|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A contentious bill that would allow housing projects up to nine stories tall near transit stations throughout California narrowly passed in the state Senate on Friday and is now on its way to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature.
Authored by Sen. Scott Wiener, Senate Bill 79 has generated significant opposition in cities such as Palo Alto and Mountain View, where city officials and civic groups have been voicing concerns about its potential impacts on historic neighborhoods and buildings. If signed into law, the bill would allow housing developments with heights of up to seven stories within a quarter mile of major transit stops such as Caltrain stations, or nine stories if immediately adjacent to these stations.
It would also permit heights of 60 feet — between six and seven stories — within a half mile of major transit stations.
In areas that are near high-frequency bus service or light rail, maximum heights for residential developments would be up to 85 feet within a quarter mile and 55 feet within a half mile.
In both cases, the regulations pertaining to developments within a half mile of transit areas would only apply to cities with populations of 35,000 under an amendment that was adopted during negotiations with the state Assembly.
Championed by pro-housing advocacy groups such as Cal YIMBY, Greenbelt Alliance, SPUR and Bay City Council, the bill squeaked through the state Senate by a vote of 21-8 on Thursday afternoon. Sen. Josh Becker, who represents the Midpeninsula area, did not support the bill, which he had previously criticized for adopting a “one-size-fits-all” approach toward housing. It nevertheless advanced thanks to support from several Republican members of the state Senate.
Becker concurred with the bill’s supporters that incentivizing housing near transit is an important goal. But he argued that the legislation should have greater differentiation in building heights, with the tallest buildings right next to transit and stepping down as one moves further out. He said he made specific suggestions to Wiener but they were not adopted.
“The bill was narrowed slightly, limited the radius to 1/4 mile in cities under 35,000 residents, which does not apply to a number of cities in my district,” Becker said shortly after the bill’s passage. “However, those changes did not meet the standard I laid out in my public comments. For that reason, I could not support the bill in its final form.”
State Assemblyman Marc Berman, whose district includes Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Mountain View, voted in favor of the bill as it was clearing the state Assembly on Sept. 11.
In his Sept. 12 floor speech, Wiener cited the various amendments that the bill has gone through as it made its way through the Legislature, including provisions that strengthen affordability requirements, narrow the land use authority that transit agencies would have under the bill and provide more flexibility to local cities to craft alternative plans, which would have to be approved by the state Department of Housing and Community Development.
“It will allow us to build more housing to reduce traffic congestion and to support and strengthen our public transportation systems,” Wiener said just before the Friday vote.
In a statement after the bill’s passage, Wiener characterized the bill as a way to tackle California’s affordability crisis and push back against “decades of overly restrictive policies” that have driven housing costs to astronomical levels.
“Many are being forced out of the state entirely. It has been a long road to tackling these decades-old problems, but today’s vote is a dramatic step forward to undo these decades of harm, reduce our most severe costs, and slash traffic congestion and air pollution in our state,” Wiener said.
Brian Hanlon, CEO of California YIMBY, said that with the bill’s passage, his group has achieved one of its founding goals, which he said is “legalizing apartments and condos near train stations.”
“We won many victories over the past eight years, but the dream of passing a robust, transit-oriented development program has long eluded us, until now,” Hanlon said in a statement. “My message to YIMBY activists across the country: Keep organizing, keep educating, and keep hustling. Your time will come.”
The bill has proven particularly divisive in Palo Alto, with some council members pointing out that allowing large housing projects near Caltrain stations on California Avenue and San Antonio Road could transform single-family neighborhoods like Greenmeadow, which is dominated by single-story Eichler buildings, and Old Palo Alto. Council member Pat Burt has been a consistent critic of SB79, arguing that it undermines existing efforts that cities are making to adopt zoning reforms and construct housing.
In neighboring Mountain View, critics of SB79 have contended that allowing taller buildings near the downtown transit center could threaten the historic areas around Castro Street. The group Livable Mountain View has been leading the opposition.
“It just doesn’t seem fair, given all that we’ve done as a city in Mountain View to accommodate the growth of housing,” Robert Cox, founder of Livable Mountain View, told the Mountain View Voice in late August, referring to the scope of SB 79.
With the bill’s passage in both chambers, the bill now heads to Newsom, who has until Oct. 12 to sign it.
Did Becker actually vote no or just abstain?
Will Berman ever dain explaining his votes to his constituents or is it just beneath him?
There’s no such thing as an abstention under CA Leg rules. A bill needs 21 affirmative votes in the Senate to pass, so “no vote recorded” is equivalent to voting no.