Last year, CalHDF secured the first victory in court for California’s builder’s remedy, a law allowing housing developers to ignore local zoning standards when proposing new affordable housing. The City of La Cañada Flintridge, which wrongfully denied the housing development project, appealed the decision to the California Court of Appeal, a process which may delay the proposed housing by another two years.
Under the Housing Accountability Act, cities that pursue appeals after being found to have improperly denied a housing development are liable for the costs of delay posed by the appeal. The law requires that cities post a bond in an amount to cover the costs of delay to a project. This requirement is designed to deter cities from pursuing frivolous appeals that could delay a project to the point where it would be effectively denied. The court in CalHDF’s case against La Cañada Flintridge fixed the amount of the appeal bond at $14 million, and gave the City 30 days to post the bond or dismiss the appeal. This bond would not eventually be paid to CalHDF, as it is intended to cover costs of the delay to the project. We rely on donations to fund our advocacy work on behalf of housing, you can support us by donating here.
The proposed 80-unit Builder’s Remedy project at 600 Foothill Boulevard lies at the commercial center of La Canada Flintridge, in close proximity to job centers in downtown Los Angeles and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The project would be the first multifamily development in the City in decades, and create the first low-income homes ever constructed in the City. The City’s housing plan goals and policies call for large increases of development of projects exactly like this one. Despite the alignment with the City’s written policies, or perhaps because of it, the City has chosen to spend hundreds and thousands of dollars to prevent the development. In the past, cities like La Cañada Flintridge have been free to write plans with lofty goals for housing production, while doing everything possible to ensure that those plans failed to produce the promised housing. Now the City will need to decide whether they are willing to spend millions to prevent the very type of housing that they claim to support, or do the right thing and approve the development at 600 Foothill.
Update, March 5th: last night the City voted to dismiss the appeal in response to the bond order rather than post the bond required to continue with the appeal. They will now be required to comply with the trial court’s original ruling: that the City unlawfully denied the project under the Housing Accountability Act, and must bring the application back for reconsideration.