HomeMy WebLinkAbout5c_b_Additional Materials Received_VariousFrom:Hoiyin Ip
To:Housing Element Update Advisory Committee
Subject:public comment: gas stations
Date:Tuesday, March 16, 2021 9:33:49 AM
Attachments:Screen Shot 2021-03-16 at 9.24.46 AM.png
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Housing Element Update Advisory Committee,
Could gas stations become potential housing sites?
California will stop selling gas-powered cars by 2035, that's 14 year away. More people driving EVs
meaning less business for gas stations. There's a movement of banning new gas stations. I quickly
looked into 2009-2019 data in Newport Beach (also Irvine and Laguna Beach). Trends show the cities
have had decreased number of gas stations and gasoline sales. Below is Newport Beach data. And
City website shows population increased from 84,595 to 85,706 for the same period.
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Thanks!
Hoiyin
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
From:dave@earsi.com
To:Housing Element Update Advisory Committee
Cc:Avery, Brad; Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Zdeba, Benjamin
Subject:Comments on Draft Housing Element
Date:Tuesday, March 16, 2021 12:32:29 PM
Attachments:Draft Housing Element Comments 3-16-21.pdf
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hi,
Attached are my comments and recommendations following review of the draft Housing Element.
Cheers,
Dave
David J. Tanner
223 62nd Street
Newport Beach, CA 92663
949 646-8958 home
949 233-0895 cell
Notice of Confidentiality:
This e-mail and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the address(s) named herein
and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended
recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of
this email, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify me by e-mail by replying to this message and permanently delete the original
and any copy of any email and any printout thereof.
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 1 of 8
General
Top Priorities
Satisfying the state mandated housing requirement is the predominant factor driving the direction of the
Housing Element/General Plan update. The City has chosen to proceed with the Housing Element and
Circulation Element updates first, followed by the Land Use other and remaining Elements. In updating
the Housing and Circulation Elements the City needs to incorporate additional mandates beyond
accommodating RHNA. The direction the Country is going, is to reduce GHG emissions to reduce
mankind’s impact on climate change. To become carbon neutral by 2050, if not sooner. The Country’s
Climate change polices are largely being driven by California law (SB32). These policies mandate California
reduce its statewide GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030. Local Governments must do their
fair share. Federal and state funds will be allocated to this goal. Achieving the state GHG reduction
mandate and achieving state RHNA/housing affordability mandate should be the top priorities of the
General Plan Update.
The existing General Plan vision includes a significant reduction of ADT. Combining reductions in ADT, VMT
and GHG emissions city‐wide, should be top priorities of the City’s Housing and Circulation Element
Updates.
2030 Vision
Circumstances has changed significantly since the last General Plan update. The City needs to project a
vision of the City in 2030 to serve as a blueprint for this General Plan Update. What will the City’s
population be? Where will the City’s population growth be distributed? How many additional cars will
be on the City’s roadways? What percentage of the population will be driving electric vehicles? What will
the City’s circulation needs be given the mandated reduction in total VMT of 40% below 1990 levels?1
What will the City’s carbon footprint be? What is Newport Beach’s plan to reach carbon neutrality?
California Air Resources Board 2000‐2018 GHG Inventory (2020 Edition)
1 A good example of a Climate Action Plan is the City of San Luis Obispo:
https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument?id=27835
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 2 of 8
We need to project these changes, not only in the City, but in the region? What types of measures will
local governments within SCAG implement to achieve these Housing, GHG and VMT reduction mandates?
How will the region’s population growth impact the City?
Simply stated, we need to establish a 2030 Vision of where and how people and goods will move from
one place to another, how the City is going to accommodate state mandated housing/population growth,
maintain a jobs housing balance and protect, preserve and enhance where feasible, our quality of life,
health and safety.
Based on the 2030 Vision, we should craft the Housing Element, Circulation Element and other General
Plan Elements to be internally consistent. Without the Vision, we have no blueprint!
Top priority – Establish the City 2030 Vision now. When the City has a draft “2030 Vision”, it should be
shared with the public for comment and later adopted by the City Council.
Implementation
Operation Warp Speed – we only have 9 years to achieve the 2030 Vision mandates. We cannot kick this
can down the road!
______
Specific Comments:
It is my belief the scope of the Housing Element Update should be limited to satisfying the statutory
housing requirements and RHNA. The intended scope is not to open the City up to construction of
thousands of additional new housing unit beyond what is needed to satisfy statutory requirements
and the City’s RHNA requirement.
