The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem 8.2 Reg Hous Needs CITY CLERK File # 0430-50 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 18, 2000 SUBJECT: ATTACHMENTS: RECOMMENDATION: Regional Housing Needs Determination 1999-2006 Report Prepared by Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner 1. Draft letter to ABAG 2. Revised Regional Housing Needs Determination Table for All Bay Area Jurisdictions 3. ABAG memo transmitting the third release of Regional Housing Needs Determination 4. Regional Housing Needs Determination Methodology for Dublin Revised Schedule Receive staff report Authorize the Mayor to sign the ABAG letter FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Staff and consultant costs associated with completing the City's Housing Element update has been determined as part of Fiscal Year 2000-2001 budget. BACKGROUND: March 21_, 2000. The City Council discussed the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) on March 21, 2000, and directed the Mayor to sign a letter to ABAG requesting that Dublin's allocation of RHND housing numbers be reduced. May 18, 2000. The ABAG Executive Board met on May 18, 2000, and made two changes to the RHND process: o The jobs/housing weighting ratio was changed from 10%:90% to 50%:50%. This reduced Dublin's housing allocation from 4891 dwelling units to 4741 dwelling units. A shift-was made in the distribution of dwelling unit~ assigned to unincorporated areas within cities sphere of influence (SOI). The new unincorporated SOI distribution is 75% of the allocations assigned to the cities and 25% assigned to the counties. This resulted in 695 dwelling units being reassigned from Alameda County to the City of Dublin, for a new total of 5,436. May 30, 2000. ABAG transmitted the third release of the R_HND (Attachment 3) to the cities and counties on'May 30, 2000. In that memo, ABAG made it clear that "The RHND process is inherently controversial, and in recognition of this the Executive Board revisited the previously no ted issues. However, it is not anticipated that the process will ever meet with full regional concurrence. With this in COPIES TO: In-House DiStribution ITEM NO. ~ g:\housing\housing element\7-18-00 cc staff report re regional hot,sing needs mind, we expect that this process will not be revisited again, nor will further delays be approved. It is important for ABAG to advance the RHND process to its co nclusion near the beginning of 2001". Regional Housing Needs Determination Process. ABAG determination. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) determines and officially submits the RHND responsibilities for each Bay Area jurisdiction. This RHND process is a State mandate devised to address the need for and planning of housing for all economic segments of every community throughout the State of California. State law requires that the distribution of regional housing needs ~...seek to reduce the concentration of lower income households in cities or counties which already have disproportionately high proportions of Iow income households." The California State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) first determined the Bay Area's regional housing need, and this determination was then finalized through negotiations with ABAG. Timeline. The RHND process began January 1, 1999 and will end June 30, 2006 (a seven and a half year planning period). Attachment 2 is a series of tables which show the housing need responsibilities that ABAG has identified for Dublin and other jurisdictions in Alameda County and throughout the Bay Area. As required by law, this table further delineates each j urisdiction's housing need responsibility by income category. The ABAG Executive Board's revised official release of the Regional Housing'Needs numbers re-initiated a 90-day review period, which began on June 1, 2000. On May 30, 2000, the KHND numbers were released a third time with new processing timelines. As a result of several regional meetings and feedback from jurisdictions, the ABAG Executive Board decided to restart the 90-day review and revision period. The City has the opportunity to evaluate its identified need and the distribution of this need across all income categories. All comm&nts are due to ABAG no later than August 31, 2000. ABAG will then