SB 35
Passed in 2017, SB 35 allows projects that meet certain affordability and design requirements to take advantage of a ministerial permitting process. The requirements to qualify are as follows: Affordability requirements: A project must have a percentage of units set aside as affordable to households making 80% or less of the Area Median Income For localities that have not met their RHNA allocations for above moderate income households the affordability threshold is 10%. For localities that have not met their RHNA allocations for households making 80% of AMI and lower the affordability threshold is 50%. 2/3rds of the square footage of the project must be designated for residential use, this includes residential parking garages. The project must provide prevailing wage for construction workers. 75% of the adjoining parcels must be urban uses. Must be located within a city. Must consist of two or more units. A ministerial approval process requires no public hearings and gives decision-making authority on a permitting matter to the agency tasked with evaluating permit applications. A permitting agency may still decline an application but they can only do so if it violates specific objective zoning or design standards. If a proposed project is found to violate […]
Los Altos – 40 North Main St.
In late 2018, a developer in Los Altos took a discretionary project that had been denied by the Los Altos City Council and reworked it to qualify for ministerial approval under SB 35. The project, which had initially been entirely office space was converted to a mixed-use development with multiple on-site below-market-rate units. The developer submitted an application for ministerial approval to the Los Altos Planning Department in November of 2018 and in December of 2018 the Planning Department informed the developer that the project did not qualify for ministerial approval under SB 35. They alleged that the project did not comply with parking egress standards and that the project should be subject to a 50% affordability threshold rather than a 10% affordability threshold. The developer disagreed with this assessment and contended that neither of these points rendered the project ineligible for streamlining. In particular the developer pointed out that the city failed to submit the mandatory annual housing production report required by state law automatically setting the SB 35 streamlining threshold at 10%.The Planning Department still maintains that the project violates design standards related to parking but they concede that the 10% threshold is the correct one. The Planning […]