Loading...
.01 ABAG/MTC Sustainable Communities Strategy OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ,•' CTTY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 C U P E RT I N O (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • plannin�Qcupertino.ort� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. � Agenda Date: February 8, 2011 SUMMARY ABAG/ MTC Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) - Overview of the Subregion Regional Housing Needs Allocation (Sub RHNA) process. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the information presented. The City Council will make the final decision on whether to join the Sub RHNA based on information received from the Santa Clara County City Manager's Association, the Santa Clara County Cities Association and whether a sufficient amount of contiguous jurisdictions choose to participate. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION Planning for affordable housing in the Bay Area is one of the essential tasks of sustainable development. The process of setting goals for housing growth is a necessary precursor to the Housing Element process, this process is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determines housing demand for each region of the state and provides the allocations .to the Council of Governments (COGs). It is the responsibility of each COG to in turn distribute the housing allocations among its jurisdictions. In the San Francisco Bay Area, the allocation distribution process is the responsibility of the Association of Bay Area Governments, or ABAG. The COG must distribute the allocation in accordance with the California Government Code and must do so through a fair and open public process. The process to update the RHNA will begin in 2011: • The Housing Methodology Committee for the region will be appointed in January 2011. Meetings will continue through September 2011. At the Santa Clara County level, the RHNA Methodology Committee will include 2 staff from cities (San Jose and Morgan Hill) and 2 alternates (Cupertino and Sunnyvale), and a staff inember from Santa Clara County. • Cities must determine whether they want to form a Sub RHNA group by March 16, 2011. If so, they must follow the same timeline for formulation as the Methodology Committee. • Local jurisdictions will provide input prior to the adoption of the RHNA methodology by September 2011. � 1-1 February 8, 2011 � Subregion Regional Housing Needs Allocation (Sub RHNA) Page 2 • The final housing numbers for the region will be issued by the State Departrnent of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to ABAG by September 2011. • The Draft RHNA will be released by ABAG by spring 2012. • ABAG will adopt the Final RHNA by the end of summer 2012. • Local governments will address the next round of RHNA in their next Housing Element update (2014-2022). • The distribution of housing needs will then inform the Detailed SCS Scenarios. SUB RHNA In 2004, Assembly Bill 2158 was signed into effect by the Governor. AB 2175 added Government Code Section 65584.03 to describe policy objectives of the allocation exercise, make the RHNA process more transparent and to allow contiguous local governments to form a subregion to receive and distribute its share of the regional housing need. The California Government Code specifies the method to be used to calculate the subregiori s share of the RHNA and gives the subregion the responsibility to create its own allocation methodology. This process allows the subregion to determine each jurisdictiori s share of the RHNA locally and recognize the uniqueness of each community. Should a subregion fail to develop a methodology, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the local COG, will distribute the final RHNA numbers to each jurisdiction based upon its methodology. SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUB RHNA On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, the Santa Clara Association of Planning Officials (SCCAPO) . met. to discuss the possibility of forming a subregion for the purposes of distributing the RHNA to participating jurisdictions in Santa Clara County. After a discussion of potential pros and cons (see Table 1 below), SCCAPO decided to recommend to the Santa Clara County City/County Manager's Association (SCCCMA) should become the forum to discuss the proposed ABAG methodology to provide a single Santa Clara County voice at the Housing Methodology Committee meetings. This cooperation and collaboration would: • Result in the same methodology outcome since SCCAPO did not express interest in creating its own methodology • Utilize existing forums for communication � • Maintain the ability of contiguous jurisdictions to trade RHNA numbers • Facilitate future collaboration around a single Housing Element consultant, shared analysis and policies, and potentially more efficient HCD review • Foster discussions of future structural arrangements to facilitate a potential Santa Clara subregion in eight years C:\Documents and Settings\veraG\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\BXI2IHAD\Sub RHNA UpdatePC (2).doc . �_2 February 8, 2011 Subregion Regional Housing Needs Allocation (Sub