initiate a 60-day review period, beginning September 1, 2000 and ending October 30, 2000, to evaluate and respond to all comments received from the City and other Bay Area jurisdictions and to respond to jurisdictions requesting a revision of their RHND allocation. ABAG Executive Board Meeting. ABAG staff will bring final housing needs numbers to the ABAG Executive Board for adoption at their November 16, 2000 meeting. After adoption of the numbers, a 60 to 90-day appeal process will be available to jurisdictions. The appeal process allows for jurisdictions to appeal the adopted ABAG numbers in writing, within 30 days of the final determination by the Executive Board on November 16, 2000. This written appeal would initiate a public hearing. Once all appeals have been heard and decided, the entire packet to RHND numbers will be returned to the Executive Board for approval. Once the EXecutive Board. approves the final RHND numbers, jurisdictions must be_gin the process of revising their housing elements. Under State Housing Element law, cities and counties are mandated to develop a housing strategy aimed at meeting their housing need. All housing elements are due to the State HCD for certification, by June 30 of 2001. ANALYSIS: City's RHND Allocation The City's total RHND allocation (as revised) is 5,436 hOusing units. The City will need to provide 4-~ ,~ 5, .~6 housing units from January 1, 1999 through June _~0, 2006. The following table shows the number of units within each income category that must be provided as shown in the February 1, 2000 and' June 1, 2000 determinations from ABAG: 2 Income Category. % of annual February 1, 2000 June I, 2000 . Increase Median Income for Alameda COunty Very Low 50% 720 796 76 '~Low 80% 495 531 36 Moderate 120% 1,285 1,441 156 Above Moderate Over 120% 2,391 2,668 277 4,891 5,436 545 * the annual Median Income for Alameda County was $65,700 in February of 1999. Dublin's RI-i'ND allocation figure is fairly high because it was based on the following factors: Original State HCD housing goal numbers were high because California is experiencing a severe housing sUpply shortage with an increase in population. By the year 2005, the population in the Bay Area is expected to grow by 450,000. There is a large difference between the. ABAG Projections forecast of the likely number of households and a local area's share of the regional and State housing goal as identified by law'. · Dublin's number refleCts past growth.trends and future growth potential. Dublin does not currently have a very high population of low income households. The State aims to reduce the concentration of lower income households in a particular jurisdiction by" distributing "shares" of regional housing needs. Dublin needs to provide more affordable housing units to accommodate the City's share of lower income households. ABAG has now allocated 75% of Alameda County's housing requirements that were located in the Sphere of Influence of the City of Dublin to the City. This has increased Dublin's RHND by 695 dwelling units. State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The State HCD first determines regional numbers, or "goal numbers" that are not meant to match, and they often exceed, anticipated growth in local jurisdiction hoUsing units. The State HCD then sets a goal vacancy rate and then a housing unit need to meet that vacancy rate, which is derived by assessing potential growth rates (i.e., population, jobs, and households) and loss of housing due to demolition. The numbers derived by the State HCD are then provided to ABAG in the form of a regional housing goals number, which is then broken down into income categories. ABAG is then mandated to distribute the numbers to Bay Area jurisdictionS by income categories. ABAG is ultimately responsible for allocating the RHND goal number to cities and counties throughout the Bay Area. ABAG's share of State total. When ABAG received the State HCD housing goals number, ABAG noted that the number Was too high. The State HCD's RHND for the Bay Area was 310,761 housing units. ABAG's projections model housing unit numbers (based on Projections 2000) was 185,823 housing units. ABAG negotiated with the State HCD to lower the RHND numbers. The final State HCD's RHND for the Bay Area after negotiations, was 230,743. ABAG