Housing legislation such as the Housing Accountability Act and AB 32 has made it difficult for local
governments to deny qualified housing development applications. Given land values, market factors
and landowner decisions which are beyond the City’s control, achieving the affordable housing
mandates will be extremely difficult. Despite the City’s best intensions, the City’s development history
shows housing developments provide a low percentage of affordable to market rate housing. Housing
developers utilize affordable housing legislation, incentives, density bonuses allowances, concessions,
grant funding, etc. to establish project feasibility and profitability. This circumstance is not limited to
Newport Beach. A good example is the City of Long Beach. Portions of Long Beach are undergoing a
major transformation including high density housing and hotel projects. The link below provides a
description of the variety of City housing projects and affordability to market rate housing achieved.
https://la.curbed.com/maps/long‐beach‐development‐downtown‐project‐map
The City of Newport Beach needs to come to terms with weather the current strategy for the Housing
Element Update will result in a Housing Element in full compliance with house legislation. It is a “Yes”,
or “No” answer. I believe the current draft Housing Element Update is not in full compliance because
1) it does not have sufficient landowner support, 2) the City will be unable to construct the number
of affordable housing units required within the timeframe, and as a result 3) the City will not be able
to meet the annual monitoring/performance levels. In my opinion, state intervention appears
inevitable. Even if the City could find a way to meet the Housing Element affordability requirement it
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 3 of 8
does not have the infrastructure to accommodate 20,000 + new units and its population that would
be required to meet the affordability requirement using the City’s target affordability ratio of 20%
affordable to market rate units. The reality is to achieve the 2,400± affordable unit mandate, the City
will have to authorize construction of thousands more units than the total RHNA mandate of 4,800 ±
units.
The State could choose to pursue its police powers to challenge the City if it fails to provide an
adequate Housing Element. There will likely be many cities within SCAG that will challenge the state
housing mandates. The state is attempting to adopt “Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process,
Government Code Section 65913.4 Guidelines”. If adopted, these Guidelines will make housing
approvals ministerial except in certain locations such as the coastal zone.
For the City’s Housing Element Update to have “effect” it must have voter approval if it is subject to
Greenlight. Voter approval will be difficult, if not impossible to achieve once the voters understand
the level of development that would occur under the current approach.
Finally, the City has police powers it can exercise to protect the public’s health, safety and welfare.
Preferred Compliance Strategy ‐ Under the circumstances, I believe the best strategy to satisfy the
City’s RHNA requirement is to sacrifice the minimum number of housing opportunity sites. Sites that
have landowner support and construct 100% affordable housing projects on these sites facilitated by
government financing. This is opposed to the current compliance strategy of attempting to rezone
numerous properties throughout the City some of which do not have landowner support, which will
allow construction of thousands more market‐rate housing units than are needed to satisfy RHNA.
Alternative Housing Element Compliance Strategy
o I suggest the City provide HCD with an updated Housing Element limited to new statutory and
updated demographic information, Goals and Policies. Add a new policy stating the City’s intent
to comply with all housing legislation. The City Council could certify the Housing Element Update
in this form which would be exempt from CEQA and Greenlight.
o Included with the Housing Element submittal to HCD is a separate “Streamline Housing
Implementation Plan Ordinance” (It could be titled Affordable Housing IP, or RHNA IP, or
whatever). The Streamline Housing Implement Plan Ordinance will identify the intent to comply
with state legislation and the procedures the City will implement to satisfy housing legislation
should a landowner/developer approach the City with a housing development application. The
Streamline Housing Implementation Plan Ordinance should be exempt from CEQA (Section
15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3) & 15378) and Greenlight.
Alternatively, consider use of a “Resolution” because the City considers the housing shortage a
temporary condition (some of the housing legislation expires in 2025) and the order is a directive
relating primarily to internal municipal governmental affairs.
o Include with the Housing Element submittal to HCD the Streamline Housing Implementation Plan.
The Streamline Housing Implement Plan will identify the state housing legislation and the
procedures the City will implement to satisfy housing legislation should a landowner/developer
approach the City with a housing development application. The Plan will include the RHNA
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 4 of 8
requirements, a list of candidate housing opportunity sites, their constraints, and the range of
residential units that could potentially occur on each site. The Plan will identify which of those
housing opportunity sites has landowner support. Describe the steps the City will take consistent
with state law and the City’s Charter to accommodate housing on these sites should a property
owner submit a development application to develop the site for housing. The plan would include
the annual reporting and monitoring procedures. The Plan would not propose a General Plan
Amendment or Zone Change. The Plan will include streamline/fast‐track procedures when a
qualified development application is submitted.
The Streamline Housing Implementation Plan would be considered during the Land Use Element
Update and CEQA documentation. The Land Use Element Update will likely be subject to
Greenlight. The Streamline Housing Implementation Plan could be the High‐Density Alternative
in the EIR. Since the City does not control the housing market or the decisions of landowners,
the actual number of housing units constructed would be speculative. Individual housing
development project applications submitted prior to the adoption of the Updated Land Use
Element would continue to be processed individually as they are today.
