF 16.00 4,057 428 64,912 6,848 69AC pavingSF5.00 - 6,550 - 32,750 70Curb & GutterLF40.00 536 - 21,440 - 71StripingSF1.00 - 6,550 - 6,550 72Planting StripSF23.00 1,488 1,293 34,224 29,739 73 Tree, say 36" boxEA1,300.00 2 - 2,600 - 74 Tree, say 48" boxEA 2,600.00 - 1 - 2,600 7576 A) Deduct Subtotal479,061 339,297 7778Add79 Intersection:80Remove (E) AC pavingSF 0.91 15,209 15,209 13,840 13,840 81 Remove (E) median SF 6.00 2,417 2,417 14,502 14,502 82 Remove (E) planter area for (N) bike lane SF 4.00 1,947 1,947 7,788 7,788 83 Aggregate base, say 6" thick CY 67.00 282 282 18,894 18,894 84 Precast concrete unit paving, 80mm thick w concrete bans on either sideSF 32.00 10,172 10,172 325,504 325,504 85Raised cross walkSF 18.00 563 563 10,134 10,134 86Extend concrete pavingSF 18.00 4,474 4,474 80,532 80,532 87Restore disturbed AC pavingLS 1.00 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 88Curb at medianLF 30.00 595 595 17,850 17,850 89Curb at new planting areaLF 30.00 858 858 25,740 25,740 90Curb & GutterLF 40.00 1,056 1,056 42,240 42,240 Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpG) Options Estimate DetailsPage 14 of 17 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRAND AVENUEPRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTBASED ON 90% MASTER PLANG) OPTIONS ESTIMATE DETAILSDate: 12/22/2019LineItemComponent DescriptionUnit Unit Cost $ QuantityQuantityEstimated $Estimated $Alternate AAlternate BAlternate AAlternate B91Painting (green) for bike lanesLF 16.00 413 413 6,608 6,608 92StripingLS 2,000.00 1 1 2,000 2,000 93Site furniture, allowLS 5,000.00 1 1 5,000 5,000 94Bus stopEA 20,000.00 1 1 20,000 20,000 95Planting area at medianSF 25.00 2,456 2,456 61,400 61,400 96Planting area separating bike laneSF 23.00 2,181 2,181 50,163 50,163 97Refresh (E) panting areaLS 1.00 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 98 Tree, say 36" boxEA 1,300.00 8 8 10,400 10,400 99 Tree, say 48" boxEA 2,600.00 7 7 18,200 18,200 100 Planting maintenance, allow MTH 2,000.00 1 1 2,000 2,000 101 Special traffic control/traffic management LS 50,000.00 1 1 50,000 50,000 102 Misc site items allow LS 20,000.00 1 1 20,000 20,000 103- - 104 B) Add Subtotal812,795 812,795 105106 C = B-A: Net Direct Cost333,734 473,498 107 Add Markups146%487,095 691,085 1081093Total - Add Option 3: Intersection820,829 1,164,583 110 Carried to Grand Summaryrounded-off821,000 1,165,000 Prepared for: SWA GroupPrepared by: M Lee CorpG) Options Estimate DetailsPage 15 of 17 M Lee Corporation Project Query Sheet TO:Daniel Cunningham of SWA Group FROM:M Lee Corporation MLC Job No.1430 Sheet No. Job Name:SSF Grand Ave Date: 11/27/2019 Item Reference Queries Answers (11/27/2019) 1 General Do you need us to include an allowance for escalating the estimate from current 2019 dollars to midpoint of construction? If you do, what should be the assumed construction start date and finish date? Assume 2020 - 2025 2 General What kind of "special roadway (unit) paving" should be assumed? Assume 80mm thick paver over aggregate base with concrete bans on either side. 3 General What kind of "special (unit) paving at crosswalk" should be assumed? Assume 80mm thick paver over aggregate base with concrete bans on either side. 4 General What kind of "Play Structure" should be allowed for? If not specified yet, what kind of budget allowance do you want us to carry for now? Maybe just include an allowance city has not confirmed they want a play structure at this point. Allow $200K 5 General What kind of paving should be assumed for the "Event Plaza"? Assume 80mm thick paver over aggregate base with concrete bans on either side in vehicular areas. 6 Prepared for: SWA Group Prepared by: M Lee Corp H) Queries Page 16 of 17 M Lee Corporation Key Professionals Martin Lee, Founding Principal & Chief Estimator Martin is a professional civil engineer (PE), chartered quantity surveyor (CQS), and certified professional estimator (CPE) by ASPE with over 35 years of practical experience in construction cost management and consulting services in the San Francisco Bay Area. Prior to establishing M Lee Corporation, Martin gained extensive experience working with a renowned general contractor/construction management firm and an international cost consulting firm. Working on over 1,300 projects with an estimated construction value of over $30 billion, Martin is knowledgeable of local construction practice and pricing. He enjoys and excels in construction cost and schedule management. Franklin Lee, Principal, Project Manager & Senior Estimator Principal and project manager/senior cost estimator of M Lee Corporation, Franklin is a professional civil engineer (PE), LEED accredited professional and certified estimating professional (CEP) by AACE. Franklin holds a B.S. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from University of California, Berkeley and a M.S. in Construction Engineering and Management from Stanford University. Prior to joining M Lee Corporation Franklin worked for a nationally renowned general contractor/construction management firm. He has provided cost estimating, scheduling and project management services on over 500 projects in the San Francisco Bay Area over 10 years. Contacts Martin Lee, PE, CPE, CQS Office: (415) 693-0236 Mobile: (415) 298-2136 Email: mlee@mleecorp.com 601 Montgomery Street, Suite 2040 San Francisco, CA 94111 Franklin Lee, PE, CEP, LEED AP Office: (415) 693-0236 Mobile: (415) 999-5629 Email: flee@mleecorp.com 601 Montgomery Street, Suite 2040 San Francisco, CA 94111 M LEE CORPORATION Construction Management & Consulting Estimating & Scheduling Since 1992 M Lee Corporation was established in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1992 to provide quality construction cost estimating, scheduling and construction, program and project management support services. Since its incorporation, M Lee Corporation has provided professional construction services for over 1,300 projects with an estimated value of over $30 billion, spanning all services and disciplines, scopes and sizes. Having worked in the San Francisco Bay Area over the last 27 years, our knowledge of the local construction market has proved to be a valuable asset to our clients. City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:20-09 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:2. Discussion of Public Art Recommendations from the Cultural Arts Commission and Caltrain Station Public Art (Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager/Director Parks & Recreation) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council consider several public art recommendations forwarded by the Cultural Arts Commission,and potential art opportunities for the Caltrain Station plaza,and provide staff with direction. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION For the past several years the Parks and Recreation Department has been allocated $50,000 each year through the operating budget for the purchase and installation of public art.Unlike most allocations in the operating budget,unspent funds from the prior year may be rolled forward to the next fiscal year.This practice allows for the possibility of banking the funds for a significant acquisition,or for the purchase of several pieces throughout the year. The Cultural Arts Fund currently has a balance of $78,482. One of the primary functions of the Cultural Arts Commission is to identify desirable locations for public art; select or commission murals or pieces of sculpture for consideration,including aesthetic appeal,durability, safety,and value;agendize discussion so that the public has the opportunity to participate;and finally to forward a recommendation regarding location and a specific piece of art for final approval by City Council.The most recent public art acquisitions include Orange Slices (east end of the Sculpture Garden,Orange Memorial Park);Popsicles (picnic area,Orange Memorial Park),and Windswept (Westborough median at Highway 280 exit). Staff is currently seeking City Council’s feedback regarding several art acquisitions/projects being recommended by the Cultural Arts Commission,which have been shared in past memos to Council.Although several City Council comments have been received, staff is seeking direction on how to proceed. Selection of Artist, Aaron Arevalo, for Downtown Urban Art (October 10, 2019 memo) On July 12,2019,the Department issued a request for proposals (RFP)on behalf of the Cultural Arts Commission seeking an artist,or team of artists,to take on an urban art project in downtown South San Francisco.The advertised goal of the urban art project was to highlight healthy living and anti-smoking themes via a series of 15 to 20 engaging and unexpected art pieces;a budget of $10,000 was identified.The RFP was posted on the City’s website,shared via the Cultural Arts Commission’s mailing list of art contacts, disseminated via the Department’s e-mail list,and shared on social media.The Department received one proposal by the September 6 deadline from artist Aaron Arevalo.The RFP and proposal by Aaron Arevalo can be found as Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. The Cultural Arts Commission reviewed the proposal at their meeting on Thursday,September 19,2019,and City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-09 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:2. The Cultural Arts Commission reviewed the proposal at their meeting on Thursday,September 19,2019,and unanimously moved to recommend Aaron Arevalo’s proposal for City Council’s consideration. As Council reviews the attached proposal, please keep in mind the following points: o The depictions in the attached proposals are solely concept drawings and representative of the artist’s artistic ability and his ideas around the proposed theme.The depictions are not necessarily representative of all images to be created by the artist. o While the general neighborhood in which the art will be displayed has been defined as “downtown,”the exact locations will be determined by the artist and city staff, with approval by City Council. The concept for these pieces is as temporary art to enliven the downtown experience,and hopefully to surprise and delight the viewer.In a year or two when the artwork fades or chips,it would be removed by power washing. Some general feedback that has been received is that the proposed images are too “preachy”and serious,and that a more light-hearted,whimsical,“street art”approach would be preferred.Staff and a sub-committee of Commissioners would like to work with the selected artist to develop some additional images,to identify specific locations in the downtown area for each image,and then seek formal City Council approval. Alternatively, if there is support for the concept of downtown street art, the RFP could be revised and reissued. Purchase of Two Sculptures - Artists John Carroll and HybyCozo (October 31, 2019 memo) At the Thursday,October 17,2019 Cultural Arts Commission meeting,the Commission voted to approve a recommendation to City Council to purchase two sculptures listed below.With the consensus of City Council, staff will move forward with further examining the full cost and installation logistics of the sculptures, including shipping.If satisfactory,staff will begin negotiating a purchase of the sculptures from the artists and will return to a City Council meeting to approve the Art Purchase Agreements.More information about each of the sculptures and a map showing the proposed locations is available in Attachment 3. Sculpture #1 - Modern Industrial Era (page 1 of Attachment 3) Artist: John Carroll Estimated Cost*: $4,500 Suggested location: 102 Grand Avenue @ Airport Boulevard jocogallery.com <http://jocogallery.com> Sculpture #2 - Geometric Lanterns, Strung Overhead (page 2 of Attachment 3) Artist: HybyCozo Estimated Cost*: $7,500 Suggested Location: Old Breezeway at 321 - 329 Grand Avenue www.hybycozo.com <http://www.hybycozo.com> City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-09 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:2. * Estimated cost of sculptures does not include shipping and installation. It should be noted that there are several site constraints,such as traffic occasionally running over the corner of the intersection at Grand and Airport and availability of electrical supply in the Old Breezeway,however staff believes that these issues can be addressed. Although the City is developing a streetscape improvement plan for Grand Avenue,which may conflict with these two installations,it will be several years before such a plan is implemented,and if necessary these pieces could be relocated.In the interim,the Cultural Arts Commission believes that these public art enhancements will beautify and add interest to the downtown. Public Art at the Caltrain Plaza The incorporation of public art at the renovated South San Francisco Caltrain Station has been discussed as a desirable place making element in the project since its inception,serving to highlight and punctuate the significance of this very important transportation hub and civic amenity.Construction setbacks and cost overruns have delayed the projected completion date to the end of 2020,and have to date postponed consideration of the public art component.However,if public art is to be incorporated into the project,it is important that a selection process be outlined and initiated as soon as possible before construction of the plaza area begins.It is important to note that Caltrans has very restrictive “Transportation Art”policies for the placement of public art within its sphere of influence,which may impact this project depending on where it is placed.This process requires extensive agency review,and the execution of encroachment and maintenance agreements which could significantly delay installation.Staff recommends making every effort to locate the artwork outside of the Caltrans sphere of influence if at all possible. Staff is seeking feedback from City Council on the type of art envisioned,such as sculpture,tile mosaic,mural, lighting installation,or other media;possible representational themes or preference for abstract art;preferred location within the project,such as at the plaza entrance near Grand Avenue;and the role of the Cultural Arts Commission in the process.Staff recommends,with some direction on the items noted above,that an RFP be developed for site specific artwork,written broadly enough to solicit the most creative and interesting proposals that would be complementary to the finalized downtown streetscape plan under development,and unique to South San Francisco.Staff recommends a budget of $500,000 for a significant,iconic art installation,which would be listed in the RFP, to generate high quality proposals. FISCAL IMPACT One potential funding source is the infrastructure reserve fund.Alternatively,Council may wish to consider declining the street art and downtown sculpture recommendations,and directing the current Public Art Fund of $78,482,plus a potential allocation of $50,000 in the 2020/21 budget,for a total of $128,482.This balance could be put toward the Caltrain public art project,reducing the needed funding from other sources to $371,518. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN Acceptance of the proposed public art recommendations contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan under Priority #2: Build and Maintain and Sustainable City by expanding public art offerings throughout the city. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-09 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:2. CONCLUSION City Council direction on the Cultural Arts Commission recommendations to beautify and enliven the downtown with urban street art,a sculpture,and overhead hanging lanterns will be very helpful in guiding the Commission on projects to be accomplished in 2020.Likewise,direction from City Council on vision for public art at the Caltrain Station will enable staff to launch a selection and installation schedule to coincide with the project construction schedule. Attachments: 1 - RFP for the Downtown Urban Art Project 2 - Proposal by Aaron Arevalo 3 - Information about each of the sculptures and a map showing the proposed locations 4 - PowerPoint Presentation City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 3 Proposed Locations • Sculpture #1 - Modern Industrial Era • Sculpture #2 - Geometric Lanterns, Strung Overhead #2 #1 Attachment 3 City Council Meeting Wednesday, January15, 2020 •Artist: Aaron Arevalo •Estimated Cost: $10,000 •Selection Process: RFP •About the Project: Highlight healthy living and anti- smoking themes via a series of 15 to 20 engaging and unexpected art pieces in downtown South San Francisco. •Proposed Location: Outdoor public spaces along the sidewalks and pathways of Grand Avenue in the downtown core area, from Spruce Avenue to Airport Boulevard. •This does not include private spaces. •Three (3) eligible art styles: 1.Daytime viewable images –The majority of the work will be viewed during daylight hours. 2.Shadow art images –Should play on the shadows of parking meters, signs, and other permanent structures on the sidewalks. 3.Nighttime viewable images –Up to six (6) pieces may reflect this style. Sample Artwork: Daytime Shadow Art Sample Artwork: Daytime Shadow Art Sample Artwork Daytime & Nighttime Viewable Image Sample Artwork Nighttime Viewable Image Glow in the dark art, painted on concrete sidewalk tiles. The steps to a healthier life. •Artist: John Carroll •Estimated Cost: $4,500 (not including shipping and installation) •Selection Process: Cultural Arts Commission •Suggested Location: 102 Grand Ave. @ Airport Blvd. •Materials: Mixed Media – Ceramic, Steel, Industrial Hardware •Size: 77” x 35” x 15” •Artist: HybyCozo •Estimated Cost: $7,500 (not including shipping and installation) •Size: 36” x 22” •Estimated Cost: $7,500 (not including shipping and installation) •Selection Process: Cultural Arts Commission •Suggested Location: Old Breezeway at 321 –329 Grand Ave. #2 #3 •#2 -Modern Industrial Era (102 Grand Ave. @ Airport Blvd.) •#3 -Geometric Lanterns, Strung Overhead (Old Breezeway at 321 –329 Grand Ave.) City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:19-1064 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:3. Update on the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study (Bianca Liu,Senior Engineer, Millette Litzinger (AECOM), & Daniel Krause (Caltrain)) RECOMMENDATION Staff requests City Council to provide feedback on the four alternatives. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Project (“Project”)is proposed to improve safety and decrease expected future traffic delays (due to growth in vehicle traffic),deliver greater frequency of Caltrain service,and lead to the eventual addition of high speed rail.South Linden Avenue is located in South San Francisco;Scott Street is in San Bruno.Although located in different cities,the two grade separations are proposed to be undertaken as a combined effort because of the close proximity to one another.This joint project is in the City of South San Francisco’s and the City of San Bruno’s current Capital Improvement Programs (“CIP”). On April 20,2016,the City of South San Francisco signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)with the San Mateo County Transportation Authority,the City of San Bruno,and the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB)to complete a Planning Study for the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Project.All of the parties recognized the importance of exploring grade separations as a means of reducing the impacts of increased train service on traffic and safety at the South Linden Avenue and Scott Street railroad crossings. Since January 2018,City staff has been participating on the Project Development Team which was formed to prepare the Planning Study.The team is primarily comprised of representatives from Caltrain,the City of San Bruno,and the City of South San Francisco,along with consultants AECOM and APEX Strategies which were hired by JPB.Currently,the planning phase of the project is funded.However,subsequent phases (environmental, design and construction) have not been funded yet. Six alternatives were originally developed for evaluation to achieve grade separations at South Linden Avenue and Scott Street.Two alternatives for creating the grade separation project were eliminated during the preliminary design analysis because they were infeasible given the project’s geometric constraints.One of the eliminated alternatives planned for the train tracks to be raised while South Linden Avenue and Scott Street remain at their existing elevations.The other eliminated alternative planned for the train tracks to be lowered while South Linden Avenue and Scott Street remained at their existing elevations. This left four alternatives for further investigation.The Project Development Team evaluated the four remaining alternatives that appeared to be viable options for achieving grade separation at both South Linden Avenue and Scott Street while at a minimum maintaining pedestrian and bicycle crossings.Under all scenarios, Scott Street would need to be closed to vehicular traffic to preserve private property driveway access and provide for a grade separation. The four alternatives are summarized in Attachment 1 and are as follows: City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:19-1064 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:3. ·Alternative 1 - Hybrid Track Raised and Road Lowered. The clearance between the track and the road is created by raising the track and lowering the road. The road is lowered to pass under the tracks at South Linden Avenue. Scott Street would be closed to vehicles and a pedestrian/ bicycle overpass or underpass would be provided. ·Alternative 2 - Hybrid Road Raised and Track Lowered. The clearance between the track and the road is created by raising the road and lowering the track. The road is raised to pass over the tracks at South Linden Avenue. Scott Street would be closed to vehicles and a pedestrian/ bicycle overpass or underpass would be provided. ·Alternative 3 -Track At-Grade and Road Lowered.The tracks remain at their current elevation and the road is lowered to pass under the tracks at South Linden Avenue.Scott Street would be closed to vehicles and a pedestrian/bicycle overpass or underpass would be provided. ·Alternative 4 - Track At-Grade and Road Raised. The tracks remain at their current elevation and the road is raised to pass over the tracks at South Linden Avenue. Scott Street would be closed to vehicles and a pedestrian/ bicycle overpass or underpass would be provided. On August 16,2018,the first community meeting was held at the South San Francisco Conference Center.The meeting was open to residents from both South San Francisco and San Bruno.At the community meeting representatives from Apex Strategies and AECOM presented the four alternatives that would allow for grade separation at South Linden Avenue and Scott Street. On September 26, 2018, the project team presented the Project to South San Francisco’s City Council. On October 9,2018,the project team presented the Project to San Bruno’s City Council.San Bruno City Council expressed that continuing to develop an alternative that closed Scott Street to automobiles without having detailed traffic analysis was not acceptable.Therefore,City Council directed San Bruno staff and the project team to pursue a traffic study focused on the implications of closing Scott Street. On August 28,2019,a San Bruno only community meeting was held at the Legion Hall in San Bruno.The project team presented three alternatives:(a)no grade separation at Scott Street,(b)Scott Street grade separated for pedestrians and bicyclists but closed to motorists,and (c)Scott Street grade separated for pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists. Overall, residents were opposed to Option c and in favor of Option a or b. On November 26,2019,the project team presented three alternatives to San Bruno City Council:(a)no grade separation at Scott Street,(b)Scott Street grade separated for pedestrians and bicylists but closed to motorists, and (c)Scott Street grade separated for pedestrians,bicyclists and motorists.San Bruno City Council recommended staff move forward with option (b)to explore a pedestrian/bicycle grade separated crossing at Scott Street. The same four alternatives remain from the previous City Council meeting.Attachment 1 includes a summary of the four alternatives.Attachment 2 includes the layout for each alternative.Attachment 3 includes a summary of the advantages and disadvantages. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ File #:19-1064 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:3. Revenue service for Caltrain must be maintained during construction,so temporary tracks (also called a shoofly)will need to be constructed for three of the four alternatives.No temporary tracks will be required for Alternative 4 -Track At-Grade and Road Raised.The temporary tracks will be located west of the existing tracks and there will be potential right of way impacts between Colma Creek and South Linden Avenue during the construction period.In addition,between South Linden Avenue and Scott Street the temporary tracks will encroach into Dollar Street resulting in a reduction in traffic lanes and parking during the construction period. Both South San Francisco and San Bruno plan to conduct additional public outreach on potential alternatives, leading to the selection of the preferred alternative to complete the 15%plans.JPB and the Cities of South San Francisco and San Bruno have worked collaboratively to update the schedule and currently anticipate the preliminary planning phase of work to be completed in the last quarter of 2020. The following are the anticipated key milestones and dates on the schedule: Spring 2020 - Community Meeting #3 (community feedback) May 2020 - City Council Meeting (select preferred alternative) December 2020 - Complete Project Study Report FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact of this update. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN Providing a grade separation at South Linden Avenue would contribute to the City’s Strategic Plan outcome of improved quality of life by improving traffic circulation and increasing public safety. CONCLUSION Staff requests City Council to provide feedback on the four alternatives. Attachments: 1.Summary of Alternatives 2.Alternative Layouts 3.Summary of Advantages and Disadvantages City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Summary of Alternatives Alt South Linden Avenue Scott Street 1 Rail Elevated Roads Lowered Rail Elevated Road Closed Ped/Bike Crossing* 2 Rail Lowered Roads Elevated Rail Lowered Road Closed Ped/Bike Crossing* 3 Rail At-Grade Roads Fully Lowered Rail At-Grade Road Closed Ped/Bike Crossing* 4 Rail At-Grade Roads Fully Elevated Rail At-Grade Road Closed Ped/Bike Crossing* * A Ped/Bike Underpass (Tunnel) or an Overcrossing can be designed for this alternative Attachment 1 South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Alternative 1: Hybrid (Track Raised, Roadway Lowered) South Linden Avenue Layout South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Alternative 2: Hybrid (Track Lowered, Roadway Raised) South Linden Avenue Layout South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Alternative 3: Rail at grade with Roadway Underpass South Linden Avenue Layout South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Alternative 4: Rail at grade with Roadway Overpass South Linden Avenue Layout South Linden Avenue and Scott Street Grade Separation Planning Study Advantages & Disadvantages Alternative Advantages Disadvantages Least Property Impacts Lowest Cost (Probable) Shoofly Required* Reduces Train Noise (Rail Elevation Lowered) More Property Impacts than Alt 1 Shoofly Required* High Cost Rail Remains At-Grade More Property Impacts than Alt 1 Limits Access to Adjacent Properties Greatest Impacts to Sidestreets Shoofly Required* High Cost Rail Remains At-Grade No Shoofly Required Greatest Property Impacts Visual impacts Highest Cost (Probable) * Shoofly will result in disruption to traffic on Dollar/ Herman during construction Attachment 3 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:20-01 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:4. Update on the Summer Youth Employment Pilot Program (Leah Lockhart, Human Resources Director) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council receive an update on the summer youth employment pilot program On October 2,2019 staff presented the City Council with a conceptual plan for a summer jobs program for youth within the South San Francisco community.The purpose of this program is to address some of the needs identified by the Community Collaboration for Children’s Success (CSSS)in its Neighborhood Action Plan for South San Francisco.Modeled on other successful youth employment programs,this program would provide youth with little or no work experience an opportunity to earn wages over the summer while receiving on-the- job mentoring and work-readiness training.In addition,this program will provide youth with an opportunity to build connections with working adults within the South San Francisco community.After discussion,Council directed staff to proceed with program planning and development for implementation in summer, 2020. Program Overview The pilot program will run from mid-June through mid-August,2020,with a goal of twenty (20)youth participants and at least seven participating employers.Participants must be high school students or 2020 graduates between the ages of 15-18,and must currently live or attend school in South San Francisco.Each participant will be employed by the City and assigned to a 6 or 7 week work experience (approximately 20-25 hours per week)with participating employers.Employers would pay a flat contribution per participant,which would cover approximately 50%of the wages for participants (up to $1500 for 175 hours),along with a commitment to provide an assigned mentor and learning opportunities for the students.The remaining 50%of wages would be covered by the City.The City will provide an orientation for participants to prepare them for entry to the workforce,including practical skills and tips regarding workplace etiquette,employer expectations, and maximizing learning opportunities.Throughout the summer,the City will also host weekly development workshops focusing on topics such as career planning,resume writing and interviewing,financial literacy,time management,leadership,and communication.Workshops will be facilitated by a combination of City staff and volunteers, and may include partnerships with other community organizations involved in youth development. Current Status Following the October Council meeting,staff selected and hired a consultant program manager to lead program development,implementation,and management.The following program planning and development activities have been completed: ·Met with program staff from the San Mateo County Jobs for Youth program and the San Mateo County Office of Education to identify existing resources that could be coordinated with the City,and obtain City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-01 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:4. Office of Education to identify existing resources that could be coordinated with the City,and obtain further input on program development. ·Conducted further research on best practices and model programs,including sample work site agreements and other program guidelines and materials. ·Through a partnership with the Silicon Valley Talent Partnership,conducted recruitment for a volunteer team to assist with implementation and program evaluation. ·Met with the Youth Advisory Committee (SSFYAC)to obtain further input on program design and marketing ideas. ·Developed program goals and success factors. Project Plan The immediate next steps to be will include meetings with staff from the South San Francisco Unified School District,the Boys and Girls Club,and other community programs serving youth to further refine program elements and develop participant recruitment and engagement strategies.Staff will also begin outreach to potential employers to serve as work sites in January,with the goal of securing work site agreements in February. Further details project plan are included in the attached presentation (Attachment 1). FISCAL IMPACT The total budget for this program is approximately $200,000 annually.In March,staff will be submitting a proposal for County Measure K District funds to subsidize up to $100,000 of program costs. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN The summer youth employment program supports the City’s strategic priority of Workforce Development by engaging youth with meaningful paid work opportunities to learn job skills and develop career readiness while building relationships with working professionals in our community. CONCLUSION Based on Council direction,plans are moving forward to implement a summer youth employment program in June-August,2020.Staff have selected and hired a project manager,developed a project plan,and are currently in the process of further developing program elements and outreach strategies.Staff will provide further updates to Council as key milestones are met and the program is ready to launch. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/10/2020Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Youth Summer Work Experience Pilot Program City Council Update January 15, 2020 Youth Summer Work Experience Program Program Overview Participants must be South San Francisco residents, or attending school in SSF, ages 15-18. Participants employed directly by the City and matched with employers for a 6-7 week work assignment (20-25 hours per week) Wages are partially subsidized by the City (employer pays a fee to cover 50% of wages) Employers attend an orientation and commit to providing an assigned mentor and opportunities for skill development City provides orientation to participations and weekly work readiness and “soft skills” training (3 hours per week) Project Plan and Progress Dec MarFeb AprJan May Jun July Aug Sep PLAN DEVELOP IMPLEMENT LAUNCH CLOSE & EVALUATE Progress to Date PLANNING PHASE: November -January •Selected and hired a Consultant Program Manager •Met with program staff from the San Mateo County Jobs for Youth program and the San Mateo County Office of Education •Conducted further research on best practices and program templates •Conducted recruitment for a volunteer team through the Silicon Valley Talent Partnership •Met with the Youth Advisory Committee (SSFYAC) Developed program goals and success factors PROGRAM GOALS Youth Participant Survey 20 youth completing program •At least 85% would recommend the program to a friend. •At least 85% report gains in confidence and skills for future employment Employer Survey At least 7 employers participating (20 job placements) •At least 80% will likely participate in the program again the following year. Additional Measures Follow-upsurvey of participants one year after graduationregarding employment and/or career plans Project Plan DEVELOPMENT PHASE: January - February •Additional stakeholder meetings with school district and community organizations •Outreach to potential employer participants •Prepare forms, including parental consent form, job application form, waiver forms, worksite agreements •Finalize marketing and outreach plans •Develop the application and matching process •Determine content of orientation and training programs for participants and contact potential trainers Project Plan DEVELOPMENT PHASE: March -April •Submit Measure K Grant Proposal •Secure worksite agreements with employers •Hire a HR Analyst to provide administrative support to the program •Recruit program participants and select finalist candidates •Match participants with the appropriate internship based on interests, skills, and abilities •Coordinate with City Job Fair to promote and expose the program to the youth in the community Project Plan IMPLEMENTATION PHASE: May •Meet with the representative from each participating employer to review their roles and responsibilities, ensure mentors have been assigned address and answer questions and concerns •Conduct site visits of companies to ensure they are safe and appropriate for the participating youth •Submit applications of participants to the employers and facilitate introductions Project Plan LAUNCH PHASE: JUNE-JULY •Conduct participant orientation session •Employment onboarding •Contact each employer, via the phone or email, for status updates and to proactively address issues •Conduct site visits to ensure program adherence •Conduct weekly skill workshops with participants, address issues or concerns as needed Project Plan CLOSURE & EVALUATION PHASE: AUGUST-SEPT •Placements and training continue through mid- August •Conduct a Graduation Luncheon for participants, invite Community Leaders and participating employer representative to attend •Distribute a survey to both participants and companies to determine if the program goals and objective were met •Complete report to Council summarizing the program results, recommendations for the future and seeking direction for continuing the program in 2021 Expense Category Estimated Cost Program Staffing $140,000 Consultant Program Manager Part-time HR Analyst (Apr-Aug) SVTP Volunteers (pro bono) Supplies& Services $20,000 Participant Wages & Costs $70,000 20 participants@ 15/hr Payroll taxes & insurance Employer Fees ($30,000) 20 participants @1,500 Total Program Cost $200,000 Program Budget & Funding Measure K District Fund Request $100,000 District 1 $50,000 District 5 $50,000 Questions City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:20-16 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:5. Report regarding an update to Senate Bill 50 (Wiener).(Christina Fernandez, Assistant to the City Manager) RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive an update to Senate Bill 50 (Wiener). BACKGROUND San Mateo County’s median home price of $1.3M continues to top all nationwide lists as being the most expensive county to purchase a home.The average rent in San Mateo County is $3,453 for a two-bedroom apartment and $2,695 for a one bedroom.The median monthly mortgage payment in the United States is $1,030.In order to rent a home in San Mateo County,a renter needs to earn at least $114,823 a year to afford a typical 2-bedroom apartment,making it difficult for median income families to afford to live in San Mateo County.Only 24%of San Mateo County residents can afford to purchase an entry level home.That is lower than the Bay Area’s average of 39% and the United States average of 71%. It should come as no surprise that Bay Area residents found housing costs to be the top problem facing the region, with 46% of respondents likely to leave the Bay Area in the next few years. The Bay Area is rich in jobs and poor in housing.Between 2010 and 2017,San Mateo County has created 83,000 new jobs while only 7,100 new housing units were built,a 12:1 ratio.Up until a few years ago,the ratio was 16:1 so there has been progress made, however a Jobs: Housing imbalance remains. South San Francisco Housing South San Francisco’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)estimates the City will need 1,864 units. The Housing Element does not require that these units are built during the allocation cycle,but it does require a City to have zoning in place to ensure that RHNA allocation can be constructed.The City has issued 264 building permits for new residential units.Forty permits were finalized in 2019 and included the closeout of several units within the 1256 Mission Road multifamily development.The City also completed entitlement approval for 195 units for Cadence Phase Two by Sares Regis and 172 units for 988 El Camino Real by Summerhill. In 2017, the City issued building permits for 42% of the expected housing units for the City. Senate Bill 50 In December 2018,Senator Wiener introduced Senate Bill 50 to create more homes near public transportation and jobs.According to Senator Wiener,current patterns encourage development on farmlands and wild open space while inducing lengthy commutes.Senate Bill 50 would incentivize development of small and medium sized apartment buildings near public transportation and high opportunity job centers. Incentives to build denser,multifamily housing near transit and job centers would include requiring local governments to provide an equitable communities incentive to developers.Equitable communities incentives include waivers from maximum controls on density,minimum parking requirements,maximum height requirements,and maximum floor area ratio.Dependent on the project,there is also opportunity for up to three City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 1 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-16 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:5. requirements,and maximum floor area ratio.Dependent on the project,there is also opportunity for up to three additional incentives and concessions under the Density Bonus Law, as described below. In order to obtain an equitable communities incentive,the residential development must be either a jobs-rich or transit-rich housing project.A transit-rich housing project is defined as “a residential development in which the parcels are all within a ½mile radius of a major transit stop or ¼mile radius of a stop on a high quality bus corridor.”A jobs-rich housing project means a residential development within a jobs-rich area as defined by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)and the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). These areas must have been identified as both high opportunity and either jobs-rich or capable of shortening commute distances,based on regional analysis.The analysis takes into consideration tracts that enable residents to live in a jobs-rich area measured by:(1)employment density and job totals and (2)new housing sited in the tract that allows for shorter commutes. A.Those projects defined as transit-rich or jobs-rich housing projects may receive: ·Waiver from maximum controls on density ·Waiver from minimum parking requirements greater than .5 parking spaces per unit ·Up to three incentives and concessions under the Density Bonus Law B.In addition to the waivers listed above (A), projects located up to ¼ mile radius of major transit stop may receive: ·Waiver from maximum height requirements less than 55 feet ·Waiver from maximum floor area ratio requirements less than 3.25 ·Waiver from any minimum parking requirement C.In addition to the waivers listed above in (A), projects between ¼ and ½ mile of a major transit stop may receive: ·Waiver from maximum height requirements less than 45 feet ·Waiver from maximum floor area ratio requirements less than 3.25 ·Waiver from any minimum parking requirement In addition to building denser housing in a jobs-rich or transit-rich area, the development must also: ·Locate on a site that is zoned to allow housing as an underlying use ·Prohibit the inclusion of sites (1) occupied by tenants within seven years preceding the date of the application and (2) on any parcel on which an owner of residential real property has exercised their City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 2 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-16 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:5. rights to withdraw accommodations from rent within 15 years prior to the date of the application ·Adhere to all applicable labor, construction, employment, and wage standards required by law ·Comply with relevant standard requirements and prohibitions imposed by local government regarding architectural design, restrictions on or oversight of demolition, impact fees, and community benefit agreements ·Include the number of affordable units listed below. The units must remain affordable for 55 years for rental units and 45 years for units offered for sale Affordable Housing Requirements Senate Bill 50 requires development projects that qualify for an equitable communities incentive to include affordable units. If the local government in which the development is proposed to be located has adopted an inclusionary housing ordinance, and if the ordinance requires the proposed development to include more than 20% of the units for low income or 11% for very low income, then the local ordinance will apply. If the local government has not adopted an inclusionary ordinance or if the ordinance requirements are less than those required in Senate Bill 50, then the following Inclusionary Housing Requirement will be compulsory. Project Size Inclusionary Requirement 1-10 units No affordability requirement. 11-20 units Development proponent may pay an in-lieu fee where feasible toward housing offsite affordable to lower income households. 21-200 units 15% low income; or 8% very low income; or 6% extremely low income 201-350 units 17% low income; or 10% very low income; or 8% extremely low income 351 or more units 25% low income; or 15% very low income; or 11% extremely low income If a development contributes toward housing offsite by paying an in-lieu fee,the local government will make every effort to ensure that affordable housing is located within ½mile of the original project location.If no housing sites are available,the local government will designate a site for affordable housing within the boundaries of its jurisdiction. Sensitive Communities Senate Bill 50 asserts that communities of color and those with high concentrations of poverty are disenfranchised with the community planning process.In order to provide more flexibility to those communities,the bill contains a delay for sensitive communities until July 1,2020 as well as a process for those communities to identify their own plans to encourage multifamily housing development at a range of income levels to meet unmet needs, protect residents from displacement, and address other identified priorities. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 3 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-16 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:5. A sensitive community is defined as “those communities where thirty percent or more of the population live below the poverty line,and the residential racial segregation in the census tract is at least 1.25 as defined by the Department of Housing and Community Development.In addition,it is an area designated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)as the intersection of disadvantaged and vulnerable communities.This designation will be updated every 5 years by the Department of Housing and Community Development.” DISCUSSION In May 2019,the Senate Appropriations Committee failed to move SB 50 to the Senate Floor for a vote and converted the bill into a two-year bill.This provided the author the ability to continue to work through concerns surrounding increased densities and local control.As a result,Senate Bill 50 was amended and reintroduced in January 2020 with amendments addressing concerns over local control and community preference. Amendments On January 7,2020,Senator Wiener revised Senate Bill 50 to provide additional local flexibility,as well as to clean-up and restructure the bill.The two new major components of SB 50 are centered around local flexibility and community preference. As amended,the provisions of SB 50 will have a two year delayed implementation and will not go into effect until January 1,2023.In addition,SB 50 will allow for an alternative compliance for cities that have a plan certified by the State of California’s Department of Housing and Community Development.The alternative plan must be approved by the city,such as a housing element or zoning ordinance.The alternative plan needs to accommodate similar transportation efficiency and be consistent with fair housing findings.The goal of this amendment is to allow cities the opportunity to plan locally for growth in areas that are best for the city,which may or may not be areas covered by SB 50. Alternative plans may also be items that have already been adopted by local governments through previous planning efforts.However,these plans are subject to approval by HCD.HCD will be responsible for developing guidelines for what exactly a local government would need to provide as part of an alternative plan, which will not be fully refined within SB 50.Local governments that choose not to pursue an alternative plan would be subject to the SB 50 provisions related to jobs-rich and transit-rich housing areas. As it relates to community preference,SB 50 has been amended to provide that 40%of affordable units that are created pursuant to SB 50 need to be made available through lottery to people who currently live within ½mile of the project. This provision is meant to address concerns over displacement and gentrification. Lastly,SB 50 was amended to clarify that new housing must be multi-family housing.This amendment addresses the concern that SB 50 could be used to create large single family housing projects in areas that could otherwise be suitable for multi-family housing development. Senate Bill 50 and the General Plan Senate Bill 50 provides a strong incentive for local government to produce an alternative plan rather than be subject to the default upzoning provisions in SB 50.The City of South San Francisco’s General Planning effort (Shape SSF) is an ideal vehicle to produce an alternative plan in line with SB 50 requirements. City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 4 of 5 powered by Legistar™ File #:20-16 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:5. Support and Opposition There is no question that housing remains the top problem facing Californians.However,the way to solve this problem remains a very divisive one.Senate Bill 50 is co-sponsored by California YIMBY,Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California,and the California Association of Realtors.Other supporters include apartment associations,associations of students,building and trades,housing alliances,and chambers of commerce. The League of California Cities has adopted an Oppose Unless Amended position. Next Steps Senate Bill 50 is a two-year bill in its House of Origin and it must be moved out of the Senate Appropriations Committee by January 24,2020.If the measure is moved out of committee,it will then go to the Senate Floor, where it must be approved by January 31,2020.Should SB 50 pass out of the Senate before January 31,2020, it will then be subject to the normal bill deadlines for the 2020 session,meaning that its next deadline would be the Second House policy committee deadline on June 26, 2020. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact is unknown. RELATIONSHIP TO STRATEGIC PLAN This item is informational only. CONCLUSION Senate Bill 50 has failed twice in the past three years amid opposition surrounding local control,community preference,displacement and gentrification.The latest iteration of SB 50 addresses many concerns surrounding local control and community preference.However,SB 50 must still make it through both houses of the Legislature and amendments are likely to occur.Working with our legislative firm in Sacramento,staff will continue to monitor SB 50 as it evolves and bring it back to Council for further direction as needed. Attachments: 1.SB 50 (Wiener): More Homes Act of 2020 2.PowerPoint Presentation City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 5 of 5 powered by Legistar™ AMENDED IN SENATE JANUARY 6, 2020 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 4, 2019 AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 1, 2019 AMENDED IN SENATE MARCH 11, 2019 SENATE BILL No. 50 Introduced by Senator Wiener (Coauthors: Senators Caballero, Hueso, McGuire, Moorlach, Skinner, and Stone Roth, and Skinner) (Coauthors: Assembly Members Chu, Diep, Fong, Kalra, Kiley, Low, McCarty, Quirk-Silva, Robert Rivas, Ting, and Wicks) December 3, 2018 An act to amend Section 65589.5 of, to add Sections 65913.5 and 65913.6 to, and to add Chapter 4.35 (commencing with Section 65918.50) to Division 1 of Title 7 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. legislative counsel’s digest SB 50, as amended, Wiener. Planning and zoning: housing development: streamlined approval: incentives. (1)  Existing law authorizes a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development that satisfies specified planning objective standards to be subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit. This bill would authorize a development proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project located on an eligible parcel to submit an application for a streamlined, ministerial approval process that is not subject to a conditional use permit. The bill would define a “neighborhood 95 multifamily project” to mean a project to construct a multifamily structure on vacant land, or to convert an existing structure that does not require substantial exterior alteration into a multifamily structure, consisting of up to 4 residential dwelling units and that meets local height, setback, and lot coverage zoning requirements as they existed on July 1, 2019. The bill would also define “eligible parcel” to mean a parcel that meets specified requirements, including requirements relating to the location of the parcel and restricting the demolition of certain housing development that may already exist on the site. This bill would require a local agency to notify the development proponent in writing if the local agency determines that the development conflicts with any of the requirements provided for streamlined ministerial approval within 60 days of the submission of the development to the local agency. If the local agency does not notify the development proponent within this time period, the development would be deemed to comply with those requirements. The bill would limit the authority of a local agency to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that the approval of a project under these provisions expires automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for 3 years and remain valid thereafter, so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local agency from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. This bill would allow a local agency to exempt a project from the streamlined ministerial approval process described above by finding that the project will cause a specific adverse impact to public health and safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a 95 — 2 — SB 50 significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects. This bill would establish a streamlined ministerial approval process for neighborhood multifamily projects, thereby exempting these projects from the CEQA approval process. (2)  Existing law, known as the density bonus law, requires, when an applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or moderate-income households or qualifying residents. This bill bill, on or after January 1, 2023, would require a specified city, county, or city and county to grant upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things, that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with specified law within specified time periods; and the residential development complies with specified additional requirements under existing law. The bill would impose additional requirements on a residential development located within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000. The bill would require that a residential development within a county with a population greater than 600,000 that is eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive, upon request, waivers from maximum controls on density; minimum automobile parking requirements greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit; and specified additional waivers if the residential development is located within a 1⁄2 -mile or 1⁄4 -mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. For a residential development within a county with a population equal to or less than 600,000, the bill would instead require that the incentive provide waivers from maximum controls on density, subject to certain limitations; maximum height limitations less than or equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height 95 SB 50 — 3 — for mixed use or residential use; certain requirements governing the size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy; and minimum automobile parking requirements, as provided. The bill would require a local government to grant an equitable communities incentive unless it makes a specified finding regarding the effects of the incentive on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state register of historical resources. The bill would authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable communities incentive is consistent with these provisions. The bill would delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2023. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The bill would also exempt from these provisions a local government that has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed and certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development, as specified. The bill, on or before July 1, 2021, would require the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department of Housing and Community Development, to develop and publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan, as specified. The bill, on or after July 1, 2021, would authorize a local government to submit a local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to those rules, regulations, or guidelines. The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by these provisions address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The bill would also delay implementation of these provisions in potentially sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2020. The bill would further delay implementation of these provisions in sensitive communities, determined as provided, until January 1, 2026, unless the city or county in which the area is located votes to make these provisions applicable after a specified petition and public hearing process. On and 95 — 4 — SB 50 after January 1, 2026, the bill would apply these provisions to a sensitive community unless the city or county adopts a community plan for the area that meets certain requirements. The Housing Accountability Act prohibits a local agency from disapproving, or conditioning approval in a manner that renders infeasible, a housing development project that complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria in effect at the time the application for the project is deemed complete unless the local agency makes specified written findings based on a preponderance of the evidence in the record. That law provides that the receipt of a density bonus is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. This bill would additionally provide that the receipt of an equitable communities incentive is not a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision of that act. (3)  By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4)  The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.​ State-mandated local program: yes.​ The people of the State of California do enact as follows: line 1 SECTION 1. Section 65589.5 of the Government Code is line 2 amended to read: line 3 65589.5. (a)  (1)  The Legislature finds and declares all of the line 4 following: line 5 (A)  The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a line 6 critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and line 7 social quality of life in California. line 8 (B)  California housing has become the most expensive in the line 9 nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially 95 SB 50 — 5 — line 1 caused by activities and policies of many local governments that line 2 limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, line 3 and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of line 4 housing. line 5 (C)  Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination line 6 against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to line 7 support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, line 8 reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air line 9 quality deterioration. line 10 (D)  Many local governments do not give adequate attention to line 11 the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that line 12 result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction line 13 in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing line 14 development projects. line 15 (2)  In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act line 16 adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares line 17 the following: line 18 (A)  California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of line 19 historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively line 20 and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of line 21 Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call line 22 California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and line 23 businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining line 24 the state’s environmental and climate objectives. line 25 (B)  While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, line 26 the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to line 27 significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable line 28 to Californians of all income levels is a key factor. line 29 (C)  The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, line 30 demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the line 31 negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted line 32 unaffordability. line 33 (D)  According to reports and data, California has accumulated line 34 an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must line 35 provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with line 36 growth through 2025. line 37 (E)  California’s overall homeownership rate is at its lowest level line 38 since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in line 39 homeownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. 95 — 6 — SB 50 line 1 Only one-half of California’s households are able to afford the line 2 cost of housing in their local regions. line 3 (F)  Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality line 4 and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians. line 5 (G)  The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000 line 6 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent line 7 and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more line 8 than 50 percent of their income toward rent. line 9 (H)  When Californians have access to safe and affordable line 10 housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are line 11 less likely to become homeless and in need of line 12 government-subsidized services; their children do better in school; line 13 and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining line 14 employees. line 15 (I)  An additional consequence of the state’s cumulative housing line 16 shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions line 17 caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states line 18 with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and line 19 middle-class households. California’s cumulative housing shortfall line 20 therefore has not only national but international environmental line 21 consequences. line 22 (J)  California’s housing picture has reached a crisis of historic line 23 proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has line 24 enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the line 25 approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income line 26 levels, including this section. line 27 (K)  The Legislature’s intent in enacting this section in 1982 and line 28 in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase line 29 the approval and construction of new housing for all economic line 30 segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and line 31 effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, line 32 reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development line 33 projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled. line 34 (L)  It is the policy of the state that this section should be line 35 interpreted and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest line 36 possible weight to the interest of, and the approval and provision line 37 of, housing. line 38 (3)  It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that line 39 would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and 95 SB 50 — 7 — line 1 safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and line 2 paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently. line 3 (b)  It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject line 4 or make infeasible housing development projects, including line 5 emergency shelters, that contribute to meeting the need determined line 6 pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic, line 7 social, and environmental effects of the action and without line 8 complying with subdivision (d). line 9 (c)  The Legislature also recognizes that premature and line 10 unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses line 11 continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands line 12 for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. line 13 Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should line 14 be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in line 15 implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, line 16 to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas. line 17 (d)  A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development line 18 project, including farmworker housing as defined in subdivision line 19 (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code, for very line 20 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency line 21 shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing line 22 development project infeasible for development for the use of very line 23 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency line 24 shelter, including through the use of design review standards, line 25 unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of line 26 the evidence in the record, as to one of the following: line 27 (1)  The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to line 28 this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588, line 29 is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction line 30 has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need line 31 allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for line 32 the income category proposed for the housing development project, line 33 provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be line 34 based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the line 35 housing development project includes a mix of income categories, line 36 and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional line 37 housing need for one or more of those categories, then this line 38 paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve line 39 the housing development project. The share of the regional housing line 40 need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with 95 — 8 — SB 50 line 1 the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department line 2 of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section line 3 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall line 4 have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified line 5 pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any line 6 disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph line 7 shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards. line 8 (2)  The housing development project or emergency shelter as line 9 proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public line 10 health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily line 11 mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering line 12 the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income line 13 households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter line 14 financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, line 15 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and line 16 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public line 17 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed line 18 on the date the application was deemed complete. Inconsistency line 19 with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation line 20 shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public line 21 health or safety. line 22 (3)  The denial of the housing development project or imposition line 23 of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or line 24 federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without line 25 rendering the development unaffordable to low- and line 26 moderate-income households or rendering the development of the line 27 emergency shelter financially infeasible. line 28 (4)  The housing development project or emergency shelter is line 29 proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation line 30 that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for line 31 agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not line 32 have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project. line 33 (5)  The housing development project or emergency shelter is line 34 inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and line 35 general plan land use designation as specified in any element of line 36 the general plan as it existed on the date the application was line 37 deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised line 38 housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in line 39 substantial compliance with this article. For purposes of this line 40 section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use 95 SB 50 — 9 — line 1 designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed line 2 complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or line 3 condition approval of the housing development project or line 4 emergency shelter. line 5 (A)  This paragraph cannot be utilized to disapprove or line 6 conditionally approve a housing development project if the housing line 7 development project is proposed on a site that is identified as line 8 suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income line 9 households in the jurisdiction’s housing element, and consistent line 10 with the density specified in the housing element, even though it line 11 is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and line 12 general plan land use designation. line 13 (B)  If the local agency has failed to identify in the inventory of line 14 land in its housing element sites that can be developed for housing line 15 within the planning period and are sufficient to provide for the line 16 jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income line 17 levels pursuant to Section 65584, then this paragraph shall not be line 18 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing line 19 development project proposed for a site designated in any element line 20 of the general plan for residential uses or designated in any element line 21 of the general plan for commercial uses if residential uses are line 22 permitted or conditionally permitted within commercial line 23 designations. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be line 24 on the local agency to show that its housing element does identify line 25 adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards line 26 and with services and facilities to accommodate the local agency’s line 27 share of the regional housing need for the very low, low-, and line 28 moderate-income categories. line 29 (C)  If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones line 30 where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without line 31 a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to line 32 demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient line 33 capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified line 34 in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed line 35 to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate line 36 at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of line 37 subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be line 38 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency line 39 shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general line 40 plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In 95 — 10 — SB 50 line 1 any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency line 2 to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of line 3 paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. line 4 (e)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local line 5 agency from complying with the congestion management program line 6 required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of line 7 Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976 line 8 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public line 9 Resources Code). Nothing in this section shall be construed to line 10 relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings line 11 required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code line 12 or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality line 13 Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public line 14 Resources Code). line 15 (f)  (1)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a line 16 local agency from requiring the housing development project to line 17 comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, line 18 conditions, and policies appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting line 19 the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need pursuant to line 20 Section 65584. However, the development standards, conditions, line 21 and policies shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate line 22 development at the density permitted on the site and proposed by line 23 the development. line 24 (2)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a local line 25 agency from requiring an emergency shelter project to comply line 26 with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, line 27 conditions, and policies that are consistent with paragraph (4) of line 28 subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and appropriate to, and consistent line 29 with, meeting the jurisdiction’s need for emergency shelter, as line 30 identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section line 31 65583. However, the development standards, conditions, and line 32 policies shall be applied by the local agency to facilitate and line 33 accommodate the development of the emergency shelter project. line 34 (3)  This section does not prohibit a local agency from imposing line 35 fees and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are line 36 essential to provide necessary public services and facilities to the line 37 housing development project or emergency shelter. line 38 (4)  For purposes of this section, a housing development project line 39 or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and line 40 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, 95 SB 50 — 11 — line 1 standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is line 2 substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to line 3 conclude that the housing development project or emergency line 4 shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. line 5 (g)  This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the line 6 Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency line 7 shelter, is a critical statewide problem. line 8 (h)  The following definitions apply for the purposes of this line 9 section: line 10 (1)  “Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a line 11 successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into line 12 account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. line 13 (2)  “Housing development project” means a use consisting of line 14 any of the following: line 15 (A)  Residential units only. line 16 (B)  Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and line 17 nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage line 18 designated for residential use. line 19 (C)  Transitional housing or supportive housing. line 20 (3)  “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income line 21 households” means that either (A) at least 20 percent of the total line 22 units shall be sold or rented to lower income households, as defined line 23 in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or (B) 100 line 24 percent of the units shall be sold or rented to persons and families line 25 of moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and line 26 Safety Code, or persons and families of middle income, as defined line 27 in Section 65008 of this code. Housing units targeted for lower line 28 income households shall be made available at a monthly housing line 29 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median line 30 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance line 31 with the adjustment factors on which the lower income eligibility line 32 limits are based. Housing units targeted for persons and families line 33 of moderate income shall be made available at a monthly housing line 34 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 100 percent of area median line 35 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance line 36 with the adjustment factors on which the moderate-income line 37 eligibility limits are based. line 38 (4)  “Area median income” means area median income as line 39 periodically established by the Department of Housing and line 40 Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health 95 — 12 — SB 50 line 1 and Safety Code. The developer shall provide sufficient legal line 2 commitments to ensure continued availability of units for very low line 3 or low-income households in accordance with the provisions of line 4 this subdivision for 30 years. line 5 (5)  “Disapprove the housing development project” includes any line 6 instance in which a local agency does either of the following: line 7 (A)  Votes