Methodology. ABAG staff and the Housing Methodology Committee (comprised of city and county representatives) produced a methodology based on Projections 2000. ThiS methodology ,,vas revised by the ABAG Executive revised this methodology at it's May 18, 2000 meeting. The methodology takes into account growth in terms of both households and jobs. This growth is weighted' 50% households and 50% jobs (it was formerly weighted 90% households and 10% jobs) to determine a regional allocation factor to be applied to the regional goal number received from HCD. The methodology is also used to distribute a share of housing to each jurisdiction by income category. This portion of the methodology distributes the share of each jurisdiction's need by moving each j urisdiction's income percentages (percentage of households within very low, low, moderate and above moderate- income categories) 50% towards the regional average. Compliance with State Mandate RHND is too high. The City's RHND number of 5,436 housing units is very high and constructing these many units over a 7 1/2 year period may be difficult to achieve, especially the construction of 1,327 units for very low and low income households. According to the City's land use projections and housing units finaled in 1999, the City may be able to meet the above moderate and most of the moderate income category of units within the housing element planning period, January 1, 1999 through June 30, 2006 (i.e., 3,535 units in Eastern Dublin and 1,012 units in the rest of Dublin, for a total of 4,547 units). These residential projects have a low density, medium density, or high density land use designation. However, much of this will depend on economic conditions over the next 6 1/2 years. Below-market units. The most difficult task will be meeting the 1,327 below market rate units. The City will have met 57 of the 796 very Iow income category of units during the housing element planning period. However, the City would, need to provide an additional 739 housing units for this income category. The City may be able to meet a portion of this requirement with the transit center deve]opments proposed for the East and West Dublin BAiRT statkms. Planning staff is in the process of completing the Affordable Housing Implementation Program. The Program's recommended affordable housing policies and programs will have taken into consideration the amount of affordable housing units that the City is required to provide as part of its regional housing needs requirement. -Draft Response Letter to ABAG Attachment 1 is the:draft response letter to ABAG. The City is requesting that ABAG lower Dublin's RHND numbers based on local land use data and development policies, and existing and future growth patterns for Dublin. The letter also includes a discussion regarding the requirement to provide affordable housing as an "unfunded" State mandate. The letter states that the State should consider providing financial incentives for meeting affordable housing goals. Furthermore, the letter includes a discussion of how environmental constraints may impede future housing development in Dublin. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive the staff report and authorize the Mayor to sign the ABAG letter. 4 July 19, 2000 Eugene Leong, Executive Director Association of Bay Area Governments P.O. Box 2050 Oakland, CA 94604 RE: Regional Housing Needs Determination Dear Mr. Leong: In compliance with the 90-day review process for the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND), the City of Dublin hereby requests that Dublin's allocation of RHND housing goal numbers be reduced to more accurately reflect existing and future growth patterns for the City of Dublin. The State Department of Housing and Community Development Department (State HCD) and-ABAG have allocated very unrealistic housing unit numbers that go beyond what the City projects to reasonably occur from now through June 30, 2006. HISTORIC AND PROJECTED HOUSING UNIT NUMBERS During the last seven years (1993 - 1999), the City has produced a minimal amount of housing units, especially within the very Iow and low income categories. The following table provides an average annual housing unit production figure for each income category and ABAG's annual RHND target figures. INCOME CATEGORY