Under existing law, supportive housing is a use by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted if the developer satisfies certain requirements. Existing law defines supportive housing as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in specified activities. Existing law requires a supportive housing development to include nonresidential floor area used for onsite services in specified amounts. In this regard, existing law requires a supportive housing development with more than 20 units to provide at least 3% of the total nonresidential floor area for onsite supportive services.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.

This bill would revise the above-described requirement for a supportive housing development with more than 20 units to, instead, require the supportive housing development provide at least 3% of the total floor area for onsite supportive services. The bill would authorize a supportive housing development to include administrative office space in its nonresidential floor area, provided that the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space does not exceed 25% of the total floor area. The bill would define administrative office space as an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development and other nonprofit operations. The bill would specify that administrative office space includes parking necessary to serve the office space. By expanding the use by right provisions to include administrative office space, the bill would expand the exemption for approval of ministerial projects under CEQA.

This bill would also specify that supportive housing specifically includes transitional housing for youth and young adults for purposes of the use by right provisions described above.

By requiring local officials to engage in expanded ministerial project approval, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Under existing law, supportive housing is a use by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted if the developer satisfies certain requirements. Existing law defines supportive housing as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in specified activities. Existing law requires a supportive housing development to include nonresidential floor area used for onsite services in specified amounts. In this regard, existing law requires a supportive housing development with more than 20 units to provide at least 3% of the total nonresidential floor area for onsite supportive services.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.

This bill would revise the above-described requirement for a supportive housing development with more than 20 units to, instead, require the supportive housing development provide at least 3% of the total floor area for onsite supportive services. The bill would authorize a supportive housing development to include administrative office space in its nonresidential floor area, provided that the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space does not exceed 25% of the total floor area. The bill would define administrative office space as an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development and other nonprofit operations. The bill would specify that administrative office space includes parking necessary to serve the office space. By expanding the use by right provisions to include administrative office space, the bill would expand the exemption for approval of ministerial projects under CEQA.

This bill would also specify that supportive housing specifically includes transitional housing for youth and young adults for purposes of the use by right provisions described above.

By requiring local officials to engage in expanded ministerial project approval, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Under existing law, supportive housing is a use by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted if the developer satisfies certain requirements. Existing law defines supportive housing as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in specified activities. Existing law requires a supportive housing development to include nonresidential floor area used for onsite services in specified amounts. In this regard, existing law requires a supportive housing development with less more than 20 units to provide at least 90 square feet 3% of the total nonresidential floor area for onsite supportive services.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.

This bill would revise the above-described requirement for a supportive housing development with more than 20 units to, instead, require the supportive housing development provide at least 3% of the total floor area for onsite supportive services. The bill would authorize a supportive housing development that is subject to the above-described use by right provisions to include administrative office space in its nonresidential floor area, provided that the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space does not exceed 50% 25% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units. area. The bill would define administrative office space as an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development and other nonprofit operations. The bill would specify that administrative office space includes parking necessary to serve the office space. By expanding the use by right provisions to include administrative office space, the bill would expand the exemption for approval of ministerial projects under CEQA.

This bill would also specify that supportive housing specifically includes transitional housing for youth and young adults for purposes of the use by right provisions described above.

By requiring local officials to engage in expanded ministerial project approval, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Under existing law, supportive housing is a use by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted if the developer satisfies certain requirements. Existing law defines supportive housing as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in specified activities. Existing law requires a supportive housing development to include nonresidential floor area used for onsite services in specified amounts. In this regard, existing law requires a supportive housing development with less than 20 units to provide at least 90 square feet for onsite supportive services.

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA does not apply to the approval of ministerial projects.

This bill would authorize a supportive housing development that is subject to the above-described use by right provisions to include administrative office space in its nonresidential floor area, provided that the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space does not exceed 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units. The bill would define administrative office space as an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development and other nonprofit operations. The bill would specify that administrative office space includes parking necessary to serve the office space. By expanding the use by right provisions to include administrative office space, the bill would expand the exemption for approval of ministerial projects under CEQA.

This bill would also specify that supportive housing specifically includes transitional housing for youth and young adults for purposes of the use by right provisions described above.

By requiring local officials to engage in expanded ministerial project approval, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 1801

Author:(Jackson)

As Amended Ver:June 27, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Allows a supportive housing development utilizing the by-right process in current law to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, up to certain limits.

Senate Amendments

1. Reduce the amount of a development that may be dedicated to administrative office space from 50% to 25% of the total floor area.
2. Revise the requirements for a development with more than 20 units to require at least 3% of the total floor area, rather than the total nonresidential floor area, to be provided for onsite supportive services.
3. Make other minor changes.

COMMENTS

Supportive Housing: State law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive housing is widely acknowledged as a cost-effective model for providing housing and services to people who would otherwise be institutionalized or at risk of institutionalization, as well as reducing chronic homelessness.

Despite its successes, supportive housing continues to face challenges. Supportive housing projects are often opposed by neighborhood groups that are concerned about the impact of such developments on the surrounding area. Because the land use approval process requires many steps and public hearings, and affords local governments a wide degree of latitude to deny or condition projects, opponents of supportive housing have historically been able to use these processes to block projects. CEQA has also been used to block projects that do not otherwise qualify for an exemption.

Streamlining: Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. Some local ordinances provide "streamlined" or "ministerial" processes for approving projects that are permitted "by right" – the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meeting standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under CEQA, while projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

SB 2 (Cedillo), Chapter 663, Statutes of 2008, took the first step toward removing local land use barriers for emergency shelters and supportive housing by requiring localities to accommodate their need for emergency shelters on sites where the use is allowed without a conditional use permit (CUP), and requiring cities and counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use of property. Local governments must treat supportive housing the same as other multifamily residential housing for zoning purposes and can only apply the same restrictions on multifamily housing in the same zone to supportive housing.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use "by right" in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

The author’s office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as "Office/Administrative." This would be considered a non-conforming use, and may require a CUP to proceed. If CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and a lengthy and costly discretionary approval process is required.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill would make clear that a supportive housing development may include administrative office space in certain amounts and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162. Specifically, the amount of administrative office space to support the office space must not exceed 25% of the total floor area. The bill defines "administrative office space" to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space used by a nonprofit to provide onsite supportive services and other nonprofit operations that may be beyond the scope of the attached supportive housing development, as well as parking necessary to support the office.

