Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.4 Impact Fee Assistance Second Units CITY CLERK File #' D~~[]-~[] AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: March 20, 2007 SUBJECT: Proposed Impact Fee Assistance Program (IF AP) for Second Units. Report prepared by John Lucero, Housing Specialist ATTACHMENTS: 1) City Council Staff Report dated January 16, 2007 (without attachments) . 2) Draft Housing Committee Meeting Minutes dated February 15, 2007. RECOMMENDATION: Receive Staff presentation and provide direction as follows: 1) Determine whether the City's Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee , ./1. ~ ~ Fund should be used to subsidize second unit impact fees; / \ {/I...f"r 2) Determine the amount of subsidy to be granted based on the percentage of fee assistance and the size of the unit to which the fee assistance applies; 3) Determine an amount for each Fiscal year to allocate towards the Impact Fee Assistance Program (IF AP); and 4) Determine whether a 30 years rent restriction should be a condition of receiving assistance. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The proposed IF AP for Second Units would be funded from the Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund. The amount of the fee assistance from the Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund would vary based on the annual cap funding decided by the City Council. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Background: At the City Council meeting of January 16, 2007, Staff presented a report on options for a proposed Impact Fee Assistance Program (IF AP) for Second Units funded from the Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund (Attachment 1). Staff suggested the following options for City Council consideration: . Option 1 - Pay a portion of the Impact Fees from the City's Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund in exchange for guaranteeing affordability for a set period of time for in-fill second units. Option 2 - Provide Fee Assistance (with Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Funds) for the payment of Impact Fees based on the proposed size of the Second Unit. . ------------------------------------------------------~------------------------------------------------------ COPY TO: In-House Distribution Page 1 of 4 ITEM No.li E:\2nd Unit StC Rptdoc CJ The City Council directed Staff to work with the Housing Committee to recommend the implementation of an IF AP. After meeting with the Housing Committee, Staff would then return to the City Council with the Housing Committee's recommendations. At the Housing Committee meeting on February 15, 2007, the Committee discussed the Proposed IFAP for Second Units. During the meeting, the Housing Committee received a presentation from Staff, input from a current applicant for a building permit to add a Second Unit to their home, and input from a representative of a company that builds manufactured homes. Following the presentation and public input, the Committee discussed the topic and voted to make the following recommendations to the City Council: · Adoption of an IF AP for Second Units; · Financial assistance for Impact Fees would be provided with Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Funds; and · The IF AP assistance should be based on the proposed square footage of the second unit and restrict rents to low or very low-income households for 30 years. ANALYSIS: The proposed IF AP would provide for fee assistance based on the size of the second unit. The smaller the square footage of the second unit, the less impact there would be on services; therefore, the greater the fee assistance. For example, if the unit square footage is: · 275 to 500 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 75% · 501 to 700 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 50% · 701 to 1,000 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 25% Table 1 illustrates the estimates for the minimum and maximum Impact Fees for second unit projects and fee assistance based on the size of the unit and restriction of the rent to low or very low-income households for 30 years. Table 1: Impact Fees and Fee Assistance Based on Square Footage and Restricts Rent to Very Low and Low Income Households for 30 Years Minimum and Full City Impact fees with Impact fees with Impact fees with Maximum Impact Fees 25% Fee Assistance 50% Fee Assistance 75% Fee Costs Assistance 701 to 1000 Square 501 to 700 Square 275 to 500 Square Feet Feet Feet Minimum $18,899.00 Applicant Fee Applicant Fee Applicant Fee $14,174.25 $9,449.50 $4,724.75 IF AP Assistance IF AP Assistance IF AP Assistance $4,724.75 $9,449.50 $14.174.25 Maximum $33,094.02 Applicant Fee Applicant Fee Applicant Fee $24,820.51 $16,547.01 $8,273.51 IF AP Assistance IF AP Assistance IF AP Assistance $8,273.51 16,547.01 $24,820.51 Page 2 of 4 Staff recommends a yearly funding cap for the IF AP. As more second units are built, the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund would decrease; therefore reducing money that could be available for other affordable housing programs. The City Council should consider the following options in determining a funding cap: If for example, the City Council approved a yearly funding cap of $100,000, the number of households served would vary based on the square footage of the unit and the number of proposed second units to be constructed. Based on an average fee assistance of $12,998 per household (calculated from Table 1 above), the IFAP could fund on average eight households yearly with $100,000. While historically, the City of Dublin has received one or two applications from residents for building permits to add Second Units to their homes in Dublin. This past year the City had three such requests. This program would not include Fee Assistance for Second Units that are being constructed as part of a development proposal to satisfy the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. The intent of the Housing Element was not to reduce the amount of money going into the program from developers; rather it was to help create new units in In-Fill areas of the City. The recommended IFAP for second units would also be consistent with the Housing Element Program Goal D as follows: Goal D: To Preserve and increase the efficient use of the Citv's existinz housing stock. Policy I: Encourage efficient use of existing housing stock; promote development of small units at low cost. Program D.I.I. To encourage homeowners to create second units with affordable rents for very low-and low-income households, the City will provide financial assistance through its Inclusionary Housing Fund to construct second units in exchange for deed restrictions, limiting rents, and rent increase for 30 years. The City Council may elect to reward applicants who agree to limit the rent to an affordable level for very low and low-income individuals for thirty years. The benefit of this approach would encourage efficient use of existing housing stock by promoting development of second units at a reduced cost. Furthermore, units built under the IF AP would be eligible to be included in the calculation of Dublin's Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers because the units would be rent-restricted for 30 years. Additionally, the IFAP will be added to Dublin's successes in demonstrating that the City achieved its Housing Element goals, especially when the upcoming Housing Element Update is reviewed by the State. NEXT STEPS: The City Council should consider the Housing Committee's recommendation and provide Staff with direction. If the City Council were to move forward with the Housing Committee's recommendation, Staff would return to Council at a future meeting with an IF AP for Second Units to be adopted by Resolution and a Budget Change Form, if applicable. Page 3 of 4 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive Staff presentation and provide direction as follows: 1) Determine whether the City's Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund should be used to subsidize second unit impact fees; 2) Determine the amount of subsidy to be granted based on the percentage of fee assistance and the size of the unit to which the fee assistance applies; 3) Determine an amount for each Fiscal year to allocate towards the Impact Fee Assistance Program (IFAP); and 4) Determine whether a30 year rent restriction should be a condition of receiving assistance. Page 4 of4 CITY CLERK File # D~~lOJ-~~ '&t '3 AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 16,2007 SUBJECT: Proposed Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units Report Prepared by John Lucero, Housing Specialist and Jeri Ram, Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Impact Fees Applicable to Second Units RECOMMENDATION: <1#' 1. of- \ ~: 4. 5. Receive Staff presentation; Deliberate; Direct Staff to proceed with the development of an Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units pursuant to Option 1; OR Select another Option; OR Provide Staff with direction. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: An Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units would be funded from the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund. The amount of the fee assistance from the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund would vary based on the option selected and the number of second residential. units that are constructed. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Background: ill 2006 the City of Dublin received three applications for' building permits to add attached or detached Second Units to their homes in Dublin. Two of the applications are in the Primary Planning Area (west of Dougherty Road), and one is in the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Area (EDSP A). In November, the first Second Unit was ready for issuance of the Building Permit. After receiving the estimates of charges from the City for the building permit, the Applicant expressed concerns over the amount of the Impact Fees that are imposed and collected prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Applicant indicated that the Impact Fees created a financial burden and might cause him to not build the Second Unit. '. On January 9, 2007, the Applicant for the second building permit in the Primary Planning Area was informed that the building permit was ready to be issued. When the Applicant learned about the cost ofthe City's Impact Fees, he indicated that this presented a financial hardship and expressed concerns with the affordability of the project. The Applicant indicated that he would have to go forward because he had already purchased a manufactured building to be used as the Second Unit. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - COpy TO: In-House Distribution , ~,~ K:\Agenda Statements\2006\City Council\SR 2nd unit Impact Fees,1-9-07 .DOC Attachment 1ft The third application, which is in EDSP A, is still in plan check and not ready for building permit issuance. Staffhas been unsuccessful in reaching the Applicant to discuss the Impact Fees. it o Impact Fees: While a Second Unit may sound like a small project, Impact Fees are developed by estimating the ultimate need at City buildout for City infrastructure and services such as fire stations, parks, roadways, civic buildings, and police facilities. Such Impact Fees apply to all residential development, including the construction of Second Units. After determining the ultimate need, a formula was created that equitably spread the cost of the infrastructure and services for each type of project. This analysis was performed in a special study for each type of Impact Fee that the City"charges. The type of fee study and analysis that is performed is strictly regulated by State law. In addition, Impact Fees are also charged by other agencies. These agencies require that Impact Fees be paid by the Applicant prior to the City issuing building permits. Other agencies who charge impact fees include Dublin Unified School District (DUSD) which charges for Second Units over 500 sq.ft.; Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD); and Zone 7. Second Units: Second Units are defined as residential units with separate kitchens, sleeping, and bathroom facilities, which is a part of, an extension to, or detached from, a detached single-family residence, and which is subordinate to the principal residence. (Zoning Ordinance S 8.08.020.) Pursuant to the City's Second Unit Regulations, the size of a Second Unit shall be not less than 275 square feet, nor more than 1,000 square feet. (Zoning Ordinance S 8.80.040.D.) Further, in no case shall a Second Unit exceed 35% of the total floor area of the existing single-family residence. (Ibid.) Historically, the State of California has encouraged, by enacting various laws, Second Units in residentially- zoned districts all over the State. The State regulations are implemented through each jurisdiction's Housing Element of the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. As part ofthe Housing Element, policies are set forth to help create new affordable housing and that seek to remove barriers to providing affordable housing. The State encourages Second Units as one way to provide affordable housing. The City of Dublin Housing Element has a Goal, Policy and Program directly related to the development of an Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units:. . Goal D: To Preserve and increase the efficient use of the City's existing housing stock. Policy I: Encourage efficient use of existing housing stock; promote development of small units at low cost. Program D.I.I. To encourage homeowners to create second units with affordable rentsfor very low-and low-income households, the City will provide financial assistance through its Inclusionary Housing Fund to construct second units in exchange for deed restrictions, limiting rents, and rent increase for 30 years. The City's Second Unit Regulations enable homeowners to apply for building permits for Second Units without going through a public hearing process. The City's building permit review for Second Units includes a review by Staff for consistency with the City's Second Units Regulations and all applicable building and fire codes. In addition, as noted above, prior to issuance of building permits, Impact Fees are imposed on Second Units. Inclusionary Zoning: 3 rlb 18> In July 1996, the City Council adopted an Ordinance establishing the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations for the City of Dublin. (Zoning Ordinance Chapter 8.68.) The purpose of the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations is to enhance public welfare and assure that further housing development contributes to increasing the production and provide funds for the development of residential units affordable by households of very low, low, and moderate income for ownership and/or rental housing. The City's Inclusionary Zoning Regulations require that a percentage of the units