SONOMA VALLEY HOUSING AFFORDABILITY ROADMAP
An action plan to address our community’s housing affordability crisis over the next three years, funded by Sonoma Valley Catalyst Fund.
The Roadmap Advances the 3 P’s of Housing
Preserve Affordable Infill Homes
Keep lower-income people in their affordable homes by partnering with philanthropy and other funds to assure that subsidized, below-market-rate homes in Sonoma Valley stay that way.
Produce Affordable infill homes
Build new homes that embody the principles of the Sonoma Valley Housing Declaration: affordable, for people who live or work in the Valley, within already developed areas, to create diverse, safe, complete neighborhoods.
Protect precariously housed residents
Programs aimed at keeping people at risk of homelessness housed and preventing homelessness.
-
This deeply researched Housing Affordability Roadmap describes 8-15 strategies that together reimagine housing affordability in Sonoma Valley. The Roadmap names the organizations best positioned to lead each strategy, estimates costs for each strategy, and identifies cost-saving synergies among the strategies.
The Roadmap focuses on homes that are accessible to local workers and others with limited means. (It does not include homeless services.)
-
The goal of the Roadmap is to provide clarity and actionable direction for the community, housing-related organizations and agencies (including SVC), funders (including Catalyst), and Sonoma Valley’s thought leaders about the subset of strategies that, together, over the next ~3 years, will most improve housing affordability in Sonoma Valley.
-
The Roadmap lays out the next phase of housing affordability work, both for Sonoma Valley overall and for SVC. SVC built credibility as a broad-based, effective coalition promoting housing affordability in the City’s and County’s Housing Elements. Now that those policies are in motion, it’s time to create an updated, actionable implementation plan, tiering off strategies laid out in the Housing Elements and in SVC’s 2020 Homes for A Sustainable Sonoma Valley.
-
We commissioned a Sonoma-Valley-specific housing need assessment from Generation Housing for this Roadmap. Read the assessment here for more details. Currently, the best estimate for housing PRODUCTION need in Sonoma Valley is extrapolated from Generation Housing’s county-wide estimate: ~5,800 units between now and 2030, of which 70% or 4,000 should be below-market. Data on housing subsidy PRESERVATION needs is in the City’s and County’s Housing Element appendices. SVC is not aware of any estimate of the number of precariously housed residents needing housing PROTECTION, although during this project SVUSD will begin to develop an estimate.
-
Sonoma Valley lacks the housing to support its workforce, elderly and disabled residents. While this has taken years to develop, the current situation is significantly and negatively impacting our community and economy and the future vitality of the Sonoma Valley. The current situation and its evolution has been elegantly described by the Generation Housing 2024 Report of the State of Housing in Sonoma County (1). The bottom line is that housing that supports these residents has been “hollowed out”.
When Sonoma Valley workers cannot secure housing, we all lose – on diversity, a skilled, dynamic workforce, and community. Our economy will not thrive if the people needed to drive it are living far outside of our community or great talent cannot be attracted to our community. Increasing affordable, workforce housing stock is the foundational component of maintaining our essential workforce, climate resilience, economic resilience and quality of life.
The Why
Why did this happen? Although complex in nature, a key driving force has been Sonoma Valley itself. Few people are “relocated” to Sonoma for work, they “choose” to live here because of its physical beauty, bucolic setting, small town charm and sense of community. The result is Sonoma Valley being a very desirable place to live and so market forces have been at work. A major driving force has been purchases of existing housing stock for second homes and vacation rental properties that have driven up the price of land. A second force has been a lack of new building, likely related, in part, to the first force, making housing development for affordable and workforce residents unable to ‘pencil out’ for developers. Added on to these is the third force, the nature of our economy in Sonoma Valley-an economy deeply entrenched in hospitality and agriculture, which are jobs that are lower paying.
Affordable Housing and Workforce Housing defined.
