In another desperate bid to avoid rezoning for affordable housing, some Bay Area towns are pushing housing for developmentally disabled adults as an alternative—but the proposals are likely illegal, disability rights advocates say.
The San Francisco Bay Area’s creativity knows no bounds—when it comes to finding new ways to skirt California housing production quotas. In Hillsborough, one resident proposed a novel loophole: “build a segregated development specifically for developmentally disabled adults, thus preventing a potential influx of other unwanted ‘low-income’ neighbors.” Alex Shultz and Eric Ting report on the story for SFGate.
Hillsborough, which is required by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) to permit zoning for 554 additional units by 2031, is just one of many wealthy enclaves to resist RHNA mandates to make more housing available for “very low-income” households.
For the resident who made the proposal, housing for developmentally disabled people is far preferable to housing for low-income families because he sees it as less of a disruption to the community. A councilmember from nearby Woodside, who last year suggested that his town should designate itself as a mountain lion habitat to avoid building new housing, quickly made a comparable proposal in his town. A Portola Valley councilmember offered similar reasoning. “It will not have much impact on the surrounding community because they are very quiet, crime-free, they generate almost no traffic because almost none of them drive, and they are closely supervised 24/7,” he said, implying that low-income households would not be any of those things.
Navneet Grewal, an attorney at Disability Rights California, says that while more affordable housing for people with developmental disabilities is needed, “we believe that the housing needs to be integrated.” Grewal added, “We’re opposed to just creating more institutions. There needs to be a mix of incomes and types of units offered.” Moreover, segregating a group of people in an institutional setting can have legal implications. According to Grewal, “Anytime you restrict housing to just one type of person you risk violating numerous federal and state housing laws.”
Read the full story: Rich Bay Area towns mull 'disturbing' scheme to dodge low-income housing
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
California plans to bury El Niño’s downpour
If the state plays its cards right, it may be able to store a billion acre-feet of El Niño’s water in aquifers.
Desperate measures: Advocates weigh draining Lake Powell to fill Colorado River
Draining the reservoir could reduce evaporation losses by a couple hundred thousand acre-feet.
Mamdani’s pied-à-terre tax survives legal challenge
A panel of judges found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate injury as a result of New York City's implementation of the tax.
Eastern Nebraska is running out of electricity
Data centers and electrification are straining eastern Nebraska’s grid, throttling economic development.
Seattle passes record-breaking transit services expansion
Proposition 1 will double the city’s transit tax to add 95,000 more bus trips and preserve 180,000 bus trips annually.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
City of Rosemead
Rutgers University, Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy
One Hundred Miles
University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability (SEAS)
Hunter College, City University of New York (CUNY)
The Architects Foundation
City of Cambridge
Montrose County
The Pocatello Development Authority