AVERAGE ANNUAL HOUSING UNIT PRODUCTION 1993 - 1999 ABAG'S ANNUAL TARGET FIGURE Very Loxv 4 --- 103 Low 0 --- 7 t Moderate 91 --- 184 Above Moderate 91 --- ~ 42 TOTAL 186 --- 700 This table indicates the large difference between what Dublin has produced historically and what ABAG has targeted annually, based on the RHND numbers for Dublin. ATTACHMENT I The most productive housing unit year was in 1999 where the City finaled 606 residential building permits (333 units in the above moderate income range; 243 in the moderate income range; and 30 units in the very low income range). The City prepared the following development projections through Fiscal Year 2004/2005 based on the Dublin General Plan and other local land use policies. These development projections have been incorporated into ABAG Projections 2000. Although these projections are only through June 30, 2005, the same approximate yearly projections would most likely continue through June 30, 2006 based on the amount of units left to be built throughout Dublin in compliance with the City's General Plan. DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN PROJECTIONS- FY 2000/2001 THROUGH FY 2004/2005 Fiscal Year 2000 - 2001 Fiscal Year 2001 - 2002 Fiscal Year 2002 - 2003 Fiscal Year 2003 - 2004 Fiscal Year 2004 - 2005 666 dwelling units 808 dwelling units 744 dwelling units 916 dwelling units 807 dwelling units AVERAGE ANNUAL DWELLING UNIT PROJECTIONS: 788 dwelling units Due to current development trends and a very productive housing market in 1999/2000, these projections are very optimistic compared to historical housing trends since 1993. As a result, the City requests that the RHND numbers be revised to reflect a halfway point between the historic annual housing production figure and ABAG's annual RHND target figure. The City requests an RHND figure of 3,652 housing units with the following income category distribution, based on the same RHND 1999 income ~.. percentages for Dublin: DUBLIN-PREFERRED RHND ALLOCATION Income Category Construction Need Very Low 537 Low 369 Moderate 960 Above Moderate 1.786 TOTAL: 3,652 The City sees this as a fair compromise that incorporates Dublin's General Plan objectives and land use policies while still achieving State and regional housing goals for providing housing for all economic segments of the community. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS The City's ability to construct additional housing units may be further constrained due to stringent State Fish and Game and Federal Fish and Wildlife Service policies and regulations governing threatened and endangered plant and animal species. There may be threatened and/or endangered species in the undeveloped areas of Dublin, which may impede future housing development. REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS AN "UNFUNDED'~ STATE MANDATE The most challenging part of meetihg the City's RHND numbers will be meeting the housing goals for very low and low income households. The City will need to provide 796 housing units for very Iow-income households and 531 housing units for low-income households, for a total of 1,327 units. High property values within the City make it very difficult, or almost impossible to provide below market-rate units. For example, the raw land cost for 1 acre of residentially zoned land is about $I million dollars. Additional costs are attributable to building the infrastructure necessary for supporting the development, i.e., roadway extensions/widenings; freeway interchanges; water and sewer extensions; etc. This high development cost is then reflected in the housing unit costs. Housing developers would need very large subsidies in order to construct affordable units. The City will do its best to construct the 1.327 below-market rate units and the City's affordable housing policies and implementation programs will help achieve this goal. Hovcever, State financial incentives should also be given to jurisdictions for meeting these goals. A barrier to fulfilling the needs of very.low and low income households is the lack of financial resources available to pay for it. If the State is requiring local jurisdictions to satisfy the housing needs for these economic sectors of the community, efforts must be made at the State level to establish easily accessible financial