Big “A” affordable housing is a specific designation based upon ‘area median income’ (AMI) of 120% or less. Who are these people? Vineyard workers, farm workers, house cleaners, manicurists, baristas, restaurant staff, hotel staff, elderly, disabled. According to the 2024 State of Housing in Sonoma County by Generation Housing, households where workers earn the median wage in six of the county’s most common occupations can only afford to pay, on average, $1,000 in rent each month, yet median rental costs are over $1,900 (1). Roughly 8 in 10 Extremely Low-Income (<30% AMI) and Very Low-Income (31-50% AMI) households are cost burdened, while 40% of Moderate (80-120% AMI) earning owners and renters are cost burdened (1).
Workforce housing encompasses both the Affordable designation but also includes what has been named the “missing middle” (above moderate, 121-160% AMI), whose income falls between 121-160% AMI-for which there are no government-designated programs or laws. Who are these people? Police officers, Firefighters, Hospital workers, Government workers, Small Business owners and employees.
Residents between the ages of 35–54 have vanished from the County by the tens of thousands in the last two decades. This segment is typically in need of entry-level, for-sale homes as they start families and seek to put down roots in a community (1).
The Springs neighborhood in Sonoma Valley has the largest share of overcrowded households in the county and Latino households continue to experience the highest rate of overcrowding in Sonoma County, nearly ten times the rate of White households within the county (1).
Nearly 6 in 10 seniors over 65 years old experience cost burden, higher than non-seniors and nearly 1 in 5 of all individuals experiencing homelessness in Sonoma County are now 55 years or older (1).
High land prices + lower paying jobs + limited housing stock = lack of housing accessible to our workforce, elderly and disabled residents.
This situation is not new but it is growing worse because it is not addressing the scope of need. Incremental progress has been made in developing affordable and workforce housing, but it is not enough to ensure our future as a vibrant community which offers a sustained economy and quality of life for our residents. Limited, competitive funding for affordable and workforce development and recent actions by the state government that have focused on incentivizing market-rate developers to help solve the program has had limited impact in the Sonoma Valley.
Currently, the development of affordable housing in the Sonoma Valley is driven in a piecemeal manner by a variety of non-profit or market-rate developers working independently on a project-based basis with no coordinated effort between municipalities and developers. Relying upon market-rate developers has not substantively impacted the number of affordable, workforce housing units needed in Sonoma Valley because market-rate developers require the projects to ‘pencil-out’ to make a profit.
Non-profit affordable housing developers are a key resource in expanding this housing stock bringing extensive experience in pulling together stack funding. However, several non-profit affordable housing developers have a business model that requires a minimum of 40-50 units/acre/project phase to optimize the funding and many potential land parcels will not accommodate large infill projects (<40 units/acre). Additionally, the majority of government funding and affordable housing development is for rental properties and only a few non-profit organizations and government funding are focused on home ownership. Lastly, local programs like the Renewal Enterprise District (RED, Santa Rosa) require a transit-rich center for participation. Sonoma Valley lacks sufficient transit, so is not eligible to participate.
OVERVIEW OF
STRATEGIES
SKIP TO STRATEGIES MOST RELEVANT TO YOU
-
-
Description text goes here
-
Item description
-
Description text goes here
STRATEGY 1
Create A Sonoma Valley Community Development Corporation
STRATEGY 2
Keep Renters Housed
Strategy 2a: Educate tenants and landlords
Strategy 2b: More and better housing services
Strategy 2c: Better just-cause eviction protections
STRATEGY 3
Assure Affordability Commitments Are Kept
Strategy 3a: Adopt a strong rental registry
Strategy 3b: Ensure that people living in income-restricted homes are those who need them
STRATEGY 4
Preserve Existing Affordable Housing
Strategy 4a: Buy out expiring unit
Strategy 4b: Long-term rental preservation program (naturally occurring)
Strategy 4c: Preserve mobile home parks
STRATEGY 5
Improve Zoning & Land Use Rules
Strategy 5a: Different land use rules to incentivize new affordable infill housing
Strategy 5b: Address local zoning policies that constrain development
Strategy 5c: Create the framework to sell ADUs and condo-ize parcels
Strategy 5d: Allow diverse types of housing construction
Strategy 5e: Parking reform (County)
Strategy 5 f: Reduce number of short-term rentals and incentivize renting to locals (County)
STRATEGY 6
Public or Nonprofit Ownership of Land
Strategy 6a: Establish a land bank entity
Strategy 6b: Use community land trusts to reduce cost to residents
STRATEGY 7
Workforce Housing
Strategy 7a: Improve Downpayment Programs for Lower-Income Homebuyers
Strategy 7b: Building a path to homeownership for middle-income families
STRATEGY 8
Build Local Funding Streams to House Our Community
STRATEGY 1
Create A Sonoma Valley Community Development
Summary
Sonoma Valley needs a mission-driven nonprofit to plan, coordinate, and facilitate the development and preservation of affordable and workforce homes. A community development corporation (CDC) is a proven model, filling gaps left by existing agencies. A Sonoma Valley CDC would track housing needs, identify development opportunities, coordinate stakeholders, and overcome barriers to housing production and preservation.
