Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 5.B 12/03/2003CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AGENDA BILL Agenda Title: Discussion And Possible Action Regarding The Meeting Date: December 1, 2003 Adoption Of An Ordinance Implementing An Affordable Housing Linkage Fee For Nonresidential Development In The City Of Meeting Time: 3:00 PM Petaluma X 7:00 PM Category (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar ❑ Public Hearing X New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation Department: Director: Contact Person: Phone Number: Economic Paul Maran ella Bonne Gaebl 778 -4484 (direct line) Development Cost of Proposal: $4,500 (Estimated cost of staff i e and Account Number: 903 - 400 -5401 materials) Name of Fund: Amount Budgeted: $4,500 PCDC Administration Attachments to Agenda Packet Item: 1. Executive Summary of The Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage Fee Study 2. Draft Ordinance Summary Statement: In March 2001, the City and County governments in Sonoma County jointly commissioned a study analyzing the connection between commercial development and the demand for housing created by that development. In particular, the study considered the opportunity to increase funding for affordable housing through the adoption of fees linked to the creation of jobs. Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) completed the study, The Sonoma County Workforce Housing oge fee Study in December 2001. State law requires that development fees of this type be based on an objective connection or "nexus" between the development activity and the demand the development imposes on the community. Recommended City Council Action /Suggested Motion: Discussion And Possible Action Regarding The Adoption Of An Ordinance Implementing An Affordable Housing Linkage Fee For Nonresidential Development In The City Of Petaluma Revie ed bv Finance Director: Reviewed by City Attorney: Date: Approved ky City Manager: Date: Date: x aToday's ate: Revision # and Date Revised: File Code: # Commlinkstaffrept November 15, 2003 CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 1, 2003 FOR Discussion And Possible Action Regarding The Adoption Of An Ordinance Implementing An Affordable Housing Linkage Fee For Nonresidential Development In The City Of Petaluma 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In March 2001, the City and County governments in Sonoma County jointly commissioned a study analyzing the connection between commercial development and the demand for housing created by that development. In particular, the study considered the opportunity to increase funding for affordable housing through the adoption of fees linked to the creation of jobs. Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) completed the study, The Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage inkage fee Study in December 2001. State law requires that development fees of this type be based on an objective connection or "nexus" between the development activity and the demand the development imposes on the community. 2. BACKGROUND: The basic findings of the Workforce Housing Linkage Study, dated December 2001, are summarized as follows: • Workforce housing is a countywide issue • The Sonoma County housing market has become less affordable in recent years • Future employment growth will contribute to demand for housing at a range of prices • A job /housing linkage fee could provide dedicated revenues for affordable housing finance: (1) This fee would generate revenue for affordable housing production based on the nexus between the increase in jobs among various land use types and the wages paid for jobs in those different land use types. These relationships have been assessed and quantified in the study and the resulting fee calculations serve as a starting point for policy discussion regarding the extent to which these fees can and should be used to generate housing production funds. (2) As an initial proposal, it was recommended that the jobs /housing linkage fee contribute 10% of the subsidy needed to provide affordable workforce housing, as calculated over a five year time period. (3) The following per- square -foot fees were recommended in the study report. These fees represent about 10% of the maximum fees justified in the nexus study: Commercial: $2.08 Industrial: 2.15 Retail: 3.59 The cities and Sonoma County will need to supplement existing resources and develop additional ones to help meet the housing not met through the linkage fee. The City of Petaluma has in place four funding sources which can be utilized for the development and preservation of affordable Housing: The 20% Low -Mod housing Set -aside Fund (PCDC Requirement) The Housing In -Lieu Fund (Housing Element Requirement) Community Development Block Grant (HUD funding) HOME Program Funds (HCD funding) However, even with these available sources of revenue for housing, the projected gap in revenue over the next ten years to address our housing need is $137,000,000. A calculation using the above referenced proposed fee structure over that ten -year period could fill a portion (approximately $10,920,000) of that gap. N On November 14, 2002 the Mayors' and Council members' Association approved a process for review of the model linkage fee ordinance by a working group consisting of an elected official and staff person from each city and the County. Council member Healy and Housing Administrator Gaebler represented the City of Petaluma on that committee. In four meetings between February 6 and April 17, 2003, the Working Group conducted a section -by- section review of the model ordinance and of the options presented in the model ordinance. Participants also identified issues of particular concern to their agencies from both policy and administrative