This modification could help a nonprofit service organization co-locate its administrative offices with onsite services within a streamlined, ministerially approved supportive housing development, cutting down on overhead costs and reducing the need for leasing additional commercial office space. The co-location may benefit the supportive housing residents as well, if the office spaces can be used for resident service needs like benefits paperwork processing, case management, office printing, and other services onsite.

According to the Author

"California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive."

Arguments in Support

East Bay Leadership Council supports the bill.

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) estimates ongoing costs of approximately $277,000 annually for 1.0 PY of legal staff to provide information, guidance, and technical assistance to local jurisdictions, to coordinate with the Attorney General, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, and the Governor’s Office to determine when enforcement actions are warranted, and to support and assist in any negotiations or litigation. (General Fund)
2. Unknown local costs to update guidance and procedures regarding supportive housing developments that are a use "by right" in certain zones. While the bill could impose new costs on local agencies to revise planning requirements for certain developments, and providing for streamlined and expedited review of those projects, these costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies have general authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees to cover their administrative expenses associated with new planning mandates. (Local funds)

VOTES:

ASM HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 9-0-0

YES: Ward, Joe Patterson, Grayson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Sanchez, Wilson

ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 9-0-0

YES: Juan Carrillo, Waldron, Alanis, Haney, Kalra, Pacheco, Ramos, Ward, Wilson

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Jim Patterson, Pellerin, Ta, Villapudua

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0-7

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas

SENATE FLOOR: 40-0-0

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Ashby, Atkins, Becker, Blakespear, Bradford, Caballero, Cortese, Dahle, Dodd, Durazo, Eggman, Glazer, Gonzalez, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, Menjivar, Min, Newman, Nguyen, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Portantino, Roth, Rubio, Seyarto, Skinner, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Umberg, Wahab, Wiener, Wilk

UPDATED

VERSION: June 27, 2024

CONSULTANT: Nicole Restmeyer / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0004292

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 1801

Author: Jackson (D)

Amended: 6/27/24 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE HOUSING COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/4/24

AYES: Skinner, Ochoa Bogh, Blakespear, Caballero, Cortese, Menjivar, Seyarto, Umberg, Wahab

NO VOTE RECORDED: Padilla

SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE: 7-0, 6/26/24

AYES: Durazo, Seyarto, Dahle, Glazer, Skinner, Wahab, Wiener

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/15/24

AYES: Caballero, Jones, Ashby, Becker, Bradford, Seyarto, Wahab

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Supportive housing: administrative office space

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST:

This bill allows a supportive housing development utilizing a by-right approval process in current law to also include administrative office space in the floor area of the development, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes a streamlined, by-right process for supportive housing in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, if the proposed housing development satisfies the following requirements:
   1. Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for 55 years;
   2. One hundred percent of the units, excluding managers’ units, within the development are restricted to lower income households and are or will be receiving public funding to ensure affordability of the housing to lower income Californians, as specified;
   3. At least 25% of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, are restricted to residents in supportive housing who meet criteria of the target population. If the development consists of fewer than 12 units, then 100% of the units, excluding managers’ unit, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing;
   4. The developer provides the planning agency with certain specified information;
   5. Nonresidential floor area must be used for onsite supportive services, as specified.
   6. The developer replaces any dwelling units on the site of the supportive housing development in the manner provided as specified; and
   7. Units within the development include at least one bathroom and a kitchen or other cooking facilities, including, at a minimum, a stovetop, sink, and refrigerator.
2. Allows a local government to require a supportive housing development subject to the by-right approval process to comply with written, objective development standards and policies. The standards and policies must also apply generally to other multifamily development within the same zone.
3. Defines “supportive housing” to mean housing where:
   1. At least 40% of the units are targeted to individuals or families experiencing chronic homelessness, homeless youth, or individuals exiting institutional settings who were homeless when entering the institutional setting, have a disability, and who resided in the setting for at least 15 days; and
   2. The project provides or demonstrates collaboration with programs that provide services that meet the needs of the residents, among other requirements.

This bill:

1. Allows administrative office space to be included in the nonresidential floor area of a proposed supportive housing project seeking to utilize a by-right process.
2. Defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development entitled to by-right approval process, and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. Limits the total floor area dedicated to “administrative office space” that may be included in a streamlined project to no more than 25% of the total floor area.
4. Modifies the definition of “supportive housing” under specified law to specifically include nonresidential uses and administrative office space, as defined, as well as transitional housing for youth and young adults.

Comments

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, "California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive."
2. Streamlining housing for the homeless. Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. Some local ordinances provide “streamlined” or “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by-right” – the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meeting standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), while projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu, Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018)), created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use “by-right” in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

1. What counts as nonresidential space? The author’s office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as “Office/Administrative.” Office/Administrative space could be considered a “non-conforming use,” and may require a developer to seek a conditional use permit (CUP) to proceed. If a CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and subjecting the project to a lengthy and costly discretionary approval.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill would make clear that a supportive housing development may include administrative office space in certain amounts and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162. Specifically, the amount of administrative office space to support the office space must not exceed 25% of the total floor area. The bill defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space used by a nonprofit to provide onsite supportive services and other nonprofit operations that may be beyond the scope of the attached supportive housing development, as well as parking necessary to support the office.