resources that will cover the costs of the subsidy needed to construct this type of housing. This policy change would particularly benefit jurisdictions with very high land costs that need to provide below market-rate housing. In conclusion, the City requests that the RHND numbers be reduced to more accurately reflect local land use and development policies and existing and future growth patterns for the City of Dublin and all relevant Bay Area jurisdictions. Dublin recognizes the strong need to provide below market-rate housing, however, the construction of 1,327 affordable housing units over the next six years ,,vill be very difficult to achieve. The City requests that the Sta. te HCD establish easily accessible financial resources for all jurisdictions, especially jurisdictions with very high land costs, which will cover the cost of subsidies needed to construct housing units for very low and low income households. If you have any questions regarding the above information, please feel free to contact me or Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner, of the Planning Department at (925) 833-6610. Very truly yours, Guy S. Houston Mayor Councilmembers' Alex Amoroso, ABAG Joseph A. Calabrigo, Town Manager, Danville Gerald Peeler, City Manager, Livermore Deborah Acosta. City Manager, Pleasanton Herb Moniz. City Manager, San Ramon Adolph Martinelli, Director, Community Development Agency, Alameda County Dennis Barry, Director, Community Development Dept., Contra Costa County Rich Ambrose, City Manager Eddie Peabody, Community Development Director Carol Cirelli, Senior Planner g:\housing\housing ¢lement\ABAG letter 3 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 1 Third Official Release 06/01/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: ]ALL COUNTIES ~ ¢ ;5~ '! ~ '~ :' ' ~ ~': ," ~ ": ALAMEDA 44,280 2,513 46,793 9,910 5,138 12,476 19,269 6,239 COUNTY CONTRA COSTA 33602 1 108 34,710 6,683 3,782 8,596 15 649 4,628 COUNTY ' MAR1N COUNTY 6,170 345 .' 6,515 I 241 618 I 726 2,930 869 NAPA COUNTY 6,839 224 7,063 1,434 1,019 I 775 2,835 942 SAN FRANCISCO 20,372 20,372 5,244 2,126 5,639 7,363 2,716 CITY/COUNTY SAN MATEO COUNTY 15,893 412 16 305 3,214 1,567 4,305 7,219 2,174 SANTA CLARA COUNTY 56,753 1,238 57,991 11,424 5,173 15,659 25,735 7,732 SOLANO COUNTY 16,280 2,401 18,681 3,697 2,638 4,761 7,585 2,491 SONOMA 19,912 1,897 22,313 4,411 3,029 5,879 8,994 2,9751 COUNTY ' I Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation, County receives 25%. RHND_.H~me Copyright ~1996-2000 ABAG. Afl rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner ATTACHMENT http ://www.abag.ca. gov/cgi-birdrhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 2 Third Official Release 06/0112000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: 1ALAMEDA ~! }~? ..... ',- - 1. C ,a; ' ALAMEDA ~' 2,162 0 2,162 443 265 611 .. 843... 288 ALBANY 277 0 277 64 33 77 103 37 BERKELEY 1,269 0 1,269 354 150 310 455 169 DUBLIN 4,741 695 5,436 796 531 1,441 2,668 725 EMERYVlLLE 777 0 777 178 95 226 278 104 FREMONT 6,708 0 6,708 1 079 636 1 814 3,179 894 HAYWAR D 2,711 124 2,835 625 344 834 1,032 378 LIVERMORE 4,190 917 5 107 875 482 1,403 2,347 681 NEWARK 1,250 0 1,250 205 111 347 587 167 OAKLAND 7,733 0 7,733 2,238 969 1,959 2,567 1,031 PIEDMONT 49 0 49 6 4 10 29 7 PLEASANTON 4 947 112 5,059 729 455 1,239 2,636 675 SAN LEANDRO 871 0 870 195 107 251 317 116 UNION CITY 1,913 38 1,951 338 189 559 865 260 ALAMEDA UNINCORPORATED 4,682 629 5,310 1,785 767 1,395 1,363 708 Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation. County receives 25%. RHND Home http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 2 7 /z Third Official Release 06/01/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: 1CONTRA cOSTA ANTIOCH 4,430 29 4,459 921 509 1,156 t, 873 595 BRENTWOOD 4,069 4 4,073 906 476 958 1,733 543 CLAYTON 447 0 446 55 33 84 274 59 CONCORD 2,224 95 2,319 453 273 606 987 309 DANVILLE 1,110 0 1,110 140 88 216 666 148 EL CERRITO 185 0 185 37 23 48 77 25 HERCULES 792 0 792 101 62 195 434 106 LAFAYETTE 194 0 194 30 17 42 105 26 MARTINEZ 1,308 33 1,341 248 139 341 613 i79 MORAGA 214 0 214 32 17 45 120 29 OAKLEY 1,208 0 1,208 209 125 321 553 161 ORINDA 220 0 221 31 18 43 129 29 PINOLE 288 0 288 48 35 74 131 38 PITTSBURG 2 360 153 2,513 534 296 696 987 335 PLEASANT HILL 641 73 714 129 79 175 331 95 RICHMOND 2,521 82 2,603 673 314 670 946 347 SAN PABLO 494 0 494 147 69 123 155 66 SAN RAMON 4,387 62 4,447 599 372 984 2,492 593 WALNUT CREEK 1,352 301 I 653 289 195 418 751 220 CONTRA COSTA 5,160 277 5 436 1,101 642 1,401 2,292 725 UN NCORPORATED Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action, City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation County receives 25%. http ://www.abag .ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 2 Third Official Release 06101/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county, County: 1MARIN ~ ~ ............. BELVEDERE 10 0 ,10 '1 1 2 6 1 CORTE MADERA 175 4 179 29 17 46 87 24 FAIRFAX 58 6 64 12_ 7 ,19 26 9 LARKSPUR 257 46 303 56 29 85 133 40 MILL VALLEY 170 55 225 40 21 56 108 30 NOVATO 2,570 12 2,582 476 242 734 1,130 344 ROSS 21 0 2'1 3 2 5 1 '1 3 SAN ANSELMO 137 12 149 32 13 39 65 20 SAN RAFAEL 2,05'1 39 2,090 445 207 562 876 279 SAU SALITO 143 64 207 36 '17 50 104 .28 TIBURON 144 20 '164 26 14 32 92 ' 22 MARIN UNINCORPORATED 433 88 52,1 85 48 96 292 69 Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation. County receives 25%. gH_N_P__Home Copyright ¢~1996-2000 ABAG. Afl rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 1 Third Official Release 06/0112000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: ]NAPA ~ ~ AMERICAN CANYON 1,231 92 1,323 230 181 353 559 176 CALISTOGA 174 0 173 44 31 41 57 23 NAPA 3,294 76 ' - 3,369 703 500 859 1,307 449 ST. HELENA 142 0 142 31 20 36 55 19 YOUNTVILLE 87 0 87 21 15 20 31 12 NAPA 1,913 56 1,969 405 272 466 826 263 UNINCORPORATED Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation County receives 25%. RHND Home Copyright ~1996-2000 ABAG. All rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner http://www.abag.ca, gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 1 Third Official Release 06/01/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county County: tSAN FRANCISCO ~ ~ i': ',: ,: .~, SAN FRANCISCO 20,372 0 20,372 5 244 2,~26 5639 7,363 2,7~6 Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per'Executive Board Action, City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation County receives 25%. RHND Home Copyright ~t 996-2000 ABA G. Afl rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 2 Third Official Release 06/01/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: [SAN MA*EO ATHERTON BELMONT BRISBANE BURLINGAME COLMA DALY CITY EAST PALO ALTO FOSTER CITY HALF MOON. BAY HILLSBOROUGH MENLO PARK MILLBRAE PACIFICA PORTOLA VALLEY REDWOOD CITY SAN BRUNO SAN CARLOS SAN MATEO SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO WOODSIDE SAN MATEO UNINCORPORATED 167 0 166 22 10 27 107 317 0 317 57 30 80 150 426 0 426 107 43 112 164 564 1 565 110 56 157 242 74 0 74 17 8 21 28 1,323 68 1,391 282 139 392 578 1,282 0 1,282 358 148 349 427 690 0 690 96 53 166 375 458 0 458 86 42 104 226 85 0 84 11 5 14 54 982 0 982 184 90 245 463 343 0 343 67 32 90 154 666 0 666 120 60 181 305 80 2 82 13 5 13 51 2,352 192 2,544 534 256 660 1,094 378 0 378 72 39 110 157 344 24 368 65 32 89 182 2,414 23 2,437 479 239 673 1,046 1,330 0 1,331 277 131 360 563 40 0 41 5 3 8 25 1,579 102 1,680 252 146 454 828 22 42 57 75 10 185 171 92 61 11 131 46 89 11 339 5O 49 325 177 5 224 Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. http://www, abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 2 Third Official Release 06101/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County' 1SANTA CLARA '~ ~ CAMPBELL 777 0 777 165 77 214 321 CUPERTINO 3,692 0 3,692 559 268 871 1,994 GILROY 3,710 36 3,746 906 334 1,030 1,476 LOS ALTOS 256 5 261 38 20 56 147 LOS ALTOS HILLS 83 0 83 10 5 15 53 LOS GATOS 385 17 402 72 35 97 198 MILPITAS 4,304 44 4,348 698 351 1,146 2 153 MONTE SERENO 74 2 76 10 5 13 48 MORGAN HILL 2,383 101 2,484 455 228 615 1,186 MOUNTAIN VIEW -- 3,420 3 3 423' 698 331 991 1,403 PALO ALTO 1,278 119 1,397 265 116 343 673 SAN JOSE 25,542 572 26,114 5,337 2,364 7,086 11,327 SANTA CLARA 6 339 0 6,339 1,294 590 1,786 2,669 SARATOGA 538 1 539 75 36 108 320 SUNNYVALE 3,809 27 3,836 736 361 1,075 1,664 SANTA CLARA UNINCORPORATED 1,135 311 474 106 52 213 103 104 492 499 35 11 54 580 10 331 456 186 3,482 845 72 511 63 Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent rounding may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOt RHND Allocation, County receives 25%, http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_altocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 1 Third Official Release 06/0t/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: 1SO[J~NO ,~'~,,;!Q;~._ ,',.