Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout15 LEGISLATIVE REPORTS (SB645 & SB303) 04-03-07 AGENDA REPORT Agenda Item Reviewed: City Manager Finance Director MEETING DATE: APRil 3,2007 TO: WilliAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK'S OFFICE FROM: SUBJECT: ~EGISlATIVE REPORTS SUMMARY: Attached are the following legislative items for discussion by the City Council. . SB645 (Correa): Design-Build Authorization for the Orange County Sanitation District . SB303 (Ducheny): local Government; Housing. RECOMMENDATION: Pleasure of the City Council. FISCAL IMPACT: None. YJ1//MIC ;(ffi~I'Y Maria R. Huizar . Chief Deputy City Clerk ORANGE COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT Please support OCSD's efforts to secure design-Iluifd authorization with a letter of support. It is for these reasons that our agency supports OCSD's efforts and 58' 645. cc: Michael Gold, OCSD legislative Affairs March 22, 2007 Senator Ackerman State Capitol, Room 305 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: SB 303 (Ducheny) Local Government; Housing. NOTICE OF OPPOSITION Dear Senator Ackerman I am writing on behalf of the City of Tustin to inform you that we oppose SB 303 and urge your "No" vote. SB 303 doubles the planning period (from 5 to 10 years) for the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). At the same time, it requires local agencies to pre-zone their housing need for the entire 10 year period. Moreover, it would require that every single site be analyzed to ensure that the size, configuration, use, physical and environmental characteristics, adjacent uses; market demand, and infrastructure will "realistically accommodate" the planned density of the parcel. As a result, each site will have to be visited and surveyed for all of these characteristics. It will be a massive and costly undertaking that results in a lowest-common-denominator focus on housing. Private developers often maintain that in contrast to traditional subdivisions, infill development "does not pencil out." The effect of this bill will be to undercut local and regional efforts to steer housing development to intill areas. A longer RHNA planning horizon is ideal for general planning purposes but does not provide for market or demographic shifts over the long term which would strongly influence the RHNA process. Furthermore, the 2007 RHNA allocations for jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) subregion are supply-based rather than needs-based and in Orange County are equivalent to the individual jurisdictions' projected housing growth pursuant to the Orange County Projections 2006. Therefore, in Orange County the RHNA allocations already reflect the availability of land that has been zoned for residential purposes. This is especially true in Tustin, which was recently assigned a RHNA allocation of 3,344 housing units based on housing growth projected primarily at Tustin Legacy, a planned community located at the former Marine Corps Air Station, Tustin. The City of Tustin has planned for this significant growth, but is required to demonstrate in its Housing Element how approximately 60% of the new housing will be affordable. Under current law the planning period of five years allows for market fluctuations over time that may influence when the future housing is actually constructed and occupied. However, a ten-year requirement would not be responsive to such trends. If jurisdictions were required to zone for a ten-year planning period, those jurisdictions may elect to provide more conservative housing growth input into the RHNA process in an effort to lower their RHNA allocations. Additionally, we believe this proposal will trigger significant sprawl, because-unlike the existing housing element process-no time is provided to phase-in the availability of housing sites. Furthermore, no time is provided to address issues related to infill development, to work with LAFCOs on annexation and sphere of influence requirements, infrastructure ability, and other service issues closely related to that development. While' this bill may be well-intended, it applies a flawed approach that fails to appreciate the spectrum of issues that affect land availability. Local governments do not need more state mandates; they need more funding tools to assist with the development of infrastructure in infill areas and the production of affordable units. We urge your "No" vote on this measure. Sincerely, Lou Bone Mayor Cc: Members and Consultant, Senate Transportation and Housing Committee Members and Consultant, Senate Environmental Quality Committee Ted Morley, Principal Consultant, Senate Republican Caucus Ryan Eisenberg, Consultant, Senate Republican Caucus Lynn Jacobs, Director, Department of Housing and Community Development Cynthia Bryant, Director, Governor's Office of Planning and Research Barry Sedlik, Acting Secretary, Business, Transportation and Housing Agency Mike Chrisman, Secretary, California Resources Agency Chris Kahn, Legislative Secretary, Governor's Office Genevieve Morelos, Analyst, League of California Cities