California State Sen. Scott Wiener introduced legislation on Friday that aims to increase affordable housing production throughout the state by easing zoning restrictions.
Under Senate Bill 899, nonprofit hospitals and faith institutions like churches, synagogues and mosques, would be able to build up to 150 affordable housing units on their excess property, regardless if local zoning prohibits that type of housing.
“California desperately needs housing of all kinds, including affordable housing of our low-income residents. Churches and other religious and charitable institutions often have land to spare, and they should be able to use that land to build affordable housing and thus further their mission,” Wiener said in a statement.”
“SB 899 ensures that affordable housing can be built and removes local zoning and approval obstacles in order to do so,” he said.
The legislation mandates that any organization building this type of streamlined affordable housing must maintain the affordability of the homes for a minimum of 55 years for rental properties and 45 years for properties that can be owned.
In addition, density and height restrictions will depend the location of the housing property and its proximity to major thoroughfares and commercial corridors. In low-density residential neighborhoods, affordable housing can be streamlines for projects with up to 40 units and three stories tall, while in mixed-use areas or commercial corridors, affordable housing may be streamlined for projects with up to 150 units and five stories high.
Wiener’s bill will compliment Senate Bill 1851, authored by Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks, D-East Bay, which eliminates residential parking requirements for qualifying housing developments projects on faith-based properties.
This is a terrible idea. It’s a pro-developer thing that ignores local community input and zoning codes about what should be allowed to be built in an area.
How about force cities like Palo Alto, San Francisco, Oakland, Mountain View, San Ramon, Dublin, and San Jose to build high density housing? You know the cities that actually have all the jobs? They love to have the businesses in their city but don’t want the residents. Also, there should be a minimum density requirements in public transportation hubs (BART stations). To go along with all this new housing there also needs to be investment (by the builders) into new schools and other infrastructure. That way we can avoid situations like what is happening in Dublin/Pleasanton.
Nope. How about the state keep its corrupt nose out of cities affairs completely. The recent efforts to increase the nanny-state intervention into local government affairs is unacceptable. Sacramento doesn’t fix things, and lately it is attempting to impose “progressive” ideology at the local level. And wacko Sen. Wiener is the pied-piper.
Sure, small government is great until it is negatively impacting everyone around you. The only way to create actual affordable housing is to build and meet demand. As a homeowner, this is great having such an expensive piece of real estate. If I was selfish, I’d want no more housing and just build my equity. However, I am not, and want people to have economic mobility. It’s easy to just say move somewhere else. The problem is the jobs are here and not somewhere else. How long of a commute do you expect people to have?
Sorry, BUILD BUILD BUILD!
Absolutely NOT. These organizations enjoyed a tax holiday through 501 (c)3, and now they are going to be able to crap all over their communities with slum housing.
Zoning is there for a reason.
First liberal politicians running this state into the ground make it very difficult to build, creating a crisis. Now to help ease a problem they created they want to make it easy again.
State legislature should have their sessions to pass laws severely limited. Texas Constitution limits regular session of Texas Legislature to 140 calendar days in odd-numbered years.
Good idea!
Weiner – how appropriately named! All his proposed legislation comes straight out of far left field. The clown should focus on correcting the root cause of our problems, instead of just dealing with the symptoms. Unfortunately, he’s not alone in lacking any clue about what needs to be done.
(And yes, I do but nobody would like what I would recommend, so I just keep my mouth shut and wait for the population crash.)
I’m guessing that all of these measures supposedly aimed at increasing the production of affordable housing will have the opposite effect. The Leftists running this state just don’t understand economics in general, and specifically the construction industry.
Housing prices (growth), when looked at over the past 25-30 years, are not out of line with other investments. But if California is going to go down this road, what’s to stop them from placing a limit on ‘excessive’ stock prices?
How many illegals are occupying housing here? Any Dem in favor of sending them back to solve the housing crisis?
That’s what I thought.
I guess I have a general distrust of leftists saying they will do something for churches. In contrast with Weiner’s quote above about how he is helping churches with excess land, the summary I read said nothing about already owned land nor emphasized churches. This seems like he is proposing any non-profit could buy property, and ignore zoning laws as they build if it is for low income tenants. Weiner is on record strongly in favor of high density housing and supported the building 220 square foot apartments. That will be an interesting visual mix in San Francisco with 1960s style Soviet cement block housing nested in among the Victorians. And as far as the non-profit thing goes, that is just a tax structure and I worked for a non-profit once where the management made huge amounts of money.
As churches don’t pay property taxes, etc. will any of their parcels that undergo this transformation with housing stock on them require the parcels be reassessed by the tax collector? If they’re able to rent out these units onsite then they should have to pay the same taxes as everyone else. Orrrrrrr did this state Senator not think that far ahead?
Says a lot about how bad things are in SF/Berkeley that Pelosi, Weiner, and Skinner were all re-elected.
Doesn’t that Weiner guy ever sleep? One goofy bill after another.
The more you bring these tax exempt organizations into real estate, the more it drives away legitimate real estate investors and developers. It’s hard to compete with groups who don’t pay taxes. Legitimate real estate developers will head out of state where they can make money. Leaving California with a shrinking rental market.
In other words, bills such as this will compound the problem. This guy is so amazingly short-sighted.
I can see a need to streamline the process of building affordable/low income housing to meet the great need, but not sure that totally bypassing local zoning laws is the answer. Tough situation to resolve any way you look at it. NIMBYism doesn’t help. If we work together improve housing affordability it will lift everyone up! There are a lot of things that could help…like rezoning to allow cottages or tiny houses on large lots, requiring permits for short term rentals and taxing those properties as hotels based on usage—money going to housing funds, renovating existing vacant buildings to create small apartments…
Maybe we should close our California boarders. Stop telling illegals they are welcome in California. Stop calling the mentally ill homeless. The mentally ill dont need little houses. California does not have a housing shortage. California has an illegal immigration problem and a lack of mental health treatment facilities.