Vanquished housing bill reveals split

The division forms around Senate Bill 827, crafted by state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, to loosen building regulations in areas adjacent to transportation hubs as a means of incentivizing transit-oriented development.

The ambitious proposal seeking to raise height limits, reduce parking restrictions and allow greater density near rail and bus stops failed Tuesday, April 17, in its first formal hearing before the senate Transportation and Housing Committee.

Jason Rhine, legislative analyst for the League of California Cities, portrayed the decision as a win for critics who claimed the bill reached too far without giving adequate consideration to the perspective of local elected officials.

“The committee made it clear they thought 827 was too blunt of an instrument and would be a one-size-fits-all approach,” said Rhine.

But he expects a similar effort to return in future legislative sessions, which aligns with Wiener’s promise to keep up the fight for more housing near public transportation.

“I hope it will be more balanced and offer more discretion at the local level, but at the same time get to the state’s goal of more density around transit,” said Rhine.

The bill would have provided “an incentive for housing developers to build near transit by exempting” them “from certain low-density requirements including maximum controls on residential density, maximum controls on floor-area ratio,” minimum parking requirements and maximum building heights, according to an analysis of the bill.

Critics claimed it sought to strip city councils and planning commissions of their authority in managing development proposals, by streamlining the projects with little regard for their blend with the existing community. Wiener had said local control should be limited in a state where housing costs spiraled out of control, as officials too frequently defer to the will of residents seeking to preserve their quality of life.

Matt Regan, senior vice president of public policy for the Bay Area Council, shared his disenchantment over the loss of a bill which he considered a potentially valuable weapon in the fight against California’s housing crisis.

“Obviously we were very disappointed. This was the principle housing reform bill for 2018, and it didn’t make it out of one committee,” he said.

Regan’s organization was one of the many advocacy groups which supported the proposal, with hopes that it would facilitate sufficient construction to help loosen the prevailing shortage of homes across California.

Leora Tanjuatco Ross, organizing director for the San Mateo County Housing Leadership Council, also shared frustration over the bill’s death while pledging a willingness to preserve its spirit.

“While we are disappointed to see that SB 827 will not move forward this year, we are glad that it sparked conversation about our shared responsibility to create more housing, in every city and town,” she said in an email. “We are focused on continuing this conversation in every city in San Mateo County.”

Looking ahead, Rhine said he believes future conversations around bills similar to SB 827 should also keep an eye to discussions of amendments to growth policies and offering adequate resources to cities facing growth.

To that end, Wiener also proposed Senate Bill 828, which addresses the Regional Housing Needs Allocation and aims to increase the state’s capacity for mandating construction.

Rhine also suggested legislators work to bring back redevelopment agencies, as the financing available to local cities could help facilitate more building and work toward the goals of Wiener’s legislation.

Ultimately, Rhine said his organization looked forward to further discussions on the issue with an understanding that California has plenty of work to do before the affordability crisis is beat.

Regan too advocated for the bill’s return, under a firm belief that transit-oriented development is a solution not only to the state’s affordability crisis, but would offer substantial environmental benefits through promoting public transportation.

He also called for urgency on the matter as a means of quashing the biggest threat to the stability of so many Californians’ lives.

“It marries climate, housing and planning objectives in one change. Obviously too much change for too many people too fast. But I would argue that in a crisis a crisis response is required. We don’t have the luxury of waiting for five or six years to make a good bill perfect. And Sen. Wiener’s bill was good legislation,” he said.

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105