on a proposed housing development project line 8 application and the application is disapproved, including any line 9 required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the line 10 issuance of a building permit. line 11 (B)  Fails to comply with the time periods specified in line 12 subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant line 13 to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to line 14 be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph. line 15 (i)  If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or line 16 imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or line 17 a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a line 18 building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in line 19 force at the time the application is deemed complete pursuant to line 20 Section 65943, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability line 21 or affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or line 22 moderate-income households, and the denial of the development line 23 or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject line 24 of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of line 25 conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative line 26 body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as line 27 described in subdivision (d) and that the findings are supported by line 28 a preponderance of the evidence in the record. For purposes of this line 29 section, “lower density” includes any conditions that have the same line 30 effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing. line 31 (j)  (1)  When a proposed housing development project complies line 32 with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision line 33 standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect line 34 at the time that the housing development project’s application is line 35 determined to be complete, but the local agency proposes to line 36 disapprove the project or to impose a condition that the project be line 37 developed at a lower density, the local agency shall base its line 38 decision regarding the proposed housing development project upon line 39 written findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence on line 40 the record that both of the following conditions exist: 95 SB 50 — 13 — line 1 (A)  The housing development project would have a specific, line 2 adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project line 3 is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be line 4 developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, line 5 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and line 6 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public line 7 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed line 8 on the date the application was deemed complete. line 9 (B)  There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or line 10 avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other line 11 than the disapproval of the housing development project or the line 12 approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at line 13 a lower density. line 14 (2)  (A)  If the local agency considers a proposed housing line 15 development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not line 16 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, line 17 standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in line 18 this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written line 19 documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an line 20 explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing line 21 development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in line 22 conformity as follows: line 23 (i)  Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing line 24 development project is determined to be complete, if the housing line 25 development project contains 150 or fewer housing units. line 26 (ii)  Within 60 days of the date that the application for the line 27 housing development project is determined to be complete, if the line 28 housing development project contains more than 150 units. line 29 (B)  If the local agency fails to provide the required line 30 documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing line 31 development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and line 32 in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, line 33 standard, requirement, or other similar provision. line 34 (3)  For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus line 35 pursuant to Section 65915 or an equitable communities incentive line 36 pursuant to Section 65918.51 shall not constitute a valid basis on line 37 which to find a proposed housing development project is line 38 inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an line 39 applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, line 40 or other similar provision specified in this subdivision. 95 — 14 — SB 50 line 1 (4)  For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development line 2 project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards line 3 and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing line 4 development project is consistent with the objective general plan line 5 standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is line 6 inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied line 7 with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed line 8 housing development project to comply with the objective line 9 standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the line 10 general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied line 11 to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed line 12 on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed line 13 housing development project. line 14 (5)  For purposes of this section, “lower density” includes any line 15 conditions that have the same effect or impact on the ability of the line 16 project to provide housing. line 17 (k)  (1)  (A)  The applicant, a person who would be eligible to line 18 apply for residency in the development or emergency shelter, or line 19 a housing organization may bring an action to enforce this section. line 20 If, in any action brought to enforce this section, a court finds that line 21 either (i) the local agency, in violation of subdivision (d), line 22 disapproved a housing development project or conditioned its line 23 approval in a manner rendering it infeasible for the development line 24 of an emergency shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or line 25 moderate-income households, including farmworker housing, line 26 without making the findings required by this section or without line 27 making findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence, line 28 or (ii) the local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved line 29 a housing development project complying with applicable, line 30 objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed line 31 a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without line 32 making the findings required by this section or without making line 33 findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the court line 34 shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this line 35 section within 60 days, including, but not limited to, an order that line 36 the local agency take action on the housing development project line 37 or emergency shelter. The court may issue an order or judgment line 38 directing the local agency to approve the housing development line 39 project or emergency shelter if the court finds that the local agency line 40 acted in bad faith when it disapproved or conditionally approved 95 SB 50 — 15 — line 1 the housing development or emergency shelter in violation of this line 2 section. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order line 3 or judgment is carried out and shall award reasonable attorney’s line 4 fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or petitioner, except under line 5 extraordinary circumstances in which the court finds that awarding line 6 fees would not further the purposes of this section. For purposes line 7 of this section, “lower density” includes conditions that have the line 8 same effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide line 9 housing. line 10 (B)  (i)  Upon a determination that the local agency has failed line 11 to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with line 12 this section within 60 days issued pursuant to subparagraph (A), line 13 the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this line 14 section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied line 15 pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The line 16 local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building line 17 Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 line 18 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing line 19 Rehabilitation Loan Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount line 20 of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per housing unit in the housing line 21 development project on the date the application was deemed line 22 complete pursuant to Section 65943. In determining the amount line 23 of fine to impose, the court shall consider the local agency’s line 24 progress in attaining its target allocation of the regional housing line 25 need pursuant to Section 65584 and any prior violations of this line 26 section. Fines shall not be paid out of funds already dedicated to line 27 affordable housing, including, but not limited to, Low and line 28 Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing line 29 for very low, low-, and moderate-income households, and federal line 30 HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community line 31 Development Block Grant Program funds. The local agency shall line 32 commit and expend the money in the local housing trust fund line 33 within five years for the sole purpose of financing newly line 34 constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, line 35 or low-income households. After five years, if the funds have not line 36 been expended, the money shall revert to the state and be deposited line 37 in the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the line 38 2017–18 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing line 39 Rehabilitation Loan Fund, for the sole purpose of financing newly 95 — 16 — SB 50 line 1 constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, line 2 or low-income households. line 3 (ii)  If any money derived from a fine imposed pursuant to this line 4 subparagraph is deposited in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan line 5 Fund, then, notwithstanding Section 50661 of the Health and Safety line 6 Code, that money shall be available only upon appropriation by line 7 the Legislature. line 8 (C)  If the court determines that its order or judgment has not line 9 been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders line 10 as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this line 11 section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate line 12 the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing line 13 development project, in which case the application for the housing line 14 development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the line 15 local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation line 16 of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by line 17 the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar line 18 projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant line 19 consents to a different decision or action by the local agency. line 20 (2)  For purposes of this subdivision, “housing organization” line 21 means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily line 22 engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a line 23 nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or line 24 advocating for increased access to housing for low-income line 25 households and have filed written or oral comments with the local line 26 agency prior to action on the housing development project. A line 27 housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this line 28 section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by line 29 a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to line 30 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in line 31 an action to enforce this section. line 32 (l)  If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith line 33 when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing line 34 development or emergency shelter in violation of this section and line 35 (2) failed to carry out the court’s order or judgment within 60 days line 36 as described in subdivision (k), the court, in addition to any other line 37 remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine line 38 determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of line 39 subdivision (k) by a factor of five. For purposes of this section, 95 SB 50 — 17 — line 1 “bad faith” includes, but is not limited to, an action that is frivolous line 2 or otherwise entirely without merit. line 3 (m)  Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section line 4 shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil line 5 Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record line 6 of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6 line 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the line 8 petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record line 9 shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to line 10 prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section. line 11 A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed line 12 and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective line 13 date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on, line 14 disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development line 15 project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in line 16 subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry line 17 of the trial court’s order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate line 18 review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service line 19 upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such line 20 further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court line 21 may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order line 22 of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil line 23 Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial line 24 court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be line 25 determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff line 26 is the project applicant. line 27 (n)  In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local line 28 agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and, line 29 notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or line 30 subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be line 31 prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioner’s points line 32 and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondent’s points and line 33 authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as line 34 otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the line 35 record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the line 36 prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs. line 37 (o)  This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the line 38 Housing Accountability Act. 95 — 18 — SB 50 line 1 SECTION 1. Section 65589.5 of the Government Code, as line 2 amended by Section 3.1 of Chapter 665 of the Statutes of 2019, is line 3 amended to read: line 4 65589.5. (a)  (1)  The Legislature finds and declares all of the line 5 following: line 6 (A)  The lack of housing, including emergency shelters, is a line 7 critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental, and line 8 social quality of life in California. line 9 (B)  California housing has become the most expensive in the line 10 nation. The excessive cost of the state’s housing supply is partially line 11 caused by activities and policies of many local governments that line 12 limit the approval of housing, increase the cost of land for housing, line 13 and require that high fees and exactions be paid by producers of line 14 housing. line 15 (C)  Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination line 16 against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to line 17 support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, line 18 reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air line 19 quality deterioration. line 20 (D)  Many local governments do not give adequate attention to line 21 the economic, environmental, and social costs of decisions that line 22 result in disapproval of housing development projects, reduction line 23 in density of housing projects, and excessive standards for housing line 24 development projects. line 25 (2)  In enacting the amendments made to this section by the act line 26 adding this paragraph, the Legislature further finds and declares line 27 the following: line 28 (A)  California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of line 29 historic proportions. The consequences of failing to effectively line 30 and aggressively confront this crisis are hurting millions of line 31 Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call line 32 California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and line 33 businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining line 34 the state’s environmental and climate objectives. line 35 (B)  While the causes of this crisis are multiple and complex, line 36 the absence of meaningful and effective policy reforms to line 37 significantly enhance the approval and supply of housing affordable line 38 to Californians of all income levels is a key factor. line 39 (C)  The crisis has grown so acute in California that supply, line 40 demand, and affordability fundamentals are characterized in the 95 SB 50 — 19 — line 1 negative: underserved demands, constrained supply, and protracted line 2 unaffordability. line 3 (D)  According to reports and data, California has accumulated line 4 an unmet housing backlog of nearly 2,000,000 units and must line 5 provide for at least 180,000 new units annually to keep pace with line 6 growth through 2025. line 7 (E)  California’s overall homeownership rate is at its lowest level line 8 since the 1940s. The state ranks 49th out of the 50 states in line 9 homeownership rates as well as in the supply of housing per capita. line 10 Only one-half of California’s households are able to afford the line 11 cost of housing in their local regions. line 12 (F)  Lack of supply and rising costs are compounding inequality line 13 and limiting advancement opportunities for many Californians. line 14 (G)  The majority of California renters, more than 3,000,000 line 15 households, pay more than 30 percent of their income toward rent line 16 and nearly one-third, more than 1,500,000 households, pay more line 17 than 50 percent of their income toward rent. line 18 (H)  When Californians have access to safe and affordable line 19 housing, they have more money for food and health care; they are line 20 less likely to become homeless and in need of line 21 government-subsidized services; their children do better in school; line 22 and businesses have an easier time recruiting and retaining line 23 employees. line 24 (I)  An additional consequence of the state’s cumulative housing line 25 shortage is a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions line 26 caused by the displacement and redirection of populations to states line 27 with greater housing opportunities, particularly working- and line 28 middle-class households. California’s cumulative housing shortfall line 29 therefore has not only national but international environmental line 30 consequences. line 31 (J)  California’s housing picture has reached a crisis of historic line 32 proportions despite the fact that, for decades, the Legislature has line 33 enacted numerous statutes intended to significantly increase the line 34 approval, development, and affordability of housing for all income line 35 levels, including this section. line 36 (K)  The Legislature’s intent in enacting this section in 1982 and line 37 in expanding its provisions since then was to significantly increase line 38 the approval and construction of new housing for all economic line 39 segments of California’s communities by meaningfully and line 40 effectively curbing the capability of local governments to deny, 95 — 20 — SB 50 line 1 reduce the density for, or render infeasible housing development line 2 projects and emergency shelters. That intent has not been fulfilled. line 3 (L)  It is the policy of the state that this section be interpreted line 4 and implemented in a manner to afford the fullest possible weight line 5 to the interest of, and the approval and provision of, housing. line 6 (3)  It is the intent of the Legislature that the conditions that line 7 would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health and line 8 safety, as described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) and line 9 paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), arise infrequently. line 10 (b)  It is the policy of the state that a local government not reject line 11 or make infeasible housing development projects, including line 12 emergency shelters, that contribute to meeting the need determined line 13 pursuant to this article without a thorough analysis of the economic, line 14 social, and environmental effects of the action and without line 15 complying with subdivision (d). line 16 (c)  The Legislature also recognizes that premature and line 17 unnecessary development of agricultural lands for urban uses line 18 continues to have adverse effects on the availability of those lands line 19 for food and fiber production and on the economy of the state. line 20 Furthermore, it is the policy of the state that development should line 21 be guided away from prime agricultural lands; therefore, in line 22 implementing this section, local jurisdictions should encourage, line 23 to the maximum extent practicable, in filling existing urban areas. line 24 (d)  A local agency shall not disapprove a housing development line 25 project, including farmworker housing as defined in subdivision line 26 (h) of Section 50199.7 of the Health and Safety Code, for very line 27 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency line 28 shelter, or condition approval in a manner that renders the housing line 29 development project infeasible for development for the use of very line 30 low, low-, or moderate-income households, or an emergency line 31 shelter, including through the use of design review standards, line 32 unless it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of line 33 the evidence in the record, as to one of the following: line 34 (1)  The jurisdiction has adopted a housing element pursuant to line 35 this article that has been revised in accordance with Section 65588, line 36 is in substantial compliance with this article, and the jurisdiction line 37 has met or exceeded its share of the regional housing need line 38 allocation pursuant to Section 65584 for the planning period for line 39 the income category proposed for the housing development project, line 40 provided that any disapproval or conditional approval shall not be 95 SB 50 — 21 — line 1 based on any of the reasons prohibited by Section 65008. If the line 2 housing development project includes a mix of income categories, line 3 and the jurisdiction has not met or exceeded its share of the regional line 4 housing need for one or more of those categories, then this line 5 paragraph shall not be used to disapprove or conditionally approve line 6 the housing development project. The share of the regional housing line 7 need met by the jurisdiction shall be calculated consistently with line 8 the forms and definitions that may be adopted by the Department line 9 of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section line 10 65400. In the case of an emergency shelter, the jurisdiction shall line 11 have met or exceeded the need for emergency shelter, as identified line 12 pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. Any line 13 disapproval or conditional approval pursuant to this paragraph line 14 shall be in accordance with applicable law, rule, or standards. line 15 (2)  The housing development project or emergency shelter as line 16 proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public line 17 health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily line 18 mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering line 19 the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income line 20 households or rendering the development of the emergency shelter line 21 financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, line 22 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and line 23 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public line 24 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed line 25 on the date the application was deemed complete. The following line 26 shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public line 27 health or safety: line 28 (A)  Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan line 29 land use designation. line 30 (B)  The eligibility to claim a welfare exemption under line 31 subdivision (g) of Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. line 32 (3)  The denial of the housing development project or imposition line 33 of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or line 34 federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without line 35 rendering the development unaffordable to low- and line 36 moderate-income households or rendering the development of the line 37 emergency shelter financially infeasible. line 38 (4)  The housing development project or