be restricted as affordable to very low, low and moderate income households. Over the years, developers have been required to either: 1) build all 12.5 % of the total number of units within a development as affordable units; or 2) build 7.5% of the total number of units within a development as affordable units and pay a monetary contribution in the amount of the remaining 5% of the total number of units within the development into the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund. Inclusionary units must remain affordable for a period of 55 years, through affordability restrictions recorded against the property. Since 1996, the majority of the production of new affordable units under the Inclusionary Zoning Regulations has been within the EDSP A where most of the new development in the City has occurred. However, the City has used the monies collected in the fuc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund to participate in affordable housing projects by providing below market rate loans in both the EDSP A and in the Primary Planning Area. To date, housing developments that have benefited from the fuclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund with below market rate loans are: Wicklow Square, an affordable rental senior housing complex, and Fairway Ranch, which includes a multi-family and senior rental housing. fu addition, Dublin's First Time Homebuyer Loan Program is funded with Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Funds. ANALYSIS: Based on City and other agency ordinances and requirements, Second Units must pay Impact Fees. The ~ollowing table sets forth the Impact Fee requirement for each of the three Second Units that the City has III process: Table 1: Impact Fees for Second Units in Process Project Location Tri- Valley All Non- Total City Plus Other I.D. Transportation . TVTD City Impact Fees Impact Fees Development (TVTD) Impact including Fee Fees DUSD, Zone 7 and DSRSD Proj ect 1 Primary Attached Unit: $1,200 $17,699 $18,899 $ 8,423 Planning Area Proj ect 2 Primary Detached Unit: $1,888 $17,699 $19,587 $13,019 Planning Area Project 3 Eastern Detached Unit: $1,888 $31,206 $33,094 $15,515 Dublin I Specific Plan Area The City hnpact Fees for Second Units are calculated based on formulas in each of the City's hnpact Fee Ordinances. A breakdown of the Impact Fees applicable to Second Units is attached to this report L/t)3 (Attachment 1). . As noted above, the majority of new developments of affordable housing units have been in the EDSP A. The City Council could, if desired, create a new program for just the Primary Planning Area or. both the Primary Planning Area and the EDSP A that would use monies from the Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund (per Program D.1.1 of the Housing Element) to pay for all or a portion of the Impact Fees for Second Units. It is recommended that any program approved by the City Council be limited to in-fill projects only. This would reserve the program for existing City homeowners and keep it separate from the City's Inc1usionary Zoning Ordinance. It is anticipated that the majority of requests for Second Units will be from the Primary Planning Area for the following reasons: . Lot Size - In the Primary Planning Area residential lot sizes tend to be larger than in the EDSP A; . Lot Coverage - Due to the larger lot sizes in the Primary Planning Area, a principal residence and second unit are more likely to be possible. In most instances, homes in the EDSP A are built at their maximum lot coverage area; and, . Parking Requirements - Homes in the Primary Planning Area are more likely to have the ability for an extra parking space (as required in the Second Unit Ordinance) than in the EDSP A. Staff is suggesting the following options for City Council consideration: OPTION 1 - Pay a portion of the Impact Fees from the City's Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund in exchange for guaranteeing affordability for a set time period for In-Fill Second Units. The City Council may elect to adopt an Impact Fee Assistance Program for In-Fill Second Units that would assist applicants of Second Units with the payment of Impact Fees. The Inclusionary Zoning In- Lieu Fee Funds could be used to pay all or a portion of the required Impact Fees. This report refers to this as "Fee Assistance." Although the City's Inc1usionary Zoning Regulations provides that units must remain affordable for a period of 5 5 years, the Housing Element provides that the City will provide financial assistance through its Inc1usionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund to construct Second Units in exchange for deed restrictions, limiting rents, and rent increase for 30 years. Therefore, the proposed Option 1 applies the 30 year affordability restriction. This Option 1 would reward Applicants who agree to limit the rent to an affordable level for very low and low income individuals. The City of Dublin uses the State of California Housing and Community Development Income Guidelines by County for income and rent thresholds. For very low and low income individuals, rents may not exceed 30% of the maximum income level. Additionally, this Option 1 would provide greater assistance should the Applicant agree to a rental restriction for very low income, and a graduated scale based on length oftime. The longer the unit is rent restricted, the greater the Fee Assistance. Table 2A below illustrates the estimated Impact Fees supported by various percentages of Fee Assistance for the three Second Unit projects based on the length of time the unit is rent restricted as affordable to low income households. Table 2A: Impact Fees with Fee Assistance Based on Time of Affordability for Low Income 5tJ!