RHNA) Page 3 � PROS AND CONS OF SUB RHNA PROCESS In the table below are the pros and cons of forming a subregion under Section of 65584.03 of the California Government Code. Table 1 Pros Cons • More local control/self- • Subregion is responsible and accountable for determination allocation and distribution (can't blame ABAG) • Better placement of housing • Time and staff resource concerns to complete new and protection of community methodology (will not be an issue if we can use the character ABAG RHNA allocation as a base for the subregion) • Opportunity for the County to • Need to determine structure and process for show leadership development of inethodology, including stakeholder involvement • Opportunity to strengthen • Will need some allocation of money to begin Planning Officials preliminary analysis/ outreach as. necessary (will organization (SCCAPO) as reduce amount necessary in later phases). policy advisory body to City Managers' Association and Cities Association . • More flexibility to negotiate • Cities that want to trade housing with other cities and trade units may have to allocate resources (infrastructure, services) and/ or funding • Foster collaboration and • Some of these items can be done without a coordination subregion (e.g., trades, purchasing sewer capacity/water supply) (although these trades have severe constraints that zuould not apply in a subregion) • HCD may offer consistent and • Could strain relationships between cities in the timely review of all of the County County's Housing Elements � a • Could lead to reduced costs if • A lot of work and may still end up with same cities decide to use the same ABAG methodology and/ or allocation. consultant (in the second phase) to prepare housing elements, or share resources/coordinate on policies/ etc. • Could lead to grants for • Cari t promise outcome C:\Documents and Settings\veraG\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\BXI2IHAD\Sub RHNA UpdatePC (2).doc 1-3 February 8, 2011 Subregion Regional Housing Needs Allocation (Sub RHNA) Page 4 affordable housing outreach and education. • Not all cities might participate • Safety net - use ABAG • Might fail RHNA individually. NEXT STEPS The CMA and SCCCA will be reviewing the Sub RHNA issue in February 2011 and will provide input which will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration. The Planning Commission will receive updates on the process. Even if a Sub RHNA is not formed, it appears that most of the Santa Clara County cities will make a pledge to collaborate during the RHNA allocation and Housing Element process. This collaboration could come in the form of hiring a consultant to prepare the Housing Elements for all the Santa Clara Couniy jurisdictions, transferring of RHNA allocations, etc. Re�ional Housin�Needs Allocation �RHNA� � January 2011: Appointment of RHNA Methodology Committee. • March 16, 2011: Final decision on whether to participate in Sub RHNA process. • February-August 2011: Participation and review of housing methodology (ABAG and/or subregional), including local agency input. Input will be sought from the Planning Commission, and City Council, and the community through the hearing processes. Prepared by: Vera Gil, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Developmen� Attachments: 1. ABAG/ MTC -SCS staff report to the Planning Commission dated January 25, 2011 2. Timeline for the SCS, RTP and RHNA �rocess. C:\Documents and Settings\veraG\Local Seitings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\BXI2IHAD\Sub RHNA UpdatePC (2).doc 1-4 Attachment 1 OFFICE OF COMMUIVITY DEVELOPMEN'I � � � CTTY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 C U P E RT I N O (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planningflcupertino.org PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. � Agenda Date: Tanuary 25, 2011 SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to provide the Commission with an overview of the SCS process to date. This report also describes the relationship between Senate Bill 375 and the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) and the effect of the law on local governments as well as the Bay Area as a region. The report is based on information provided by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The SCS does not alter the authority of jurisdictions over local Iand use and development decisions. PURPOSE AND APPROACH Senate Bil� 375 became law in 2008 and is considered landmark legislation for California relative to land use, transportation and environmental plarming. It calls for the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in all metropolitan regions in California. Within the Bay Area, the law gives joint responsibility for the SCS to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). The SCS integrates several existing planning processes and is required to accomplish the following objectives: 1. Provide a new 25-year land use strategy for the Bay Area that is realistic and identifies areas to accommodate all of the region s population, including all incorne groups; 2. Forecast a land use pattern, which when integrated with the transportation system, reduces greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks and is measured against our regional target established by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). �, , The SCS is a land use strategy required to be included as part of the Bay Area s 25-year R�gional Transportation Plan (RTP). By federal law, the RTP rnust be internally consistent. Therefore, the over $200 billion dollars of transportation investment typically included in the RTP must align with and support the SCS land-use pattern. SB 375 also requires that an updated eight- year regional housing need allocation (RHNA) prepared by ABAG is consistent with the SCS. The SCS, RTP and RHNA will be adopted simultaneously in early 2013 (see Attachment 1- SCS Schedule). � 1-5 January 25, 2011 Sustainable Communities Strategies Update Page 2 The primary goal is to build a Bay Area which continues to thrive and prosper under the changing circumstances of the twenty-first century. A successful SCS wi11: • Recognize and support compact walkable places where residents and workers have access to services and amenities to meet their day-to-day needs; • Reduce long commutes and decrease reliance that increases energy independence and decreases the region's carbon consumption; • Support complete communities which remain livable and affordable for all segments of the population, maintaining the Bay Area as an attractive place to reside, start or continue a business, and create jobs. . • Support a sustainable transportation system and reduce the need for expensive highway and transit expansions, freeing up resources for other more productive public investments; • Provide increased accessibility and affordability to our most vulnerable populations; • Conserve water and decrease our dependence on imported food stocks and their high � transport costs. � � In recognition of these other goals, ABAG and MTC will adopt performance targets and � indicators that will help ir�form decisions about land use patterns and transportation investments. These targets and indicators will apply to the SCS and the RTP. The targets and indicators are being developed by the Performance Targets and Indicators Ad Hoc Committee of the Regional Advisory Working Group (RAWG), which includes local planning and transportation staff, non-profit organizations, and business and developers' organizations. The targets are scheduled for adoption early 2011 and the indicators wi.11 be adopted in spring 2011. BUILDING ON EXISTING EFFORTS In many respects the SCS builds upon existing efforts in many Bay Area communities to encourage more focused and compact growth while recognizing the unique characteristics and differences of the region's many varied communities. FOCUS Priority Development Areas (PDAs) are locally-identified and regionally adopted infill development opportunity areas near transit. Cupertino does not currently have a PDA. While PDAs are only three percent of the regiori s land area, local governments have indicated that based upon existing plans, resources, and incentives, the PDAs can collectively accrammodate over fiffy percent of the Bay Area's housing needs through 2035. The current RTP allocates an average of $60 million a year to PDA incentive-related funding. Future RTPs, consistent with the SCS, will be structured to provide policies and funding that is supportive of PDAs and potentially other opportunity areas for sustainable development in the region. PARTNERSHIPS To be successful, the SCS will require a partnership among regional agencies, local jurisdictions, Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs), transit agencies, and other regional stakeholders. 1-6 January 25, 2011 Sustainable Communities Strategies Update Page 3 MTC and ABAG are engaged in an intense information exchange with County-Corridors Working Groups throughout the Bay Area. Cupertino's Director of Community Development is working with the Santa Clara County Association of Planning Officials (SCCAPO), primarily composed of planning directors from each city and from Santa Clara County, to address these issues. Other City staff inembers are involved in working groups of planners and transportation officials coordinated by and supported technically by the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The City/County Managers Association and the Santa Clara County Cities Association are also active in reviewing key policy actions related to the SCS. In addition to the County-Corridor Working Groups, a Regional Advisory Working Group (RAWG), composed of local government representatives and key stakeholders throughout the region, provides technical oversight at the , regional level. The Director of Community Development is a participant in those meetings. PROCESS - SCS SCENARIOS The final SCS will be the product of an interactive process that includes a sequence of growth and supportive transportation scenarios. Starting with an Initial Vision Scenario (February 2011), followed by more detailed SCS scenarios that refine the initial vision scenario (Spring and Fa112011), and final draft (early 2012). Initial Vision Scenario ABAG and MTC will release an Initial Vision Scenario in February 2011 based in large part on input from local jurisdictions