emergency shelter is line 39 proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation line 40 that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for 95 — 22 — SB 50 line 1 agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not line 2 have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project. line 3 (5)  The housing development project or emergency shelter is line 4 inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and line 5 general plan land use designation as specified in any element of line 6 the general plan as it existed on the date the application was line 7 deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised line 8 housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in line 9 substantial compliance with this article. For purposes of this line 10 section, a change to the zoning ordinance or general plan land use line 11 designation subsequent to the date the application was deemed line 12 complete shall not constitute a valid basis to disapprove or line 13 condition approval of the housing development project or line 14 emergency shelter. line 15 (A)  This paragraph cannot be utilized to disapprove or line 16 conditionally approve a housing development project if the housing line 17 development project is proposed on a site that is identified as line 18 suitable or available for very low, low-, or moderate-income line 19 households in the jurisdiction’s housing element, and consistent line 20 with the density specified in the housing element, even though it line 21 is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction’s zoning ordinance and line 22 general plan land use designation. line 23 (B)  If the local agency has failed to identify in the inventory of line 24 land in its housing element sites that can be developed for housing line 25 within the planning period and are sufficient to provide for the line 26 jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need for all income line 27 levels pursuant to Section 65584, then this paragraph shall not be line 28 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve a housing line 29 development project proposed for a site designated in any element line 30 of the general plan for residential uses or designated in any element line 31 of the general plan for commercial uses if residential uses are line 32 permitted or conditionally permitted within commercial line 33 designations. In any action in court, the burden of proof shall be line 34 on the local agency to show that its housing element does identify line 35 adequate sites with appropriate zoning and development standards line 36 and with services and facilities to accommodate the local agency’s line 37 share of the regional housing need for the very low, low-, and line 38 moderate-income categories. line 39 (C)  If the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones line 40 where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without 95 SB 50 — 23 — line 1 a conditional use or other discretionary permit, has failed to line 2 demonstrate that the identified zone or zones include sufficient line 3 capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter identified line 4 in paragraph (7) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583, or has failed line 5 to demonstrate that the identified zone or zones can accommodate line 6 at least one emergency shelter, as required by paragraph (4) of line 7 subdivision (a) of Section 65583, then this paragraph shall not be line 8 utilized to disapprove or conditionally approve an emergency line 9 shelter proposed for a site designated in any element of the general line 10 plan for industrial, commercial, or multifamily residential uses. In line 11 any action in court, the burden of proof shall be on the local agency line 12 to show that its housing element does satisfy the requirements of line 13 paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583. line 14 (e)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local line 15 agency from complying with the congestion management program line 16 required by Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 65088) of line 17 Division 1 of Title 7 or the California Coastal Act of 1976 line 18 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public line 19 Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section This section line 20 shall not be construed to relieve the local agency from making one line 21 or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the line 22 Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California line 23 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section line 24 21000) of the Public Resources Code). line 25 (f)  (1)  Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in shall line 26 be construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring the housing line 27 development project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written line 28 development standards, conditions, and policies appropriate to, line 29 and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction’s share of the regional line 30 housing need pursuant to Section 65584. However, the line 31 development standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied line 32 to facilitate and accommodate development at the density permitted line 33 on the site and proposed by the development. line 34 (2)  Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in shall be line 35 construed to prohibit a local agency from requiring an emergency line 36 shelter project to comply with objective, quantifiable, written line 37 development standards, conditions, and policies that are consistent line 38 with paragraph (4) of subdivision (a) of Section 65583 and line 39 appropriate to, and consistent with, meeting the jurisdiction’s need line 40 for emergency shelter, as identified pursuant to paragraph (7) of 95 — 24 — SB 50 line 1 subdivision (a) of Section 65583. However, the development line 2 standards, conditions, and policies shall be applied by the local line 3 agency to facilitate and accommodate the development of the line 4 emergency shelter project. line 5 (3)  Except as provided in subdivision (o), nothing in this section line 6 shall be construed to prohibit a local agency from imposing fees line 7 and other exactions otherwise authorized by law that are essential line 8 to provide necessary public services and facilities to the housing line 9 development project or emergency shelter. line 10 (4)  For purposes of this section, a housing development project line 11 or emergency shelter shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and line 12 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, line 13 standard, requirement, or other similar provision if there is line 14 substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to line 15 conclude that the housing development project or emergency line 16 shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity. line 17 (g)  This section shall be applicable to charter cities because the line 18 Legislature finds that the lack of housing, including emergency line 19 shelter, is a critical statewide problem. line 20 (h)  The following definitions apply for the purposes of this line 21 section: line 22 (1)  “Feasible” means capable of being accomplished in a line 23 successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into line 24 account economic, environmental, social, and technological factors. line 25 (2)  “Housing development project” means a use consisting of line 26 any of the following: line 27 (A)  Residential units only. line 28 (B)  Mixed-use developments consisting of residential and line 29 nonresidential uses with at least two-thirds of the square footage line 30 designated for residential use. line 31 (C)  Transitional housing or supportive housing. line 32 (3)  “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income line 33 households” means that either (A) at least 20 percent of the total line 34 units shall be sold or rented to lower income households, as defined line 35 in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or (B) 100 line 36 percent of the units shall be sold or rented to persons and families line 37 of moderate income as defined in Section 50093 of the Health and line 38 Safety Code, or persons and families of middle income, as defined line 39 in Section 65008 of this code. Housing units targeted for lower line 40 income households shall be made available at a monthly housing 95 SB 50 — 25 — line 1 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of area median line 2 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance line 3 with the adjustment factors on which the lower income eligibility line 4 limits are based. Housing units targeted for persons and families line 5 of moderate income shall be made available at a monthly housing line 6 cost that does not exceed 30 percent of 100 percent of area median line 7 income with adjustments for household size made in accordance line 8 with the adjustment factors on which the moderate-income line 9 eligibility limits are based. line 10 (4)  “Area median income” means area median income as line 11 periodically established by the Department of Housing and line 12 Community Development pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health line 13 and Safety Code. The developer shall provide sufficient legal line 14 commitments to ensure continued availability of units for very low line 15 or low-income households in accordance with the provisions of line 16 this subdivision for 30 years. line 17 (5)  Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2025, line 18 “deemed complete” means that the applicant has submitted a line 19 preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1. line 20 (6)  “Disapprove the housing development project” includes any line 21 instance in which a local agency does either of the following: line 22 (A)  Votes on a proposed housing development project line 23 application and the application is disapproved, including any line 24 required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the line 25 issuance of a building permit. line 26 (B)  Fails to comply with the time periods specified in line 27 subdivision (a) of Section 65950. An extension of time pursuant line 28 to Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) shall be deemed to line 29 be an extension of time pursuant to this paragraph. line 30 (7)  “Lower density” includes any conditions that have the same line 31 effect or impact on the ability of the project to provide housing. line 32 (8)  Until January 1, 2025, “objective” means involving no line 33 personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being line 34 uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform line 35 benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the line 36 development applicant or proponent and the public official. line 37 (9)  Notwithstanding any other law, until January 1, 2025, line 38 “determined to be complete” means that the applicant has submitted line 39 a complete application pursuant to Section 65943. 95 — 26 — SB 50 line 1 (i)  If any city, county, or city and county denies approval or line 2 imposes conditions, including design changes, lower density, or line 3 a reduction of the percentage of a lot that may be occupied by a line 4 building or structure under the applicable planning and zoning in line 5 force at the time housing development project’s the application is line 6 complete, that have a substantial adverse effect on the viability or line 7 affordability of a housing development for very low, low-, or line 8 moderate-income households, and the denial of the development line 9 or the imposition of conditions on the development is the subject line 10 of a court action which challenges the denial or the imposition of line 11 conditions, then the burden of proof shall be on the local legislative line 12 body to show that its decision is consistent with the findings as line 13 described in subdivision (d), and that the findings are supported line 14 by a preponderance of the evidence in the record, and with the line 15 requirements of subdivision (o). line 16 (j)  (1)  When a proposed housing development project complies line 17 with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision line 18 standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect line 19 at the time that the application was deemed complete, but the local line 20 agency proposes to disapprove the project or to impose a condition line 21 that the project be developed at a lower density, the local agency line 22 shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing development line 23 project upon written findings supported by a preponderance of the line 24 evidence on the record that both of the following conditions exist: line 25 (A)  The housing development project would have a specific, line 26 adverse impact upon the public health or safety unless the project line 27 is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be line 28 developed at a lower density. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, line 29 adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and line 30 unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public line 31 health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed line 32 on the date the application was deemed complete. line 33 (B)  There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or line 34 avoid the adverse impact identified pursuant to paragraph (1), other line 35 than the disapproval of the housing development project or the line 36 approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at line 37 a lower density. line 38 (2)  (A)  If the local agency considers a proposed housing line 39 development project to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not line 40 in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, 95 SB 50 — 27 — line 1 standard, requirement, or other similar provision as specified in line 2 this subdivision, it shall provide the applicant with written line 3 documentation identifying the provision or provisions, and an line 4 explanation of the reason or reasons it considers the housing line 5 development to be inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in line 6 conformity as follows: line 7 (i)  Within 30 days of the date that the application for the housing line 8 development project is determined to be complete, if the housing line 9 development project contains 150 or fewer housing units. line 10 (ii)  Within 60 days of the date that the application for the line 11 housing development project is determined to be complete, if the line 12 housing development project contains more than 150 units. line 13 (B)  If the local agency fails to provide the required line 14 documentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), the housing line 15 development project shall be deemed consistent, compliant, and line 16 in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, line 17 standard, requirement, or other similar provision. line 18 (3)  For purposes of this section, the receipt of a density bonus line 19 pursuant to Section 65915 or an equitable communities incentive line 20 pursuant to Section 65918.51 shall not constitute a valid basis on line 21 which to find a proposed housing development project is line 22 inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, conformity line 23 with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, line 24 requirement, or other similar provision specified in this subdivision. line 25 (4)  For purposes of this section, a proposed housing development line 26 project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards line 27 and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing line 28 development project is consistent with the objective general plan line 29 standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is line 30 inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied line 31 with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed line 32 housing development project to comply with the objective line 33 standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the line 34 general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied line 35 to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed line 36 on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed line 37 housing development project. line 38 (k)  (1)  (A)  (i)  The applicant, a person who would be eligible line 39 to apply for residency in the housing development project or line 40 emergency shelter, or a housing organization may bring an action 95 — 28 — SB 50 line 1 to enforce this section. If, in any action brought to enforce this line 2 section, a court finds that any of the following are met, the court line 3 shall issue an order pursuant to clause (ii): line 4 (I)  The local agency, in violation of subdivision (d), disapproved line 5 a housing development project or conditioned its approval in a line 6 manner rendering it infeasible for the development of an emergency line 7 shelter, or housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income line 8 households, including farmworker housing, without making the line 9 findings required by this section or without making findings line 10 supported by a preponderance of the evidence. line 11 (II)  The local agency, in violation of subdivision (j), disapproved line 12 a housing development project complying with applicable, line 13 objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria, or imposed line 14 a condition that the project be developed at a lower density, without line 15 making the findings required by this section or without making line 16 findings supported by a preponderance of the evidence. line 17 (III)  (ia)  Subject to sub-subclause (ib), the local agency, in line 18 violation of subdivision (o), required or attempted to require a line 19 housing development project to comply with an ordinance, policy, line 20 or standard not adopted and in effect when a preliminary line 21 application was submitted. line 22 (ib)  This subclause shall become inoperative on January 1, 2025. line 23 (ii)  If the court finds that one of the conditions in clause(i) is line 24 met, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling line 25 compliance with this section within 60 days, including, but not line 26 limited to, an order that the local agency take action on the housing line 27 development project or emergency shelter. The court may issue line 28 an order or judgment directing the local agency to approve the line 29 housing development project or emergency shelter if the court line 30 finds that the local agency acted in bad faith when it disapproved line 31 or conditionally approved the housing development or emergency line 32 shelter in violation of this section. The court shall retain jurisdiction line 33 to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out and shall award line 34 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit to the plaintiff or line 35 petitioner, except under extraordinary circumstances in which the line 36 court finds that awarding fees would not further the purposes of line 37 this section. line 38 (B)  (i)  Upon a determination that the local agency has failed line 39 to comply with the order or judgment compelling compliance with line 40 this section within 60 days issued pursuant to subparagraph (A), 95 SB 50 — 29 — line 1 the court shall impose fines on a local agency that has violated this line 2 section and require the local agency to deposit any fine levied line 3 pursuant to this subdivision into a local housing trust fund. The line 4 local agency may elect to instead deposit the fine into the Building line 5 Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the 2017–18 line 6 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing line 7 Rehabilitation Loan Fund. The fine shall be in a minimum amount line 8 of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per housing unit in the housing line 9 development project on the date the application was deemed line 10 complete pursuant to Section 65943. In determining the amount line 11 of fine to impose, the court shall consider the local agency’s line 12 progress in attaining its target allocation of the regional housing line 13 need pursuant to Section 65584 and any prior violations of this line 14 section. Fines shall not be paid out of funds already dedicated to line 15 affordable housing, including, but not limited to, Low and line 16 Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds, funds dedicated to housing line 17 for very low, low-, and moderate-income households, and federal line 18 HOME Investment Partnerships Program and Community line 19 Development Block Grant Program funds. The local agency shall line 20 commit and expend the money in the local housing trust fund line 21 within five years for the sole purpose of financing newly line 22 constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, line 23 or low-income households. After five years, if the funds have not line 24 been expended, the money shall revert to the state and be deposited line 25 in the Building Homes and Jobs Trust Fund, if Senate Bill 2 of the line 26 2017–18 Regular Session is enacted, or otherwise in the Housing line 27 Rehabilitation Loan Fund, for the sole purpose of financing newly line 28 constructed housing units affordable to extremely low, very low, line 29 or low-income households. line 30 (ii)  If any money derived from a fine imposed pursuant to this line 31 subparagraph is deposited in the Housing Rehabilitation Loan line 32 Fund, then, notwithstanding Section 50661 of the Health and Safety line 33 Code, that money shall be available only upon appropriation by line 34 the Legislature. line 35 (C)  If the court determines that its order or judgment has not line 36 been carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders line 37 as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this line 38 section are fulfilled, including, but not limited to, an order to vacate line 39 the decision of the local agency and to approve the housing line 40 development project, in which case the application for the housing 95 — 30 — SB 50 line 1 development project, as proposed by the applicant at the time the line 2 local agency took the initial action determined to be in violation line 3 of this section, along with any standard conditions determined by line 4 the court to be generally imposed by the local agency on similar line 5 projects, shall be deemed to be approved unless the applicant line 6 consents to a different decision or action by the local agency. line 7 (2)  For purposes of this subdivision, “housing organization” line 8 means a trade or industry group whose local members are primarily line 9 engaged in the construction or management of housing units or a line 10 nonprofit organization whose mission includes providing or line 11 advocating for increased access to housing for low-income line 12 households and have filed written or oral comments with the local line 13 agency prior to action on the housing development project. A line 14 housing organization may only file an action pursuant to this line 15 section to challenge the disapproval of a housing development by line 16 a local agency. A housing organization shall be entitled to line 17 reasonable attorney’s fees and costs if it is the prevailing party in line 18 an action to enforce this section. line 19 (l)  If the court finds that the local agency (1) acted in bad faith line 20 when it disapproved or conditionally approved the housing line 21 development or emergency shelter in violation of this section and line 22 (2) failed to carry out the court’s order or judgment within 60 days line 23 as described in subdivision (k), the court, in addition to any other line 24 remedies provided by this section, shall multiply the fine line 25 determined pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) of line 26 subdivision (k) by a factor of five. For purposes of this section, line 27 “bad faith” includes, but is not limited to, an action that is frivolous line 28 or otherwise entirely without merit. line 29 (m)  Any action brought to enforce the provisions of this section line 30 shall be brought pursuant to Section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil line 31 Procedure, and the local agency shall prepare and certify the record line 32 of proceedings in accordance with subdivision (c) of Section 1094.6 line 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure no later than 30 days after the line 34 petition is served, provided that the cost of preparation of the record line 35 shall be borne by the local agency, unless the petitioner elects to line 36 prepare the record as provided in subdivision (n) of this section. line 37 A petition to enforce the provisions of this section shall be filed line 38 and served no later than 90 days from the later of (1) the effective line 39 date of a decision of the local agency imposing conditions on, line 40 disapproving, or any other final action on a housing development 95 SB 50 — 31 — line 1 project or (2) the expiration of the time periods specified in line 2 subparagraph (B) of paragraph (5) of subdivision (h). Upon entry line 3 of the trial court’s order, a party may, in order to obtain appellate line 4 review of the order, file a petition within 20 days after service line 5 upon it of a written notice of the entry of the order, or within such line 6 further time not exceeding an additional 20 days as the trial court line 7 may for good cause allow, or may appeal the judgment or order line 8 of the trial court under Section 904.1 of the Code of Civil line 9 Procedure. If the local agency appeals the judgment of the trial line 10 court, the local agency shall post a bond, in an amount to be line 11 determined by the court, to the benefit of the plaintiff if the plaintiff line 12 is the project applicant. line 13 (n)  In any action, the record of the proceedings before the local line 14 agency shall be filed as expeditiously as possible and, line 15 notwithstanding Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure or line 16 subdivision (m) of