RHNA is a statewide program that calculates how much housing each local jurisdiction needs to build, by income level, over an eight-year cycle, to meet its populations’ needs. Each local government is required to adopt a Housing Element laying out how it plans to meet these goals, and to submit annual progress reports to the state. The progress reports for 2017 became available in December 2018.
By 2017, Marin had met 40% of its overall 2015-2023 RHNA goal, scoring a B+. But don’t be misled–the reason Marin did well on its overall grade is because its elected officials lobbied for, and won, a reduced RHNA requirement, giving it the lowest housing allocation as a percentage of population in the Bay Area. Marin only needs to create enough new housing for 0.9% of its 2017 population compared to the regional average of 2.4%.
Even with these reduced expectations, Marin is far behind in production of affordable units. While Marin has already reached 69% of its housing goal for above-moderate-income housing within the first three years of the eight-year period, it has met only 17% of its goal for moderate income housing (MOD), 39% of its goal for low-income housing (LI), and 14% of its goal for very low-income housing (VLI). Marin is not alone in this respect— statewide, many more market-rate units are being built than affordable homes.
Progress on housing goals varies by town. Some towns scored pretty low: Tiburon got a C and Belvedere got a C+. In terms of affordable housing production—Belvedere permitted no low- or very low-income housing in this period, and Tiburon didn’t even permit any moderate incomehousing.
Mill Valley, San Anselmo, Sausalito, Corte Madera, and Larkspur scored in the “A” range. Mill Valley and Sausalito have achieved much of their low- or very low-income RHNA goals by permitting privately produced “non-deed restricted” units such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs). This means that these cities expect this new housing to be affordable based on a survey of comparable units, but the units are not required to be or stay affordable or even be occupied. Seven Bay Area communities, all of them wealthy enclaves, have reported the majority of their very low-income units as “non-deed restricted”. While many housing advocates view the production of ADUs as an innovative way to introduce “naturally occurring” affordable housing into upper-income communities that would oppose multi-family affordable housing, some advocates are concerned that this is an evasion of low-income housing requirements. The place of ADUs in providing affordable housing is still an emerging field of research, and the State has not yet provided standard guidance on how to verify their affordability.
Corte Madera, which also received an A grade, is a different story. It has achieved 283% of its overall 8-year goal, but nearly all of the 204 permits issued between 2015-2017 were for above-moderate income housing. Corte Madera’s high performance is directly attributable to the approval of Tam Ridge Residences (the infamous “Wincup”) development of 180 units, of which only 18 are affordable.
Fairfax, which received a C+ this round, will see a big change in its next progress report, having permitted Victory Village senior housing, a 54-unit subsidized apartment building for low- and very-low income seniors. The protracted battle for the approvals for that project, and the ongoing funding difficulties it has encountered as a result, perfectly illustrate why so little “deed-restricted” affordable housing is built in Marin.
San Rafael (C+) also projects a sizable gain in housing with several upcoming developments, including the long-awaited Whistlestop project, which will create 67 units of affordable senior housing. San Rafael has also permitted a large number of accessory dwelling units.
Despite scoring lower than Mill Valley and Sausalito in this round, Novato (B-) is likely to provide many more affordable units in coming years, potentially including affordable “teacher housing” at Novato Unified School District (NUSD) and College of Marin (Indian Valley) campuses, as well as housing for low-income veterans at Hamilton.
Marin only needs to create 2,298 total housing units between 2015 and 2023 to meet its RHNA goals. The California Department of Economic Development projects the creation of 16,400 new jobs in Marin during this period. That is 13.5% employment growth vs. 2% growth in the number of housing units. So, unless seven workers were to live in each new housing unit—which we know won’t happen—even more commuters will be traveling into Marin every working day. To make matters worse, 60% of annual job openings in Marin are for relatively low-wage positions that require a high school degree or less—exacerbating the jobs/housing mismatch in terms of number of units produced and affordability levels.
Marin’s housing and traffic woes, and its outsized carbon footprint, are destined to grow as we continue to prioritize jobs over housing and refuse to adequately address our housing affordability crisis. MEHC celebrates the small housing victories to date, but we hope to see more real progress by the time the 2018 data are released.
Considering Marin’s resistance to new development, you might be surprised to learn that Marin scored the highest among Bay Area counties in meeting last year’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals according to a recent report,