Additional modifications in this bill could help a nonprofit service organization co-locate its administrative offices with onsite services within a streamlined, ministerially approved supportive housing development, cutting down on overhead costs and reducing the need for leasing additional commercial office space. The co-location may benefit the supportive housing residents as well, if the office spaces can be used for resident service needs like benefits paperwork processing, case management, office printing, and other services onsite.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

• The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) estimates ongoing costs of approximately $277,000 annually for 1.0 PY of legal staff to provide information, guidance, and technical assistance to local jurisdictions, to coordinate with the Attorney General, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, and the Governor’s Office to determine when enforcement actions are warranted, and to support and assist in any negotiations or litigation. (General Fund)
  
• Unknown local costs to update guidance and procedures regarding supportive housing developments that are a use “by right” in certain zones. While the bill could impose new costs on local agencies to revise planning requirements for certain developments, and providing for streamlined and expedited review of those projects, these costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies have general authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees to cover their administrative expenses associated with new planning mandates. (local funds)

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/15/24)

East Bay Leadership Council

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/15/24)

None received

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 73-0, 5/21/24

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Boerner, Bonta, Bryan, Calderon, Juan Carrillo, Wendy Carrillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, Dixon, Essayli, Flora, Mike Fong, Vince Fong, Gallagher, Garcia, Gipson, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Jackson, Jones-Sawyer, Kalra, Lackey, Lee, Low, Lowenthal, Maienschein, McCarty, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Stephanie Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Jim Patterson, Joe Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Quirk-Silva, Ramos, Rendon, Reyes, Rodriguez, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Santiago, Schiavo, Soria, Ta, Ting, Valencia, Villapudua, Waldron, Wallis, Ward, Weber, Wicks, Wilson, Wood, Zbur, Robert Rivas

NO VOTE RECORDED: Cervantes, Megan Dahle, Friedman, Gabriel, Holden, Mathis, Luz Rivas

Prepared by: Alison Hughes / HOUSING / (916) 651-4124

8/18/24 8:50:54

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 1801 (Jackson) - Supportive housing: administrative office space

Bill Summary:

AB 1801 would authorize a supportive housing development that qualifies for a streamlined, ministerial local agency approval process to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, as specified.

Fiscal Impact:

• The Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) estimates ongoing costs of approximately $277,000 annually for 1.0 PY of legal staff to provide information, guidance, and technical assistance to local jurisdictions, to coordinate with the Attorney General, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency, and the Governor’s Office to determine when enforcement actions are warranted, and to support and assist in any negotiations or litigation. (General Fund)
  
• Unknown local costs to update guidance and procedures regarding supportive housing developments that are a use “by right” in certain zones. While the bill could impose new costs on local agencies to revise planning requirements for certain developments, and providing for streamlined and expedited review of those projects, these costs are not state-reimbursable because local agencies have general authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees to cover their administrative expenses associated with new planning mandates. (local funds)

Background:

Some local ordinances provide “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by right”—the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and a local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meet standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most large housing projects are not allowed ministerial review. Instead, these projects are vetted through both public hearings and administrative review, including design review and appeals processes, and may be subject to additional discretionary actions, such as a conditional use permit. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review, while projects permitted by right are not.

Existing law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on a person’s length of stay that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and is linked to onsite or offsite services that help residents retain the housing, improve their health status, and maximize their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Cities and counties must treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use that is the same as other multifamily housing for zoning purposes, and may only apply restrictions to supportive housing that are applicable to multifamily housing in that zone.

Existing law, as enacted by AB 2162 (Chiu), Chap. 753/2018, established supportive housing that meets specified criteria as a use by right in all zones that allow multifamily residential uses, including mixed use zones. To qualify for the by-right approval, a supportive housing development must make all the units affordable to lower income families for 55 years, and at least 25 percent of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services: at least 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3 percent of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units. Supportive services must be limited to tenant use, which includes community rooms, case management offices, computer rooms, and community kitchens.

Proposed Law:

AB 1801 would authorize administrative office space to be included within a supportive housing development that qualifies for a streamlined, ministerial local agency approval process. Specifically, this bill would:

• Define “administrative office space” as an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development entitled to by-right approval process, and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
• Revise the definition of “supportive housing” to explicitly include transitional housing for youth and young adults, and to include nonresidential uses and administrative office space.
• Expand the allowable uses of nonresidential area in a supportive housing project to include administrative office space.
• Limit the amount of a supportive housing development that may be dedicated to administrative office space to 25 percent of the total floor area.
• Revise the requirements for a development with more than 20 units to require at least 3 percent of the total floor area, rather than the total nonresidential floor area, to be provided for onsite supportive services.

Related Legislation:

AB 2162 (Chiu), Chap. 753/2018, provided for streamlined ministerial approval of affordable housing developments that include a percentage of supportive housing units and onsite services.

Staff Comments:

The bill’s mandated local costs related to revising the criteria to qualify for streamlined and ministerial approvals would not be subject to state reimbursement because local agencies have the authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees as necessary to cover administrative costs. Existing law authorizes planning and zoning fees to “include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations.” Case law and previous decisions by the Commission on State Mandates support the position that local governments’ planning costs are not reimbursable when the state imposes new planning mandates.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Senator María Elena Durazo, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Supportive housing: administrative office space

Allows a supportive housing development using the by-right approval process in current law to also include administrative office space and parking.

Background

Planning and approving new housing is mainly a local responsibility. The California Constitution allows cities and counties to “make and enforce within its limits, all local, police, sanitary and other ordinances and regulations not in conflict with general laws.” It is from this fundamental power (commonly called the police power) that cities and counties derive their authority to regulate behavior to preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the public—including land use authority.

Planning and Zoning Law. State law provides additional powers and duties for cities and counties regarding land use. The Planning and Zoning Law requires every county and city to adopt a general plan that sets out planned uses for all of the area it covers. A general plan must include specified mandatory “elements,” including a housing element that establishes the locations and densities of housing, among other requirements. Cities’ and counties’ major land use decisions—including most zoning ordinances and other aspects of development permitting—must be consistent with their general plans.

Zoning and approval processes. Local governments use their police power to enact zoning ordinances that establish the types of land uses allowed or authorized in an area. Zoning often identifies a primary use for parcels in the area, as well as other uses that are allowed if they meet conditions imposed by the local government.

Some local ordinances provide “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by right”—the zoning ordinance clearly states a particular use is allowable, and a local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meet standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most large housing projects are not allowed ministerial review. Instead, these projects are vetted through both public hearings and administrative review, including design review and appeals processes.

