Council Backs Program for Affordable Housing Units

The City Council this week once again signaled its reluctance to force local developers to build housing for the poor, instead endorsing a program to encourage construction of new affordable units or the rehabilitation of old ones.

The council’s action could herald the end of a long and fractious debate over Long Beach’s affordable housing policy. In the course of yearlong discussions, the council has repealed a law that it passed unanimously in 1989, various replacement proposals have come and gone, and developers and housing activists have denounced one another.

The latest proposal--which must be approved by the Planning Commission before it returns to the council for final votes--represents a compromise between the business community and housing advocates. By escaping mandatory requirements, developers scored a major victory, yet they also agreed to drop several provisions that had been bitterly condemned by housing activists.

Under the program, the city would allow developers to build extra units in apartment or condominium projects if the developers agreed to make a certain percentage of those extra units affordable to low-income tenants or to fix up existing affordable units.

Housing advocates also had pushed for a backup provision in case the voluntary effort failed. Under that proposal, developers would have been required to build low-income units in projects throughout the city if the incentives did not work.

But the council earlier this year had already voted to repeal a much-criticized ordinance that would have required developers who demolished low-income apartments to replace them or make payments to a housing fund. And it was clear Tuesday that the majority of the council members had not changed their minds.

By a 5-4 vote, the council rejected a motion that would have created a mandatory program if the voluntary incentives didn’t produce enough affordable units. Councilmen Wallace Edgerton, Doug Drummond, Les Robbins, Warren Harwood and Jeffrey A. Kellogg voted against it.

“It’s meaningless without the teeth,” complained Dennis Rockway, an attorney for the Legal Aid Foundation of Long Beach, which has represented housing groups during months of meetings on the proposed ordinance.

If the voluntary program fails to produce the affordable housing it is supposed to and if there is nothing else to take its place, Rockway and others argued, then the city will be back where it started.

The council in response said it would reconsider city policy if the incentives failed.

Under the voluntary program, a developer would be allowed to add 25% more units to his project than would normally be permitted under zoning regulations if he agrees to set aside a certain percentage of those extra units for low-income residents.

In the case of the units for sale, the condos would have to remain affordable for 10 years. In the case of rental units, the apartments would have to remain affordable for 30 years.

The extra density would be granted only in areas of the city already zoned for high-density residential development of 30 units an acre or more.

Instead of including affordable units in the new project, a developer would also be permitted to contribute to a city housing fund, build affordable units at another site, or fix up existing low-cost housing.

Additionally, the proposal calls for developers to give 18-month eviction notices to tenants living in low-rent buildings slated for demolition.

Developers had asked for much more during negotiations: a 30% density bonus, a greater reduction of development standards, part ownership of the affordable condo units constructed under the program, and permission to postpone the payment of various city fees on new projects for five years.

“Most of the really outrageous things are gone,” remarked Toby Rothschild, executive director of Legal Aid, calling the incentives “a fairly reasonable compromise.”

Steven Sanders, representing a coalition of business and real estate interests, said he would be happy with the proposed ordinance if some “flaws” were corrected. For example, he said the 30-year affordability stipulation for rental units should include more allowances for cost-of-living increases.

Unless such changes are made in the final version of the ordinance, Sanders predicted that few new affordable units would be built. Instead, he said, developers will choose to rehabilitate existing apartments in older buildings. As for those who contend a voluntary program will be ignored by developers, Sanders said: “I’m hoping to prove they’re wrong.”