One of the most closely watched housing production bills in California died last week after its author determined amendments made in the Senate would have rendered the bill useless.
Assemblymember David Alvarez (D-San Diego) introduced AB 2560 earlier this year. The law would have streamlined the approval of housing developments in the coastal zone that make use of the state's affordable housing density bonus law.
The density bonus law offers developers relief from certain building regulations if they set aside a portion of the homes in their projects as affordable housing. Advocates say the law has proven highly effective at increasing the supply of both market-rate and affordable housing.
But current law gives the California Coastal Commission broad veto power over density bonus projects if they fall within the agency's jurisdictional boundaries, which extend as far as 5 miles inland from the ocean.
Alvarez said amendments introduced this summer in the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Water, which is chaired by Sen. Dave Min (D-Irvine), ran counter to the bill's intent.
"Through the process, and in the spirit of compromise, I offered amendments that reduced the bill's scope by exempting specific areas to ensure more natural resources are not threatened," Alvarez said. "In the Senate, we received even further amendments (that) would essentially give even more authority to the Coastal Commission, which is quite the opposite of what we're trying to accomplish, and could hinder more housing from being built by increasing bureaucratic processes."
Alvarez voluntarily withdrew the bill from consideration Thursday while vowing to bring it back next year. He said carrying the bill this far had introduced him to new allies in the legislature who agree that California needs more housing, especially in coastal areas.
"We've built a bigger coalition," Alvarez said. "That, I think, just makes me feel good going into next year and starting this conversation once again."
The Coastal Commission was established in 1972 to protect natural resources along the state's coastline and ensure continued public access to the coast. Critics say the agency has become unaccountable and too often sides with wealthy homeowners trying to block new development in the state's most desirable and exclusive neighborhoods.
Coastal Commission staff have bristled at the growing chorus of criticism and have publicly testified against reform efforts in the legislature.
Next month, the commission's 12 voting members will decide whether to permit a new rapid bus service along an abandoned rail line in Monterey County. Supporters argue the service would offer a more affordable, sustainable and reliable alternative to driving on the congested Highway 1.
But in a 68-page report, commission staffers argue the bus service should be rejected because it would "significantly alter the sense and perception of serenity" on an adjacent hiking trail. Both the trail and the rail tracks are separated from Highway 1 by just a few feet.