~ Project I.D. Full Impact Fee Impact fee Impact fee Impact fee with 25% Fee with 50% Fee with 75% Fee Assistance Assistance Assistance No Affordability 15 Years 25 Years 30 Years Afford ab ilitv Affordabilitv Affordabllity Proi ect One $18,899.00 $14,174.25 $ 9,449.50 $ 4,724.75 Project Two $19,587.00 $14,690.25 $ 9,793.50 $ 4,896.75 Proi ect Three $33,094.02 $24,820.52 $16,547.01 $ 8,273.51 Table 2B below illustrates the estimated hnpact Fee supported by various percentages of Fee Assistance for the three Second Unit projects based on the length of time the unit is rent restricted as affordable to very-low income households. Table 2B: Impact Fees with Fee Assistance Based on Time of Affordability for Very Low Income Project I.D. Full Impact Fee Impact fee Impact fee Impact fee with 35% Fee with 600/0 Fee with 850/0 Fee Assistance Assistance Assistance No Affordability 15 Years 25 Years 30 Years Affordability Affordability Affordabllity Proiect One $18,899.00 $12,284.35 $ 7,559.60 $2,834.85 Project Two $19,587.00 $12,731.55 $ 7,834.80 $2,938.05 Proiect Three $33,094.02 $21,511.11 $13,237.61 $4,964.10 The benefits of this approach would be: · The Fee Assistance Program for Second Units would be consistent with the Housing Element Program Dl.I, which would assist in demonstrating that the City achieved its Housing Element Goals, especially when the upcoming Housing Element Update is reviewed by the State; . Units built under this option could be counted towards the' City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation because they would be rent-restricted; · The City's Fee Assistance Program for Second Units may encourage second residential units in the Primary Planning Area where there are not as many affordable units being constructed as in the EDSP A; and, . An increase in Second Residential Units would provide a different type of affordable housing. Some ofthe concerns related to this approach would be: · If many second units were built, the City would have a reduction in the amount of money available for other affordable housing programs; . . This Option 1 does not include Fee Assistance for Second Units that are being constructed as part of a development proposal to satisfy the requirements of the Inc1usionary Zoning Ordinance. Developers may wish to take advantage of this Fee Assistance Program; however, to 40 so, there would be a reduction in the overall amount that the City collects for affordable housing. The intent of the Housing Element was not to reduce the amount of money going into the program from developers; rather it was to help create new units in In-Fill areas of the City; we;b.. i 3> . The variety of time periods on affordability will require more monitoring by Staff; and, . As properties resell, new homeowners may not wish to comply with the affordability restrictions under the Fee Assistance Program; thus, ensuring compliance may take more Staff time. The City Attorney has indicated that where excess rent is charged for Second Units subject to the affordability restrictions imposed by the Fee Assistance Program, the City may take appropria~e legal action to recover the excess rent charged, as well as any other appropriate remedy. OPTION 2 - Provide Fee Assistance (with Inc1usionarv Zoning In-Lieu Fee Funds) for the navment of Impact Fees based on the proposed size of the Second Unit for Second Units. The rationale for the Fee Assistance provided in Option 2 is that the smaller the square footage of the second unit, the less impact there would be on services, therefore, the greater the Fee Assistance. For example, if the unit square footage is: 275 to 500 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 75% 501 to 700 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 50% 701 to 1,000 square feet, the Fee Assistance would be 25% Table 3 below illustrates the estimated Impact Fees Jor the three Second Unit projects after Fee Assistance based on the size of Second Unit. Table 3: Impact Fees with Fee Assistance Based on Square Footage Project I.D. Full City Impact fee Impact fee Impact fee Impact fees Impact Fee with 250/0 Fee with 50% Fee with 75% Fee from Other Assistance Assistance Assistance A!encies 701 to 1000 501 to 700 275 to 500 Sauare Feet Square Feet SQuare Feet Project One $18,899.00 $14,174.25 $ 