We consider how cities are responding to California’s legislation that preempts them from requiring parking close to transit. To what extent are cities sticking to the letter of the law? Which cities are going further and taking the opportunity to go beyond the scope of the state requirements? Or are some cities attempting to evade the spirit of the law?

Siting subsidized affordable housing in dense urban areas near transit can help the state meet its environmental goals by reducing vehicle travel and lowering the amount of vehicle miles traveled (VMT). However, more information is needed on exactly how best to allocate housing subsidies that both improve access to economic and educational opportunities for underrepresented groups, and improve mobility throughout the state more broadly while reducing VMT. This project will address the challenge of identifying neighborhoods that are best suited to promoting the state’s housing and environmental goals. The research will look at VMT rates in neighborhoods with affordable housing and examine the access and environmental benefits of subsidized affordable housing near transit in dense, urban areas. The project will assemble tract-level data and indicators, and will analyze changes in the location of subsidized and non-subsidized housing between 2007 and 2018 to determine if the current and expected future distribution of affordable housing is consistent with the state’s VMT reduction goals. Findings from this analysis will be used to identify target priority areas for renters at the policy and program levels, including the siting of new federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit construction. In addition, the project will examine if and how transportation considerations are being incorporated into three important and innovative housing programs, which have a shared goal of increasing residential choice and mobility.

Density is important for successful transit service, and recent state and local housing policies tie production to transit proximity. Multifamily housing, however, often faces many obstacles. One important obstacle is that most cities evaluate transit-adjacent multifamily housing developments with discretionary processes. Discretionary approval is slow and uncertain: developers and city officials negotiate project-by-project, sometimes adding years to project timelines. The resulting delays and conditions can depress housing production and raise costs, with the result being fewer transit-accessible homes. An alternative is by-right approvals, which automatically approve projects that meet published standards, bringing housing to market quicker and at a lower cost. By-right approval could deliver denser and more affordable housing to urban areas, supporting increased transit ridership and other mobility goals. Because by-right approval is relatively rare, however, estimates of how much more housing it could deliver remain vague. This project used the City of Los Angeles’ Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) program to help identify the role of by-right approval in delivering more housing near transit. The TOC program presents a rare opportunity to compare the impact of by-right and discretionary approvals in a single political and market context. The analysis compared costs, project timelines, and community benefits of by-right and nearby discretionary projects. The research team estimated reductions in project costs and time to market resulting from by-right approvals compared to affordable units provided by developers. This quantitative analysis was complemented by interviews with developers, community-based organizations, lenders, city officials, and others. The research team found that by-right projects were permitted 28% faster than discretionary projects, controlling for project and neighborhood characteristics. By-right projects also had less variance in their approval times, suggesting that by-right approval offers not just more speed but more certainty.