Home > Resource Center > In the News Home > Greenbelt Alliance in the News

Greenbelt Alliance In the News

June 30, 2002

Valley lags in housing affordability

State has yet to get many plans

That's because in order to rate the cities, a "Housing Crisis Report Card" prepared by affordable housing advocates relied on state-mandated housing plans that were supposed to be completed by Dec. 31.

About a third of the 40 largest cities in the nine-county Bay Area -- including Livermore, Pleasanton and Dublin -- missed the deadline and still were working on the plans -- when the study went to press.

Only 28 percent of the plans studied by the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California and the Greenbelt Alliance were judged "good" or better. Twenty percent -- including the plan prepared by San Ramon -- received "needs improvement" scores. Some 23 percent of the plans, including those prepared by Alameda County and the cities of Fremont, Hayward and Walnut Creek, received a failing grade.

Although cities in the Valley have been slow to update the plans, formally known as General Plan Housing Elements, political leaders have not been ignoring the affordable housing issue. Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin and San Ramon all have instituted steps that would have earned them points on their "report cards."

Those steps include "inclusionary" zoning policies requiring developers to make a certain percentage of every project affordable. Livermore and Pleasanton also attempt to compensate for the increasing demand for housing when new jobs are created by imposing a fee on commercial developments for affordable houses.

But if the report card had been based on past performance, the Valley's cities would not have fared well. Between 1988 and 1998, Livermore and Pleasanton saw about half of affordable housing needs met, while developers in San Ramon and Dublin met just 6 percent and 2 percent of needs, respectively.

The report card did not look at past performance so that all cities would have a chance to make the "honor roll," said study author Shannon Dodge, regional coordinator of the Non-Profit Housing Association.

One of the biggest challenges for many cities that are mostly developed is simply finding the land where affordable housing can be built, she said.

"The cities' job of identifying sites for infill housing is ever more important," Dodge said. "It's crucial that cities get real about finding places within their boundaries where more compact housing can be built.

" Dodge attended an affordable housing forum in Pleasanton last week and is familiar with the Housing Element the city has submitted to the state.

"It's definitely got some strengths -- the inclusionary zoning ordinance looks like a really good one," Dodge said. "It does seem to me that the challenge that's facing the city is to identify land where new housing can be accommodated, and Pleasanton has identified a whole lot of sites."

Most of the sites that are identified are not zoned for high density residential development, however, and "in order for the plan to be a real plan, and not just a paper plan, I think the state is going to make a strong pitch for (Pleasanton) to amend its General Plan and permanently rezone" those areas, she said.

Pleasanton planner Jerry Iserson said there is a policy in the Housing Element that says the city will conduct a General Plan study in the next six months to one year to rezone enough land as residential to meet affordable housing goals.

"Some would need to be (high density), that's how you're going to get your affordable housing," he said. "We'd have to look at each property individually."

Iserson pointed to a plan developer Ponderosa Homes is proposing for the Busch property in eastern Pleasanton as an example of how affordable housing is incorporated into new projects.

The latest plan for the property, scheduled to be reviewed by the Planning Commission on July 24, calls for 192 single family houses and a 172-unit senior housing complex. All of the affordable housing component of the project is being incorporated in the senior development, with 86 below-market rate units.

Dodge called San Ramon's plan to adopt an inclusionary zoning policy requiring that 25 percent of houses in new projects affordable "ambitious." The details of that policy, approved by San Ramon voters in March as part of an update of the city's General Plan, remain to be worked out.

"The actual ordinances do have to be drafted and implemented by the (City Council)," said Brooke Littman, housing programs manager for the city of San Ramon. "That is ambitious, but I'm hoping they'll recognize this is a document that was voted on."

Littman, whose position was created in November, said San Ramon is forming a Housing Committee to make advisory recommendations to the City Council.

The "needs improvement" grade the city received "could have been worse, especially since were just starting, but it recognizes that we're serious about (affordable housing)," Littman said."Now we basically have to implement those tools and get going."

Through the Tri-Valley Housing Committee, cities in the Valley, and Alameda and Contra Costa county officials are planning a work force housing forum in September, Littman said.

Although cities were graded on how well their General Plan Housing Element updates accommodate affordable housing, there are few penalties for not preparing plans that make it possible to meet housing goals that are set by the state and regional planners.

Although private citizens may sue cities that are out of compliance, Dodge said state law must be changed to provide stronger incentives -- and consequences -- for cities that do not make it possible for developers to build affordable housing.

In Pleasanton, residents have fought developments perceived as high density through referendums.

A citizens initiative on the November ballot would bar the city from permitting housing on 318 acres it controls along Bernal Avenue. Affordable housing advocates want the city to set aside 15 acres for affordable housing, saying the high price of land limits opportunities to provide housing for low- and very low-income residents.

Although residents say they fear the effects of high-density housing on traffic and schools, Dodge said those fears are largely unfounded.

Building housing near jobs can reduce traffic, and children are less likely to be transferred from school to school if their families can buy a house and settle down, she said.

"Political leadership and courage is really what's needed in a lot of these cities," she said. "It's hard for political leaders to be courageous. They have to face the voters every few years."

###