STRATEGY 2
Keep Renters Housed
Summary
Expand accessible services: landlord-tenant negotiation, housing navigation, rental assistance, and eviction prevention.
STRATEGY 2a
Educate tenants and landlords
Summary
Sonoma City and County need a rental registry to track rental costs, occupancy, evictions, and displacement patterns across mid- and low-cost rental housing in Sonoma Valley. Without this data, policymakers cannot identify and address issues in the housing market.
STRATEGY 2b
More & Better Housing Services
Summary
Sonoma Valley’s renters need consistently funded, culturally accessible rental housing wraparound services, including resources to find housing, rental assistance, and landlord-tenant negotiation.
STRATEGY 2c
Better just-cause eviction protections
Summary
Sonoma Valley’s renters need consistently funded, culturally accessible rental housing wraparound services, including resources to find housing, rental assistance, and landlord-tenant negotiation.
STRATEGY 3
Assure Affordability Commitments Are Kept
Summary
Local governments jointly create a rental registry that delivers transparency, accountability, and tracking.
STRATEGY 3a
Adopt a strong rental registry
Summary
Sonoma City and County need a rental registry to track rental costs, occupancy, evictions, and displacement patterns across mid- and low-cost rental housing in Sonoma Valley. Without this data, policymakers cannot identify and address issues in the housing market.
STRATEGY 3b
Ensure that people living in income-restricted homes are those who need them
Summary
Identify subsidized homes (including “inclusionary units”) and ensure that those units are indeed rented to qualifying low-income residents. Absent this follow-through, deserving people are being excluded from affordable homes.
STRATEGY 4
Preserve Existing Affordable Housing
Summary
Buy out deed-restricted units before their affordability expires, to prevent loss to the open market.
STRATEGY 4a
Buy out subsidized homes before their subsidies expire, so they can be affordable into perpetuity.
Summary
Sonoma Valley already has many protected, below-market homes, but most of them have time-limited protections that will expire, leaving those units and their occupants vulnerable to the extreme prices of the open market. A coalition of property owners, government agencies, and nonprofits can rescue those subsidized units and extend their subsidies perpetually.
STRATEGY 4b
Identify unsubsidized “naturally affordable” housing in Sonoma Valley and ensure its permanent affordability.
Summary
Sonoma Valley still has lower-cost homes, studios, mobilehomes, and apartments. We need to locate those homes and rally partners and agreements to keep them affordable even as overall housing costs rise.
STRATEGY 4c
Preserve mobilehome parks
Summary
About 10% of Sonoma Valley’s residents live in mobilehome parks, mostly seniors and lower-income families, so it is paramount that these communities remain affordable. We need to strengthen local mobilehome park closure and conversion ordinances and prevent conversion of mobilehome parks. Ample examples across California show the way.
STRATEGY 5
Improve Zoning & Land Use Rules
Summary
Several local policies impede the construction of lower-cost housing in infill locations. Policies should instead incentivize and streamline such construction. As SVC and others demonstrated successfully during the City’s and County’s Housing Element updates, advocacy can change these local policies.
-
The City of Sonoma controls how land can be used, minimum parcel size, parking requirements, and a host of other rules affecting housing within the 2 square miles of the City. The elected City Council decides on policy after the appointed Planning Commission makes recommendations.
The County of Sonoma controls how land can be used, minimum parcel size, parking requirements, and a host of other rules affecting housing in the rest of Sonoma Valley. The Board of Supervisors decides on policy after the appointed Planning Commission makes recommendations.