this section, all or part of the record may be line 17 prepared (1) by the petitioner with the petition or petitioner’s points line 18 and authorities, (2) by the respondent with respondent’s points and line 19 authorities, (3) after payment of costs by the petitioner, or (4) as line 20 otherwise directed by the court. If the expense of preparing the line 21 record has been borne by the petitioner and the petitioner is the line 22 prevailing party, the expense shall be taxable as costs. line 23 (o)  (1)  Subject to paragraphs (2), (6), and (7), and subdivision line 24 (d) of Section 65941.1, a housing development project shall be line 25 subject only to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and line 26 in effect when a preliminary application including all of the line 27 information required by subdivision (a) of Section 65941.1 was line 28 submitted. line 29 (2)  Paragraph (1) shall not prohibit a housing development line 30 project from being subject to ordinances, policies, and standards line 31 adopted after the preliminary application was submitted pursuant line 32 to Section 65941.1 in the following circumstances: line 33 (A)  In the case of a fee, charge, or other monetary exaction, to line 34 an increase resulting from an automatic annual adjustment based line 35 on an independently published cost index that is referenced in the line 36 ordinance or resolution establishing the fee or other monetary line 37 exaction. line 38 (B)  A preponderance of the evidence in the record establishes line 39 that subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, line 40 policy, or standard beyond those in effect when a preliminary 95 — 32 — SB 50 line 1 application was submitted is necessary to mitigate or avoid a line 2 specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, as defined line 3 in subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (j), and there line 4 is no feasible alternative method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid line 5 the adverse impact. line 6 (C)  Subjecting the housing development project to an ordinance, line 7 policy, standard, or any other measure, beyond those in effect when line 8 a preliminary application was submitted is necessary to avoid or line 9 substantially lessen an impact of the project under the California line 10 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section line 11 21000) of the Public Resources Code). line 12 (D)  The housing development project has not commenced line 13 construction within two and one-half years following the date that line 14 the project received final approval. For purposes of this line 15 subparagraph, “final approval” means that the housing development line 16 project has received all necessary approvals to be eligible to apply line 17 for, and obtain, a building permit or permits and either of the line 18 following is met: line 19 (i)  The expiration of all applicable appeal periods, petition line 20 periods, reconsideration periods, or statute of limitations for line 21 challenging that final approval without an appeal, petition, request line 22 for reconsideration, or legal challenge having been filed. line 23 (ii)  If a challenge is filed, that challenge is fully resolved or line 24 settled in favor of the housing development project. line 25 (E)  The housing development project is revised following line 26 submittal of a preliminary application pursuant to Section 65941.1 line 27 such that the number of residential units or square footage of line 28 construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any line 29 increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, line 30 concession, waiver, or similar provision. For purposes of this line 31 subdivision, “square footage of construction” means the building line 32 area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title line 33 24 of the California Code of Regulations). line 34 (3)  This subdivision does not prevent a local agency from line 35 subjecting the additional units or square footage of construction line 36 that result from project revisions occurring after a preliminary line 37 application is submitted pursuant to Section 65941.1 to the line 38 ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect when the line 39 preliminary application was submitted. 95 SB 50 — 33 — line 1 (4)  For purposes of this subdivision, “ordinances, policies, and line 2 standards” includes general plan, community plan, specific plan, line 3 zoning, design review standards and criteria, subdivision standards line 4 and criteria, and any other rules, regulations, requirements, and line 5 policies of a local agency, as defined in Section 66000, including line 6 those relating to development impact fees, capacity or connection line 7 fees or charges, permit or processing fees, and other exactions. line 8 (5)  This subdivision shall not be construed in a manner that line 9 would lessen the restrictions imposed on a local agency, or lessen line 10 the protections afforded to a housing development project, that are line 11 established by any other law, including any other part of this line 12 section. line 13 (6)  This subdivision shall not restrict the authority of a public line 14 agency or local agency to require mitigation measures to lessen line 15 the impacts of a housing development project under the California line 16 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section line 17 21000) of the Public Resources Code). line 18 (7)  With respect to completed residential units for which the line 19 project approval process is complete and a certificate of occupancy line 20 has been issued, nothing in this subdivision shall limit the line 21 application of later enacted ordinances, policies, and standards line 22 that regulate the use and occupancy of those residential units, such line 23 as ordinances relating to rental housing inspection, rent line 24 stabilization, restrictions on short-term renting, and business line 25 licensing requirements for owners of rental housing. line 26 (8)  This subdivision shall become inoperative on January 1, line 27 2025. line 28 (p)  This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the line 29 Housing Accountability Act. line 30 SEC. 2. Section 65913.5 is added to the Government Code, to line 31 read: line 32 65913.5. For purposes of this section and Section 65913.6, the line 33 following definitions shall apply: line 34 (a)  “Development proponent” means the developer who submits line 35 an application for streamlined approval pursuant to Section line 36 65913.6. line 37 (b)  “Eligible parcel” means a parcel that meets all of the line 38 following requirements: line 39 (1)  The parcel is not located on a site that is on a coastal zone, line 40 as defined in Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the 95 — 34 — SB 50 line 1 Public Resources Code, unless the local agency has a population line 2 of 50,000 or more, based on the most recent United States Census line 3 Bureau data. line 4 (1) line 5 (2)  The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in paragraph line 6 (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 7 (3)  The parcel satisfies the requirements specified in line 8 subparagraphs (B) to (K), inclusive, of paragraph (6) of line 9 subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 10 (2)  The parcel is not located on a site that is any of the following: line 11 (A)  A coastal zone, as defined in Division 20 (commencing line 12 with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code, unless the local line 13 agency has a population of 50,000 or more, based on the most line 14 recent United States Census Bureau data. line 15 (B)  Either prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance, line 16 as defined pursuant to United States Department of Agriculture line 17 land inventory and monitoring criteria, as modified for California, line 18 and designated on the maps prepared by the Farmland Mapping line 19 and Monitoring Program of the Department of Conservation, or line 20 land zoned or designated for agricultural protection or preservation line 21 by a local ballot measure that was approved by the voters of that line 22 jurisdiction. line 23 (C)  Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife line 24 Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993). line 25 (D)  Within a very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined line 26 by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to line 27 Section 51178, or within a high or very high fire hazard severity line 28 zone as indicated on maps adopted by the Department of Forestry line 29 and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 4202 of the Public line 30 Resources Code. A parcel is not ineligible within the meaning of line 31 this subparagraph if it is either: line 32 (i)  A site excluded from the specified hazard zones by a local line 33 agency, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 51179. line 34 (ii)  A site that has adopted fire hazard mitigation measures line 35 pursuant to existing building standards or state fire mitigation line 36 measures applicable to the development. line 37 (E)  A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section line 38 65962.5 or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department line 39 of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the line 40 Health and Safety Code, unless the Department of Toxic 95 SB 50 — 35 — line 1 Substances Control has cleared the site for residential use or line 2 residential mixed uses. line 3 (F)  Within a delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by line 4 the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State line 5 Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic line 6 protection building code standards adopted by the California line 7 Building Standards Commission under the California Building line 8 Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of line 9 Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local line 10 building department under Chapter 12.2 (commencing with Section line 11 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2. line 12 (G)  Within a special flood hazard area subject to inundation by line 13 the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined line 14 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official line 15 maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. line 16 If a development proponent is able to satisfy all applicable federal line 17 qualifying criteria in order to provide that the site satisfies this line 18 subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for streamlined approval line 19 under this section, a local government shall not deny the application line 20 on the basis that the development proponent did not comply with line 21 any additional permit requirement, standard, or action adopted by line 22 that local government that is applicable to that site. A development line 23 may be located on a site described in this subparagraph if either line 24 of the following are met: line 25 (i)  The site has been subject to a Letter of Map Revision line 26 prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and line 27 issued to the local jurisdiction. line 28 (ii)  The site meets Federal Emergency Management Agency line 29 requirements necessary to meet minimum flood plain management line 30 criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program pursuant to Part line 31 59 (commencing with Section 59.1) and Part 60 (commencing line 32 with Section 60.1) of Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 44 of the line 33 Code of Federal Regulations. line 34 (H)  Within a regulatory floodway as determined by the Federal line 35 Emergency Management Agency in any official maps published line 36 by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, unless the line 37 development has received a no-rise certification in accordance line 38 with Section 60.3(d)(3) of Title 44 of the Code of Federal line 39 Regulations. If a development proponent is able to satisfy all line 40 applicable federal qualifying criteria in order to provide that the 95 — 36 — SB 50 line 1 site satisfies this subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for line 2 streamlined approval under this section, a local government shall line 3 not deny the application on the basis that the development line 4 proponent did not comply with any additional permit requirement, line 5 standard, or action adopted by that local government that is line 6 applicable to that site. line 7 (I)  Lands identified for conservation in any of the following: line 8 (i)  An adopted natural community conservation plan pursuant line 9 to the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (Chapter line 10 10 (commencing with Section 2800) of Division 3 of the Fish and line 11 Game Code). line 12 (ii)  A habitat conservation plan pursuant to the federal line 13 Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.). line 14 (iii)  Any other adopted natural resource protection plan. line 15 (J)  Habitat for protected species identified as candidate, line 16 sensitive, or species of special status by state or federal agencies, line 17 fully protected species, or species protected by any of the line 18 following: line 19 (i)  The federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. line 20 1531 et seq.). line 21 (ii)  The California Endangered Species Act (Chapter 1.5 line 22 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3 of the Fish and line 23 Game Code). line 24 (iii)  The Native Plant Protection Act (Chapter 10 (commencing line 25 with Section 1900) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code). line 26 (K)  Lands under conservation easement. line 27 (3) line 28 (4)  The development of the project on the proposed parcel would line 29 not require the demolition or alteration of any of the following line 30 types of housing: line 31 (A)  Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, line 32 or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and line 33 families of moderate, low, or very low income. line 34 (B)  Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control line 35 through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. line 36 (C)  Housing occupied by tenants, as that term is defined in line 37 subdivision (l) of Section 65918.50, within the seven years line 38 preceding the date of the application, including housing that has line 39 been demolished or that tenants have vacated before the application line 40 for a development permit. 95 SB 50 — 37 — line 1 (D)  A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real line 2 property has exercised their rights under Chapter 12.75 line 3 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to line 4 withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years line 5 before the date that the development proponent submits an line 6 application pursuant to Section 65913.6. line 7 (4) line 8 (5)  The development of the project on the proposed parcel would line 9 not require the demolition of a historic structure that was placed line 10 on a national, state, or local historic register. line 11 (c)  “Local agency” means a city, including a charter city, a line 12 county, including a charter county, or a city and county, including line 13 a charter city and county. line 14 (d)  “Neighborhood multifamily project” means a project to line 15 construct a multifamily structure of up to four residential dwelling line 16 units that meets all of the following requirements: line 17 (1)  The project meets one of the following conditions: line 18 (A)  The parcel or parcels on which the neighborhood line 19 multifamily project would be located is vacant land, as defined in line 20 subdivision (e). line 21 (B)  If the project is a conversion of an existing structure, the line 22 conversion shall not require substantial exterior alteration. For the line 23 purposes of this subparagraph, a project requires “substantial line 24 exterior alteration” if the project would require either of the line 25 following: line 26 (i)  The demolition of 25 percent or more of the existing exterior line 27 vertical walls, measured by linear feet. line 28 (ii)  Any building addition that would increase total interior line 29 square footage by more than 15 percent. line 30 (2)  (A)  The neighborhood multifamily project shall meet all line 31 objective zoning standards and objective design review standards line 32 that do not conflict with this section or Section 65913.6. If, on or line 33 after July 1, 2019, a local agency adopts an ordinance that line 34 eliminates zoning designations permissive to residential use or line 35 decreases residential zoning development capacity within an line 36 existing zoning district in which the development is located than line 37 what was authorized on July 1, 2019, then that development shall line 38 be deemed to be consistent with any applicable requirement of this line 39 section and Section 65913.6 if it complies with zoning designations 95 — 38 — SB 50 line 1 not in conflict with this section and Section 65913.6 that were line 2 authorized as of July 1, 2019. line 3 (B)  For purposes of this paragraph, “objective zoning standards” line 4 and “objective design review standards” means standards that line 5 involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official line 6 and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and line 7 uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both line 8 the development proponent and the public official before the line 9 development proponent submits an application pursuant to this line 10 section. These standards include, but are not limited to, height, line 11 setbacks, floor area ratio, and lot coverage. For purposes of this line 12 section and Section 65913.6, “objective zoning standard” does not line 13 include any limits related to residential density that would limit a line 14 development to fewer than four residential units per parcel. line 15 (3)  A local agency may require the neighborhood multifamily line 16 project to provide at least 0.5 parking spaces per unit. line 17 (e)  “Vacant land” means either of the following: line 18 (1)  A property that contains no existing structures. line 19 (2)  A property that contains at least one existing structure, but line 20 the structure or structures have been unoccupied for at least five line 21 years and are considered substandard as defined by Section 17920.3 line 22 of the Health and Safety Code. line 23 SEC. 3. Section 65913.6 is added to the Government Code, to line 24 read: line 25 65913.6. (a)  For purposes of this section, the definitions line 26 provided in Section 65913.5 shall apply. line 27 (b)  Except as provided in subdivision (g), a development line 28 proponent of a neighborhood multifamily project on an eligible line 29 parcel may submit an application for a development to be subject line 30 to a streamlined, ministerial approval process provided by this line 31 section and not be subject to a conditional use permit if the line 32 development meets the requirements of this section and Section line 33 65913.5. line 34 (c)  (1)  If a local agency determines that a development line 35 submitted pursuant to this section is in conflict with any of the line 36 requirements specified in this section or Section 65913.5, it shall line 37 provide the development proponent written documentation of line 38 which requirement or requirements the development conflicts with, line 39 and an explanation for the reason or reasons the development line 40 conflicts with that requirement or requirements, within 60 days of 95 SB 50 — 39 — line 1 submission of the development to the local agency pursuant to this line 2 section. line 3 (2)  If the local agency fails to provide the required line 4 documentation pursuant to paragraph (1), the development shall line 5 be deemed to satisfy the requirements of this section and Section line 6 65913.5. line 7 (d)  Any design review or public oversight of the development line 8 may be conducted by the local agency’s planning commission or line 9 any equivalent board or commission responsible for review and line 10 approval of development projects, or the city council or board of line 11 supervisors, as appropriate. That design review or public oversight line 12 shall be objective and be strictly focused on assessing compliance line 13 with criteria required for streamlined projects, as well as any line 14 reasonable objective design standards published and adopted by line 15 ordinance or resolution by a local agency before submission of a line 16 development application, and shall be broadly applicable to line 17 development within the local agency. That design review or public line 18 oversight shall be completed within 90 days of submission of the line 19 development to the local agency pursuant to this section and shall line 20 not in any way inhibit, chill, or preclude the ministerial approval line 21 provided by this section or its effect, as applicable. line 22 (e)  Notwithstanding any other law, a local agency, whether or line 23 not it has adopted an ordinance governing automobile parking line 24 requirements in multifamily developments, shall not impose line 25 automobile parking standards for a streamlined development that line 26 was approved pursuant to this section, including those related to line 27 orientation or structure of off-street automobile parking, beyond line 28 those provided in the minimum requirements of Section 65913.5. line 29 (f)  (1)  If a local agency approves a development pursuant to line 30 this section, that approval shall automatically expire after three line 31 years except that a project may receive a one-time, one-year line 32 extension if the project proponent provides documentation that line 33 there has been significant progress toward getting the development line 34 construction ready. For purposes of this paragraph, “significant line 35 progress” includes filing a building permit application. line 36 (2)  If a local agency approves a development pursuant to this line 37 section, that approval shall remain valid for three years from the line 38 date of the final action establishing that approval and shall remain line 39 valid thereafter for a project so long as vertical construction of the line 40 development has begun and is in progress. Additionally, the 95 — 40 — SB 50 line 1 development proponent may request, and the local agency shall line 2 have discretion to grant, an additional one-year extension to the line 3 original three-year period. The local agency’s action and discretion line 4 in determining whether to grant the foregoing extension shall be line 5 limited to considerations and process set forth in this section. line 6 (g)  This section shall not apply if the local agency finds that the line 7 development project as proposed would have a specific, adverse line 8 impact upon the public health or safety, including, but not limited line 9 to, fire safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily line 10 mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering line 11 the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income line 12 households. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” line 13 means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, line 14 based on objective, identified written public health or safety line 15 standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the line 16 application was deemed complete. Inconsistency with the zoning line 17 ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute line 18 a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety. line 19 (h)  A local agency shall not adopt any requirement, including, line 20 but not limited to, increased fees or inclusionary housing line 21 requirements, that applies to a project solely or partially on the line 22 basis that the project is eligible to receive ministerial or streamlined line 23 approval pursuant to this section. line 24 (i)  This section shall not affect a development proponent’s line 25 ability to use any alternative streamlined by right permit processing line 26 adopted by a local agency, including the provisions of subdivision line 27 (i) of Section 65583.2 or 65913.4. line 28 SEC. 4. Chapter 4.35 (commencing with Section 65918.50) is line 29 added to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, to read: line 30 line 31 Chapter 4.35. Equitable Communities Incentives line 32 line 33 65918.50. For purposes of this chapter: line 34 (a)  “Development proponent” means an applicant who submits line 35 an application for an equitable communities incentive pursuant to line 36 this chapter. line 37 (b)  “Eligible applicant” means a development proponent who line 38 receives whose development project meets the requirements of this line 39 chapter to receive an equitable communities incentive. line 40 (c)  “FAR” means floor area ratio. 