From: Liang
Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 9:33 PM
Date: Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 9:33 PM
Subject: Action Plan and Timeline to fulfill RHNA allocation all income categories
To: Aarti Shrivastava <AartiS@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, City Attorney's Office <CityAttorney@cupertino.org>
Dear Aarti and David,
The first reporting period for this Housing Element cycle will end by the end of this year.
Under SB 35, HCD would now require Cupertino to pull permits for at least 50% of units in all income categories.
I wonder what is the city's action plan to fulfill that 50% requirement in each income level so that we are not subject to SB 35 next year. In other words, what is our action plan to approve and permit 178 EVL/VL units, 104 Low units, and 116 Moderate units?
Liang
Cupertino Resident
To: Aarti Shrivastava <AartiS@cupertino.org>, David Brandt <davidb@cupertino.org>, City Attorney's Office <CityAttorney@cupertino.org>
What options we have and what financial burdens each option will put on the city and taxpayers?
If the city has studied this issue and has an action plan, please point me to any such document or meeting minutes.
I've looked through the Housing Element and I couldn't find a clear plan to provide the BMR housing numbers in the RHNA allocation.
From the Appendix B of Housing Element Technical Report, I see that the city marked every site in Scenario A as "Very Low/Low":
The city has approved Hamptons and Marina projects, total 600+188 units. But they only provide a small fraction of the "Very Low/Low" units. So, I wonder whether the city has a plan to actually provide BMR at all income levels in RHNA requirement?
I noticed the letter at the end of Appendix B from Low Foundation of Silicon Valley. The letter points out:
- There is no analysis as to why housing production in Cupertino for low-income individuals and families fell nearly 90% short of its affordable housing allocations under the past planning period's RHNA.
- In general, the qualified objectives and housing programs currently in the Housing Element lack specific time frames or actions, and require changes to make them effective tools for development.
- The Draft's programs lack meaningful timeframes, which makes it difficult to determine whether the programs will have beneficial impacts during the planning period. State law requires that the Draft contain programs that set forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period. (Government Code § 65583(c).)
- Cupertino's programs also lack clarity and specificity, which makes is extremely difficult for members of the public to understand what steps Cupertino will take to achieve its goals and how and when the public can engage with Cupertino staff. Per HCD, "programs must include a specific time frame for implementation, identify the agencies or officials responsible for implementation and describe the jurisdiction's specific role in implementation." (Housing Programs: Conserve and Improve the Existing Housing Stock, Required Components of Program Actions, http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/
housing_element2/PRO_conserve. php.)
Looking through Chapter 4 Housing Element and Appendix B Housing Element Technical Report, I did not find any "specific time frame for implementation" or "actions" to deliver the "356 extremely low/very low-income units, 207 low-income units, 196 moderate-income units" within the 8 years of Housing Element cycle.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Now that several 2017 pro-housing laws, including SB 35, have passed, I wonder what's the city's plan to fulfill RHNA requirements? What has been done? What's planned for 2018 or the next 4 years, remaining in the current HE cycle.
Sincerely,
Liang
