Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 4.A 07/02/2018DATE: July 2, 2018 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council through City Manager FROM: Sue Caste cci, Housing Administrator SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Increasing Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fees Payable As Required by Program 4.3 in the City of Petaluma's General Plan 2025, 2015- 2023 Housing Element As Adopted by Resolution No. 2014-190 N.C.S. and Replacing the Housing In Lieu Fees Set by Resolution No. 2003-241 N.C.S.; and Adoption of a Resolution Increasing the Commercial Development Housing Linkage Fees Pursuant to Petaluma Municipal Code section 19.36.040(C) and Replacing the Commercial Linkage Fees Set by Resolution No. 2011-071 N.C.S. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council: 1) Adopt a Resolution Increasing Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu Fees Payable As Required by Program 4.3 in the City of Petaluma's General Plan 2025, 2015-2023 Housing Element As Adopted by Resolution No. 2014-190 N.C.S. and Replacing the Housing In Lieu Fees Set by Resolution No. 2003-241 N.C.S.; and 2) Adopt a Resolution Increasing the Commercial Development Housing Linkage Fees Pursuant to Petaluma Municipal Code section 19.36.040(C) and Replacing the Commercial Linkage Fees Set by Resolution No. 2011-071 N.C.S. BACKGROUND The affordability of housing in Petaluma has long been of interest to Petaluma City Councils. City programs have done much to provide housing for every income level, with emphasis on first-time homebuyers, very -low and low and moderate -income residents, and the homeless, all when funding was more plentiful. The California Legislature has recognized that the "availability of housing is of vital statewide importance."' It also has found that cities "have a responsibility to use the powers vested in them to facilitate the improvement and development of housing to make adequate provision for the housing needs of all economic segments of the community. ,2 Accordingly, the state has legislated both requirements and incentives to facilitate and expedite the construction of affordable housing, including, but not limited to, through enactment of the density bonus law, and restrictions on local disapproval of housing projects. I Gov. Code, 65580(a) 2 Gov. Code, 65580(4) In 1985, the City of Petaluma formulated and enacted an inclusionary housing policy. The policy, which is a program of the Housing Element, (a chapter of the City's General Plan), is simple, flexible, and enforceable. In addition, the Legislature, through the adoption of the Housing Element law (Gov. Code, 65580, et seq.), requires local governments to adequately plan to meet their existing and projected housing needs, including their share of the Regional Housing Need Allocation. (RHNA). The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is required to allocate each region's share of the statewide housing need to regional Councils of Governments. In Petaluma's case, that is the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). ABAG has assigned the following RHNA to the City: Regional Housing Need Allocation — 2015-2023 (as of 4/30/18) Income Category Housing Need Permits issued Very Low 0-50% of AMI 199 9 Low (51% - 80% of AMI 103 23 Moderate 81%-120% AMI 121 24 Above Moderate (over 120% of AMI 322 595 TOTAL UNITS 745 651 The City's current inclusionary housing policy located in the 2015-2023 Housing Element, requires developers of new residential developments to provide affordable housing, and offers them options as to how they fulfill that requirement: 1) build on-site units or dedicate a portion of the project site to the City for development of affordable units; 2) pay an in -lieu fee, or 3) use alternative methods to meet the intent of the inclusionary requirement subject to approval by the City Council, such as by seeking approval for providing a smaller percentage of on-site units or for donating a separate parcel of land for development of affordable units. In 2004, the City Council adopted an ordinance implementing a Commercial Linkage Fee for nonresidential development within the City of Petaluma. The construction of nonresidential development is a major factor in attracting new employees to Petaluma but places a strain on an already impacted housing stock. Housing affordability was part of Council goal discussion in February 2017. The Council determined to review housing -related fees to generate funding for affordable housing projects, and adopted the priority, "Identify and implement programs to increase affordable housing," in its 2017 and 2018 goals. A task included with this priority is "seek to provide housing for all income levels.'? In April, 2017, Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) was retained by the City to update the City's inclusionary housing in -lieu fee for residential projects and the City's commercial linkage fee. In addition, EPS was asked to prepare a nexus -based fee study for rental and ownership housing. 2 EPS presented their draft nexus study to the Council at a workshop on September 25, 2017. Council directed staff to gather more information to help clarify alternatives for consideration and City Council direction. At the March 5, 2018 City Council meeting, staff presented several policy options for Council consideration which included: 1) increasing the In Lieu fee; 2) increasing the Commercial Linkage fee; 3) establishing a percentage requirement for on-site inclusionary housing; and 4) establishing a percentage for the In Lieu fee inclusionaiy requirement. DISCUSSION This section will address the changes that the Council directed be made to the Housing In -Lieu Fee, and the Commercial Linkage Fee at the March 5, 2018 City Council meeting. In Lieu Fee Amendment The current in -lieu fees collected by the City in accordance with Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element are inadequate to fund construction of sufficient numbers of affordable housing units to meet the City's projected housing needs based on our RHNA numbers. Council directed that the in -lieu fee be increased to a point where it will incentivize developers to provide on-site affordable units for both homeownership and rental residential