95 SB 50 — 41 — line 1 (d)  “High-quality bus corridor” means a corridor with fixed line 2 route bus service that meets all of the following criteria: line 3 (1)  It has average service intervals for each line and in each line 4 direction of no more than 10 minutes during the three peak hours line 5 between 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., inclusive, and the three peak hours line 6 between 3 p.m. to 7 p.m., inclusive, on Monday through Friday. line 7 (2)  It has average service intervals for each line and in each line 8 direction of no more than 20 minutes during the hours of 6 a.m. line 9 to 10 p.m., inclusive, on Monday through Friday. line 10 (3)  It has average service intervals for each line and in each line 11 direction of no more than 30 minutes during the hours of 8 a.m. line 12 to 10 p.m., inclusive, on Saturday and Sunday. line 13 (4)  It has met the criteria specified in paragraphs (1) to (3), line 14 inclusive, for the five years preceding the date that a development line 15 proponent submits an application for approval of a residential line 16 development. line 17 (e)  (1)  “Jobs-rich area” means an area identified by the line 18 Department of Housing and Community Development in line 19 consultation with the Office of Planning and Research that is high line 20 opportunity and either is jobs rich or would enable shorter commute line 21 distances based on whether, in a regional analysis, the tract meets line 22 both of the following: line 23 (A)  The tract is high opportunity, meaning its characteristics line 24 are associated with positive educational and economic outcomes line 25 for households of all income levels residing in the tract. line 26 (B)  The tract meets either of the following criteria: line 27 (i)  New housing sited in the tract would enable residents to live line 28 near more jobs than is typical for tracts in the region. line 29 (ii)  New housing sited in the tract would enable shorter commute line 30 distances for residents, relative to existing commute patterns and line 31 jobs-housing fit. line 32 (2)  The Department of Housing and Community Development line 33 shall, commencing on January 1, 2020, 2021, publish and update, line 34 every five years thereafter, a map of the state showing the areas line 35 identified by the department as “jobs-rich areas.” line 36 (f)  “Job-rich housing project” means a residential development line 37 within a jobs-rich area. A residential development shall be deemed line 38 to be within a jobs-rich area if both of the following apply: line 39 (1)  All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent line 40 of their area outside of the jobs-rich area. 95 — 42 — SB 50 line 1 (2)  No more than 10 percent of residential units or 100 units, line 2 whichever is less, of the development are outside of the jobs-rich line 3 area. line 4 (g)  “Local government” means a city, including a charter city, line 5 a county, or a city and county. line 6 (h)  “Major transit stop” means a rail transit station or a ferry line 7 terminal that is a major transit stop pursuant to subdivision (b) of line 8 Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code. line 9 (i)  “Potentially sensitive community” means any of the line 10 following: line 11 (1)  An area that is designated as “high segregation and poverty” line 12 or “low resource” on the 2019 Opportunity Maps developed by line 13 the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. line 14 (2)  A census tract that is in the top 25 percent scoring census line 15 tracts from the internet-based CalEnviroScreen 3.0 tool. line 16 (3)  A qualified census tract identified by the United States line 17 Department of Housing and Urban Development for 2019. line 18 (4)  It is the intent of the Legislature to consider all both of the line 19 following: line 20 (A)  Identifying additional communities as potentially sensitive line 21 communities in inland areas, areas experiencing rapid change in line 22 housing cost, and other areas based on objective measures of line 23 community sensitivity. line 24 (B)  Application of the process for determining sensitive line 25 communities established in subdivision (d) of Section 65918.55 line 26 to the San Francisco Bay area. line 27 (j)  “Residential development” means a project with at least line 28 two-thirds of the square footage of the development designated line 29 for residential use. line 30 (k)  “Sensitive community” means either of the following: line 31 (1)  Except as provided in paragraph (2), an area identified line 32 pursuant to subdivision (d) (b) of Section 65918.55. 65918.58. line 33 (2)  In the Counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, line 34 Santa Clara, San Francisco, San Mateo, Solano, and Sonoma, areas line 35 designated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission on line 36 December 19, 2018, as the intersection of disadvantaged and line 37 vulnerable communities as defined by the Metropolitan line 38 Transportation Commission and the San Francisco Bay line 39 Conservation and Development Commission, which identification 95 SB 50 — 43 — line 1 of a sensitive community shall be updated at least every five years line 2 by the Department of Housing and Community Development. line 3 (l)  “Tenant” means a person who does not own the property line 4 where they reside, including residential situations that are any of line 5 the following: line 6 (1)  Residential real property rented by the person under a line 7 long-term lease. line 8 (2)  A single-room occupancy unit. line 9 (3)  An accessory dwelling unit that is not subject to, or does line 10 not have a valid permit in accordance with, an ordinance adopted line 11 by a local agency pursuant to Section 65852.2. line 12 (4)  A residential motel. line 13 (5)  A mobilehome park, as governed under the Mobilehome line 14 Residency Law (Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 798) of line 15 Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code), the Recreational line 16 Vehicle Park Occupancy Law (Chapter 2.6 (commencing with line 17 Section 799.20) of Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code), line 18 the Mobilehome Parks Act (Part 2.1 (commencing with Section line 19 18200) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), or the line 20 Special Occupancy Parks Act (Part 2.3 (commencing with Section line 21 18860) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code). line 22 (6)  Any other type of residential property that is not owned by line 23 the person or a member of the person’s household, for which the line 24 person or a member of the person’s household provides payments line 25 on a regular schedule in exchange for the right to occupy the line 26 residential property. line 27 (m)  “Transit-rich housing project” means a residential line 28 development, the parcels of which are all within a one-half mile line 29 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop line 30 on a high-quality bus corridor. A project shall be deemed to be line 31 within the radius if both of the following apply: line 32 (1)  All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent line 33 of their area outside of a one-half mile radius of a major transit line 34 stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus line 35 corridor. line 36 (2)  No more than 10 percent of the residential units or 100 units, line 37 whichever is less, of the project are outside of a one-half mile line 38 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop line 39 on a high-quality bus corridor. 95 — 44 — SB 50 line 1 65918.51. A (a)  Except as provided in subdivision (b) or line 2 Section 65918.58, on and after January 1, 2023, a local line 3 government shall, upon request of a development proponent, grant line 4 an equitable communities incentive, as specified in Section line 5 65918.53, Sections 65918.54 and 65918.55, when the development line 6 proponent seeks and agrees to construct a multifamily residential line 7 development that satisfies the requirements specified in Section line 8 65918.52. Sections 65918.52 and 65918.53, and, if applicable, line 9 Sections 65918.54 and 65918.55. line 10 (b)  A local government shall not be required to grant an line 11 equitable communities incentive pursuant to subdivision (a) if the line 12 local government has a local flexibility plan that has been reviewed line 13 and certified by the Department of Housing and Community line 14 Development pursuant to Section 65918.59. line 15 65918.52. In order to be eligible for an equitable communities line 16 incentive pursuant to this chapter, a A residential development line 17 shall meet is not eligible for an equitable communities incentive line 18 pursuant to this chapter unless the residential development meets line 19 all of the following criteria: line 20 (a)  The residential development is either a job-rich housing line 21 project or transit-rich housing project. line 22 (b)  The residential development is located on a site that meets line 23 the following requirements: line 24 (1)  At the time of application, the site is zoned to allow housing line 25 as an underlying use in the zone, including, but not limited to, a line 26 residential, mixed-use, or commercial zone, as defined and allowed line 27 by the local government. line 28 (2)  If the residential development is located within a coastal line 29 zone, as defined in Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) line 30 of the Public Resources Code, the site satisfies the requirements line 31 specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 32 meets the following conditions: line 33 (A)  The site satisfies the requirements specified in paragraph line 34 (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 35 (B)  The site is located in a city that has a population equal to line 36 or greater than 50,000, based on the most recent United States line 37 Census Bureau data. line 38 (3)  The site is not located within any of the following: line 39 (A)  A coastal zone, as defined in Division 20 (commencing line 40 with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code, if the site is 95 SB 50 — 45 — line 1 also located in a city that has a population of less than 50,000, line 2 based on the most recent United States Census Bureau data. line 3 (B) line 4 (A)  A very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the line 5 Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section line 6 51178, or within a very high fire hazard severity zone as indicated line 7 on maps adopted by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection line 8 pursuant to Section 4202 of the Public Resources Code. A parcel line 9 is not ineligible within the meaning of this paragraph if it is either line 10 of the following: line 11 (i)  A site excluded from the specified hazard zones by a local line 12 agency, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 51179. line 13 (ii)  A site that has adopted fire hazard mitigation measures line 14 pursuant to existing building standards or state fire mitigation line 15 measures applicable to the development. line 16 (C) line 17 (B)  A parcel for which either of the following apply: line 18 (i)  The parcel is a contributing parcel within a historic district line 19 established by an ordinance of the local government that was in line 20 effect as of December 31, 2010. line 21 (ii)  The parcel includes a structure that was listed on a state or line 22 federal register of historic resources before the date that the line 23 development proponent first submits an application for an equitable line 24 communities incentive pursuant to this chapter. line 25 (c)  If the residential development is located within a county that line 26 has a population equal to or less than 600,000, based on the most line 27 recent United States Census Bureau data, the residential line 28 development satisfies all of the following additional requirements: line 29 (1)  The site satisfies the requirements specified in paragraph line 30 (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 31 (2)  The site is not located within either of the following: line 32 (A)  An architecturally or historically significant historic district, line 33 as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 5020.1 of the Public line 34 Resources Code. line 35 (B)  A special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the 1 line 36 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by line 37 the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official maps line 38 published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. If a line 39 development proponent is able to satisfy all applicable federal line 40 qualifying criteria in order to provide that the site satisfies this 95 — 46 — SB 50 line 1 subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for streamlined approval line 2 under this section, a local government shall not deny the application line 3 on the basis that the development proponent did not comply with line 4 any additional permit requirement, standard, or action adopted by line 5 that local government that is applicable to that site. A development line 6 may be located on a site described in this subparagraph if either line 7 of the following are met: line 8 (i)  The site has been subject to a Letter of Map Revision line 9 prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and line 10 issued to the local jurisdiction. line 11 (ii)  The site meets Federal Emergency Management Agency line 12 requirements necessary to meet minimum flood plain management line 13 criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program pursuant to Part line 14 59 (commencing with Section 59.1) and Part 60 (commencing line 15 with Section 60.1) of Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 44 of the line 16 Code of Federal Regulations. line 17 (3)  The residential development has a minimum density of 30 line 18 dwelling units per acre in jurisdictions considered metropolitan, line 19 as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 65583.2, or a minimum line 20 density of 20 dwelling units per acre in jurisdictions considered line 21 suburban, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 65583.2. line 22 (4)  The residential development is located within a one-half line 23 mile radius of a major transit stop and within a city with a line 24 population greater than 50,000. line 25 (d)  (1)  If the local government has adopted an inclusionary line 26 housing ordinance requiring that the development include a certain line 27 number of units affordable to households with incomes that do not line 28 exceed the limits for moderate income, lower income, very low line 29 income, or extremely low income specified in Sections 50079.5, line 30 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code, and that line 31 ordinance requires that a new development include levels of line 32 affordable housing in excess of the requirements specified in line 33 paragraph (2), the residential development complies with that line 34 ordinance. The ordinance may provide alternative means of line 35 compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in-lieu fees, line 36 land dedication, offsite construction, or acquisition and line 37 rehabilitation of existing units. line 38 (2)  (A)  If the local government has not adopted an inclusionary line 39 housing ordinance, as described in paragraph (1), the residential line 40 development includes an affordable housing contribution for 95 SB 50 — 47 — line 1 households with incomes that do not exceed the limits for line 2 extremely low income, very low income, and low income specified line 3 in Sections 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety line 4 Code. line 5 (B)  For purposes of this paragraph, the residential development line 6 is subject to one of the following, as applicable: line 7 (i)  If the project has 10 or fewer units, no affordability line 8 contribution is imposed. line 9 (ii)  If the project has 11 to 20 residential units, the development line 10 proponent may pay an in-lieu fee to the local government for line 11 affordable housing, where feasible, pursuant to subparagraph (C). line 12 (iii)  If the project has more than 20 residential units, the line 13 development proponent shall do either of the following: line 14 (I)  Make a comparable affordability contribution toward housing line 15 offsite that is affordable to lower income households, pursuant to line 16 subparagraph (C). line 17 (II)  Include units on the site of the project that are affordable line 18 to extremely low income, very low income, or lower income line 19 households, as defined in Sections 50079.5, 50105, and 50106 of line 20 the Health and Safety Code, as follows: line 21 line 22 Inclusionary Requirement Project Size line 23 15% lower income; or line 24 8% very low income; or 21– 200 units line 25 6% extremely low income line 26 17% lower income; or line 27 10% very low income; or 201–350 units line 28 8% extremely low income line 29 25% lower income; or line 30 15% very low income; or 351 or more units line 31 11% extremely low income line 32 line 33 (C)  (i)  The development proponent of a project that qualifies line 34 pursuant to clause (ii) or subclause (I) of clause (iii) of line 35 subparagraph (B) may make a comparable affordability line 36 contribution toward housing offsite that is affordable to lower line 37 income households, pursuant to this subparagraph. line 38 (ii)  For the purposes of this subparagraph, “comparable line 39 affordability contribution” means either a dedication of land or line 40 direct in-lieu fee payment to a housing provider that proposes to 95 — 48 — SB 50 line 1 build a residential development in which 100 percent of the units, line 2 excluding manager’s units, are sold or rented at affordable housing line 3 cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, line 4 or affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and line 5 Safety Code, subject to all of the following conditions: line 6 (I)  The site, and if applicable, the dedicated land, is located line 7 within a one-half mile of the qualifying project. line 8 (II)  The site, and if applicable, the dedicated land, is eligible line 9 for an equitable communities incentive. line 10 (III)  The residential development that receives a dedication of line 11 land or in-lieu fee payment pursuant to this paragraph provides line 12 the same number of affordable units at the same income category, line 13 which would have been required onsite for the qualifying project line 14 pursuant to subclause (II) of clause (iii) of subparagraph (B) of line 15 paragraph (2). line 16 (IV)  The value of the dedicated land or in-lieu fee payment must line 17 be at least equal to the capitalized value of the forgone revenue line 18 that the development proponent would have incurred if the line 19 qualifying project had provided the required number and type of line 20 affordable units onsite. line 21 (V)  If the qualifying project includes 21 or more units of line 22 housing, the comparable affordability contribution is subject to a line 23 recorded covenant with the local jurisdiction. A copy of the line 24 covenant shall be provided to the Department of Housing and line 25 Community Development. line 26 (iii)  For the purposes of this subparagraph, “qualifying project” line 27 means a project that receives an equitable communities incentive line 28 by providing a comparable affordability contribution. line 29 (iv)  The qualifying development shall not be issued a certificate line 30 of occupancy before the residential development receiving a line 31 dedication of land or direct in-lieu fee payment pursuant to this line 32 subparagraph receives a building permit. line 33 (D)  Affordability of units pursuant to this paragraph shall be line 34 restricted by deed for a period of 55 years for rental units or 45 line 35 years for units offered for sale. line 36 (e) line 37 (c)  The site does not contain, or has not contained, either of the line 38 following: line 39 (1)  Housing occupied by tenants within the seven years line 40 preceding the date of the application, including housing that has 95 SB 50 — 49 — line 1 been demolished or that tenants have vacated prior to the line 2 application for a development permit. line 3 (2)  A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real line 4 property has exercised their rights under Chapter 12.75 line 5 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to line 6 withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years prior line 7 to the date that the development proponent submits an application line 8 pursuant to this chapter. line 9 (f) line 10 (d)  The residential development complies with all applicable line 11 labor, construction employment, and wage standards otherwise line 12 required by law and any other generally applicable requirement line 13 regarding the approval of a development project, including, but line 14 not limited to, the local government’s conditional use or other line 15 discretionary permit approval process, the California line 16 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section line 17 21000) of the Public Resources Code), or a streamlined approval line 18 process that includes labor protections. line 19 (g) line 20 (e)  The residential development complies with all other relevant line 21 standards, requirements, and prohibitions imposed by the local line 22 government regarding architectural design, restrictions on or line 23 oversight of demolition, impact fees, and community benefits line 24 agreements. line 25 (h) line 26 (f)  The equitable communities incentive shall not be used to line 27 undermine the economic feasibility of delivering low-income line 28 housing under the state density bonus program or a local line 29 implementation of the state density bonus program, or any locally line 30 adopted program that puts conditions on new development line 31 applications on the basis of receiving a zone change or general line 32 plan amendment in exchange for benefits such as increased line 33 affordable housing, local hire, or payment of prevailing wages. line 34 65918.53. (a)  (1)  Any transit-rich or job-rich housing project line 35 within a county that has a population greater than 600,000, based line 36 on the most recent United States Census Bureau data, that meets line 37 the criteria specified in Section 65918.52 shall receive, upon line 38 request, an equitable communities incentive as follows: 95 — 50 — SB 50 line 1 65918.53. A residential development is not eligible for an line 2 equitable communities incentive pursuant to this chapter unless line 3 the residential development meets all of the following criteria: line 4 (a)  If the local government has adopted an inclusionary housing line 5 ordinance requiring that the development include a certain number line 6 of units affordable to households with incomes that do not exceed line 7 the limits for moderate income, lower income, very low income, line 8 or extremely low income specified in Sections 50079.5, 50093, line 9 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code, and that line 10 ordinance requires that a new development include levels of line 11 affordable housing in excess of the requirements specified in line 12 paragraph (2), the residential development complies with that line 13 ordinance. The ordinance may provide alternative means of line 14 compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in-lieu fees, line 15 land dedication, offsite construction, or acquisition and line 16 rehabilitation of existing units. line 17 (b)  (1)  If the local government has not adopted an inclusionary line 18 housing ordinance, as described in subdivision (a), the residential line 19 development includes an affordable housing contribution for line 20 households with incomes that do not exceed the limits for extremely line 21 low income, very low income, and low income specified in Sections line 22 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code. line 23 (2)  For purposes of this subdivision, a residential development line 24 satisfies the affordable housing contribution requirement of this line 25 subdivision if the residential development is subject to one of the line 26 following, as applicable: line 27 (A)  If the project has 10 or fewer units, no affordability line 28 contribution is imposed. line 29 (B)  If the project has 11 to 20 residential units, the development line 30 proponent may pay an in-lieu fee to the local government for line 31 affordable housing, where feasible, pursuant to paragraph (3). line 32 (C)  If the project has more than 20 residential units, the line 33 development proponent shall do either of the following: line 34 (i)  Make a comparable affordability contribution toward housing line 35 offsite that is affordable to lower income households, pursuant to line 36 paragraph (3). line 37 (ii)  Include units on the site of the project that are affordable line 38 to extremely low income, very low income, or lower income line 39 households, as defined in Sections 50079.5, 50105, and 50106 of line 40 the Health and Safety Code, as follows: 95 SB 50 — 51 — line 1 Inclusionary Requirement Project Size line 2 15% lower income; or line 3 8% very low income; or 21–200 units line 4 6% extremely low income line 5 17% lower income; or line 6 10% very low income; or 201–350 units line 7 8% extremely low income line 8 25% lower income; or line 9 15% very low income; or 351 or more units line 10 11% extremely low income line 11 line 12 (3)  (A)  The development proponent of a project that qualifies line 13 pursuant to subparagraph (B) of, or clause (i) of subparagraph line 14 (C) of, paragraph (2) may make a comparable affordability line 15 contribution toward housing offsite that is affordable to lower line 16 income households, pursuant to this paragraph. line 17 (B)  For the purposes of this paragraph, “comparable line 18 affordability contribution” means either a dedication of land or line 19 direct in-lieu fee payment to a housing provider that proposes to line 20 build a residential development in which 100 percent of the units, line 21 excluding manager’s units, are sold or rented at affordable housing line 22 cost, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, line 23 or affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and line 24 Safety Code, subject to all of the following conditions: line 25 (i)  The site, and, if applicable, the dedicated land are located line 26 within a one-half mile of the qualifying project. line 27 (ii)  The site, and, if applicable, the dedicated land are eligible line 28 for an equitable communities incentive. line 29 (iii)  The residential development that receives a dedication of line 30 land or in-lieu fee payment pursuant to this paragraph provides line 31 the same number of affordable units at the same income category line 32 that would have been required on the site of the qualifying project line 33 pursuant to clause (ii) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) for line 34 the qualifying project to be eligible for an equitable community line 35 incentive if the development proponent did not make a comparable line 36 affordability contribution. line 37 (iv)  The value of the dedicated land or in-lieu fee payment is at line 38 least equal to the capitalized value of the forgone revenue that the line 39 development proponent would have incurred if the qualifying 95 — 52 — SB 50 line 1 project