Accessory units best way to hit state's housing mandate

California leaders have been relentless in their demand that cities and counties build millions of new housing units both market rate and affordable.

Protests by local elected officials and regular citizens that much of the state doesn't have the water and basic infrastructure that new housing requires are met with a shrug from state legislators of both parties.

The better approach is for local governments to take steps to comply with those mandates but do so in a manner that minimizes disruption to communities while adding truly needed affordable and workforce housing.

There's a perhaps overly optimistic hope that courts will be more sympathetic with those jurisdictions that fall short of complying with the full Regional Housing Needs Allocation, but deliver the required number of housing units for low, very low and moderate income Californians.

There's one route toward accomplishing that goal which tends to be downplayed by the consultants many municipalities employ to redraft their general plan housing elements so they comply with the RNHA.

The strategy is to proactively facilitate construction of accessory dwelling units or ADUs. These in-law units and granny apartments are now permitted in single-family zoned neighborhoods.

Benefits for property owners include extra income, a home for adult family members and a spot for the owners to “retire in place” while renting the principal home.

Community rewards include satisfying ADU mandates, providing affordable homes for our workforce and integrating energy-efficient housing into the scale of single-family neighborhoods.

I met with two Marnities, Margaret Carrigan and Elizabeth Kromer, who created a business, Value+ADU (aka VADU), to guide homeowners interested in a unit.

They explained what accessory units could do to address housing requirements by using Marin's unincorporated communities as an example.

During the 2022-2030 planning cycle, county leaders must facilitate creation in unincorporated neighborhoods of 2,226 new units for Marinites having incomes that are extremely low, very low, low and moderate. That housing is what is really needed, not homes for upper-income folks.

The California Department of Finance reports 24,197 single-family home lots and 4,420 parcels with multi-unit apartments and condos in non-municipal Marin. There are also mixeduse commercial buildings which, pursuant to state law, may add ADUs to replace vacant retail space.

If, on those 30,000 or so lots, just 5% or 1,500 of the owners ask to build one second unit, two-thirds of unincorporated Marin's “affordable” housing allocation is satisfied with a minimum of disruptive large-scale housing. The same logic applies to Marin's 11 municipalities.

Accessory units aren't a panacea but they need to play a far greater role in addressing Marin's housing needs.

While this doesn't help developers specializing in large-scale construction, it will be a boon for local architects and contractors who will get the small scale ADU jobs.

Carrigan and Kromer contend Marin municipalities and county government can greatly expand existing efforts to encourage more accessory units. Do it by mimicking Pasadena, a leader in promoting second units. Doit by lowering building fees, further simplifying the permitting process and taking better advantage of existing state programs designed to facilitate ADUs.

I would also add exempting accessory units from being property tax reassessed if the new homes are permanently dedicated as “affordable.”

There's no denying there's negative impacts from any new housing including ADUs. Traffic will increase, scarce water will be consumed and more infrastructure is required.

Whether new housing is in high-rises or neighborhoodfriendly accessory units, these downsides result from legal loopholes allowing state legislators to ignore their duty to fund impacts emanating from the laws they enact. California politicians talk about the “housing crisis” but fall mute when it comes to paying for what they demand.