File #: 22-1184    Name: Consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on revisions to the County’s 2010 General Plan, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 18.40 of the Monterey County Code) and administrative manual addressing applicable projects, affordability requir
Type: General Agenda Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 12/15/2022 In control: Housing Advisory Committee
On agenda: 12/21/2022 Final action:
Title: Consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on revisions to the County's 2010 General Plan, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 18.40 of the Monterey County Code) and administrative manual addressing applicable projects, affordability requirements, terms of affordability and exemptions.
Attachments: 1. Staff Report, 2. Attachment 1 - Inclusionary Housing Recommendations - Comments and Responses, 3. Attachment 2 - Background for Recommendations - Comments and Responses
Title
Consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on revisions to the County's 2010 General Plan, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 18.40 of the Monterey County Code) and administrative manual addressing applicable projects, affordability requirements, terms of affordability and exemptions.

Report
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Housing Advisory Committee consider a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on revisions to the County's 2010 General Plan, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (Chapter 18.40 of the Monterey County Code) and administrative manual addressing applicable projects, affordability requirements, terms of affordability and exemptions.

SUMMARY/DISCUSSION:
The Housing Advisory Committee (HAC) is charged with making recommendations to the Board of Supervisors on revisions to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. At the November 9, 2022 HAC meeting staff presented background information to support its recommendations. Five themes emerged during the discussion and public comment on the staff recommendations.

The first theme was around the idea that the County should consider different affordability percentages for high and low-cost areas within the County. The underlying concern expressed was that developers would elect to meet the project's affordable housing obligations off-site in lower development cost areas than constructing the affordable housing obligation on the project site. If this was to materialize, consistently developing the affordable units in disadvantaged communities would result in an inconsistency with the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) and the emerging policy direction of the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

The second theme was around the improved social and economic outcomes associated with lower-income households who are integrated into higher income communities. While not directly related to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance update, these comments echoed the concerns around AFFH but a...

Click here for full text