developments. After much discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to increase the in- lieu fee to an amount calculated at a 20% inclusionary requirement. Assumes Unit = 2,000 Sq.Ft. Fee / Sq.Ft. Fee / Unit Petaluma (Current Fee) $4.51 $9,022 Petaluma (EPS In -Lieu) $10.12 $20,236' Petaluma (EPS Nexus) $26.00 $52,000 Low Fee $2.07 $4,132 High Fee $17.62 $35,242 Median Fee $5.47 $10,940 The EPS calculated maximum fee for a 20% inclusionary requirement would be $10.12 s.f./ per unit for both rental and for -sale developments as specified in the Administrative Draft Memorandum dated September 19, 2017. In Attachment 3, the new In -Lieu Fees are calculated using the 20% requirement of $10.12 psf. The increase to the in -lieu fee averages approximately 140% from Petaluma's current in -lieu fee. The in -lieu fee would also be used to calculate any fee balance owed equivalent to fractional units that result from the 15% onsite calculation. The increase is effective upon its adoption, except that any residential project or mixed-use application with a residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the affordable housing in lieu fee in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment Commercial LinkaLe Fee Amendments As new employment -generating development continues to occur in the City, additional affordable housing will be required to house a portion of the new lower wage workforce. The Commercial Linkage Fee is intended to capture a portion of the funds needed to support that additional housing. The Commercial Linkage Fee Ordinance was revised in 2011 and provides for an annual escalator based on the latest "Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index — 20 City Average" and went into effect on July 1, 2012. There were no increases to the Commercial Linkage Fee before 2012. Below are comparisons of the EPS calculated maximum fee and Sonoma County's current fee. It was the consensus of the Council to set the fee at the current rate of Sonoma County's commercial linkage fee as indicated in the table above. The increase will be effective upon its adoption, except that any residential project or mixed-use application with a residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the affordable housing in lieu fee in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment. Nature of the Inclusionary Housing In Lieu and Commercial Linkage Fees In the case of California Building Association v. City of San Jose, (2015) 61 Cal. 4th 435, the California Supreme Court upheld the City of San Jose's inclusionary ordinance which requires residential developments in the city that create 20 or more new, additional or modified dwelling units to make available 15% of the for -sale units at an affordable housing cost as specified in the ordinance. The court held that adoption of inclusionary ordinances to mitigate the effect of new market rate housing on affordable housing stock, increase the number of affordable housing units, and distribute affordable units throughout a community to obtain the benefits of economically diverse communities is not an exaction if it imposes lawful, non -confiscatory land use restrictions in the form of price limits. According to the court, such inclusionary ordinances, to be valid, need only be reasonably related to the broad general welfare purposes for which they are enacted. The court held that such ordinances that require development projects to provide a reasonable amount of on-site affordable units, and offer reasonable alternative means of satisfying the ordinance's inclusionary objectives, such through payment of in -lieu fees, land dedication, and off-site rd Petaluma's Current Fee/s.f. EPS Calculated maximum Fee/s.f. Sonoma County Current Fee/s.f. Office $2.34 $99.00 $2.75 Retail $4.03 $167.00 $4.75 Light hidustrial/Warehouse $2.41 $62.00 $2.84 It was the consensus of the Council to set the fee at the current rate of Sonoma County's commercial linkage fee as indicated in the table above. The increase will be effective upon its adoption, except that any residential project or mixed-use application with a residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the affordable housing in lieu fee in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment. Nature of the Inclusionary Housing In Lieu and Commercial Linkage Fees In the case of California Building Association v. City of San Jose, (2015) 61 Cal. 4th 435, the California Supreme Court upheld the City of San Jose's inclusionary ordinance which requires residential developments in the city that create 20 or more new, additional or modified dwelling units to make available 15% of the for -sale units at an affordable housing cost as specified in the ordinance. The court held that adoption of inclusionary ordinances to mitigate the effect of new market rate housing on affordable housing stock, increase the number of affordable housing units, and distribute affordable units throughout a community to obtain the benefits of economically diverse communities is not an exaction if it imposes lawful, non -confiscatory land use restrictions in the form of price limits. According to the court, such inclusionary ordinances, to be valid, need only be reasonably related to the broad general welfare purposes for which they are enacted. The court held that such ordinances that require development projects to provide a reasonable amount of on-site affordable units, and offer reasonable alternative means of satisfying the ordinance's inclusionary objectives, such through payment of in -lieu fees, land dedication, and off-site rd construction, are valid local and use regulations and not,takings. The court also contrast inclusionary restrictions and fees that impose price controls and other land use restrictions that serve a broader constitutionally permissible purpose or purposes unrelated to the impact of the proposed development from development mitigation fees, which are intended to fund needed public, improvements, the purpose of which is to merely mitigate the effects or impacts of the developments on which the fees are imposed. Consistent with the holding in California Building Association, the Petaluma Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee and Commercial Linkage Fee are not exactions or development impact