Both jurisdictions operate under a General Plan that describes higher-level land use policies. Both General Plans are being updated now and will remain in force for about 20 years. Fine details of policy that allow staff to implement policies are described in ordinances and codes.
-
Advocates
Sonoma Valley Collaborative, and its members on their own
Generation Housing
California YIMBY
Legal Aid of Sonoma County, North Bay Organizing Project (depending on the policy)
Developer advocates
Incremental Developers Alliance
Habitat for Humanity
California Housing Partnership
Burbank Housing
Eden Housing
MidPen Housing
PEP Housing
SAHA
Construction and trades
North Bay Leadership Council
Advisors
Sonoma County Community Development Commission
California Department of Housing & Community Development
California Housing Partnership
National Housing Law Project
National Low Income Housing Coalition
Novogradac
Redwood Credit Union and other community-based banks
-
Costs for advocacy to improve land use policy are primarily in the category of staff time for strategy meetings and coalition-building, policy research, writing and revising statements for different audiences, creating and promoting media messages, conversing with decision-makers in private, recruiting and supporting community members who may not have confidence in their ability to be influential, and participating in public meetings which can last for hours. Lesser costs include printing for 1-pagers, occasional creation of buttons or other identifying items, occasional small costs to boost social media posts, and occasional travel for regional strategy meetings.
The sub-strategies below could each likely be achieved by a 6 to 12-month campaign. Multiple substrategies could be combined and packaged under a compelling umbrella as resources permit. Tackling one or two of these substrategies for 6 months could cost $8,000-$10,000, whereas pursuing several substrategies simultaneously, as a unified campaign over 12 months, could cost $30,000-$50,000.
Investors, donors, and funders should realize that supporting policy advocacy is fundamentally different from funding services or projects. The outcome of advocacy work is not guaranteed, because unlike in a conventional nonprofit project, advocates face actual opposition, and the opposition is often better funded. Local government’s limited bandwidth can also limit success. On the upside, regardless of near-term success, advocacy done well builds alliances, both among advocates and with decision-makers, and these linkages then open doors for more good work.
SUB STRATEGY 5b
Address Local Zoning Policies That Constrain Development
Summary
Eliminate or revise restrictive zoning policies to allow taller, denser, and more cost-effective housing, including below-market and incremental projects.
STRATEGY 5a
Different Land Use Rules to Incentivize New Affordable Infill Housing
Summary
Encourage truly affordable housing (through subsidy or design) on most urban parcels throughout the City and unincorporated Sonoma Valley, by offering strong incentives to developers to build or otherwise create affordable units.
STRATEGY 5c
Create the Framework to Sell ADUs and Condoize Parcels
Summary
Allow the separate sale or conveyance of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) from the primary residence.
-
The separate sale of ADUs was made possible with the passage of Assembly Bill 1033 (Ting). AB 1033 can help to increase the number of available housing units, particularly affordable housing options. It also provides an opportunity for property owners to generate additional income or to downsize while still living on their original property.
ADUs can range in size from as small as 500 SF to as large as 1200 SF. As such, they tend to be a more naturally affordable option among for-sale housing options. Sonoma Valley has many large properties that can accommodate an ADU, but little opportunity for infill development on greenfield properties remains.
The major provisions of AB 1033 are:
Allows ADUs to be sold separately from the primary residence. This means that property owners can sell their ADU as a standalone unit, similar to a condominium.
Specifies that ADUs can be converted into condominiums, creating separate property titles for the ADU and the primary residence. This provides greater flexibility for property owners and potential buyers.
Grants local governments the authority to adopt ordinances that permit the separate sale of ADUs. Local governments can establish specific guidelines and regulations to ensure that ADU conversions comply with local zoning and building codes.
Perhaps the only major pitfall of AB 1033 is the absence of an immediate owner-occupancy provision, a tool often utilized to curb corporate speculation of housing units not subject to an affordability covenant. It appears that owner-occupancy requirements can be instituted for ADUs only after January 1, 2025.
