CALIFORNIA FOCUS
FOR RELEASE: FRIDAY, MARCH 10, 2023, OR THEREAFTER
BY THOMAS D. ELIAS
“SB 9 ENDED
R-1 ZONING, BUT IT’S NOT MEETING GOALS”
More than
a year after it took effect, the landmark housing density law known as SB 9 has
drawn many derogatory labels: a usurper of local powers, a neighborhood
wrecker, a destroyer of dreams, and more. But the most accurate epithet for it
today is something much simpler. So far, it’s a flop.
SB 9,
sponsored by San Diego’s Democratic state Sen. Toni Atkins, was intended to
help solve the California housing shortage by encouraging owners of current
single-family homes to divide their lots in two, with each half eligible for a
duplex and an additional dwelling unit, often known as an ADU.
So six
housing units are now authorized almost automatically on most single-family
properties in this state. The SB 9 sponsors believed when it passed in the fall
of 2020 that this would create enormous financial incentives for current
homeowners to sell to developers.
After all, a new cottage
industry had arisen since permitting of ADUs, also known as “granny units,”
became virtually automatic in January 2020, with almost all new homes featuring
them and many existing homeowners buying and renting out prefabricated units.
But enthusiasm for the kind of
density SB 9 intended to create has not come close to matching the homeowner
and developer interest in building ADUs. A report early this year from UC
Berkeley’s consistently pro-density Terner Center for Housing Innovation
described the law’s impact so far as “limited or nonexistent.”
The
failure so far of this law may comfort some homeowners interested in maintaining
their roomy lifestyles and the character of their neighborhoods, but the
conditions causing it may not be permanent.
For one
thing, nothing in SB 9 compels anyone to build as much as a single affordable
unit, or any units designated for low-income residents.
With both
median home prices and the cost of building a single one-bedroom unit in
California both hovering above $800,000, it’s difficult to see how creating
bunches of duplexes will be much help to families who currently don’t own homes
and thus have not built up many tens of thousands of dollars in equity.
The
contrast with building large apartment or condominium complexes is sharp: They
must include at least some affordable units. They also can get a “density
bonus” allowing them to create more units if they provide more than the required
percentage of affordable or low-income ones.
So the
market for new duplexes is not hot today, especially in a time of dropping
population. Then there’s the matter of financing: Interest on home and
construction loans is higher today than almost any time in the last 20 years,
as the Federal Reserve Board keeps upping interest rates to stem inflation.
That
depresses both home prices and sales everywhere in the nation, including
California, and makes it difficult for developers to fund new projects.
There’s
also a shortage of construction workers, similar to the dearth of workers that
has seen “help wanted” signs appear in thousands of restaurant and store
windows.
All these
conditions might be temporary, possibly changing considerably as inflation
slows.
But
there’s also the matter of reluctance by current homeowners to carve up their
properties or sell out and move elsewhere.
The
steady rise of California property values over the 14 years since the Great
Recession – until it halted or slowed in mid-2021 – has left huge numbers of
longtime homeowners flush with equity, sometimes mounting into the millions of
dollars.
If they
access some of that resource via refinancing or reverse mortgages, a lot of the
financial incentive for creating six homes out of one can disappear.
All of
which means SB 9 does not figure to become a major housing factor anytime soon.
This has
caused its onetime enthusiastic backers to deny they ever saw it as a major
part of the solution. One example is Atkins, the state Senate’s president then
and now. She told a reporter SB 9 “was never intended to be an overnight fix to
our housing shortage…it was intended to increase the housing supply over time.”
It still
may do that someday, but reality right now is that SB 9 has not amounted to
much.
-30-
Email Thomas Elias
at tdelias@aol.com. His book, "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most
Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government’s Campaign to Squelch It,"
is now available in a soft cover fourth edition. For more Elias columns, visit www.californiafocus.net
No comments:
Post a Comment