After a public workshop to discuss amendments to the county’s
complex, state-mandated housing element Tuesday, some San Benito
County Supervisors say they still feel the state has backed them
into a corner, forcing them to approve more houses than the
community can support or lose out on state grants.
Hollister – After a public workshop to discuss amendments to the county’s complex, state-mandated housing element Tuesday, some San Benito County Supervisors say they still feel the state has backed them into a corner, forcing them to approve more houses than the community can support or lose out on state grants.
“I think we understand it (the housing element) better; I don’t think we’re any more comfortable with it,” Board Chairman Reb Monaco said of the plan that includes doubling the density of housing units in some areas to catch up with state-predicted future housing needs.
Like all other California counties and cities, San Benito County is required to plan for a state-mandated number of homes in several categories, including affordable and low-income housing, based on the future growth predictions. If the city or county can’t or won’t allow for the required homes in their general plan, the state can refuse all grant money for local programs such as homeless shelters until the problem is remedied. After hastily approving the density changes in order to meet a grant deadline early last month, Monaco and several other supervisors said they weren’t entirely sure what they had approved and were hoping to come back and tweak the plan later.
On April 5, the board approved and submitted changes to the county’s General Plan that would increase housing density allowed in areas zoned for multi-family housing. Previously, density in these zones was capped at 8 to 12 units per acre, but last month’s amendment increased densities to 20 units per acre.
“We didn’t really think we were short (on required housing), it was just a matter of what the state wants to see,” said Senior County Planner Mary Paxton. “We thought we’d met the target, but the state wanted to be assured that we’d be able to provide high-density, low-income housing. They have a pretty rigid rubric for these things and one of the things they like to see is a density of 20 units per acre in a community this size.”
Supervisors Pat Loe and Don Marcus both said Wednesday they were comfortable with these changes and their implications.
“If we’re going to have more affordable housing then we have to have higher densities,” Loe said.
But Monaco and Supervisor Anthony Botelho said yesterday 20 units per acre is not a realistic goal because of inadequate infrastructure.
“We’re able to meet our requirements today, but I think we have some serious problems in meeting our objectives a few years from now,” said Botelho. “What concerns me is because of the lack of infrastructure, especially water and waste disposal, it’s putting up a lot of red flags as far as how we’re going to meet our low- and moderate-income housing needs.”
Monaco agreed yesterday that the state was forcing the county to make promises it can’t keep.
“It’s one of those situations you really can’t win,” Monaco said. “The state has all these requirements for us and, given our situation, we can’t meet them. It’s fine to set a standard but if you can’t meet it you’re never going to win.”
Marcus said Wednesday he realized the density changes could contribute to infrastructure obstacles along the way, but hoped the county could avoid problems by staying on top of the situation.
“I believe that we’re just going to have to continue to be cognizant of the infrastructure and be aware of where the sphere of influence is,” he said. “We’ll just have to work hard to make sure those services can be provided.”
According to Paxton, the state Department of Housing and Community Development should be getting back to her “any day now” about whether the updated housing element will be approved.
Jessica Quandt covers politics for the Free Lance. Reach her at 831-637-5566 ext. 330 or at
jq*****@fr***********.com
.