9,449.50 $4,724.25 $ 8,423 Project Two $19,587.00 $14,690.25 $ 9,793.50 $4,896.75 $13,019 PrOl ect Three $33,094.02 $24,820.52 $16,547.01 $8,273.51 . $15,515 A sub-option to this Option 2 would be to restrict the rent to low or very low income households for 30 years, similar to Option 1 above. The benefits of this approach would be: . Encourage efficient use of existing housing stock by promoting development of smaller units at a low cost; · Would lessen the financial burden to homeowners that want to provide Second Units; and, · Would provide housing that is "affordable by design" rather than restricted to a certain income range, which would be another alternative type of affordable housing, Some of the concerns related to this approach would be: . If many Second Units were built, the City would have a reduction in the amount of money -7 vb 1..3 available for other affordable housing programs; . This Option 2 is not consistent with the Program identified in the City's adopted Housing Element because it does not guarantee affordability and units could not be counted towards the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation; . This Option 2 does not include fee assistance for Second Units that are being constructed as part of a development proposal to satisfy the requirements of the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. . Developers may wish to take advantage of this Fee Assistance Program; however, to do so, there would be a reduction in the overall amount that the City collects for affordable housing. The intent of the Housing Element was not to reduce the amount of money going into the program from developers; rather it was to help create new units in in-fill areas of the City; and, . The Second Units would not be rent restricted and could be rented at a rate that would not be affordable. However, if the City Council wanted to further explore this approach, Staff could draft a program that restricts the rents for a certain term. OPTION 3 - Forward To Housin2: Committee The Council may elect to refer this matter to the Housing Committee for their consideration. It should be noted that two of the building permits are ready to be issued. The Applicants may be concerned with the delay in the City Council's decision. OPTION 4 - Not Adopt An Impact Fee Assistance Pro2:ram for Second Units The City Council may elect to do nothing and not adopt an Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units. This Option 4 would reserve monies in the lnclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund for other programs or assistance. However, a consequence may be that less Second Units would be constructed. Additionally, the option would not be consistent with the goals ofthe Housing Element, as note above. NEXT STEPS: The City Council should consider the Options listed above and provide Staffwith direction. If the City Council were to select Options 1 or 2, Staff would return to Council at a future meeting with an Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units to be adopted by Resolution ofthe City Council and a Budget Change Form, if applicable. If the City Council were to select Option 3, referral to tbe Housing Committee, Staff would schedule the item for tbe next possible Housing Committee Agenda. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council 1 ) Receive Staff presentation; 2) Deliberate; 3) Direct Staff to proceed with the development of an Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units pursuant to Option 1; OR 4) Select another Option; OR 5) Provide Staffwith direction. IMPACT FEES APPLICABLE TO SECOND UNITS ..~13 Impact Fees were established to pay for the design, development and construction of public improvement projects for: streets; public facilities; parks; and fire capital expansion projects. The amounts charged for Impact Fees are dependent upon the type and size of a particular development and are based upon related studies, conducted prior to the adoption of the fees. Fees are updated on an annual basis based upon various cost indexes. The Impact Fees for low density, single detached homes in the Primary Planning area include: $6,921 $4,157 $2,732 $1,075 $328 $1,616 $1,200 or $1 ,888 (attached vs. detached) $870 $18,899 or $19,587 attached VS. detached The Impact Fees for the Eastern Dublin Specific Plan area include: Land, Community Parks Fee $6,921 Improvements, Community Parks $4,157 Community Buildings $2,732 Libraries $1,075 Civic Center $328 Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee (this fee $1,200 or $1,888 (attached vs. detached) varies) Fire Impact Fee $870 Neighborhood Parks, Land $4,060 Improvements, Neighborhood Parks $1,801 Aquatic Center $463 Freeway Interchange Fee $289.28 Traffic impact Fee - Category 1 $5,752 Traffic Impact Fee - Category 2 $1,517 Traffic Impact Fee - Category 2 (BART) $1,236 Noise Mitigation Fee $4.74 TOTAL $32,406.02 or 33,094.02 (attached vs. detached) DRAFT '1 'b I.