Zoning ordinances also contain provisions to physically shape development and impose other requirements, such as setting maximum heights and densities for housing units, minimum numbers of required parking spaces, setbacks, and lot coverage ratios. These ordinances can also include conditions on development to address aesthetics, community impacts, or other particular site-specific considerations.

Supportive housing. State law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on a person’s length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and is linked to onsite or offsite services that help residents retain the housing, improve their health status, and maximize their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive housing is widely acknowledged as a cost-effective model for providing housing and services to people who would otherwise be institutionalized or at risk of institutionalization, as well as reducing chronic homelessness.

State law requires cities and counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use of property (SB 2, Cedillo, 2008). Local governments must also treat supportive housing the same as other multi-family residential housing for zoning purposes and may only apply restrictions to supportive housing that also apply to multi-family housing in the same zone.

Ministerial approval for supportive housing. The Legislature recently took several steps to encourage the development of supportive housing. In 2018, the Legislature established supportive housing as a use by right in all zones that allow multifamily residential uses, including mixed use zones (AB 2162, Chiu). AB 2162 capped the size of projects eligible for by-right approval at 50 units if the project is located in a jurisdiction that has a population of 200,000 or less and the homeless population based on the annual point-in-time count (PIT) is 1,500 or less. However, a city or county can adopt a policy to allow more units as a use by right, and adopting that ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.

To qualify for the by-right approval under AB 2162, a supportive housing development must make all the units affordable to lower income families for 55 years, and at least 25 percent of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing. The units must include at least one bathroom and a kitchen or other cooking facilities.

A supportive housing development must also include onsite supportive services that take up at least 90 square feet for a development with 20 or fewer units, or at least three percent of the nonresidential floor space for developments of more than 20 units. These supportive services must be limited to tenant use, which includes, but is not limited to, community rooms, case management offices, computer rooms, and community kitchens.

The author wants to allow administrative office space that doesn’t directly provide services to residents to be a part of these developments.

Proposed Law

Assembly Bill 1801 allows administrative office space to be included in a supportive housing development. The bill defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding supportive housing development. “Administrative office space” also includes parking necessary to serve the office space.

AB 1801 caps the total floor area that can be dedicated to administrative office space at 50 percent of the total floor area dedicated to residential units, and makes other technical and clarifying changes.

Comments

1. Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive.”

2. Office vs. housing. AB 1801 allows administrative office space to be part of supportive housing developments that qualify for by right uses, so long as it doesn’t exceed half of the amount of space devoted to housing. In practice, this means that one third of the supportive housing project could go to office space that isn’t used to support the residents of the development, but instead covers other nonprofit operations and parking. That takes up space that could otherwise be used for more housing and services for residents of the development, and stretches the definition of supportive housing. To ensure that buildings constructed under this by-right authority stay sharply focused on providing housing and services, the Committee may wish to consider amending AB 1801 to reduce the amount of space that can be devoted to office or parking uses.

3. Let’s get technical. Committee staff recommends the following technical amendments to AB 1801:

• On p. 3, in line 2, strike “50675.14” and insert “50675.2”
• On p. 4, in line 6, strike “nonresidential”
• On p. 4, in line 11, strike “and associated parking”

3. Mandate. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local governments for the costs of new or expanded state mandated local programs. Because AB 1801 adds to the duties of local planning officials, Legislative Counsel says that the bill imposes a new state mandate. AB 1801 disclaims the state's responsibility for providing reimbursement by citing local governments’ authority to charge for the costs of implementing the bill's provisions.

4. Incoming! The Senate Housing Committee approved AB 1801 at its June 4^th hearing on a vote of 9-0. The Senate Local Government Committee is hearing the bill as the Committee of second reference.

Assembly Actions

Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee: 9-0

Assembly Local Government Committee: 9-0

Assembly Appropriations Committee: 15-0

Assembly Floor: 73-0

Support and Opposition

(6/21/24)

Support: None submitted.

Opposition: None submitted.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING

Senator Nancy Skinner, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: AB 1801 Hearing Date: 6/4/2024

SUBJECT: Supportive housing: administrative office space

DIGEST: This bill allows a supportive housing development utilizing a by-right approval process in current law to also include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes a streamlined, by-right process for supportive housing in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, if the proposed housing development satisfies the following requirements:
   1. Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for 55 years;
   2. One hundred percent of the units, excluding managers’ units, within the development are restricted to lower income households and are or will be receiving public funding to ensure affordability of the housing to lower income Californians, as specified;
   3. At least 25% of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, are restricted to residents in supportive housing who meet criteria of the target population. If the development consists of fewer than 12 units, then 100% of the units, excluding managers’ unit, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing;
   4. The developer provides the planning agency with certain specified information;
   5. Nonresidential floor area must be used for onsite supportive services, as specified.
   6. The developer replaces any dwelling units on the site of the supportive housing development in the manner provided as specified; and
   7. Units within the development include at least one bathroom and a kitchen or other cooking facilities, including, at a minimum, a stovetop, sink, and refrigerator.
2. Allows a local government to require a supportive housing development subject to the by-right approval process to comply with written, objective development standards and policies. The standards and policies must also apply generally to other multifamily development within the same zone.
3. Defines “supportive housing” to mean housing where:
   1. At least 40% of the units are targeted to individuals or families experiencing chronic homelessness, homeless youth, or individuals exiting institutional settings who were homeless when entering the institutional setting, have a disability, and who resided in the setting for at least 15 days; and
   2. The project provides or demonstrates collaboration with programs that provide services that meet the needs of the residents, among other requirements.

This bill:

1. Allows administrative office space to be included in the nonresidential floor area of a proposed supportive housing project seeking to utilize a by-right process.
2. Defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development entitled to by-right approval process, and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. Limits the total floor area dedicated to “administrative office space” and associated parking that may be included in a streamlined project to no more than 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units.
4. Modifies the definition of “supportive housing” under specified law to specifically include nonresidential uses and administrative office space, as defined, as well as transitional housing for youth and young adults.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. "California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive."
2. What are the primary solutions to ending and preventing homelessness? Simply put, we need more housing; more housing at all income levels, and in particular, more housing affordable to the lowest income earners.

