Nevada County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
Affordable Housing in Nevada County Reason for Investigation As stated in the California Government Code, Article 10.6
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Note: Missing finding numbers detected: F3
Findings and Recommendations 5 findings
F1
Page 1
The Grand Jury found that only the BOS can give staff authority to include mandates in the general plan for affordable housing in all construction. At present, staff can ask a developer to include it, but cannot require it. 2. Local agencies should adopt a policy that allows for deferred payment of fees, and/or partial or full waiver, of planning, mitigation, and building permit fees as incentives for builders. •
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
Accept the responsibility of its leadership role in gaining community support for affordable housing projects and overcoming NIMBY attitudes.
F2
Page 1
The Grand Jury found there were differences of opinion among staff and the BOS concerning whether this is or is not already being applied, or applied on a case by case basis. 3. Adopt the second unit
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Consider creating a new position or establishing a functional assignment of Affordable Housing Coordinator either on site or as part of a new, regional Housing Authority. The primary responsibility would be to ensure that goals and objectives of the Affordable Housing Task Force are implemented in a timely manner through the collaborative efforts of all affected departments, groups, and agencies.
F4
Page 1
The Grand Jury learned that while the county did permit duplexes to be mixed in the Eden Ranch project, that project has not been completed. 5. The county and cities should require that all senior assisted care residential developments include at least 20% of the total units affordable to low-income seniors. •
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Give deadlines to department tasks, put quantifiable measures in place to follow-up, and ensure that departments and staff are meeting the County’s affordable housing goals and objectives. 8
F5
Page 1
The Grand Jury learned that this would apply only for new construction and not to existing facilities. 6. The county should create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund from impact and in-lieu housing fees throughout the county, to be used for affordable housing development. •
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Direct staff to focus efforts on the development of new multi-family units that address very-low yearly income ($24,400) and low yearly income ($39,000) needs rather than work-force housing needs for those with moderate yearly income ($50.000).
F6
Page 1
The Grand Jury found that the BOS differentiates between affordable housing and workforce housing, by saying, these are two different issues, although the latter term is not a state-recognized term. 7. Streamline the development-approval process, provide affordable housing pre-application meetings, accurate and consistent processing information, and priority processing. •
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
Overhaul local ordinances and zoning regulations that create obstacles to the development of affordable housing.
Additional Recommendations 2
These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.
-
R3Provide general fund support to the Department of Housing and Community Services, thus freeing the Director and his staff to focus their efforts on developing and implementing creative housing and funding programs that meet the needs of local residents.
-
R7Correct staff’s understanding of its collaborative role in working with developers of mixed use and multi-family projects. Such collaborations must identify and implement incentives, streamline, and redesign developmental approval processes and procedures. REQUIRED RESPONSE Board of Supervisors – August 20, 2003 9
Conclusions 1
-
CL1 Page 7Affordable housing goals remain unfulfilled because of a variety of public and private sector factors. In addition to those factors cited by interviewees, the Grand Jury found additional issues. For example, the BOS and county staff can be a major factor in accomplishing the affordable housing goals in the county. Without their leadership and control, it will not happen. 7 Without state or federal penalties attached to failures to meet goals, there is no local imperative to overcome public and private obstacles. Lacking this impetus, the BOS fails to exercise its authority where it can to change zoning and increase density, while it simultaneously approves ordinances that clearly undercut the intent of state regulations for meeting local housing needs (e.g. second unit ordinance). In spite of the fact that the BOS claims to place a high priority on achieving affordable housing goals, no real action has taken place. In part, this is due to the widespread NIMBY attitude of people who believe that providing affordable housing will downgrade their property values and bring in undesirable neighbors to their neighborhoods. This attitude in the community must be addressed. When major opposition to many proposed projects comes from the community at large and local political entities, the BOS must be willing to spend some political capital to overcome the naysayer. Clearly, the BOS needs to retrain its focus on the development of multi-family housing units. While a number of task force recommendations need to be included in the General Plan update now in progress, others may not need to be addressed at this time. Large, multi- family developments are known to be the most cost-effective approach for meeting affordable housing needs on the scale required in this county. Therefore, a continued focus on recommendations that are less likely to help the county meet its housing goals, such as the second unit ordinance and the latest task force, can only serve as detractors from the major efforts that are now required.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Nevada County Board of Supervisors
Elected County Office