> DRAFT A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Housing Committee was held on Thursday f ebruary 15, 2007 in the Dublin Civic Center Regional Meeting Room, 100 Civic Plaza, Dublin. Community Development Director Jeri Ram called the meeting to order at 6:05p.m. CALL TO ORDERJROLL CALL Present: Chair Mary Rose Parkman; Committee Members Christine Kaehuaea, Steve Murdoch, Ronald De Diemar, Kathy Avanzino, Dale Garren, Lynn Locke and Don Biddle; Jeri Ram, Community Development Director; John Lucero, Housing Specialist Gaylene Burkett Housing Assistant; and Rhonda franklin, Recording Secretary. ORAL COMMUNICATION - None MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS The February 15, 2007 minutes were approved as submitted. WRlTIEN COMMUNICATIONS - None NEW BUINESS 6.1 Proposed Impact Fee Assistance Program for Second Units Mr. John Lucero, Housing Specialist presented the specifics of the proposed Impact Fee Assistance Program. Cm. Avanzino asked if the second units would be rent restricted. Mr. Lucero responded that the current affordable rent restrictions would apply to the second units. The rent for the second units would not exceed beyond 35% of an individual's income. Cm. De Diemar asked when would applicants find out about the impact fees. Mr. Lucero responded that after the applicants submit their application for the construction of the second units, Staff would draft a letter giving the details of all applicable fees. There was a concern among the Committee members regarding the impact fees being charged. Staff (Ms. Jeri Ram and Mr. Lucero) explained that impact fees are charged to sustain the level of services being provided to the community. The City is proposing to assist the community by providing applicants with fee assistance through the Inclusionary Zoning In- Lieu Fee Fund. Housing Committee 10 February 15, 2007 ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFf f /2.. e~ Cm. Garren asked what would happen if the home were foreclosed. Mr. Lucero responded that the City is in the process of creating a framework for this Program and would need to work on the details. Cm. Garren asked what if a homeowner constructed the second units, but does not offer it for rent Mr. Lucero responded that the City would enter into an agreement with the homeowner which would state, "should the homeowner rent the unit at any given time then it will be rented to a very low-, or low-income household." Cm. Locke expressed her concerns regarding the validity of the Program if the unit were never rented. Mr. Lucero responded that such questions were raised during the January 16, 2007 City Council meeting and the City Council directed Staff to seek input from the Housing Committee. Cm. De Diemar noted that there would be a time when the elderly parents living in the second units may pass on and at that time, potentially, there will be a market rate unit next to an affordable unit Cm. De Diemar asked Staff if the homeowner were to sell the property and at the time of the sale, is there an option for the homeowner to pay back the loan, receive the credits due and opt-out on the affordability of the unit? Mr. Lucero responded that the City may look into this possibility. There was a general discussion among the Committee members regarding the acceptability of renting the second unit primarily for providing a space for elderly parents and college students. Hearing no further questions or comments from the Committee members, Mr. Lucero opened the meeting for public comment Mr. Steve Laos, from Valley Home Development, commented on the demand for second units and their use. Valley Home Development has constructed the second unit for Mr. Sam Sendee, a homeowner in Dublin. Mr. Laos indicated that a mC!iority of the requests received by his company are for housing elderly parents in the second units. Chair Parkman asked Mr. Laos what was the typical square footage for these units. Mr. Laos indicated that they are typically in the range of 350 - 1000 square feet Cm. De Diemar asked Mr. Laos if, in his experience, the fees weren't subsidized then what would the demand be for second units. Mr. Laos responded that he would not be able to answer that question as the fees differ from area to area. The larger the area with larger infrastructure, the higher the fees would be to construct such units. There was a discussion among the Committee members regarding the consequences of the impact fees on future development. Mr. Sam Sendee, a resident of 8567 Galindo Drive, elaborated on his reasons for applying for a second unit. Mr. Sendee would like his elderly parents and sister to live in the second unit Mr. Sendee's sister would be assisting him in taking care of his elderly parents. Housing Committee II February 15, 2007 DRAFT 11....:1 l~''i II\')~ The Housing Committee members asked Mr. Sendee if he understood the guidelines for the second unit in terms of its affordability for 30 years. Mr. Sendee responded that he did understand, however, he was hoping for something more reasonable in terms of the fees being charged, as