According to the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, in a May 2019 report, “when housing costs are more affordable and housing opportunities are more readily available, there is a lower likelihood of households becoming homeless, and households who do become homeless can exit homelessness more quickly and with greater likelihood of sustaining that housing long-term. To reduce the negative impacts of housing instability, and to end homelessness as quickly and efficiently as possible, communities are increasingly focused on expanding the supply of housing that is affordable to renter households at lower income levels, as well as ensuring that people experiencing and exiting homelessness have access to such housing.”^[1]

A report released by the National Low Income Housing Coalition on April 21, 2022 found that in the Sacramento metro area, very low-income renters face a shortage of more than 78,000 affordable and available homes.^[2] Additionally, the report found that only 41 affordable and available rentals exist in the Sacramento region for every 100 very low-income renter households, according to the coalition’s analysis. The shortage is exacerbated by the fact that low-income renters find themselves competing against higher-income renters in the private market, which cannot sufficiently compensate for the deficit. The report, focused on federal solutions, stated that the shortage can only be addressed through sufficient long-term federal investments in affordable housing programs designed to serve households with the greatest needs. The same conclusion, however, can be attributed to the entire state of California.

1. Streamlining housing for the homeless. Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. Some local ordinances provide “streamlined” or “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by-right” – the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meeting standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), while projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu, Chapter 753), created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use “by-right” in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

1. What counts as nonresidential space? The author’s office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as “Office/Administrative.” Office/Administrative space could be considered a “non-conforming use,” and may require a developer to seek a conditional use permit (CUP) to proceed. If a CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and subjecting the project to a lengthy and costly discretionary approval.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill would make clear that a supportive housing development may include administrative office space in certain amounts and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162. Specifically, the amount of administrative office space and associated parking to support the office space must not exceed 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units. The bill defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space used by a nonprofit to provide onsite supportive services and other nonprofit operations that may be beyond the scope of the attached supportive housing development, as well as parking necessary to support the office.

Additional modifications in this bill could help a nonprofit service organization co-locate its administrative offices with onsite services within a streamlined, ministerially approved supportive housing development, cutting down on overhead costs and reducing the need for leasing additional commercial office space. The co-location may benefit the supportive housing residents as well, if the office spaces can be used for resident service needs like benefits paperwork processing, case management, office printing, and other services onsite.

1. Double referral. This bill was also referred to the Local Government Committee.

Related Legislation:

AB 2162 (Chiu, Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018) — established a by-right, ministerial approval process for supportive housing developments that meet certain criteria in certain jurisdictions.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,

May 29, 2024.)

SUPPORT:

None received.

OPPOSITION:

None received.

-- END --

1. The Importance of Housing Affordability and Stability for Preventing and Ending Homelessness. (US Interagency Council on Homelessness, May 2019). https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Housing-Affordability-and-Stablility-Brief.pdf ↑

2. Yoon-Hendricks, Alexandria. 78,000 low-income Sacramentans can’t find an affordable home to rent, report finds. (Sacramento Bee, April 21, 2022). https://www.sacbee.com/news/equity-lab/article260609137.html?ac_cid=DM636661&ac_bid=-371228598 ↑

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 1801

Author:(Jackson)

As Introduced Ver:January 8, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Allows a supportive housing development utilizing the by-right process in current law to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, up to certain limits.

Major Provisions

1. Adds administrative office space to the existing authorization to include certain amounts of nonresidential floor area in proposed supportive housing projects seeking to utilize the by-right process in AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018.
2. Defines "administrative office space" to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development authorized under AB 2162 (Chiu) and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. Limits the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space and associated parking that may be included in a streamlined project to no more than 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units.
4. Modifies the definition of "supportive housing" under specified law to specifically include nonresidential uses and administrative office space, as defined, as well as transitional housing for youth and young adults.

COMMENTS

Supportive Housing: State law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive housing is widely acknowledged as a cost-effective model for providing housing and services to people who would otherwise be institutionalized or at risk of institutionalization, as well as reducing chronic homelessness.

Despite its successes, supportive housing continues to face challenges. Supportive housing projects are often opposed by neighborhood groups that are concerned about the impact of such developments on the surrounding area. Because the land use approval process requires many steps and public hearings, and affords local governments a wide degree of latitude to deny or condition projects, opponents of supportive housing have historically been able to use these processes to block projects. CEQA has also been used to block projects that do not otherwise qualify for an exemption.

Streamlining: Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. Some local ordinances provide "streamlined" or "ministerial" processes for approving projects that are permitted "by right" – the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meeting standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under CEQA, while projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

SB 2 (Cedillo), Chapter 663, Statutes of 2008, took the first step toward removing local land use barriers for emergency shelters and supportive housing by requiring localities to accommodate their need for emergency shelters on sites where the use is allowed without a conditional use permit (CUP), and requiring cities and counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use of property. Local governments must treat supportive housing the same as other multifamily residential housing for zoning purposes and can only apply the same restrictions on multifamily housing in the same zone to supportive housing.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use "by right" in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers' units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

The author's office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as "Office/Administrative." This would be considered a non-conforming use, and may require a CUP to proceed. If CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and a lengthy and costly discretionary approval process is required.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill would make clear that a supportive housing development may include administrative office space in certain amounts and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162. Specifically, the amount of administrative office space and associated parking to support the office space must not exceed 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units. The bill defines "administrative office space" to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space used by a nonprofit to provide onsite supportive services and other nonprofit operations that may be beyond the scope of the attached supportive housing development, as well as parking necessary to support the office.

This modification could help a nonprofit service organization co-locate its administrative offices with onsite services within a streamlined, ministerially approved supportive housing development, cutting down on overhead costs and reducing the need for leasing additional commercial office space. The co-location may benefit the supportive housing residents as well, if the office spaces can be used for resident service needs like benefits paperwork processing, case management, office printing, and other services onsite.

According to the Author

"California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive."

Arguments in Support

None on file.