fees intended to fund public improvements pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code §66000 and following), but rather are part of and implement the City's land use regulations for creating affordable housing. Public Comments The public had an opportunity to comment at the September 27, 2017 City Council workshop and at the March 5, 2018 City Council meeting on the Housing Fees update. A meeting was also scheduled to reach out to stakeholders regarding the proposed changes to Petaluma's housing policies and housing fees. A flyer was sent out to a group of over fifty contacts that have either developed projects in Petaluma; are currently developing projects in Petaluma, or are housing advocates. The notice of the community meeting was also published in the Argus Courier on April 5, 2018. On April 12, 2018, staff, along with the consultants from EPS, hosted a community workshop to receive public input on the affordable housing policies and fee update. Public comments on the Housing policy and Fee update received to date are included in Attachment #4 FINANCIAL IMPACTS Financial Impacts beyond the staff time required to prepare this report and providing public notice are undetermined. The in -lieu fee increase will add additional revenue to the In Lieu Housing Fund if all future developments do not include on-site units in their proposal. According to the nexus study by EPS, as specified in the Administrative Draft Memorandum dated September 19, 2017, the increase in the commercial linkage fee could generate additional revenue of approximately $1,400,000 if all commercially zoned parcels were developed in Petaluma. ATTACHMENTS 1. Resolution Increasing Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fees Payable As Required by Program 4.3 in the City of Petaluma's General Plan 2025, 2015-2023 Housing Element 2. Exhibit A to Resolution Increasing In -Lieu fees 3. Resolution Increasing the Commercial Development Housing Linkage Fees Pursuant to Petaluma Municipal Code section 19.36.040(C) 4. Public Comments Items listed below are large in volume and are not attached to this report, but may be viewed at the following links: 5 ATTACHMENT #1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA INCREASING INCLUSIONARY HOUSING IN LIEU FEES PAYABLE AS REQUIRED BY PROGRAM 4.3 IN THE CITY OF PETALUMA'S GENERAL PLAN 2025,2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT AS ADOPTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 2014-190 N.C.S. AND REPLACING THE HOUSING IN LIEU FEES SET BY RESOLUTION NO. 2003-241 N.C.S. WHEREAS, on December 6, 1982, by Resolution no. 9620 N.C.S., the City Council adopted the Housing Element of the Petaluma General Plan ("1982 Housing Element") setting forth the goals, polices and implementation programs to achieve an adequate supply of housing for all groups; and WHEREAS, Program 2 of the policies for implementing the 1982 Housing Element provided for requiring developers of residential developments with 16 or more units to achieve adequate housing supply for all groups by one of several methods, including an lieu fee related to the cost of providing housing to write down land costs or acquire housing for low and moderate - income housing in Petaluma; and WHEREAS, on August 20, 1984, by adoption of Resolution no. 84-199 N.C.S., the City Council established a schedule of in lieu fees to implement Program 2 of the 1982 Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on December 16, 2002, by Resolution no. 2002-198 N.C.S. the City Council adopted the Housing Element of the Petaluma General Plan ("2002 Housing Element") setting the goals, policies and implementation programs to achieve an adequate supply of housing units and programs for all groups; and WHEREAS, Program 4.4 of the 2002 Housing Element provided for requiring residential projects of five or more units to contribute to the provision of below-market rate housing by providing affordable units on site, dedicating a portion of the project site, making an in -lieu payment to the City's housing fund, or using alternative methods; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 2003, by Resolution No. 2003-241 N.C.S., the City Council established an in -lieu fee schedule for those developers who chose to make an in- lieu; payment into the City's housing fund; and 7 WHEREAS, on May 19, 2008, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2008-085 N.C.S., adopting the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 ("General Plan"), which contained the City's then -existing housing element; and WHEREAS, on June 15, 2009, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2009-094 N.C.S., adopting the Petaluma 2009-2014 Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2014-190 N.C.S., adopting the Petaluma 2015-2023 Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2015, the state Housing and Community Development Department ("HCD") approved the 2015-2023 Housing Element as approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2015 the City Council approved Resolution No. 2015-171 N.C.S., adopting a First Amendment to the 2015-2023 Housing Element Program 4.3 to ensure consistency between the City's Housing Element and the holding in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles, (2009) 175 CA 41h 1396, which held that the Costa - Hawkins Act, Civil Code section 1954.53(a), prohibits local agencies from requiring on-site inclusionary housing in rental housing developments; and WHEREAS, recent amendments to the state Planning and Zoning Law, which is codified in Government Code section 65000 and following ("Planning Law") pursuant to AB -1505, which took effect January 1, 2018 and is codified in Government Code sections 65850 and 65850.1, permit cities to adopt ordinances requiring inclusion of affordable residential units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income households in rental housing developments, and require that such ordinances provide alternate means of compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in -lieu fees, land dedication, off-site construction, or acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units, and grant HCD the authority to review certain such ordinances that require more than 15 percent of the total number of units in a