perspectives. In general, agency representatives to the Working Group agreed on the concept of flexibility for each agency using the ordinance. It was noted, however, that the Ordinance was based upon the nexus study and therefore any wide variances could present a legal problem. At Council direction, staff worked with the Petaluma Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee to elicit their review and comments. After two meetings, the committee made the following recommendations: Phase in the proposed fees. Following that recommendation, staff suggests that one -third of the fee amount would go into effect on January 1, 2005; the second one -third of the fee would go into effect on January 1, 2006; and the full amount would go into effect on January 1, 2007. The fees would be calculated at 50% for any commercial, industrial, or retail development in the City's two redevelopment areas. The draft ordinance (Exhibit #2) is based on the model ordinance and modified to incorporate Petaluma's State - certified Housing Element goals and policies, the findings of a community -based work force housing task force (which met for a year and produced a report on their findings), and our community's unique 20 -year old housing program. 3. ALTERNATIVES: (1) Adopt an Ordinance Implementing An Affordable Housing Linkage Fee For Nonresidential Development In The City Of Petaluma. (2) Modify the ordinance; return to Council with appropriate changes. (3) Reject ordinance. 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: A very brief report on the amount of non - residential development in the City from 1990 -2001 was completed by the General Plan Administration staff. The data reveals that 4,000,000 square feet of non - residential development occurred during that eleven -year period. A linkage fee averaging $2.60 (the average of the three levels proposed by the study) would have generated $10,425,000 and the Housing Division currently leverages our housing funds at a ratio of $10 -12 outside dollars for every local dollar. 5. CONCLUSION: Although the City of Petaluma has a very successful history of addressing its housing goals, including meeting our Fair Share goals as calculated by the Association of Bay Area Governments, the high cost of housing in our community has never diminished, even during the recent economic recession. We remain the 4th least affordable housing market in the country. There are various sources of outside funding available for very -low income families, seniors and persons with special needs. There are few sources which wiltallow funding for those working class people who fall between low- income and those who can afford "trophy" homes. This commercial linkage fee would provide the City with the capability of filling that need in our goal of serving the broad spectrum of housing needs in the community. 6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION: Success will be measured by the number of workforce housing units which are developed utilizing the proceeds of this linkage fee. 7. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the draft ordinance. a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXHIBIT 1 December 12, 2001 This Draft Report sets forth the preliminary findings of the Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage Fee Study conducted by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) on behalf of a coalition comprised of Sonoma County and its nine incorporated jurisdictions. The findings are summarized as follows: 1. Workforce housing is a Countywide issue. • Sonoma County is unique in the Bay Area region in that the labor force is highly self contained. Most jobs in the County are held by residents of the County and most County residents work within the County. • Commuting into or out of the County, as a percentage of the total workforce, is relatively minor; however, commuting across jurisdictions within the County is prominent. • Some cities are net providers of jobs (i.e., contain more jobs than employed residents) while other cities and communities serve primarily as housing locations. • Communities that primarily provide housing are required by State law (following • ABAG's RHND calculations) to provide a disproportionate share of affordable housing for workers in other jurisdictions. • Communities that have a higher proportion of jobs to housing typically benefit from the higher public revenues (e.g., sales taxes) and lower service costs associated with employment uses, while more housing - dominated communities may bear higher service costs and receive comparatively lower public revenues. • Throughout this report, the term "affordable housing" describes housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households who pay a maximum of 30 percent of income for housing. • Many moderate income households cannot afford to purchase median - priced, single family homes in the County; very few multifamily units are available (for purchase or rent) that would otherwise provide an affordable alternative. As a result, families earning up to 120 percent of the median income may need assistance in securing housing and should be eligible for G:AHousing \CommLink Exhibits.doc housing programs funded through the proposed jobs /housing linkage fee schedule. 2. The Sonoma County housing market has become less affordable in recent years. • Housing in Sonoma County has gotten significantly more expensive in recent years, with every jurisdiction showing similar increases in housing prices. Moderate income households that could once purchase a single family home no longer have this option. • The great majority of homes in Sonoma County are single family detached residences, which command increasingly high prices. In recent years, the proportion of Sonoma County homes in the single family detached category has actually increased, as fewer apartments and other multifamily units have been constructed. • While townhomes and condominiums are priced within reach of many households, few of these units are being produced in Sonoma County, as is the case in many other communities. • The rental market in Sonoma County has also become significantly more expensive. A recent survey of apartment complexes indicates that the Sonoma County rental market has experienced a 70 percent increase in rental prices since 1990. 