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations:

1. HCD estimates ongoing General Fund costs of $269,000 annually for one attorney position to handle the increase in technical assistance and enforcement actions relating to the expansion of by-right supportive housing law. Specific tasks would include providing information, guidance, and technical assistance to local jurisdictions to ensure compliance with supportive housing laws, as well as close coordination with the Office of the Attorney General, the Business, Consumer Safety and Housing Agency, and the Governor's Office in determining when enforcement actions are warranted, then supporting and assisting any related negotiations or litigation.
2. Local costs resulting from this bill are not reimbursable by the state because local agencies have general authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees to cover their administrative expenses associated with new planning mandates.

VOTES

ASM HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 9-0-0

YES: Ward, Joe Patterson, Grayson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Sanchez, Wilson

ASM LOCAL GOVERNMENT: 9-0-0

YES: Juan Carrillo, Waldron, Alanis, Haney, Kalra, Pacheco, Ramos, Ward, Wilson

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Sanchez, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Dixon, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Jim Patterson, Pellerin, Ta, Villapudua

UPDATED

VERSION: January 8, 2024

CONSULTANT: Nicole Restmeyer / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0003071

Date of Hearing: May 1, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1801

Author:(Jackson) – As Introduced Ver:January 8, 2024

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill allows a supportive housing development using the by-right project approval process provided in existing law to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Allows a supportive housing development utilizing the by-right project approval process provided in AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018, to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, provided the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space and associated parking does not exceed 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units.
2. Defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development authorized under AB 2162 (Chiu) and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. For purposes of this bill, modifies the existing definition of “supportive housing” to include nonresidential uses and administrative office space and to specifically include transitional housing for youth and young adults.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. HCD estimates ongoing General Fund costs of $269,000 annually for one attorney position to handle the increase in technical assistance and enforcement actions relating to the expansion of by-right supportive housing law. Specific tasks would include, providing information, guidance, and technical assistance to local jurisdictions to ensure compliance with supportive housing laws, as well as close coordination with the Office of the Attorney General, the Business, Consumer Safety and Housing Agency, and the Governor’s Office in determining when enforcement actions are warranted, then supporting and assisting any related negotiations or litigation.
2. Local costs resulting from this bill are not reimbursable by the state because local agencies have general authority to charge and adjust planning and permitting fees to cover their administrative expenses associated with new planning mandates.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects.

1. Background. Some local ordinances provide streamlined or ministerial processes for approving projects that are permitted “by right,” meaning the zoning ordinance clearly states a particular use is allowable, and a local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. A project reviewed ministerially requires only an administrative review designed to ensure the project is consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, and meets state and local building standards. Most housing projects subject to discretionary review and approval are also subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

Existing law defines supportive housing as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving their health status, and maximizing their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.

In 2018, AB 2162 established supportive housing as a use “by right” in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower-income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

According to the author’s office, under AB 2162, it is unclear whether dedicating space in a development to other nonresidential activities, such as administrative office space, may be considered a non-conforming use and require a conditional use permit to proceed. If a conditional use permit is required, ministerial approval is generally void, and a much-lengthier and costlier discretionary approval process is required.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill makes clear a supportive housing development may include administrative office space within certain parameters and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 17, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Juan Carrillo, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1801 (

Author:Jackson) – As Introduced Ver:January 8, 2024

SUBJECT: Supportive housing: administrative office space

SUMMARY: Allows a supportive housing development utilizing the by-right process in current law to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, up to certain limits. Specifically, this bill:

1. Adds administrative office space to the existing authorization to include certain amounts of nonresidential floor area in proposed supportive housing projects seeking to utilize the by-right process in AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018.
2. Defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development authorized under AB 2162 (Chiu) and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. Limits the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space and associated parking that may be included in a streamlined project to no more than 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units.
4. Modifies the definition of “supportive housing” under specified law to specifically include nonresidential uses and administrative office space, as defined, as well as transitional housing for youth and young adults.
5. Provides that no reimbursement is required by this bill because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district under this bill would result from a legislative mandate that is with the scope of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article 1 of the California Constitution.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes a streamlined, by-right process for supportive housing in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, if the proposed housing development satisfies the following requirements:
   1. Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for 55 years;
   2. One hundred percent of the units, excluding managers’ units, within the development are restricted to lower income households and are or will be receiving public funding to ensure affordability of the housing to lower income Californians, as specified;
   3. At least 25% of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, are restricted to residents in supportive housing who meet criteria of the target population. If the development consists of fewer than 12 units, then 100% of the units, excluding managers’ unit, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing;
   4. The developer provides the planning agency with certain specified information;
   5. Nonresidential floor area must be used for onsite supportive services in the following amounts:
      1. For a development with 20 or fewer units, at least 90 square feet; or
      2. For a development of more than 20 units, at least 3% of the total nonresidential floor area must be provided for onsite supportive services that are limited to tenant use, including, but not limited to, community rooms, case management offices, computer rooms, and community kitchens.
   6. The developer replaces any dwelling units on the site of the supportive housing development in the manner provided as specified; and
   7. Units within the development include at least one bathroom and a kitchen or other cooking facilities, including, at a minimum, a stovetop, sink, and refrigerator. [Government Code (GOV) §65651]
2. Allows a local government to require a supportive housing development subject to the by-right process in 1) to comply with written, objective development standards and policies; however, the standards and policies must apply generally to other multifamily development within the same zone. (GOV § 65651)
3. Requires a local government’s review of a supportive housing development under 2) to be conducted consistent with [65589.5(f)] and establishes that the review does not constitute a “project” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. (GOV§ 65651)
4. Defines, for purposes of the by-right process in 1), “supportive housing” to mean housing where:
   1. At least 40% of the units are targeted to individuals or families experiencing chronic homelessness, homeless youth, or individuals exiting institutional settings who were homeless when entering the institutional setting, have a disability, and who resided in the setting for at least 15 days; and
   2. The project provides or demonstrates collaboration with programs that provide services that meet the needs of the residents, among other requirements. [Health and Safety Code Section (HSC) § 50675.14]
5. Defines “homeless youth” to mean either of the following:
   1. A person who is not older than 24 years of age and is either homeless or at risk of becoming homeless, is no longer eligible for foster care on the basis of age, or has run away from home; or
   2. A person who is younger than 18 years of age, emancipated, and homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. (GOV § 12957)

FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal and contains a state-mandated local program.