Submit this material to HCD and see what they say. Negotiate from this point and provide additional
information as needed.
Given the ongoing effort by HCD to adopt “Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process, Government Code
Section 65913.4 Guidelines” the City’s intent to comply should be clear by these documents. I doubt HCD
will ask the State Attorney General to sue the City or cut off its share of state tax revenues. Local
government challenges to the RHNA allocations are certain to occur, as well as challenges to the
Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process Guidelines if passed. If these Guidelines are passed, they will
make the Housing Element/Land Use Element mute. By pursuing this strategy, the City will be able to
take advantage of any changes in HCD policies as these challenges are resolved.
This strategy will be consistent with the LCP, (there will be no basis to support an LCP challenge to the
Coastal Commission). This strategy will allow the City to meet its Housing Element submittal deadline,
minimize expense to the City, minimizing the potential for significant community unrest and not overly
burden the City’s efforts to meet the 2030 GHG reduction mandate by rezoning properties which could
generate higher levels of GHG emissions unnecessarily for housing that may never be developed.
This strategy will be compatible with the City’s other 2 housing strategies, regulatory change and adoption
of measures to protect public health, safety and welfare.
______
The following comments are directed to the Draft Housing Element as written, but could be incorporated
into the Streamline Housing Implementation Plan above, should the City decide to pursue this or a similar
path.
Housing opportunity sites should be prioritized. (rated on a 1‐10 scale or by class I, II, III, etc.)
Provide the minimum number of housing sites to satisfy RHNA + a housing buffer (the Banning Ranch
and/or the lowest priority site(s). HCD can always pressure the City to add more.
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 5 of 8
Housing Element in‐fill sites should provide a Table with a column showing the maximum land
use/zoning density, a column showing the maximum density bonus density and a column showing the
total density/housing opportunity site.
Remember any increase in allowable emissions (density) beyond the 1990 levels will impact the City
GHG emissions reduction requirement (40% below 1990 levels by 2030). The more properties are re‐
zoned to uses allowing higher GHG emissions, the bigger the City’s challenge to meet 2030 mandates.
I don’t know what the 1990 GHG levels were (probably those contained in the GP final EIR). I’m
guessing they did not project the maximum residential buildout permitted for those properties today.
Therefore, the measures needed to meet City’s required reduction will likely be greater than currently
anticipated.
Utilize development agreement(s) for prioritized sites (allow special incentives above and beyond for
the right project at the right site with a high level of affordability).
Allow density transfers from non‐priority sites to priority sites. (example: away from Mariners Mile
where there is limited transportation infrastructure, higher risks to public safety from additional
housing development and a high probability, if not certainty of Coastal Development Permit appeals
to the Coastal Commission or triggering a Greenlight II movement.)
Note: HCD Draft “Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process, Government Code Section 65913.4
Guidelines” contain the following site restrictions:
“ARTICLE IV. DEVELOPMENT ELIGIBILITY
Section 401. Site Requirements
(b) The development proponent shall demonstrate that, as of the date the application is
submitted, the development is not located on a legal parcel(s) that is any of the following:
(1) Within a coastal zone, as defined in Division 20 (commencing with section 30000)
of the Public Resources Code.”
As an affordable housing incentive, consider allowing mixed‐use with no garage/carport/on‐site
parking (except for emergency vehicles and a limited number of guests) and allowing design
modifications to increase the family size the unit can accommodate. Residents would be dependent
on services like Uber, mass transit or other forms of transportation (UCI students might like to rent
space in this type of unit or large family units where the kids share a room). In the future when
autonomous cars are available, individuals of all income levels may choose not to own a car, not to
have a driver’s license and not incur the cost of car insurance. These measures will help achieve
affordability and reduce total VMT and GHG emissions. It will be up to the developer to request these
incentives. This could be a position taken by the City to shift the requirement from total number of
housing units required to meet RHNA, to total population housed in its Housing Element.
If possible, incorporate language into the Housing Element Update or it monitoring plan to allow the
City to cancel/terminate incentives as the RHNA requirements are satisfied. Alternatively, delay the
GPA/Zoning for these opportunity sites until an application is submitted, then Streamline/fast track
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 6 of 8
the entitlement. Once the properties are designated for residential use, state law may permanently
prohibit the City from downzoning the property in the future.
The Housing Element and other elements should state the GP update reflects the State mandated
vision, not the vision of the residents.
Identify disadvantaged communities within the Housing Element.
Disadvantaged Communities ‐ The City should consider establishing new disadvantaged
community(s) to protect these communities from the adverse effects from new development and to
meet environmental justice standards.
From my research, disadvantaged communities are defined by state laws and entities like the
California PUC to qualify for specific government funding programs. They are normally tied to
minorities and income levels, but the definitions all indicate there could be other factors (again, the
term disadvantaged communities, and their definitions are tied to specific governmental funding
programs).