3. Future employment growth will contribute to demand for housing at a range of prices. • A very high proportion of future job growth in the County is expected to occur in relatively low- paying jobs. • the great majority of new households in Sonoma County associated with this employment growth will not be able to afford to buy a median priced home. • The financial difficulty of buying or renting a home in Sonoma County will cause employers to pay higher wages and /or cause employees to suffer a housing cost burden, live in overcrowded conditions to save money, or commute from outside Sonoma County and thus increase congestion on Sonoma County roads. • High housing prices and unavailability of affordable housing options could reduce the attractiveness of Sonoma County to potential employers, weakening economic development and job opportunities for the County's residents. G:\Housing \CommLink Exhibits.doc [+ 4. A jobs / housing linkage fee could provide dedicated revenues for affordable housing finance. • A jobs /housing fee would generate revenue for affordable housing production based on the nexus between the increase in jobs among various land use types (e.g., office, industrial, or hotel development) and the wages paid for jobs in those different land use types. These relationships have been assessed and quantified in this study, and the resulting fee calculations serve as a starting point for policy discussions regarding the extent to which these fees can and should be used to generate affordable housing production funds. • As an initial proposal, it is recommended that the jobs /housing linkage fee contribute ten percent of the subsidy needed to provide affordable workforce housing (as calculated over a five year time period). • It is initially recommended that the jobs /housing linkage fee be applied to three land use categories: Commercial, Industrial, and Retail. •A fee representing ten percent of the needed subsidy would result in the following fees per square foot: Commercial: $2.08 per square foot; Industrial: $2.15 per square foot; Retail: $3.59 per square foot. • If employment growth and associated development occur at their projected rates over the next five years, jobs /housing fees at the levels listed above could generate as much as $35.5 million dollars. • Revenues from a jobs /housing fee would combine with other funding sources to construct affordable units. Significant annual sources of funds for housing programs include federal low- income housing tax credits, CDBG, and HOME funds, and RDA housing set - asides. • Approximately 22 percent of housing developed in Sonoma County since 1996 has been specifically targeted to lower income households. A total of 2,809 units have been constructed to serve families, seniors, and disabled residents in very -low, low and moderate income groups. County -wide jobs /housing fees at the levels proposed in this report could generate enough funding to construct up to 1,180 affordable units over five years. These potential units represent the equivalent of 42 percent of affordable units constructed in the County from 1996 to 2001. 5. Efforts to implement a jobs / housing fee can be enhanced by cooperative action of local governments and the private sector. • As part of the implementation process, the cities and County of Sonoma G:\Housing \CommLhik Exhibits.doc s will need to make important strategy decisions regarding level of jurisdictional cooperation, fee collection, and fee distribution. • Expanded public /private cooperation will be important to successfully adopting a jobs /housing fee. A jobs /housing linkage fee schedule is only one component in achieving affordable housing goals. Other equally and perhaps more important factors include the supply of sites suitably zoned for affordable units as well as community attitudes toward affordable projects. G:\Housing \ComniLink Exhibits.doc EXHIBIT 2 AN ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING A COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEE FOR NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY OF PETALUMA WHEREAS, the City of Petaluma along with all other cities in Sonoma County and the County of Sonoma participated in the creation of a study to establish a link between the continued growth of employment and the need for affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the findings and conclusions of the Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage Fee Study on which this ordinance is based; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on said fee on October 27, 2003 and December 1, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Petaluma Municipal Code is hereby amended to add Chapter 17.35 "Affordable Housing Linkage Fee" to read as follows: Chapter 17.35 Commercial Linkage Fee 17.35.010 PURPOSE. a. Mitigation of Affordable Housing Impacts Linked to Nonresidential Development. The purpose of this chapter is to (1) implement the goals and objectives of the General Plan Housing Element of the City of Petaluma; (2) mitigate the housing impacts caused by new, changed and expanded nonresidential development in the City of Petaluma; (3) provide housing affordable to persons who earn between 80 -100% of the area median income. The City Council has determined that