As of June 2024, San Jose appears to be the only city to opt into using AB 1033, with the bill taking effect July 2024. Local governments need to opt in to make the ADU-as-condominium approach available to them. The sale of ADUs is allowed in Seattle, Oregon, and Texas. We will want to look to these states to determine best practices since this is a new program and might have unanticipated challenges when it comes to actual execution.
Some potential concerns with AB 1033 are as follows:
Mortgage and Title Concerns: AB 1033 does not address how the sale of an ADU might affect existing mortgages or titles. Homeowners considering selling an ADU should consult with a real estate professional to avoid potential complications, such as triggering the due-on-sale clause of their mortgage.
Regulatory Landscape: The bill's broad language has raised concerns about creating loopholes for new construction standards and complicating homeowner relationships with federal loan terms. There's a risk that without clear guidelines, the process of selling or conveying an ADU could become fraught with legal and financial challenges.
Conflicts with existing zoning code. For example, the City Council would need to change the zoning code to allow for this strategy to be executed, because currently, flag lots are banned in the City.
In addition to the regular housing policy partners operating in Sonoma Valley, for this sub strategy, Napa Sonoma ADU Center, whose mission is to help homeowners build ADUs, can provide advocacy support and potentially help with crafting template resolution language that we can share with jurisdictions.
STRATEGY 5d
Allow Diverse Types of Housing Construction
Summary
Allow any type of housing construction material or method, as long as it meets health and safety requirements, wherever housing is allowed.
-
This policy would allow manufactured homes, prefab homes, mobilehomes, tiny homes, trailer homes, modular homes, 3D printed homes, strawbale construction, roundpole construction, and any other type of construction method or material, as long as it meets California Building Code.
Many of these approaches are often smaller and less expensive than conventional stick-built construction, which would lower barriers to accessing both rental and for-sale housing.
Local ordinances can be modeled on other jurisdictions in California that have already passed similar measures, such as San Diego, San José, the City of Los Angeles.
STRATEGY 5e
Parking Reform
Summary
Reduce or eliminate parking minimums to reduce housing development costs and promote walkable, sustainable communities.
-
Each additional parking space can add $25,000-$65,000 to the cost of development in high-cost locations like Sonoma Valley. Local governments seeking to boost housing supply should reduce or eliminate parking requirements to lower costs and promote more sustainable development. In Minneapolis, Minnesota, which famously allowed small multifamily development across most of its residential zoning in 2019, much of the resultant increase in housing and reduction in housing cost was actually caused by the simultaneous elimination of parking requirements, according to Minneapolis advocates speaking to the Sonoma County housing community in 2025.
Remove parking requirements that drive up development costs. Instead, if anything, set parking maximums to prevent excessive land use for parking. Developers will allocate land to parking based on what they expect buyers and renters to prefer, so local government does not need to dictate parking minimums. The City of Sonoma has reduced the required number and size of parking spaces.
Allow shared parking between residential, retail, and office spaces
Allow and promote “unbundled” parking, especially for multi-unit projects, which separates the cost to a resident for parking space from the cost of rent
Allow an ADU and new living space (for example from converting a garage to a bedroom) without requiring new parking
The Association of Bay Area Governments prepared a comprehensive parking policy playbook that can help guide decision making on which parking reforms should be prioritized.
Advisors and Collaborators Specific to this Sub Strategy
Transform https://transformca.org/. Transform works across the Bay Area to reshape transportation and housing using community-driven solutions and transformative policy advocacy.
Parking Reform Network https://parkingreform.org/. They have an extensive library of parking policies enacted across the country.
SUB STRATEGY 5f
Reduce the Number of Short-Term Rentals and Incentivize Renting to Locals
Summary
Align Sonoma Valley’s Short-Term Rental (STR) regulations (both City and County) with Santa Rosa’s policy, to prevent oversaturation in our neighborhoods and protect housing for locals.
-
About 10% of Sonoma County’s housing stock is estimated to be unavailable to local residents because it is used for whole-house (also called “non-hosted”) short-term vacation rentals or as a second or third home. The City of Sonoma already has a ban on STR. Sonoma Valley’s previous County Supervisor was able to get small areas in Sonoma Valley to limit the number of STRs, but could not get a supervisorial majority to enact county-wide policy.
