AgdaPkt 2020-09-21 Joint SA PFA - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

9.A. - Page 29 of 34 • Burlingame, Campbell, Palo Alto, and San Jose included a similar exception. • Staff recommends adopting Exception 5 as the Planning entitlement process can take multiple years, particularly for large-scale projects that also require CEQA review. Due to significant time and monetary investment necessary to obtain planning entitlements, imposing additional building requirements after initial project design introduces additional project costs. Note: Projects entitled after Reach Codes adoption would be subject to all -electric requirements so the window for this exception would be relatively small. Exception 6 — All -Electric building requirements shall not apply to new residential structures that designate 100% of the dwelling units to be affordable, excluding any onsite manager unit(s), for persons earning 80% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI), as evidenced by instruments recorded against the property that restrict the units as affordable for a period of at least 55 years. • Affordable housing developments that are seeking tax credits and potentially other funding source are subject to a maximum allowable cost per unit. The cost of constructing certain Reach Codes requirements could potentially make projects ineligible to receive tax credits and other funding, in turn making the project financially infeasible. • The City's Affordable Housing Ordinance requires ownership developments to provide 15% of total units as affordable units for moderate income households (120% of AMI). For rental developments, 20% of total units must be provided as affordable - 5% for very -low income (50% of AMI), 5% for low income (80% of AMI) and 10% for moderate income (120% of AMI). However, developers can also propose alternative compliance options which have included developing 100% affordable, standalone buildings in order to meet the Affordable Housing Ordinance requirements. By establishing the exception for 100% affordable projects that provide units at 80% AMI or below, this would encourage developers to exceed the City's Affordable Housing Ordinance requirements and provide units at deeper affordability levels. • Having an exception for affordable housing may not preclude all -electric affordable housing developments as affordable housing developers have expressed support for all -electric construction where feasible. Affordable housing developers would be encouraged to meet with TRC, or similar design consultants, to address building electrification and design/cost issues. • Exception 6 would be unique to Redwood City. Other cities, such as San Jose, have an exception for buildings containing low or very low income units, but the exception specifically applies to relaxed EV charging requirements. • Staff recommends adopting Exception 6. The Bay Area continues to face an ever -worsening affordable housing crisis. Creating housing, particularly affordable housing, is the City Council's top strategic priority. This exception would help ensure that affordable housing projects supporting the City's lowest income residents are not discouraged. While not a guarantee, affordable housing developers have expressed interest in constructing all -electric buildings when possible. Exception 7 — All -electric building requirements would not apply to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) or Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) as long as they are created through the conversion of existing space. The requirements will apply to ADUs and JADUs that are created through new construction. • An ADU/JADU is typically a second smaller residential dwelling unit that is constructed on the same property as a primary larger residence. • Requiring all -electric ADUs/JADUs within an existing space may require the existing residential electrical service to be upgraded and is estimated to cost approximately $3,000. In addition, all - Page 9 of 14 mm City of Redwood City 1017 Middlefield Road, Redwood City, CA. 94063 Tel: 650-780-7000 www. redwood city.org 131