residential rental development to be affordable to households earning 80 percent or less of area median income; and WHEREAS, the 2015-2023 Housing Element as amended identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs and states goals and policies, and quantifies objectives and special programs for the reservation, improvement and development of housing in the City from 2015 through 2023; and WHEREAS, Policy 4.2 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element currently provides for assigning a share of the responsibility for providing affordable housing to the developers of market -rate housing and non-residential projects; and WHEREAS, Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element currently provides for continuing to require residential projects of five or more units to contribute to provision of below-market rate housing by: dedicating 15% of the units on-site or a portion of the project site or property to the City or a non-profit organization for use as affordable housing; encouraging developers of projects within a half -mile radius of the planned Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit District ("SMART") stations to provide at least 15 percent of the units in a rental housing project at rents affordable to very low and low income households for a minimum period of 30 years; requiring developers of for sale projects within a half -mile radius of the planned SMART stations to provide at least 15% of the units at prices affordable to low and moderate income households for a minimum period of 30 years; or by making an in lieu payment to the City's housing fund; or by using alternative methods to meet the intent of the inclusionary requirement, subject to approval by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City has 2,161 housing units in various stages of development but only 75 of the units are affordable in accordance with the City's inclusionary housing requirements; and WHEREAS, in -lieu fees collected by the City in accordance with Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element are insufficient to fund construction of sufficient numbers of affordable housing units to meet the City's projected housing needs; and WHEREAS, the City contracted with Economic and Planning Systems ("EPS") to complete studies ("EPS Studies") to identify funds the City could lawfully recover from inclusionary housing in lieu fees and to provide information and analysis in support of potential updates to the City's affordable housing fees; and, WHEREAS, at a City Council workshop on September 25, 2017, EPS gave an Affordable Housing Fees presentation ("Presentation"), presented an administrative draft memorandum ("Memorandum"), and a draft Ownership Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee report, a draft Nexus -Based Affordable Housing Fee Analysis for Ownership Housing report, a draft Nexus -Based Affordable Housing Fee Analysis for Rental Housing report, and a draft Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Study report all dated August 29, 2017 and all referred to as the "Reports," and WHEREAS, the Presentation, Memorandum and the Reports detailed a gap between market prices of housing in the City and prices affordable to very low, low, and moderate - income households, and included a proposed per square foot in lieu fee for rental and ownership projects based on the affordability gap; and WHEREAS, the City Council hereby approves the Presentation, Memorandum and the Reports, which are by this reference hereby made a part of this resolution; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to approve an inclusionary housing ordinance in accordance with the authority in AB -1505 to require on-site inclusionary housing units as part of residential housing development projects, both homeownership and rental, in the City to mitigate the effect of new market rate housing on the .City's stock of affordable housing, we to increase the number of affordable units in the city, and to distribute the affordable units throughout the city to obtain the benefits of economically diverse communities and generally to ensure the provision of affordable housing to help address the City's Regional Housing Need Allocation and the acute housing crisis in Sonoma County, and to provide for alterative means of compliance as AB -1505 requires; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to increase the City's Inclusionary Housing In -Lieu fee in accordance the EPS Presentation, the Memorandum, and the Reports, to apply to developers of residential housing that the Council permits to make a payment in -lieu of providing affordable housing on site to more closely approach developers' fair -share responsibility toward contributing to implementing the City's 2015-2023 Housing Element policies and programs; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the holding of the California Supreme Court in California Building Association v. City of San Jose, (2015) 61 Cal. 4" 435, where a city adopts an inclusionary ordinance to mitigate the effect of new market rate housing on the City's stock of affordable housing, to increase the number of affordable units in the city, and to distribute the affordable units throughout the city to obtain the benefits of economically diverse communities, such an ordinance is not an exaction, if it imposes lawful, non -confiscatory land use restrictions in the form of price limits; and WHEREAS, under California Building Association, inclusionary ordinances, to be valid, need only be reasonably related to the broad general welfare purposes for which they are enacted, and such inclusionary housing ordinances that require residential projects to provide a reasonable amount of on-site affordable units, and offer reasonable alternative means of satisfying the ordinance's inclusionary objectives, such as payment of in -lieu fees, land dedication, and off-site construction are valid local land use regulations and not takings; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this resolution and the inclusionary housing in - lieu, fee it establishes is a valid local land use regulation and does not effect a taking in accordance with California Building Association; and WHEREAS, this resolution and the inclusionary housing in -lieu fee it