COMMENTS:

1. Bill Summary. This bill allows a supportive housing development to include up to 50% the total floor area for nonresidential uses, which includes administrative office space and parking, and still be eligible for by-right approval under existing law. The bill also specifically includes transitional housing for youth and young adults in the definition of supportive housing. This bill is author sponsored.
   
2. Author’s Statement. According to the author, “California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need.”

“AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive.”

1. Planning and Zoning Law. State law provides powers and duties for cities and counties regarding land use. Each city and county must prepare and periodically update a comprehensive, long-range general plan to guide future planning decisions. The general plan has seven mandatory elements: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open-space, noise, and safety. General plans must also either include an eighth element on environmental justice, or incorporate environmental justice concerns throughout the other elements. Cities and counties may adopt optional elements that address issues of their choosing, and once adopted, those elements have the same legal force as the mandatory elements. The general plan must be “internally consistent,” which means the various elements cannot have conflicting information or assumptions.

The general plan works as the foundation for community planning and provide the long-range goals of development in a jurisdiction. In contrast to the long-term, zoning classifies the specific, immediate uses of land. Counties, general law cities, and charter cities with populations of more than two million are required to maintain consistency between their zoning ordinance and their adopted general plan. The Office of Planning and Research state in its General Plan Guidelines and Technical Advisories advises that zoning must be consistent with the general plan. If not, the zoning is invalid at the time of its enactment.

1. Zoning and Approval Processes. Local governments use their police power to enact zoning ordinances that shape development, such as setting maximum heights and densities for housing units, minimum numbers of required parking spaces, setbacks to preserve privacy, lot coverage ratios to increase open space, and others. These ordinances can also include imposing conditions on developments to address aesthetics, community impacts, or other particular site-specific considerations.

1. By-right Permitting. Some local ordinances provide “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by right”—the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Local governments have two options for providing landowners with relief from zoning ordinances that might otherwise prohibit or restrict a particular land use: variances and conditional use permits. A variance may be granted to alleviate a unique hardship on a property owner because of the way a generally-applicable zoning ordinance affects a particular parcel. A conditional use permit allows a land use that is not authorized by right in a zoning ordinance, but may be authorized if the property owner takes certain steps, such as to mitigate the potential impacts of the land use. Both of these processes require hearings by the local zoning board and public notice.
   
2. Supportive Housing. State law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive housing is widely acknowledged as a cost-effective model for providing housing and services to people who would otherwise be institutionalized or at risk of institutionalization, as well as reducing chronic homelessness.

Despite its successes, supportive housing continues to face challenges. Supportive housing projects are often opposed by neighborhood groups that are concerned about the impact of such developments on the surrounding area. Because the land use approval process requires many steps and public hearings, and affords local governments a wide degree of latitude to deny or condition projects, opponents of supportive housing have historically been able to use these processes to block projects. CEQA has also been used to block projects that do not otherwise qualify for an exemption.

SB 2 (Cedillo), Chapter 663, Statutes of 2008, took the first step toward removing local land use barriers for emergency shelters and supportive housing by requiring localities to accommodate their need for emergency shelters on sites where the use is allowed without a conditional use permit (CUP), and requiring cities and counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use of property. Local governments must treat supportive housing the same as other multifamily residential housing for zoning purposes and can only apply the same restrictions on multifamily housing in the same zone to supportive housing.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use “by right” in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

The author’s office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as “Office/Administrative.” This would be considered a non-conforming use, and may require a CUP to proceed. If CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and a lengthy and costly discretionary approval process is required.

1. Previous Legislation. AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018 established a by-right, ministerial approval process for supportive housing developments that meet certain criteria in certain jurisdictions.
   
2. Arguments in Support. None on file.
   
3. Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
4. Double-Referral. This bill was double-referred to the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee, where it passed on a 9-0 vote on April 10, 2024.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

None on file.

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Linda Rios / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958

Date of Hearing: April 10, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Christopher M. Ward, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 1801 (

Author:Jackson) – As Introduced Ver:January 8, 2024

SUBJECT: Supportive housing: administrative office space

SUMMARY: Allows a supportive housing development utilizing the by-right process in current law to include administrative office space in the nonresidential floor area of the development, up to certain limits. Specifically, this bill:

1. Adds administrative office space to the existing authorization to include certain amounts of nonresidential floor area in proposed supportive housing projects seeking to utilize the by-right process in AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018.
2. Defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space utilized by a nonprofit organization for the purpose of providing onsite supportive services at a supportive housing development authorized under AB 2162 (Chiu) and includes other nonprofit operations beyond the scope of the corresponding development, including parking necessary to serve the office space.
3. Limits the total floor area dedicated to administrative office space and associated parking that may be included in a streamlined project to no more than 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units.
4. Modifies the definition of “supportive housing” under specified law to specifically include nonresidential uses and administrative office space, as defined, as well as transitional housing for youth and young adults.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes a streamlined, by-right process for supportive housing in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses, if the proposed housing development satisfies the following requirements:
   1. Units within the development are subject to a recorded affordability restriction for 55 years;
   2. One hundred percent of the units, excluding managers’ units, within the development are restricted to lower income households and are or will be receiving public funding to ensure affordability of the housing to lower income Californians, as specified;
   3. At least 25% of the units in the development or 12 units, whichever is greater, are restricted to residents in supportive housing who meet criteria of the target population. If the development consists of fewer than 12 units, then 100% of the units, excluding managers’ unit, must be restricted to residents in supportive housing;
   4. The developer provides the planning agency with certain specified information;
   5. Nonresidential floor area must be used for onsite supportive services in the following amounts:
      1. For a development with 20 or fewer units, at least 90 square feet; or
      2. For a development of more than 20 units, at least 3% of the total nonresidential floor area must be provided for onsite supportive services that are limited to tenant use, including, but not limited to, community rooms, case management offices, computer rooms, and community kitchens.
   6. The developer replaces any dwelling units on the site of the supportive housing development in the manner provided as specified; and
   7. Units within the development include at least one bathroom and a kitchen or other cooking facilities, including, at a minimum, a stovetop, sink, and refrigerator. (Government Code (GC) Section 65651(a))
2. Allows a local government to require a supportive housing development subject to the by-right process in 1) to comply with written, objective development standards and policies; however, the standards and policies must apply generally to other multifamily development within the same zone. (GC 65651(b)(1))
3. Requires a local government’s review of a supportive housing development under 2) to be conducted consistent with [65589.5(f)] and establishes that the review does not constitute a “project” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. (GC 65651(b)(2))
4. Defines, for purposes of the by-right process in 1), “supportive housing” to mean housing where:
   1. At least 40% of the units are targeted to individuals or families experiencing chronic homelessness, homeless youth, or individuals exiting institutional settings who were homeless when entering the institutional setting, have a disability, and who resided in the setting for at least 15 days; and
   2. The project provides or demonstrates collaboration with programs that provide services that meet the needs of the residents, among other requirements. (Health and Safety Code Section 50675.14)
5. Defines “homeless youth” to mean either of the following:
   1. A person who is not older than 24 years of age and is either homeless or at risk of becoming homeless, is no longer eligible for foster care on the basis of age, or has run away from home; or
   2. A person who is younger than 18 years of age, emancipated, and homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. (GC 12957(e))

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

Author’s Statement: According to the author, “California has a moral imperative to provide the needed housing and supportive services to our unhoused populations. AB 1801 will provide greater clarity and cost efficiency to those non-profits who seek to build affordable housing for the thousands of Californians in need. AB 1801 helps accomplish this goal by providing clarity to current law and will allow for the construction and development of administrative office spaces, facilities, and parking on the same grounds as the supportive housing projects. We know that when the administrative and other needed facilities are on the same site as the housing, people are better served and set up to thrive.”

Supportive Housing: State law defines supportive housing to be housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by homeless persons or families, and that is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. Supportive housing is widely acknowledged as a cost-effective model for providing housing and services to people who would otherwise be institutionalized or at risk of institutionalization, as well as reducing chronic homelessness.

Despite its successes, supportive housing continues to face challenges. Supportive housing projects are often opposed by neighborhood groups that are concerned about the impact of such developments on the surrounding area. Because the land use approval process requires many steps and public hearings, and affords local governments a wide degree of latitude to deny or condition projects, opponents of supportive housing have historically been able to use these processes to block projects. CEQA has also been used to block projects that do not otherwise qualify for an exemption.

Streamlining: Cities and counties enact zoning ordinances to implement their general plans. Zoning determines the type of housing that can be built. Some local ordinances provide “streamlined” or “ministerial” processes for approving projects that are permitted “by right” – the zoning ordinance clearly states that a particular use is allowable, and local government does not have any discretion regarding approval of the permit if the application is complete. Projects reviewed ministerially require only an administrative review designed to ensure they are consistent with existing general plan and zoning rules, as well as meeting standards for building quality, health, and safety. Most housing projects that require discretionary review and approval are subject to review under CEQA, while projects permitted ministerially generally are not.

SB 2 (Cedillo), Chapter 663, Statutes of 2008, took the first step toward removing local land use barriers for emergency shelters and supportive housing by requiring localities to accommodate their need for emergency shelters on sites where the use is allowed without a conditional use permit (CUP), and requiring cities and counties to treat transitional and supportive housing projects as a residential use of property. Local governments must treat supportive housing the same as other multifamily residential housing for zoning purposes and can only apply the same restrictions on multifamily housing in the same zone to supportive housing.

Recognizing the continuing difficulties with moving supportive housing developments through a discretionary process, in 2018, AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, created a by-right approval process for certain supportive housing developments so long as they met specific zoning and unit requirements. The bill established supportive housing as a use “by right” in all zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including commercial zones, so long as at least 25% or 12 units of the proposed project – whichever is greater – are restricted to people experiencing or at risk of homelessness. The remaining units, excluding managers’ units, must be restricted to lower income households. A project must also dedicate a minimum amount of floor area in the development to providing onsite supportive services – either 90 square feet in projects with 20 units or fewer, or 3% of the total nonresidential floor area in projects with more than 20 units.

The author’s office points out that in AB 2162, use of residential zoned land for the provision of supportive services is acknowledged, but it is unclear if dedicating other space in the development to other nonresidential activities may trigger a local jurisdiction to consider the use as “Office/Administrative.” This would be considered a non-conforming use, and may require a CUP to proceed. If CUP is required, ministerial approval streamlining is generally void, and a lengthy and costly discretionary approval process is required.

To eliminate this uncertainty, this bill would make clear that a supportive housing development may include administrative office space in certain amounts and still access the by-right approval process established by AB 2162. Specifically, the amount of administrative office space and associated parking to support the office space must not exceed 50% of the total floor area dedicated to residential units. The bill defines “administrative office space” to mean an organizational headquarters or auxiliary office space used by a nonprofit to provide onsite supportive services and other nonprofit operations that may be beyond the scope of the attached supportive housing development, as well as parking necessary to support the office.

This modification could help a nonprofit service organization co-locate its administrative offices with onsite services within a streamlined, ministerially approved supportive housing development, cutting down on overhead costs and reducing the need for leasing additional commercial office space. The co-location may benefit the supportive housing residents as well, if the office spaces can be used for resident service needs like benefits paperwork processing, case management, office printing, and other services onsite.

Arguments in Support: None on file.

Arguments in Opposition: None on file.

Related Legislation:

AB 2162 (Chiu), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2018: Established a by-right, ministerial approval process for supportive housing developments that meet certain criteria in certain jurisdictions.

Double Referred: This bill was also referred to the Assembly Committee on Local Government where it will be heard should it pass out of this committee

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

None on file.

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Nicole Restmeyer / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085