~} } ~ ..... · . ,~, BENICIA 413 0 413 70 49 90 204 55 DIXON 1,330 134 1,464 268 237 379 580 195 FAIRFIELD 3,049 - 763 3,812 761 573 972 I506 508 RIO VISTA 1,337 54 1,391 357 190 342 502 185 SUISUN CITY 985 19 1,004 191 123 256 434 134 VACAVILLE 4,008 628 4,636 860 629 1,172 1975 618 VALLE JO 3,038 204 3,242 690 474 779 1,299 432 SOLANO 2,120 600 2,719 500 363 771 1,085 363 UNINCORPORATED T 0 "F ,ex L Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries. Independent roundin9 may affect totals. Per Executive Board Action. City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation. County receives 25%. RHND Home Copyright ~t 996-2000 ABAG. All rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner http://www.abag.ca, gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ABAG Regional Housing Allocation Page 1 of 1 Third Official Release 06101/2000 Use the selection box below to see each jurisdictions RHND Allocation by county. County: JSONQMA . ~i~;;l~<'.~.iO~ .:;L. ~":'~:.::':i ":~ L,~.:~, ,: ;:..~:: CLOVERDALE 415 8 423 95 51 128 149 56 COTATI 563 4 567 113 63 166 225 76 HE'ALDSBURG ....... 566 7 573 112 78 171 212 76 PETALUMA 1,133 11 1,144 206 124 312 502 153 ROHNERT PARK 1,462 662 2,124 401 270 597 856 283 SANTA ROSA 7,213 439 7,654 1,539 970 2,120 3,025 1,021 SEBASTOPOL 262 12 274 58 35 75 106 37 SONOMA 403 281 684 146 90 188 260 91 WINDSOR 2,071 0 2 071 430 232 559 850 276 SONOMA UNINCORPORATED 6 325 474 6,799 1,311 1,116 1,563 2,809 907 ~.-,~,~-~ ~ ~.~¢--~ Notes: RHND Allocation based upon ABAG Projections 2000 Jurisdiction Boundaries, Inde 9endent rounding may affect totats~ Per Executive Board Action, City receives 75% of Unincorporated SOl RHND Allocation County receives 25% RHND Home Copyright ~t 996-2000 ABAG. Afl rights reserved. By Kearey Smith, Regional Planner http ://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_allocation.pl 07/11/2000 ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA C,-OV'FRNMENTS RECEIVED .DUBLIN PLANNING ABAG MEMO To: May 30, 2000 Regional Housing Needs Determination Jurisdiction Contacts Cc: Cito~ and To~-n Mayors County Board of Supervisors Chairs and Presidents City, To'~m and County Marlagers and Administrators Community Development and Planning Diredtors .(cc: without ar:ac~ments) From: Eugene Leong, Executive Director Alex .~moroso, Senior Planner Re~onal Housing Needs Determination 1999-2006 Release ~r) · ' or ~ rehmmary Numbers Th_is memo aid ar-ach_menu se~'e as official transmitT, z! of the Regional Hop-sin_* Neec. s Distribution (R_HND) responslmhnes for each ~a~,- Area ~unscucuon. The~., P~YqND numbers are being~ rmezsea' ' for a rb_ird dine, z_nd a new' dme!ine for the ,ur°cess is at-~acneu._&s a resulr ofABAG zxecunve Board action, r_h~ memoaoloD-' ' an.q allocations have been changed. These changes re r_he merhodoloD, and the R}iND allocat~ons are ~e resulr of extensive detiberarioni (and iplit votes on virtually even' discuss:on point) at ~e May 18, 2000 Executive Board. In maldng modifications re d",.e me~odoioD,, r_he Executive Board rook into consideration extensive r%edbazk from jurisdictions. The Board evaluated the need re address ?x_BAG "smm-r growr_h" policies and relate Ge FZ~!qD process to those policies. A focus of "smart grey, mb' is .jobs and housing balance, and planning for development re oczur ,- ~_ ......... areas. As a result, the ' ' ' sm~s h lng revlsea memoaoloD ous allocations responsibllir7 rewards job produ:.ing areas. There as also an emphasis on cities rak/n< ~ greater sEare or future housing grov, x_h within me~r spheres of influence. The Executive Board f:els rhar this is more reflective of'a cir,.'-centered and balanced development pattern dqat r.he Bay Area must move toward in the tYarure. ,o_~D' :'. ~,o:: ;,,eeirc. 