affordable housing requirements are needed, has found the following requirements to be consistent with its General Plan and, pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.2, has considered the effects of the fee with respect to the City's housing needs as established in the City's Housing Element, as amended from time to time pursuant to state law. 17.35.020 FINDINGS. a. Need for Affordable Housing. The City Council has found that persons of low -and moderate - income are experiencing increasing difficulty in locating and maintaining adequate, safe and sanitary affordable housing. b. Housing Needs and Impacts Created by Nonresidential Development. Pursuant to the Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage inkage Fee Study published by Economic and Planning Systems Inc. in December 2001, the City Council finds that the construction or expansion of nonresidential development is a major factor in attracting new employees to the City of Petaluma and the County of Sonoma. A substantial number of these new employees and their families seek residence in the City and County and place a greater strain on an already impacted housing stock. Current and new employees who are unable to find affordable housing in the jurisdictions in which they work are forced to commute long distances. This situation adversely affects their quality of life, consumes limited energy resources, increases traffic congestion and has a negative impact on air quality. Employers have or will have problems attracting a labor force because of the shortage of housing affordable to many workers. c. Means of Meeting Affordable Housing Demand. Increasing the production and availability of affordable housing is problematic. Prices and rents for affordable housing remain below the level needed to attract new construction. At the same time, escalating land costs and rapidly diminishing amounts of land available for development hinder the provision of affordable housing units solely through private action. Federal and State housing finances and subsidy programs are not sufficient by themselves to satisfy the affordable housing needs associated with employment resulting from nonresidential development. Programs and activities to expand affordable housing opportunities can be accomplished through public /private partnership action. It is the purpose of this chapter to establish a feasible means by which developers of nonresidential development projects assist in (1) increasing the supply of low- and moderate - income housing and (2) increasing the supply of housing in proximity to employment centers. d. Imposing Housing Requirement on Developers Whose Projects Create the Need. It is appropriate to impose some of the cost of the increased burden of providing housing for low- and moderate - income people necessitated by such development directly upon the sponsors of a development, and indirectly upon the occupiers. The imposition of an affordable housing unit /fee requirement is an appropriate means to accomplish the purpose of this chapter. In calculating the affordable housing unit /fee requirement, the City Council has taken into account other factors in addition to the simple calculation of contribution. These include impact of the unit requirements on construction costs, special factors and hardships associated with certain types of development, and legal issues. e. Rational Relationship Between. Affordable Housing Need Created and Fee Requirement. The unit requirements and housing fees contained in this chapter are designed to create a rational relationship between the amount of housing need created by the land use and the size of the fee, taking into account the effect of such fee requirement on providing affordable housing opportunities and the economic feasibility of imposing such requirements. 17.35.030 DEFINITIONS. As used in this section: Addition shall mean adding gross square feet to an existing development project or building subject to this ordinance. Affordable housing shall mean the total cost of monthly housing payments does not exceed thirty (30) percent of gross household income. Changed Nonresidential Development shall mean the transition of existing nonresidential space from one type of nonresidential use to another or a change from residential to nonresidential. City Manager shall mean the City Manager of the City of Petaluma or his/her designee. Development or development project for purposes of this Chapter shall mean any project resulting in new, expanded, remodeled, or changed nonresidential development. Director of Community Development shall mean the Director of Community Development for the City of Petaluma or his /her designee. Expanded Nonresidential Development shall mean construction that results in a net increase in the gross square footage of an existing nonresidential space. Gross square feet or gross square footage shall mean the area included within the surrounding walls of a nonresidential development. This area does not include enclosed parking for vehicles. Low- and moderate- income shall mean a household with total annual income between 80 -100 percent of the area median income, adjusted for family size, and in accordance with the Area Median Income Schedule as published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Santa Rosa MSA. Nexus Study shall mean the Sonoma County Workforce Housing Linkage Fee Study published by Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. in December, 2001 as may be amended from time to time. Remodeled Nonresidential Development shall mean all interior tenant or owner improvements to existing nonresidential space. 