establishes is exempt from environmental review under the general rule in Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines because CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this resolution and the inclusionary housing in - lieu fee it establishes creates changes in the physical environment, or results in any changes to the General Plan or Implementing Zoning Ordinance land use policies, and any development that 10 occurs in the future subject to such standards will undergo an independent analysis pursuant to the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, this resolution and the inclusionary housing in -lieu fee it establishes is statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15283 of the CEQA Guidelines because this resolution and the inclusionary housing in lieu fee reflect determinations by the City regarding the need to adequately provide for the City's share of regional housing needs pursuant to Government Code section 65584; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Petaluma as follows: 1. The above recitals are hereby declared to be true and correct and are incorporated into this resolution as findings of the City Council of the City of Petaluma. 2. The in lieu inclusionary housing fee schedule attached to and hereby made a part of this resolution as Exhibit A shall apply to payments to the City's housing fund which the City Council permits developers to make in lieu of provision of on-site affordable housing in accordance with Policy 4.2 and Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element. 3. In lieu fees authorized pursuant to this resolution shall be paid and collected on behalf of the City at the time escrow closes on purchase of for -sale residential units, and at the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for rental units. 4. The in lieu inclusionary housing fees established pursuant to Resolution no. 2003-241 and any other previously -enacted in lieu inclusionary housing fees are hereby repealed on the date this resolution takes effect. 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this resolution is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this resolution and each and all provisions thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more of said provisions be declared unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid. 6. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption, except that any residential project or mixed-use application with a residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the affordable housing in lieu fee in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment. 11 ATTACHMENT #2 EXHIBIT A IN LIEU HOUSING FEES (5 units or more -based on square footage) see Tables below: Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft. Fee Sq. Ft Fee 640 $6,477 960 $9,715 1280 $12,954 1600 $16,192 1920 $19,430 650 $6,578 970 $9,816 1290' $13,055 1610,; ' $16,293 1930 $19,532 660 $6,679 980 $9,918 1300 $13,156 1620; $16,394 1940 $19,633 670 $6,780 990 $10,019 1310 $13,257 1630 $16,496 1950 $19,734 680 $6,882 1000 $10,120 1320 $13,358 1640 $16,597 1960 $19,835 690 $6,983 1010 $10,221 1330' $13,460 1650 $16,698 1970 $19,936 700 $7,084 1020 $10,322 1340 $13,561 1660 $16,799 1980 $20,038 710 $7,185 1030 $10,424 1350 $13,662 1670 $16,900 1990 $20,139 720 $7,286 1040 $10,525 1360 $13,763 1680 $17,002 2000 $20,240 730 $7,388 1050 $10,626 1370 $13,864 1690 $17,103 2010 $20,341 740 $7,489 1060 $10,727 1380 $13,966 1700' $17,204 2020 $20,442 750 $7,590 1070 $10,828 1390' $14,067 1710 $17,305 2030 $20,544 760 $7,691 1080 $10,930 1400 $14,168 1720 $17,406 2040 $20,645 770 $7,792 1090 $11,031 1410. $14,269 1730 $17,508 2050. $20,746 780 $7,894. 1100 $11,132 1420' $14,370 1740' $17,609 2060 $20,847 790 $7,995 1110 $11,233 1430` $14,472 1750 " $17,710 2070 $20,948 800' $8,096 1120 $11,334 1440' $14,573 1760' $1.7,811 2080 $21,050 810 $8,197 1130 $11,436 1450 $14,674 1770 $17,912 2090 $21,151 820', $8,298 1140 $11,537 1460- $14,775 1780 $18,014 2100 $21,252 830 $8,400 1150 $11,638 1470 $14,876 1790 $18,115 2110 $21,353 840 $8,501 1160 $11,739 1480 $14,978 1800' $18,216 2120 $21,454 850 $8,602 1170 $11,840 1490' $15,079 1810 $18,317 2130 $21,556 860' $8,703 1180 $11,942 1500;, $15,180 1820 $18,418 2140 $21,657 870 $8,804 1190' $12,043 1510 $15,281 1830 $18,520 2150 $21,758 880' $8,906 1200 $12,144 1520; $15,382 1840'? $18,621 2160 $21,859 890' $9,007 1210 $12,245 1530' $15,484 1850' $18,722 2170 $21,960 900 $9,108 1220 $12,346 1540, $15,585 -1860 $18,823 2180 $22,062 910 $9,209 1230 $12,448 1550' $15,686 1870 $18,924 2190 $22,163 920 $9,310 1240 $12,549 1560, $15,787 1880 $19,026 2200 $22,264 930 $9,412 1250 $12,650 1570 $15,888 1890 $19,127 2210 $22,365 940' $9,513 1260 $12,751 1580 $15,990 1900 $19,228 2220 $22,466 950 $9,614 1270 $12,852 1590, $16,091 1910' $19,329 1 2230 1 $22,568 12 Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft Fee Sq. Ft. Fee Sq. Ft Fee 2240 $22,669 2560 $25,907 2880 $29,146 3200 $32,384 3520 $35,622 2250 $22,770 2570 $26,008 2890 $29,247 3210' $32,485 3530 $35,724 2260 $22,871 2580 $26,110 2900' $29,348 3220 $32,586 3540 $35,825 2270 $22,972 2590' $26,211 2910 $29,449 3230 $32,688 3550 $35,926 2280 $23,074 2600 $26,312 2920 $29,550 3240 $32,789 3560 $36,027 2290 $23,175 2610 $26,413 2930 $29,652 3250 $32,890 3570 $36,128 2300 $23,276 2620 $26,514 2940 $29,753 3260 $32,991 3580 $36,230 2310` $23,377 2630 $26,616 2950 $29,854 3270 $33,092 3590 $36,331 2320 $23,478 2640 $26,717 2960 $29,955 3280 $33,194 3600 $36,432 2330 $23,580 2650 $26,818 2970 $30,056 3290' $33,295 3610 $36,533 2340 ` $23,681 2660 $26,919 2980 $30,158 3300 $33,396 3620 $36,634 2350' $23,782 2670 $27,020 2990' $30,259 3310 $33,497 3630 $36,736 2360 ` $23,883 2680' $27,122 3000 i $30,360 3320 $33,598 3640 $36,837 2370 $23,984 2690 $27,223 3010 $30,461 3330 $33,700 3650 $36,938 2380 $24,086 2700 $27,324 3020 $30,562 3340 $33,801 3660 $37,039 2390 $24,187 2710 $27,425 3030: $30,664 3350 - $33,902 3670 $37,140 2400 $24,288 2720 $27,526 3040. $30,765 3360 $34,003 3680 $37,242 2410' $24,389 2730 $27,628 3050 $30,866 3370! $34,104 3690 $37,343 2420 $24,490 2740 $27,729 3060 $30,967 3380 $34,206 3700 $37,444 2430 $24,592 2750 $27,830 3070 $31,068 3390 $34,307 3710 $37,545 2440' $24,693 2760' $27,931 '3080 $31,170 3400 $34,408 3720 $37,646 2450 $24,794 2770 ' $28,032 3090_` $31,271 3410 $34,509 3730 $37,748 2460 $24,895 2780 $28,134 3100 $31,372 3420 $34,610 3740 $37,849 2470' $24,996 2790' $28,235 3110;1 $31,473 3430 $34,712 3750 $37,950 2480 $25,098 2800 $28,336 3120 $31,574 3440 $34,813 3760 $38,051 2490 $25,199 2810 $28,437 3130` $31,676 3450 ` $34,914 3770 $38,152 2500 $25,300 2820 $28,538 3140 $31,777 3460 $35,015 3780 $38,254 2510 $25,401 2830' $28,640 3150 $31,878 3470 $35,116 3790 $38,355 2520 $25,502 2840 $28,741 3160 $31,979 3480 .