Example: CPUC
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/discom/#:~:text=Disadvantaged%20communities%20refers%20to%20the,
of%20asthma%20and%20heart%20disease.
“Disadvantaged Communities
The Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015 (also known as Senate Bill 350 or SB
350) calls upon the CPUC to help improve air quality and economic conditions in communities
identified as "disadvantaged." For example, changing the way we plan the development and
future operations of power plants around the state, or rethinking the location of clean energy
technologies to benefit burdened communities. Additionally, SB 350 requires that the CPUC
and the California Energy Commission create a Disadvantaged Communities Advisory Group,
which assists the two Commissions in understanding how energy programs impact these
areas and could be improved. Read the CPUC's press release on the creation of the Advisory
Group.
What Is A Disadvantaged Community?
Disadvantaged communities refers to the areas throughout California which most suffer from
a combination of economic, health, and environmental burdens. These burdens include
poverty, high unemployment, air and water pollution, presence of hazardous wastes as well
as high incidence of asthma and heart disease. One way that the state identifies these areas
is by collecting and analyzing information from communities all over the
state. CalEnviroScreen, an analytical tool created by the California Environmental Protection
Agency (CalEPA), combines different types of census tract‐specific information into a score to
determine which communities are the most burdened or "disadvantaged." Insert a city or
town in the CalEnviroScreen map's search box here to see if it is considered a disadvantaged
community in this context.
How do Environmental Justice and Social Justice relate to Disadvantaged Communities?
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 7 of 8
Environmental and social justice seeks to come to terms with, and remedy, a history of unfair
treatment of communities, predominantly communities of people of color and/or low‐income
residents. These communities have been subjected to disproportionate impacts from one or
more environmental hazards, socio‐economic burdens, or both. Residents have been
excluded in policy setting or decision‐making processes and have lacked protections and
benefits afforded to other communities by the implementation of environmental and other
regulations, such as those enacted to control polluting activities. See CPUC Environmental and
Social Justice (ESJ) Action Plan web page.
ESJ communities include, but are not limited to:
Disadvantaged communities, as identified by CalEPA's CalEnviroScreen tool;
All Tribal lands;
Low‐income households (Household incomes below 80 percent of the area median
income); and
Low‐income census tracts (Census tracts where aggregated household incomes are less
than 80 percent of area or state median income).”
I have found no restriction on the ability of a city/local government to create one or more
disadvantaged communities for its own reasons, based on its own definition(s), defined by its
standards for quality of life, level of protection for public health, safety and welfare. Depending on
the City’s reasons, its disadvantage community(s) may or may not qualify for government funding.
One such reason for the City to designate its own disadvantaged community(s) would be to satisfy the
requirements of environmental justice. Disadvantaged communities would not be an acceptable
location for new housing. Examples of reasons why the City may want to designate certain areas
within the City as disadvantaged include:
o Areas subject to natural hazards (high fire risk, sea level rise, flooding, tsunami, ability to
evacuation quickly in the event of a disaster, earthquake risk)
o Areas subject to high noise levels
o Areas subject to Public Safety Power Shutoffs
o Areas subject to chronic public parking shortages
o Commercial zones subject to deficient parking
o Areas under the takeoff and departure paths from JWA (exposure to noise, unburnt fuel and
emissions)
o Areas in non‐compliance with current development standards or have aging infrastructure
o Areas containing natural resources under stress from urbanization
Master General Plan Update Schedule ‐ Based on the available information, staff should develop a
Master General Plan Update schedule/timeline which itemizes the Housing Element Update and all
other element updates, zone changes, CEQA compliance, Greenlight vote, etc. The anticipated
description/scope of the Greenlight vote should be provided based on the information know at this
time. A cost estimate should be provided along with a preliminary risk assessment. The Master
Schedule should be updated periodically. Based on the available information, one or more
alternatives strategies (Master General Plan Update schedule/timeline) should be evaluated and
presented to the public for comment and to the City Council for guidance.
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview
Draft Housing Element
Comments March 16, 2021
David Tanner Page 8 of 8
House Cleaning ‐ We should be going through the Housing Element eliminating policies that are no
longer necessary, have been fully implemented or are infeasible.
We should summarize much of the data in the Draft Housing Element and attach the bulk of the
information to the Housing Element as appendices.
Fear ‐ Anything that is proposed/changed in favor of housing in the General Plan and Municipal Code
is likely to be made permanent by the state.
If the City is going to take steps to protect certain areas from the over‐reach of state government, the
time to do so is before the State passes legislation to prevent the City from doing so.
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee - March 17, 2021 Item No. V(c)- 2 - Additional Materials Received Initial Draft Housing Element Overview