through the county/corridor engagement process and information collected by December 2010. The Vision Scenario will encompass an initial identification of places, policies and strategies for long-term, sustainable development in the Bay Area. Local governments will identify pIaces of great potential for sustainable development, including PDAs, transit corridors, employment areas, as well as infill opportunity areas that lack transit services but offer opportunities for increased walkability and reduced driving. As noted earlier, Cupertino has not currently proposed a PDA. . The Initial Vision Scenario will: ■ Incorporate the 25-year regional housing need encompassed in the SCS; ■ Provide a preliminary set of housing and employment growth numbers at regional, county, jurisdictional, and sub-jurisdictional levels; � , ■ Be evaluated against the greenhouse gas reduction target as well aas the additional performance targets adopted for the SCS. Detailed Scenarios By the early spring of 2011 the conversation beiween local governments, and regional agencies will turn to the feasibility of achieving the Initial Vision Scenario by working on the Detailed. Scenarios. The Detailed Scenarios will be different than the initial Vision Scenario in that they will take into account constraints that might limit development potential, and will identify the infrastructure and resources that can be identified and/or secured to support the scenario. 1-7 January 25, 2011 Sustainable Communities Strategies Update Page 4 • MTC and ABAG expect to release a first round of Detailed Scenarios by Ju1y 2011. Local jurisdictions will provide input, which will then be analyzed for the release of the Preferred Scenario by the end of 2011. The County/Corridor Working Groups as well as the RAWG will facilitate local input into the scenarios through 2011.. The analysis of the Detailed Scenarios and Preferred Scenario takes into account the Performance Targets and Indicators. REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION As described above, the eight-year RHNA must be consistent with the SCS. Planning for affordable housing in the Bay Area is one of the essential tasks of sustainable development. In the SCS, this task becomes integrated with the regional land use strategy, the development of complete communities and a sustainable transportation system. The county/corridor engagement process will include discussions of RHNA, since both the SCS and RHNA require consideration of housing needs by income group. The process to update the RHNA will begin in 2011: • A Housing Methodology Committee for the region will be appointed in january 2011. Meetings . will continue through September 2011. At the Santa Clara County � level, the RHNA Methodology Committee will include 2 staff from cities (San Jose and Morgan Hill) and 2 alternates (Cupertino and Sunnyvale), and a staff inember from Santa Clara County. • Cities must determine whether they want to form a sub-regional RHNA group by March 2011. If so, they must follow the same timeline for formulation as the Methodology Committee. • I.ocal jurisdictions will provide input prior to the adoption of the RHNA methodology by September 2011. , • The final housing numbers for the region will be issued by the State Departrnent of Housing and Co�munity Development (HCD) to ABAG by September 2011. • The Draft RHNA will be released by ABAG by spring 2012. • ABAG will adopt the Final RHNA by the end of summer 2012. • Local goverrunents will address the next round of RHNA in their next Housing Element update (2014-2022). • The distribution of housing needs will then inform the Detailed SCS Scenarios. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN The SCS creates an explicit link between the land use choices and the transportation investments. MTC and ABAG's commitment to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and provision of housin� for all income levels translates into an alignment of the development of�° places committed to these goals and transportation, infrastructure and housing funding. The regional agencies will work closely with the CMAs, transportation agencies and local jurisdictions to define financially consfrained transportation priorities in their response to a call for transportation projects in early 2011 and a detailed project assessment that will be completed .by july/ August 2011; the project assessment will be an essential part of the development of Detailed SCS Scenarios. The RTP will be analyzed through 2012 and released for review by the end of 2012. ABAG will approve the SCS by March 2013. MTC will adopt the final RTP and SCS by Apri12013. 1-8 january 25, 2011 Sustainable Communities Strategies Update Page 5 Regional agencies will prepare one Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for both the SCS and the RTP. This EIR might assist local jurisdictions in stxeamlining the environmental review process for some of the projects that are consistent with the SCS. Local jurisdictions are currently providing input for the potential scope of the EIR. Regional agencies are investigating the scope and strategies for an EIR that could provide the most effective support for local governments. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL TASKS MTC, ABAG and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District are coordinating the impacts of CEQA thresholds and guidelines recently approved by the Air District. The Air District is currently developing tools and mitigation measures related to the CEQA thresholds and guidelines to� assist with development projects in PDAs. 'The four regional agencies will be � coordinating other key regional planning issues including any adopted climate adaptation- related policy recommendations or best practices encompassed in the Bay Plan update recently released by Bay Area Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). CUPERTIN�'S ROLE IN THE SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY The City will Ue asked to respond to several key questions over the coming year and beyond, such as (but not limited to): 1. How do our current policy documents (General Plan, Specific Plans and Area Plans) relate to the SCS? 2. How much housing and employment should/can the City accommodate to provide a meaningful contribution to smart growth and sustainable development mandates of the Bay Area and balance new growth opportunities with the existing character of the City of Cupertino? 3. Where are the key areas where the City expects to accommodate new housing and employment within the next 25 yeaxs? � 4. What are the key local sustainable development issues/strategies that might be advanced through the SCS (e.g. type of housing, employment centers, affordable housing, opportunities for enhanced commercial revenue, etc.)? � 5. What infrastructure investments would be needed to support additional development in Cupertino (e.g., enhanced school facilities, open space, transportation/transit, etc.)? � 6. . How should the City Council, Commission and staff participate in the SCS process? The SCS provides an opportunity for the City of Cupertino to advance local goals as part of a coordinated regional framework. The SCS wi11 help begin a dialogue on balancing issues at the local level (new housing, jobs, etc.) while addressing regional objectives. As such, it may serve as a platform for cities and counties to discuss and address a wide spectrum of challenges, including high housing costs, economic development, affordable and accessible transportation, and public health, and identify local, regional, and state policies to address them. 1-9 January 25, 2011 Sustainable Communities Strategies Update Page 6 NEXT STEPS The following is an outline of key steps in the SCS process in 2011: • October/November 2010; Staff input to Planned Development Areas (PDAs) and other "opportunity" areas. • February 2011: Release of the Initial Vision Scenario. . • March/Apri12011: Local agency feedback to the Initial Vision Scenario. • April-August 2011: Release of Detailed SCS Scenarios and local agency input. Re�ional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNAl • January 2011: Appointrnent of RHNA Methodology Committee. � March 2011: Determination wheth�r to participate in subregional housing methodology effort. • February-August 2011: Participation and review of housing methodology (ABAG and/or subregional), including local agency input. Input to the Initial and Detailed Vision scenarios will encompass reviews by staff, the Planning Commission, and City Council, and the community through the hearing process. Prepared by: Aarti Shrivastava, Director of Community Development �C�:�.G� , ( f�� �d2�`��.af� ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Draft Schedule of City Input for Sustainable Community Strategies and Regional Housing Needs Allocation Process Attachment 2: Letter from ABAG Outlining Process for Subregional RHNA Determinations Attachment 3: Place Type Description Charts (ABAG/MTC) J• J. G:planning/pdreport/pc2/L011/SCA l.Ipdate012511.doc 1-10 ATTACHMENT A- VTP 2040 SCHEDULE UECEMBEIt lA1�l1AfIY FEN{tllll!iY RIANCII APIiIL h1AY JUNE JULY NI t,tl�; Sk.f'if.l'.S�{i lt l��[ I�rilElt r�,i^,1t�L!F liL� f.MltLH IANUnRY FEBRIlAft'! h1�HCl1 API;II. MAY IUNE JUL1' AUGUSC SEPfEMBER OCIONER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY fE8Ri11lPV M11ARCf1 TI'RIL Develop VTA VfP 2035 P�oject Review Draft Plan Development�Yi'P Progrem Area VTf� �odo final VTP VTA (VTP Constrained and Submit Lists to Scenario and Creation of Initial Revie�v/Fnancial Discussions with Regional Deve�opment of VTP loao Document/Public Open Houses UraltfEtwiraomenlai imr�ad �oQo zoqo) Unconstratined MTC Testing Project Lists project Lists Agencies Reporl Document �� s + 'a , : � � � � � f �,� _ 3 7 F- . . � � e � . I ;Y - .;� Y RTP � Release Vision Release of Technical SCS Scenario PrefeRed Detailed SCS Scenario Development Detalled Analysis o! SCS ResultsJFundin� SCS Scenario Scenario Scenarius Dis[ussions Scenario Prepare SCS/fiTP Plan Final DrafLSCS/RTPPian SCS/RTP Plan _ 'S _ Adopts final State HCD RHNA Reviews final RHNA .�+��� RTP Fund Estimates and Cail for Projects Release Draft State HCD Issues Adopt RHNA Dreft RFINA Plan Comments�Pub{ic Release f(nal Begin RHNA Process RHNA Methodology Housing Release of Dra}t RNN/1 Plan qPpeals RHNA Draft Methodology Determination ��� � _ _�� a � �v � s � � � � N