$35,218 3800 $38,456 2530 $25,604 2850 $28,842 3170' $32,080 3490 i $35,319 3810 $38,557 2540 $25,705 2860 $28,943 3180 $32,182 3500 % $35,420 3820 $38,658 2550 $25,806 1 2870' $29,044 3190` $32,283 3510 $35,521 1 3830 $38,760 13 ATTACHMENT #3 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA INCREASING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT HOUSING LINKAGE FEES FOR NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS PURSUANT TO PETALUMA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 19.36.040(C) AND REPLACING THE COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEES SET BY RESOLUTION NO. 2011-071 N.C.S. WHEREAS, on December 15, 2003, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2171 N.C.S. implementing a commercial linkage fee for nonresidential projects to mitigate the impact of nonresidential development on the need for affordable housing; and WHEREAS, on May 2, 2011 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2403 .amending the commercial linkage fee to ensure that it continues to make an adequate financial contribution from new and expanded nonresidential development to the City's affordable housing programs; and WHEREAS, the City's commercial linkage fee program, which is currently codified in Chapter 19.36 entitled "Commercial Development Housing Linkage Fee" ("Housing Linkage Fee") of the Petaluma Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Housing Linkage Fee chapter in the Municipal Code provides in Section 19.36.010 that the purpose of the chapter is to implement the goals and objectives of the general plan housing element of the City; mitigate housing impacts caused by new, changed and expanded nonresidential development in the City, and provide affordable housing to people who earn between 80 and 100 percent of area median income; and WHEREAS, the Housing Linkage Fee chapter includes in Section 19.36.020 various findings of the City Council, including findings that the purposes of the chapter include establishing a feasible means by which developers of nonresidential development projects assist in increasing the supply of low and moderate income housing and increasing the supply of housing in proximity to employment centers, and that the chapter is intended 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 requirements on providing affordable housing opportunities and the economic feasibility of imposing such requirements; and WHEREAS, the Housing Linkage Fee chapter in Section 19.36.040 provides that Housing Linkage Fees shall be established from time to time by resolution of the City Council, and that such fees shall be adjusted annually using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index 20 City Average; and 14 WHEREAS, the Housing Linkage Fee chapter in Section 19.36.050 provides that developers of projects subject to Housing Linkage Fees may apply to receive a credit against the fees or a portion thereof if they provide affordable housing through some other means agreeable to the City; and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2008, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2008-085 N.C.S., adopting the City of Petaluma General Plan 2025 ("General Plan"), which contained the City's then -existing housing element; and WHEREAS, on June 15, 2009, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2009-094 N.C.S., adopting the Petaluma 2009-2014 Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on December 1, 2014, the City Council approved Resolution No. 2014-190 N.C.S., adopting the Petaluma 2015-2023 Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on January 23, 2015, the state Housing and Community Development Department ("HCD") approved the 2015-2023 Housing Element as approved by the City Council; and WHEREAS, on November 2, 2015 the City Council approved Resolution No. 2015-171 N.C.S., adopting a First Amendment to the 2015-2023 Housing Element Program 4.3 to ensure consistency between the City's Housing Element and the holding in Palmer/Sixth Street Properties, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles, (2009) 175 CA 0 1396, which held that the Costa - Hawkins Act, Civil Code section 1954.53(a), prohibits local agencies from requiring ori -site inclusionary housing in rental housing developments; and . WHEREAS, recent amendments to the state Planning and Zoning Law, which is codified in Government Code section 65000 and following ("Planning Law") pursuant to AB -1505, which took effect January 1, 2018 and is codified in Government Code sections 65850 and 65850.1, permit cities to adopt ordinances requiring inclusion of affordable residential units for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income households in rental housing developments, and require that such ordinances provide alternate means of compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in -lieu fees, land dedication, off-site construction, or acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units, and grant HCD the authority to review certain such ordinances that require more than 15 percent of the total number of units in a residential rental development to be affordable to households earning 80 percent or less of area median income; and. WHEREAS, the 2015-2023 Housing Element as amended identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs and states goals and policies, and quantifies objectives and special programs for the reservation, improvement and development of housing in the City from 2015 through 2023; and 15 WHEREAS, Policy 4.2 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element currently provides for assigning a share of the responsibility for providing affordable housing to the developers of market -rate housing and non-residential projects; and