17.35.040 APPLICATION OF FEE. a. Determination of Development Projects. The fee requirement shall be applied to nonresidential development projects involving the construction of a new building, construction of additional gross square footage to existing nonresidential buildings, interior remodels of existing nonresidential buildings, or a change in nonresidential use or a change from residential to nonresidential use in an existing building that increases the number of employees. b. Determination of Land Uses. For the purposes of, this ordinance, nonresidential land uses shall be divided into three (3) classifications: commercial, retail, and industrial. Where necessary, the Director of Community Development shall determine the land use classification that best describes the nonresidential development, or portion thereof in the case of "Mixed Use" developments, for the purposes of assigning the fee to be charged. c. Application of Fee. The fee shall be applied as provided in Sections 17.35.040 (a) and (b) commencing on January 1, 2005 and shall automatically increase on January 1, 2006 and on January 1, 2007 as follows: Effective Date Commercial Fee Retail Fee Industrial Fee January 1, 2005 $0.69 /square foot $1.19 /square foot $0.71 /square foot January 1, 2006 $1.38 /square foot $2.38 /square foot $1.42 /square foot January 1, 2007 $2.08 /square foot $3.59 /square foot $2.15 /square foot The fee shall be applied to all building permits issued on or after the applicable effective date. For any "changed nonresidential use" that does not require a building permit, the fee shall be applied at the time a new business license is issued. d. Application of Fee in Redevelopment Project Areas. Any nonresidential development as provided in Sections 17.35.040 (a) and (b) located within the adopted boundaries of a City of Petaluma Community Development Commission redevelopment project area shall pay a fee equal to one -half the amount established by the table in Section 17.35.040 (c) or, after January 1, 2007, as may be adjusted from time to time. 17.35.050 FEE CREDIT OR REFUND. a. Fee Credit. A developer of any project subject to the fee requirement may apply to receive a credit against the total amount of fees due, or a portion thereof, if said developer provides affordable housing through some other means agreeable to the City of Petaluma. b. Refund of Fee. If the affordable housing fee is paid and the building permit is later canceled or voided, or the permit which triggers the application of the fee fails to vest within the terms of said permit, the Director of Community Development may, upon written request of the developer, order return of the fee if (1) the fees paid have not been committed, and (2) work on the private development project has not progressed to a point that would permit commencement of a new, changed, or expanded use for which a fee would be payable. 17.35.060 USE OF FEES. a. Use and Disbursement of Monies in the Fund: Monies collected pursuant to this Chapter shall be used in accordance with and in support of activities to implement the City's adopted Housing Element, Consolidated Plan, and Implementation Plan. Activities shall be limited to direct expenditure for the development of affordable housing as defined herein or incidental non- capital expenditures related to such projects, including but not limited to land acquisition, applicable pre - development costs, construction, rehabilitation, subsidization, counseling or assistance to other governmental entities, private organizations or individuals to expand affordable housing opportunities to low- and moderate - income households. Monies in the fund may be disbursed, hypothecated, collateralized, or otherwise employed for these purposes from time to time as the City Council so determines is appropriate to accomplish the purposes of the affordable housing fund. These uses include, but are not limited to, assistance to housing development corporations, equity participation loans, grants, predevelopment loan funds, participation leases, loans to develop affordable housing or other public /private partnership arrangements. The affordable housing funds may be expended for the benefit of both rental or owner - occupied housing. b. Accounting of Fees. All fees shall be deposited into a segregated account and all expenditures of funds from the same shall be documented and available for public inspection during regular business hours. 17.35.070 EXEMPTIONS. a. Public facilities, public and private schools, and churches are exempt from the provisions of this section. 17.35.080 FEE ESCALATORS. a. After January 1, 2007, this fee shall be annually increased to reflect the percentage increase in the cost of construction or public improvements as reported in the Engineering News Record - Construction Price Index for the San Francisco Bay Area. b. This fee may be adjusted from time to time, based upon amendments or updates to the Nexus Study, or based on any other data and analysis which the City Council determines to be applicable to the continued establishment of this fee. Section 2. All code provisions, ordinances, and parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are repealed. The provisions of this ordinance, insofar as they are substantially the same as existing code provisions relating to the same subject matter shall be construed as restatements and continuations thereof and not as new enactments. With respect, however, to violations, rights accrued, liabilities accrued, or appeals taken, prior to the effective date of this ordinance, under any chapter, ordinance, or part of an ordinance shall be deemed to remain in full force for the purpose of sustaining any proper suit, action, or other proceedings, with respect to any such violation, right, liability or appeal. Section 3. The City Cleric is hereby directed to post /publish this ordinance for the period and in the manner required by the City Charter. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage. 12