he has spent a considerable amount of money on the second unit Cm. Garren asked what programs the City is administering through the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund. Ms. Ram responded that the City is currently administering its First Time Homebuyer Loan Program through this fund. The City also provides loans for the development of affordable housing such as Wicklow Square and Fairway Ranch, and is also currently considering funding the revitalization of the Arroyo Vista site. She indicated that there were adequate funds available in the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund. Cm. Garren asked if this was a departure from regular affordable housing since it is not accessible to the community. Ms. Ram responded that the unit would be providing subsidized housing to a family member who cannot afford to rent elsewhere. There was a consensus among the Committee members that this was a creative way of providing an affordable unit in an existing development Mr. Lucero asked the Committee members to discuss whether they would like to recommend adopting the Impact Fee Assistance Program; and, if they are in favor of the Program, what option they would like to recommend to the City Council and state their reasons. Chair Parkman stated that she would like to recommend Option 2 along with the rent restriction as it was a practical and a fair option to calculate fees based on the square footage. Cm. Avanzino agreed with Chair Parkman and recommended Option 2, however, she would like to remove the rent restriction part of it as she felt that it was unfair to force the homeowner to conform to the inclusionary requirements in order to meet Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers. Cm. De Diemar stated that he would like to recommend Option l. He pointed out that choosing Option 2 may force homeowners to construct cramped units. There was a suggestion from Cm. Locke to apply a funding cap from the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund for this Program. Mr. Lucero responded that she could make this part of her recommendation to the City Council. Cm. Garren stated that he would agree with Cm. Locke and suggested that the City set aside money from the Inclusionary Zoning In-Lieu Fee Fund for this Program. Ms. Ram stated that currently the City has received only a few applications in the last 3-5 years. The City does not anticipate many construction of second units in the eastern Dublin area as the lots are very small. If development of second units were to occur, most likely they would be in the primary planning area. Housing Committee 12 February 15, 2007 DRAFT ItW Mr. Lucero reminded the Housing Committee Members that they first need to decide if they would like to recommend an Impact Fee Ac3sistance Program prior to voting on the Options. On a motion by Cm. De Diemar and seconded by Cm. Garren, the Housing Committee unanimously voted to recommend adopting an Impact Fee Ac3sistance Program. Cm. Locke asked Staffs reasons for recommending Option 1. Mr. Lucero explained in detail Staffs reasons for recommending Option I. The Housing Committee members had concerns restricting the second units for a fixed number of years. Ms. Ram pointed out that one of the goals in the Housing Element is to provide financial assistance through the indusionary funds for the construction of second units in exchange for deed restrictions, limiting rents and rent increase for 30 years. She indicated that this was an established policy and Staff is ensuring compliance to this Policy through the Program. Cm. Kaehuaea stated that she would like to recommend Option 2 along with the rent restriction since it is equitable. Cm. Murdock also recommended Option 2, along with the rent restrictions. Cm. Avanzino recommended Option 2, however, she did not want the rent restriction to be part of this option as she felt that the homeowner may not be aware about the Area Median Income (AMI) and the calculations involved, unless the City assists them in selecting their renters. Cm. Garren also recommended Option 2, along with the rent restrictions. Cm. Locke also concurred with Cm. Garren and recommended Option 2 with the rent restrictions. On a motion by Cm. Locke, seconded by Cm. Garren, with a 5.1-1 vote, with Cm. De Diemar voting against Option 2, Cm. Avanzlno abstaining to vote, the Housing Committee recommended Option 2 with the sub-option to rent restrict the unit along with the suggested modifications to set a funding cap and an opt-out clause for this Option. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None OTHER BUSINESS - None 8.1.1 Staff Updates Mr. Lucero reminded the Housing Committee regarding the upcoming Volunteer Recognition Dinner on February 23, 2007. Housing Committee 13 February 15, 2007 DRAFT ADJOURNMENT The meeting was acljoumed at 7:45 p.m. I-3DW Respectfully Submitted, Housing Committee Chair ATTESTED: Community Development Director K:\Housing Committee\Minutes\2-15-07.doc Housing Committee 14 February 15, 2007