WHEREAS, Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element currently provides for continuing to require residential projects of five or more units to contribute to provision of below-market rate housing by: dedicating 15% of the units on-site or a portion of the project site or property to the City or a non-profit organization for use as affordable housing; encouraging developers of projects within a half -mile radius of the planned Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit District ("SMART") stations to provide at least 15 percent of the units in a rental housing project at rents affordable to very low and low income households for a minimum period of 30 years; requiring developers of for sale projects within a half -mile radius of the planned SMART stations to provide at least 15% of the units at prices affordable to low and moderate income households for a minimum period of 30 years; or by making an in lieu payment to the City's housing fund; or by using alternative methods to meet the intent of the inclusionary requirement, subject to approval by the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City has 2,161 housing units in various stages of development but only 75 of the units are affordable in accordance with the City's inclusionary housing requirements; and WHEREAS, in -lieu fees collected by the City in accordance with Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element are insufficient to fund construction of sufficient numbers of affordable housing units to meet the City's projected housing needs; and WHEREAS, the City contracted with Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) to complete studies ("EPS Studies") to identify funds the City could lawfully recover from inclusionary housing in lieu fees and to provide information and analysis in support of potential updates to the City's affordable housing fees; and, WHEREAS, at a City Council workshop on September 25, 2017, EPS gave an Affordable Housing Fees presentation ("Presentation"), presented an administrative draft memorandum ("Memorandum"), and a draft Ownership Inclusionary Housing In Lieu Fee report, a draft Nexus -Based Affordable Housing Fee Analysis for Ownership Housing report, a draft Nexus -Based Affordable Housing Fee Analysis for Rental Housing report, and a draft Commercial Linkage Fee Nexus Study report all dated August 29, 2017 and all referred to as the "Reports," and WHEREAS, the Presentation, Memorandum and the Reports, detailed a gap between market prices of housing in the City and prices affordable to very low, low, and moderate - income households, and included a proposed per square foot in lieu fee for rental and ownership projects based on the affordability gap; and 16 WHEREAS, the City Council hereby approves the Presentation, Memorandum and the Reports, which are by this reference hereby made a part of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adopt updated Commercial Linkage Fees for nonresidential development projects as authorized by section 19.36.040(C) of the Municipal Code such that the fees do not exceed the amounts needed to mitigate the actual affordable housing impacts attributable to the nonresidential development projects to which the fees relate, as determined by the EPS report, and so that such projects increase the supply of low and moderate income housing and housing in proximity to employment centers in the City; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the holding of the California Supreme Court in California Building Association v. City of San Jose, (2015) 61 Cal. 4th 435, where a city adopts an inclusionary ordinance to mitigate the effects of development on the City's stock of affordable housing, and to increase the number of affordable units in the city, and to distribute the affordable units throughout the city to obtain the benefits of economically diverse communities, such an ordinance is a valid local land use regulation and not a taking if it is reasonably related to the broad general welfare purposes for which it is enacted, and offers reasonable alternative means of satisfying the ordinance's inclusionary objectives; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this resolution and the Housing Linkage fee it establishes is a valid local land use regulation and does not effect a taking in accordance with California Building Association; and WHEREAS, this resolution and the Housing Linkage Fees it establishes are exempt from environmental review under the general rule Section 150610)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines because CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment, and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this resolution and the Housing Linkage Fees it establishes creates changes in the physical environment, or results in any changes to the General Plan or Implementing Zoning Ordinance land use policies, and any development that occurs in the future subject to such standards will undergo an independent analysis pursuant to the requirements of CEQA; and WHEREAS, this resolution and the inclusionary Housing Linkage Fees it establishes is statutorily exempt pursuant to Section 15283 of the CEQA Guidelines because this resolution and the Housing Linkage Fees reflect determinations by the City regarding the need to adequately provide for the City's share of regional housing needs pursuant to Government Code section 65584; 17 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Petaluma as follows: 1. The above recitals are hereby declared to be true and correct and are incorporated into the resolution as findings of the City Council of the City of Petaluma. 2. The following Housing Linkage Fees shall apply to non-residential projects subject to this resolution in accordance with Policy 4.2 and Program 4.3 of the 2015-2023 Housing Element: 3. Housing Linkage Fees authorized pursuant to this resolution shall be paid and collected on behalf of the City at the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. The Housing Linkage Fees established pursuant to Resolution No. 2011-071 N.C.S. and any other previously -enacted commercial development Housing Linkage Fees are hereby repealed on the date this resolution takes effect. 