Santa Rosa has a policy worth emulating. Its provisions include:
Ban new non-hosted STR Permits while allowing existing permits to expire over time. (County only, City already bans)
Three-strike rule: If an STR gets three citations, the permit is permanently revoked and the property owner is permanently ineligible for future consideration of a Short-Term Rental Permit on the property that was the subject of the revocation
Limit non-hosted STR Permits to one per owner. Multi-permit holders may retain and renew their permits but cannot acquire new permits.
Allow Permit holders a 30-day grace period following the expiration of their Permit to submit a renewal application
Revoke STR permits upon sale of property. Of all the features listed here, this is the only one not yet enacted by the City of Sonoma.
Enact a new program providing incentive to landowners to rent to locals, as in Tahoe.
Note that although many support a tax on vacant homes or second or third homes, as a way to make those homes available instead to local residents, it is not clear that such a tax would generate more money for affordable housing than it would cost in staff time to monitor and enforce. The City of Sonoma is investigating this tradeoff.
STRATEGY 6a
Establish a Land Bank Entity
Summary
A land bank entity for Sonoma Valley could acquire and hold strategic properties until the time is right for them to be redeveloped for community benefit. Land banking prevents speculative price increases and ensures land remains dedicated to affordable housing.
STRATEGY 6b
Use Community Land Trusts to Reduce Cost to Residents
Summary
In Sonoma Valley, the extremely high cost of land is the over-riding barrier to lower-cost housing. An effective way to remove the burden of the cost of land, for people living in Sonoma Valley, is to use the Community Land Trust model, in which a nonprofit owns the land, so the resident pays only for the value of the home they live in.
STRATEGY 6
Public or Nonprofit Ownership of Land
Summary
Land banks, housing land trusts, and cooperatives enable permanently lower costs of owning or renting homes.
STRATEGY 7a
A Strategic Action Plan for Farmworker Housing in Sonoma
Summary
To address the urgent and unacceptable housing crisis among Sonoma Valley farmworkers, we need a focused farmworker housing needs assessment, practical assessment of feasible solutions, and development of farmworker-specific housing.
STRATEGY 7b
Improve Downpayment Programs for Lower-Income Homebuyers
Summary
When Sonoma Valley workers cannot secure homeownership, we all lose – on diversity, a skilled, dynamic workforce, and community. Assisting first time home buyers with downpayment funds is an established way to boost home ownership around the nation.
STRATEGY 7
Workforce Housing & Homeownership
Summary
A focus on farmworker housing and first-time homebuyers.
STRATEGY
A Strategic Action Plan for Farmworker Housing in Sonoma
Summary
To address the urgent and unacceptable housing crisis among Sonoma Valley farmworkers, we need a focused farmworker housing needs assessment, practical assessment of feasible solutions, and development of farmworker-specific housing.
STRATEGY 7b
Improve Downpayment Programs for Lower-Income Homebuyers
Summary
When Sonoma Valley workers cannot secure homeownership, we all lose – on diversity, a skilled, dynamic workforce, and community. Assisting first time home buyers with downpayment funds is an established way to boost home ownership around the nation.
STRATEGY 8
Build Local Funding to House Our Community
Summary
Local government funding sources help bring in state and federal dollars, and are more flexible.
Acknowledgements
The Sonoma Valley Housing Affordability Roadmap is by Sonoma Valley Collaborative, in partnership with Legal Aid of Sonoma County, Generation Housing, and Donna Dambach. SVC authors are Caitlin Cornwall, Maria Membrila, Kim Jones, and Mia Sasaki. Legal Aid authors are Patrick McDonnell and Caitlin Vjelby. Generation Housing authors are Calum Weeks, Josh Shipper, and Max Zhang.
Sonoma Valley Collaborative is deeply grateful to Sonoma Valley Catalyst Fund for funding this project and for being a long-time thought partner on what Sonoma Valley needs.
Thank you to the following people for sharing their expertise to make this Roadmap:
Leonardo Lobato, La Luz Center
David Guhin and Jennifer Gates, City of Sonoma
Felix AuYeung, MidPen Housing