|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
An ambitious and divisive housing bill that seeks to encourage taller and denser developments near transit lines survived a key vote in the state Senate last week with the assistance of state Sen. Josh Becker, though its ultimate fate remains uncertain is it moves to the Assembly.
Becker, a Democrat who represents Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Mountain View and other cities in the San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, in many ways epitomizes his party’s ambivalence toward Senate Bill 79, a housing bill that was authored by state Sen. Scott Wiener. The bill would grant concessions to new housing projects near train stations, light rail, bus corridors and ferry stops. Development standards would vary based on distance from transit areas and types of transit available. Maximum heights, for example, would range from 45 feet to 95 feet, depending on which of the three “tiers” a project falls into.
The bill moved through the state Senate on June 3 on a vote of 21 to 13, with some Democrats joining Republicans in expressing concerns about SB 79. Sen. Caroline Menjivar, whose district includes the San Fernando Valley, argued that many parts of California, including her district, have inadequate and scarcely used transit services. The light rail service in her district goes “from nowhere to nowhere” and isn’t connected to any destinations that her constituents would need to go to.
“We’re not London. We’re not Zurich,” Menjivar, whose district includes the San Fernando Valley. “We don’t have the transit infrastructure yet. When we look at these kinds of bills, we shouldn’t put the horse before the carriage. We should invest in infrastructure.”
While Becker voted to advance the bill, he emphasized in an interview that his support hinges on significant changes that would need to be made to the legislation before it comes back to the Senate for a final vote. Chief among them is a clearer differentiation between projects that are located right along a transit corridor, or within 1/8 of a mile and those that are as far as half a mile away.
Becker told this publication that if this were the final vote, he would not have supported SB 79.
“I was clear to the team that I will not vote on this bill on the way back unless the radius has changed,” Becker said.
The bill also proved divisive in Palo Alto, where City Council member Pat Burt described the prior version of the bill as a “one-size-fits-all” proposal that takes the “chainsaw to local zoning.”
“We’re talking about 55 feet and 5 stories by right without any parking requirements in an Eichler neighborhood,” Burt said at an April meeting, referring to Eichler neighborhoods in south Palo Alto that are within half a mile of the San Antonio Caltrain station. “That’s how crazy this is.”
While he had urged his colleagues to oppose the legislation, others on the council advocated for a wait-and-see approach. Vice Mayor Vicki Veenker supported taking no position on the bill at this time but monitoring it as it moves through the Legislature.
Supporters of SB 79 characterized the bill as a much-needed measure to address California’s housing crisis by focusing on areas that are particularly suitable for residential development: transit corridors. Wiener noted that placing housing near transit would not only help boost housing supply but also support transit services, many of which are now facing significant financial pressure. Many transit areas currently have little housing around them and, as a result, have low ridership, he said.
“The purpose of this bill is to say, ‘Let’s focus on more housing around the highest quality transportation, where we have to make significant public investment of tax dollars,’ and I support that investment,” Wiener said during the June 3 hearing on his bill. “If we’re going to invest, as we should, in better and better public transportation, let’s help it succeed.”
Becker similarly said that he sees great value in focusing residential development on transit corridors. In recent months, he has been a vocal critic of the state’s existing process for encouraging housing. Under the Regional Housing Needs Assessment process, the state assigns a housing quota to each jurisdiction and requires them to adopt a plan for meeting its state-mandated target for new dwellings. Those that don’t get their plans certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development by the state’s deadline become vulnerable to “builder’s remedy” projects that effectively ignore local zoning regulations.
The new approach proposed by SB 79 has merit, Becker argued, because it focuses on transit corridors and, as such, would require some of the more urban parts of the state to build a greater share of housing. In addition to greater distinction between areas right next to transit stations and those further away, the revised bill would need to include provisions to give more flexibility to local governments, particularly those that have already adopted zoning changes to encourage more housing near transit, to get his support.
“A lot of the housing legislation out of Sacramento has been misguided,” said Becker, who recently tried to spearhead a law to reform and limit use of builder’s remedy. “That’s why I didn’t support a lot of it. I think this conversation around building near transit statewide is an important one and I think there are some good elements in this bill.”
The bill will now go to the state Assembly for hearings. Assembly member Marc Berman has not yet staked out a position on the bill, according to his office but his spokesperson said that Berman will be evaluating SB 79 closely.
Correction: The article initially stated that Pat Burt was concerned about the proximity of Eichler neighborhoods to El Camino Real. His concern was about their proximity to the San Antonio Caltrain station.