had provided the required number and type of affordable line 2 units onsite. line 3 (v)  If the qualifying project includes 21 or more units of housing, line 4 the comparable affordability contribution is subject to a recorded line 5 covenant with the local jurisdiction. A copy of the covenant shall line 6 be provided to the Department of Housing and Community line 7 Development. line 8 (C)  For the purposes of this paragraph, “qualifying project” line 9 means a project that receives an equitable communities incentive line 10 by providing a comparable affordability contribution. line 11 (D)  The qualifying development shall not be issued a certificate line 12 of occupancy before the residential development receiving a line 13 dedication of land or direct in-lieu fee payment pursuant to this line 14 paragraph receives a building permit. line 15 (4)  The affordability of units made affordable to meet the line 16 requirements of this subdivision shall be restricted by deed for a line 17 period of 55 years for rental units or 45 years for units offered for line 18 sale. line 19 (c)  Residents living within one-half mile of the development at line 20 time of application shall receive priority for the following: line 21 (1)  Forty percent of the affordable housing units in the line 22 development that are reserved for lower income households. line 23 (2)  Forty percent of the affordable housing units in the line 24 development that are reserved for very low income households. line 25 (3)  Forty percent of the affordable housing units in the line 26 development that are reserved for extremely low income line 27 households. line 28 65918.54. An eligible applicant that proposes a residential line 29 development within a county that has a population greater than line 30 600,000, based on the most recent United States Census Bureau line 31 data, shall receive, upon request, an equitable communities line 32 incentive as follows: line 33 (a)  If the residential development is a transit-rich or job-rich line 34 housing project, the applicant shall receive both of the following: line 35 (A) line 36 (1)  A waiver from maximum controls on density. line 37 (B) line 38 (2)  A waiver from minimum automobile parking requirements line 39 greater than 0.5 automobile parking spots per unit. line 40 (2)  An eligible applicant proposing a 95 SB 50 — 53 — line 1 (b)  If the residential development within a county that has a line 2 population greater than 600,000, based on the most recent United line 3 States Census Bureau data, that is located within a one-half mile line 4 radius, but outside a one-quarter mile radius, of a major transit line 5 stop stop, the applicant shall receive, in addition to the incentives line 6 specified in paragraph (1), subdivision (a), waivers from all of the line 7 following: line 8 (A) line 9 (1)  Maximum height requirements less than 45 feet. line 10 (B) line 11 (2)  Any requirement governing the relationship between the line 12 size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy that line 13 would restrict the structure to a FAR of less than 2.5. line 14 (C) line 15 (3)  Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), line 16 paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), any minimum automobile parking line 17 requirement. line 18 (3)  An eligible applicant proposing a line 19 (c)  If the residential development within a county that has a line 20 population greater than 600,000, based on the most recent United line 21 States Census Bureau data, that is located within a one-quarter line 22 mile radius of a major transit stop stop, the applicant shall receive, line 23 in addition to the incentives specified in paragraph (1), subdivision line 24 (a), waivers from all of the following: line 25 (A) line 26 (1)  Maximum height requirements less than 55 feet. line 27 (B) line 28 (2)  Any requirement governing the relationship between the line 29 size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy that line 30 would restrict the structure to a FAR of less than 3.25. line 31 (C) line 32 (3)  Notwithstanding paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), any line 33 minimum automobile parking requirement. line 34 (b)  A residential development within a county that has a line 35 population less than or equal to 600,000, based on the most recent line 36 United States Census Bureau data, that meets the criteria specified line 37 in Section 65918.52 shall receive, upon request, an equitable line 38 communities incentive as follows: line 39 (1)  A waiver from maximum controls on density, subject to line 40 paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65918.52. 95 — 54 — SB 50 line 1 (2)  A waiver from maximum height limitations less than or line 2 equal to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height line 3 for mixed use or residential use. For purposes of this paragraph, line 4 “highest allowable height” means the tallest height, including line 5 heights that require conditional approval, allowable pursuant to line 6 zoning and any specific or area plan that covers the parcel. line 7 (3)  Any requirement governing the relationship between the line 8 size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy that line 9 would restrict the structure to a FAR of less than 0.6 times the line 10 number of stories proposed for the project. line 11 (4)  A waiver from minimum automobile parking requirements, line 12 as follows: line 13 (A)  If the residential development is located within a one-quarter line 14 mile radius of a rail transit station in a city with a population of line 15 greater than 100,000, based on the most recent United States line 16 Census Bureau data, the residential development project shall line 17 receive a waiver from any minimum automobile parking line 18 requirement. line 19 (B)  If the residential development does not meet the criteria line 20 specified in clause (i), the residential development project shall line 21 receive a waiver from minimum automobile parking requirements line 22 of more than 0.5 parking spaces per unit. line 23 (c)  Notwithstanding any other law, a project that qualifies for line 24 an equitable communities incentive may also apply for a density line 25 bonus, incentives or concessions, and parking ratios in accordance line 26 with subdivision (b) of Section 65915. To calculate a density bonus line 27 for a project that receives an equitable communities incentive, the line 28 “otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density” as line 29 described in subdivision (f) of Section 65915 shall be equal to the line 30 proposed number of units in, or the proposed square footage of, line 31 the residential development after applying the equitable line 32 communities incentive received pursuant to this chapter. In no line 33 case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development line 34 standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the line 35 construction of a development meeting the criteria of this chapter line 36 and subdivision (b) of Section 65915 at the unit count or square line 37 footage or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this line 38 chapter and as may be increased under Section 65915 in accordance line 39 with this subdivision, but no additional waivers or reductions of 95 SB 50 — 55 — line 1 development standards, as described in subdivision (e) of Section line 2 65915 shall be permitted. line 3 (d)  The local government shall grant an incentive requested by line 4 an eligible applicant pursuant to this chapter unless the local line 5 government makes a written finding, based on substantial evidence, line 6 that the incentive would have a specific, adverse impact on any line 7 real property or historic district that is listed on a federal or state line 8 register of historical resources and for which there is no feasible line 9 method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse line 10 impact without rendering the development unaffordable. line 11 (e)  An eligible applicant proposing a project that meets all of line 12 the requirements under Section 65913.4 may submit an application line 13 for streamlined, ministerial approval in accordance with that line 14 section. line 15 (f)  The local government may modify or expand the terms of line 16 an equitable communities incentive provided pursuant to this line 17 chapter, provided that the equitable communities incentive is line 18 consistent with, and meets the minimum standards specified in, line 19 this chapter. line 20 65918.55. (a)  An eligible applicant that proposes a residential line 21 development within a county that has a population less than or line 22 equal to 600,000, based on the most recent United States Census line 23 Bureau data, that meets all of the requirements in subdivision (b) line 24 shall receive, upon request, an equitable communities incentive line 25 as follows: line 26 (1)  A waiver from maximum controls on density. line 27 (2)  A waiver from maximum height limitations less than or equal line 28 to one story, or 15 feet, above the highest allowable height for line 29 mixed use or residential use. For purposes of this paragraph, line 30 “highest allowable height” means the tallest height, including line 31 heights that require conditional approval, allowable pursuant to line 32 zoning and any specific or area plan that covers the parcel. line 33 (3)  Any requirement governing the relationship between the line 34 size of the parcel and the area that the building may occupy that line 35 would restrict the structure to a FAR of less than 0.6 times the line 36 number of stories proposed for the project. line 37 (4)  A waiver from minimum automobile parking requirements, line 38 as follows: line 39 (A)  If the residential development is located within a one-quarter line 40 mile radius of a rail transit station in a city with a population of 95 — 56 — SB 50 line 1 greater than 100,000, based on the most recent United States line 2 Census Bureau data, the residential development project shall line 3 receive a waiver from any minimum automobile parking line 4 requirement. line 5 (B)  If the residential development does not meet the criteria line 6 specified in subparagraph (A), the residential development project line 7 shall receive a waiver from minimum automobile parking line 8 requirements of more than 0.5 parking spaces per unit. line 9 (b)  To be eligible for an equitable communities incentive line 10 outlined in subdivision (a), a residential development shall meet line 11 all of the following requirements: line 12 (1)  The site satisfies the requirements specified in paragraph line 13 (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4. line 14 (2)  The site is not located within either of the following: line 15 (A)  An architecturally or historically significant historic district, line 16 as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 5020.1 of the Public line 17 Resources Code. line 18 (B)  A special flood hazard area subject to inundation by the line 19 1-percent annual chance flood (100-year flood), as determined by line 20 the Federal Emergency Management Agency in any official maps line 21 published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. If a line 22 development proponent is able to satisfy all applicable federal line 23 qualifying criteria in order to provide that the site satisfies this line 24 subparagraph and is otherwise eligible for an equitable line 25 communities incentive under this chapter, a local government shall line 26 not deny the application on the basis that the development line 27 proponent did not comply with any additional permit requirement, line 28 standard, or action adopted by that local government that is line 29 applicable to that site. A development may be located on a site line 30 described in this subparagraph if either of the following are met: line 31 (i)  The site has been subject to a Letter of Map Revision line 32 prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and line 33 issued to the local jurisdiction. line 34 (ii)  The site meets Federal Emergency Management Agency line 35 requirements necessary to meet minimum flood plain management line 36 criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program pursuant to Part line 37 59 (commencing with Section 59.1) and Part 60 (commencing with line 38 Section 60.1) of Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 44 of the Code line 39 of Federal Regulations. 95 SB 50 — 57 — line 1 (3)  The residential development has a minimum density of 30 line 2 dwelling units per acre in jurisdictions considered metropolitan, line 3 as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 65583.2, or a minimum line 4 density of 20 dwelling units per acre in jurisdictions considered line 5 suburban, as defined in subdivision (e) of Section 65583.2. line 6 (4)  The residential development is located within a one-half line 7 mile radius of a major transit stop and within a city with a line 8 population greater than 50,000. line 9 (c)  Notwithstanding any other law, a project that qualifies for line 10 an equitable communities incentive may also apply for a density line 11 bonus, incentives or concessions, and parking ratios in accordance line 12 with subdivision (b) of Section 65915. To calculate a density bonus line 13 for a project that receives an equitable communities incentive, the line 14 “otherwise maximum allowable gross residential density,” as line 15 described in subdivision (f) of Section 65915, shall be equal to the line 16 proposed number of units in, or the proposed square footage of, line 17 the residential development after applying the equitable line 18 communities incentive received pursuant to this chapter. In no line 19 case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development line 20 standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the line 21 construction of a development meeting the criteria of this chapter line 22 and subdivision (b) of Section 65915 at the unit count or square line 23 footage or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this line 24 chapter and as may be increased under Section 65915 in line 25 accordance with this subdivision, but no additional waivers or line 26 reductions of development standards, as described in subdivision line 27 (e) of Section 65915 shall be permitted. line 28 65918.56. (a)  The local government shall grant an incentive line 29 requested by an eligible applicant pursuant to this chapter unless line 30 the local government makes a written finding, based on substantial line 31 evidence, that the incentive would have a specific, adverse impact line 32 on any real property or historic district that is listed on a federal line 33 or state register of historical resources and for which there is no line 34 feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, line 35 adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable. line 36 (b)  An eligible applicant proposing a project that meets all of line 37 the requirements under Section 65913.4 may submit an application line 38 for streamlined, ministerial approval in accordance with that line 39 section. 95 — 58 — SB 50 line 1 (c)  The local government may modify or expand the terms of line 2 an equitable communities incentive provided pursuant to this line 3 chapter, provided that the equitable communities incentive is line 4 consistent with, and meets the minimum standards specified in, line 5 this chapter. line 6 65918.54. line 7 65918.57. The Legislature finds and declares that this chapter line 8 addresses a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal line 9 affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the line 10 California Constitution. Therefore, this chapter applies to all cities, line 11 including charter cities. line 12 65918.55. line 13 65918.58. (a)  On or before July 1, 2020, 2023, Sections line 14 65918.51 to 65918.54, inclusive, shall not apply to a potentially line 15 sensitive community. After July 1, 2020, 2023, Sections 65918.51 line 16 to 65918.54, inclusive, shall apply in any potentially sensitive line 17 community that is not identified as a sensitive community pursuant line 18 to subdivision (b). line 19 (b)  On or before July 1, 2020, 2023, sensitive communities in line 20 each county shall be identified and mapped in accordance with the line 21 following: line 22 (1)  The council of governments, or the county board of line 23 supervisors in a county without a council of governments, shall line 24 establish a working group comprised of residents of potentially line 25 sensitive communities within the county, ensuring equitable line 26 representation of vulnerable populations, including, but not limited line 27 to, renters, low-income people, and members of classes protected line 28 under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 line 29 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3 of Title 2). line 30 (2)  The working group shall develop a map of sensitive line 31 communities within the county, which shall include some or all line 32 of the areas identified as potentially sensitive communities pursuant line 33 to subdivision (i) of Section 65918.50. The working group shall line 34 prioritize the input of residents from each potentially sensitive line 35 community in making a determination about that community. line 36 (3)  Each board of supervisors or council of governments shall line 37 adopt the sensitive communities map for the county, along with line 38 an explanation of the composition and function of the working line 39 group and the community process and methodology used to create line 40 the maps, at a public hearing held on or before July 1, 2020. 2023. 95 SB 50 — 59 — line 1 (c)  Sections 65918.51 to 65918.54, inclusive, shall apply in a line 2 sensitive community on and after January 1, 2026, unless the city line 3 or county in which the sensitive community is located has adopted line 4 a community plan for an area that includes the sensitive community line 5 that is aimed toward increasing residential density and multifamily line 6 housing choices near transit stops and meets all of the following: line 7 (1)  The community plan is not in conflict with the goals of this line 8 chapter. line 9 (2)  The community plan permits increased density and line 10 multifamily development near transit, with all upzoning linked to line 11 onsite affordable housing requirements that meet or exceed the line 12 affordable housing requirements in Sections 65918.51 to 65918.54, line 13 inclusive. Community plans shall, at a minimum, be consistent line 14 with the overall residential development capacity and the minimum line 15 affordability standards set forth in Sections 65918.51 to 65918.54, line 16 inclusive, within the boundaries of the community plan. line 17 (3)  The community plan includes provisions to protect line 18 vulnerable residents from displacement. line 19 (4)  The community plan promotes economic justice for workers line 20 and residents. line 21 (5)  The community plan was developed in partnership with at line 22 least one of the following: line 23 (A)  A nonprofit or community organization that focuses on line 24 organizing low-income residents in the sensitive community. line 25 (B)  A nonprofit or community organization that focuses on line 26 organizing low-income residents in the jurisdiction. line 27 (C)  If there are no nonprofit or community organizations line 28 working within the sensitive community or the jurisdiction, a line 29 nonprofit with demonstrated experience conducting outreach to line 30 low-income communities. line 31 (6)  Residents of the sensitive community are engaged throughout line 32 the planning process, including through at least three community line 33 meetings that are held at times and locations accessible to line 34 low-income residents. line 35 (7)  All public documents and meetings related to the planning line 36 process are translated into all languages spoken by at least 25 line 37 percent of residents of the sensitive community. line 38 (8)  The community plan is adopted before July 1, 2025. line 39 (d)  Each city and each county shall make reasonable efforts to line 40 develop a community plan for any sensitive communities within 95 — 60 — SB 50 line 1 its jurisdiction. A community plan may address other locally line 2 identified priorities, provided they are not in conflict with the intent line 3 of this chapter or any other law. A city or county may designate a line 4 community plan adopted before July 1, 2020, 2023, as the plan line 5 that meets the requirements of this paragraph, subdivision, provided line 6 that the plan meets all criteria in this section. line 7 (e)  Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, Sections line 8 65918.51 to 65918.54, inclusive, shall apply in any sensitive line 9 community if all of the following apply: line 10 (1)  At least 20 percent of adult residents of the sensitive line 11 community sign a petition attesting that the community desires to line 12 make the provisions of Sections 65918.51 to 65918.54, inclusive, line 13 applicable in the area. The petition shall describe in plain language line 14 the planning standards set forth in Sections 65918.51 to 65918.54, line 15 inclusive; be translated into all languages spoken by at least 25 line 16 percent of residents in the affected area; and collect contact line 17 information from signatories to the petition, including first, middle, line 18 and last name, mailing address, and phone number and email line 19 address if available. line 20 (2)  The local government has verified the petition to ensure line 21 compliance with paragraph (1). line 22 (3)  Following signature verification, the local government city line 23 or county provides public notice and opportunity to comment to line 24 residents of the affected area and holds a minimum of three public line 25 hearings in the affected area at a time and in a place and manner line 26 accessible to low-income residents and other vulnerable line 27 populations. line 28 (4)  The governing body for the city or county in which the line 29 sensitive community is located determines, by majority vote, to line 30 apply this chapter in the affected area. line 31 (f)  It is the intent of the Legislature to consider all of the line 32 following: line 33 (1)  Tasking local government entities with greater community line 34 connection with convening and administering the process for line 35 identifying sensitive communities. line 36 (2)  Requiring review by the Department of Housing and line 37 Community Development of the designation of sensitive line 38 communities. line 39 65918.59. (a)  On or before July 1, 2021, the Governor’s Office line 40 of Planning and Research, in consultation with the Department 95 SB 50 — 61 — line 1 of Housing and Community Development, shall develop and line 2 publish on its internet website rules, regulations, or guidelines for line 3 the submission and approval of a local flexibility plan. The rules, line 4 regulations, or guidelines shall include requirements that the local line 5 government demonstrate that the local flexibility plan would do line 6 the following: line 7 (1)  Affirmatively further fair housing, as that term is defined in line 8 Section 8899.50, to an extent as great or greater than if the local line 9 government were to grant equitable communities incentives in line 10 fulfillment of Section 65918.51. line 11 (2)  Achieve a standard of transportation efficiency as great or line 12 greater than if the local government were to grant equitable line 13 communities incentives in fulfillment of Section 65918.51. line 14 (3)  Increase overall feasible housing capacity for households line 15 of lower, moderate, and above moderate incomes, considering line 16 economic factors such as cost of likely construction types, line 17 affordable housing requirements, and the impact of local line 18 development fees. line 19 (b)  On or after July 1, 2021, a local government may submit a line 20 local flexibility plan for review and approval by the Department line 21 of Housing and Community Development pursuant to the rules, line 22 regulations, or guidelines adopted pursuant to subdivision (a). line 23 (c)  A local government submitting a local flexibility plan and line 24 the Department of Housing and Community Development shall line 25 process, review, and certify the local flexibility plan as line 26 expeditiously as possible after local community planning and line 27 stakeholder outreach is complete. line 28 (d)  Any rule, regulation, or guideline developed and published line 29 by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research pursuant to line 30 this section shall not be subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with line 31 Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. line 32 SEC. 5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to line 33 Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because line 34 a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service line 35 charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or line 36 level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section line 37 17556 of the Government Code. O 95 — 62 — SB 50 SB 50 (Wiener) More HOMES Act of 2020 City of South San Francisco City Council January 15, 2020 SB 50 Provides an Equitable Communities Incentive •Transit Rich •Jobs-Rich Inclusionary Housing •More than 20 units Sensitive Communities Amendments •Locally Adopted Alternative Plan •January 1, 2023 •HCD/OPR Approved •Community Preference •Lottery System •Multi-Family Housing Next Steps House of Origin •Rules Committee •Policy Committee •Appropriations (if fiscal) •Floor Other House •Rules Committee •Policy Committee(s) •Appropriations (if fiscal) •Floor House of Origin If agreement cannot be reached –2 house Conference Committee Governor’s Desk Questions City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:20-15 Agenda Date:1/15/2020 Version:1 Item #:6. Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation Initiation of litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4): One potential case City of South San Francisco Printed on 1/13/2020Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™