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this resolution is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this resolution and each and all provisions thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more of said provisions be declared unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid. 6. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption, except that any non- residential project or mixed use application with a non-residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the Housing Linkage Fees in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment. 18 Office/Commercial Retail Industrial $2.75/ s.f. $4.75/s.f. $2.84/s.f. 3. Housing Linkage Fees authorized pursuant to this resolution shall be paid and collected on behalf of the City at the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 4. The Housing Linkage Fees established pursuant to Resolution No. 2011-071 N.C.S. and any other previously -enacted commercial development Housing Linkage Fees are hereby repealed on the date this resolution takes effect. 5. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this resolution is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction or preempted by state legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this resolution and each and all provisions thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more of said provisions be declared unconstitutional, unlawful, or otherwise invalid. 6. This resolution shall become effective upon its adoption, except that any non- residential project or mixed use application with a non-residential component that is deemed complete by the Planning Division prior to September 1, 2018 shall have the option of paying the Housing Linkage Fees in effect and otherwise applicable to the project at the time of payment. 18 ATTACHMENT #4 PUBLIC COMMENTS: September 27, 2017 Workshop: Letter from Basin Street (attached) People who spoke during Public Comment period: 1. Sean Flannery of Basin Street Properties — Any fee increase will make it more unaffordable and discourage investment in housing. It will also discourage development in the City. 2. George Baker — Architect since 1982. Afforeable housing is a crisis in Petaluma and the free market is not working. 20% inclusionary requirement for on-site and 34% for paying an in lieu fee. The nexus study is pretty thorough but it is implementing too low of a fee which is only kicking the can down the road. 3. Gabriela Orantes — Supports 24% inclusionary requirement. Economic Development report for 2017 stated that 60% of Petaluma residents make less than $100,000, so a $2,200 — 1 bed apartment or even more for a 2 bedroom apartment is out of range for households with 2 minimum income average earners who make less than $65,000. There is a lack of availability of affordable rentals. 4. Cynthia Clarkson - Thank you for making this a priority and agrees about the 24% requirement for on-site and off site. She is a Hospice nurse and they are losing staff who can't afford to live in Petaluma. If we don't do anything about affordable housing, we will lose our young people and we should increase fees on development. March 5, 2018 City Council meeting: No public comments April 12 Community Workshop: No public comments. Many questions on the process. 19 Document Received After Agenda Distribution - Agenda Item # 1.A BASINSTREET PRO P r R T 1 r 5 tel 707 795 - 4477 fax 707 795 - 6283 September 25, 2017 City of Petaluma 11 English Street Petaluma, CA .94952 Re: City Council Workshop to Discuss Housing Fees Update and the Impact Fee Nexus Study Dean Mayor Glass and Members of the City Council: We are writing to express serious concerns about the'suggestion in the staff report for the above workshop that the City of Petaluma consider dramatically increasing current housing impact fees even though current fees are consistent with other jurisdictions in Sonoma County. Initially, we note that the prior impact fee study that was relied upon looked at all of the City impact fees together against the backdrop of the General Plan. The total impact fees for a single family residential unit in Petaluma, excluding the affordable housing impact fee, currently exceeds $41,000. Similarly, the total impact fees for a multi -family unit in Petaluma, excluding the affordable housing impact fee, exceeds $28,000. Similarly, the EPS report compares housing fees in Petaluma to housing fees in other jurisdictions without comparing overall impact fee rates. While helpful, such a comparison does not give the decision makers any information on how total impact fees in Petaluma compare with the other jurisdictions. Such information is crucial in determining whether Petaluma's impact fee structure as a whole is competitive with the other jurisdictions' impact fee structures. Lastly, it should be recognized that the "high" fee recommended as a starting point in the staff report is from outside Petaluma (Walnut Creek), and is a significant outlier that skews the average rates reflected in'the EPS report, From a market perspective, the housing market is finally back on its feet after many years of stagnation: Raising fees at this time runs a serious risk of making 1383 N. MoDowell Blvd„ Suite 220 Petaluma, CA 94954 W W W.BASIN-STREFT.COM 20 September 25, 2017 Page BASINSTREET P R 0 P E RTJ E S marginal housing projects infeasible, including previously approved projects for which owners and lenders have relied upon the existing impact fee structure. While providing more affordable housing is a laudable goal, reducing new housing product coming to the market by increasing fees is not the answer. Such risks are acknowledged in the EPS report and supporting documentation. EPS recommends no increase in the commercial linkage fee, and, at most, "marginally higher fees" with respect to rental/for-sale housing (see Attachment #2, "Administrative Draft Memorandum", Key Finding #2). As one of the founding board members of the Housing Land Trust of Sonoma County, I know that affordable housing is an important issue involving many complex factors. We ask that you take your time in addressing this important issue, and that you take into account the suppressive nature that raising fees has on the construction of new homes in Petaluma. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Paul Andronico Legal Counsel 21