2e~'e' -_- ]nlp 5,tree: 031,: ane Ca ':3--;_; ~:~507-.:':5c The modifications to the methodolog7 include: · A shift in the jobs/housing weighting ratio used in the methodolog'y. The new' jobs to housing weighting ratio is 50/50. · A shift in the distribution of unincorporated sphere of influence (SOI). The new unincorporated SOI distribution is 75% of the allocations assigned to the cities and 25% assigned to the counties. The Third Official Release information 0une 1, 2000) attached to this memo derails the revised allocations for each jurisdiction. June 1 is the beginning of the 90 day local review and comment period. The schedule of dates related to the RHND process has been attached, and reflects the n~v timeline based upon the anticipated legislatively approved six month extension. The RI-IND process is inherently controversial, and in recognition of this the Executive Board revisited the previously noted issues. Howler, ir is nor anticipated that the process will ever meYr with full regional con~zurrence. With this in mind, we expect this process will not be revisited again,' nor will further delays"be approved. It is important for ABAG to advance the RHND process to its conclusion near the beginr, ing of 2001i ,~dl of r_he information included as attachments for this memo can be found on the ABAG web site ar httt~://www.abag.ca, gov/planning/housingneeds/99rhnd.hrm. Should you have any questions regarding this memo or related information, please contact ?alex Amoroso (5]0) 464.7955 email: Al~A@abag.ca.gov or Kearey Smith (510) 464.7994 email: KeareyS@abag.ca.gov ABAG Regional Housing Distribution Model Page 1 of 2 lq% ABAG Regional Housing Distribution Model 1999-2006 'RItND Allocation Period Third Official Release 06/01/2000 Jurisdiction: tDUBLIN Households 2006 11,920 Regional Share of -.. Households Household.. Household Household 1999 Growth Growth Growth 8,133 = 3,787. 177,318 2.14% Jobs 2006 32,050 Jobs Job Regional Share of 1999 Growth Job Growth Job Growth 23,706 = 8,344 422,754 1.97% Share of Job Growth ( 1.97% X Weight Factor 0.5 Share of HCD Uninc. Total Jurisdiction Household Weight Regional Need SOl Projected Growth Factor Need Need Need + 2.14% X 0.5) X 230,743 = 4,741 + 695 + 5,436 Income category Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate 1990 Regional 1999 Income RHND Income Percentage Percentage Allocation 20.7% 14.7% 796 11.6% 9.8% 531 26.3% 26.5% 1,441 41.3% 49.1% 2,668 1990 Income Percentage 8.8% 8.7% 26.6% 55.9% Methodo!ogy_. Hp_m___e AT F^OHMENT http://www.abag.ca.gov/cgi-bin/rhnd_meth.pl 07/01/2000 REVISED SCHEDULE ini:iate I/m:si!:gI I [m,sil:g M~:rhodoh~gy l'hmsing Methodolo!~y Housing Methodology Methodohwv (Mmmi~:eel C,mm.m'~.,: :q":*'"gl . Cmm~ittee Meeting Committee Meedng April '2 ~e Ap:'i~ 22' May ! 4 June 4 & June 18 ' gxec Bo:u'd Ai,p~oves ~ L&GO comments · Commntce March 18~ ,~,, , . I · Junel7 ~,~=~L . · . .I ~__ ~ r I Executive Board ~ I'ICD pmvi&.~ r~'gl,mal Executive Board Reviews Methodology Im,~sing need numbers al?roves methodology July i 5 I ~ I , l,msu,, N-,'dm,,.,I,~, v. ABAG staff releases i Commitrce mcerin:$< to the regional numbers I review draiN' numbers and I i mcdmdni%F I I( 11 ) Ihrmally approves ~ h~cal share resuhs J SmiY us~.s m,:dm,l,4,L y, - 90-day review . ........ ~. ti.cd period re-initiated by ~ .,~.,m.,,,~ ,,., ,,='d',m*: ABAG Executive Board [ Allocation ~. · A~A G l:ka:uti~,e Board (Februa~ 1) '. hklm j ' ".,h [ (May 18) ': -. '~: (/u,~ I). , I 9~Mk~y rcvit:w :..:¥ :C"- . : ':;;'! .?.~dli~ie~:fi~'~'~is&Th'b~l '5 '~tBA~ 60-day ,'er/,v,,e ,o AIIA(? ,e'l,,,,se to l:v~c,tti,,~ba~da'' roves . "Localj~o.isdlction~'be~i, · ;:.;;~:. .,. . ,~ .,....;:, ...'i ..... ., . · .. · ,, · . ._ ...... ~p : .... '; '.'.7 .:..., · .:' .;: :,comment~on Regmnal : .icommentrperma oe;¢im /ttrisdictional 'finalnnmbers process ofrevhingHousing '."' :".' . ..'~ .';.;::::':.':c::.~:~ll3~at~:'~i~, .:-:: ' · ' ' , /, . - · '-' - .... '~..";. :;'e, ....... " ...... :.~ .... ~ . ' ': ...... co,,m fur ~. ~ ....... ' · :;.. ' ':.:': ~.. ~lF~hF, ts I- - ' - :,'.¢.i z),."-: ;},',~,=;k¢, ~'!C;"7~;5;~:;;"" ::,,:;::::! , ,:',.':.:" :.' ' " ..... . :: ~ . ...v . . ::' ~. :.;.':::i':,::;:;;;;:5't.7:::.:;..::.t?~.xk"::':.7::'..: ... ', ::: '. · .. . , .'..- ..-,. ~-'/-r;:. ,.)~,, ~z#~}~ ;~¢~;?~?¥;~57,?~:.~¢?~¢5%~?:;;;~:..'?;?~:~'¢~;:.::?~ ~ ~,c~.~,~: .:.:.,.:::..:.. ~.:. '. ~::~:::::~,~..:;~,~..;~'¢,~;~.;:.,:~':;~ -. I..: .-.. ..' .':..,..":".-.',.::.,.:..,;~,.. "::.: ,~ .... ':' [ . '.-" ':.. · . ;~ . :':., , :.: .'.; ~' .,.,: ':.. ; '.; ' ,.. '..:~: