HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 13a - Opposing Senate Bill 50 - Housing Development Incentives
DATE: May 7, 2019
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Dominic Lazzaretto, City Manager
By: Michael Bruckner, Assistant to the City Manager
Laena Shakarian, Management Aide
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 7258 OPPOSING SENATE BILL 50 - PLANNING
AND ZONING: HOUSING DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
Recommendation: Adopt
SUMMARY
Senate Bill 50 - Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives (“SB 50”)
exempts a development in a “job-rich” or “transit rich” development zone from certain
local ordinances that limit maximum residential density, maximum floor area ratio, and
minimum parking spaces. If enacted, the bill would undermine local control of the City’s
development authorities as it pertains to height limitations, density, parking
requirements, and design review standards. Therefore, it is recommended that the City
Council adopt Resolution No. 7258 (Attachment “A”) urging the City’s legislative
delegation in Sacramento to vote No on SB 50; and authorize the Mayor to send a letter
to the City’s legislative delegation in Sacramento to vote in opposition to SB 50.
BACKGROUND
On December 3, 2018, State Senator Wiener (D-11-San Francisco) introduced SB 50
(Attachment “B”). Senator Wiener’s SB 50 is a revision of SB 827, Transit Rich Housing
Bonus Legislation, which failed to advance in the legislature after it was killed in its first
state Senate committee hearing. On March 6, 2018 , the City Council voted to adopt
Resolution No. 7209 opposing SB 827, and authorized the Mayor to send a letter to the
City’s legislative delegation in Sacramento to vote in opposition of said legislation.
Unlike SB 827, SB 50 includes protections for low-income tenants and leniency for
communities at greater risk of displacement. Subject to some limitations, SB 50
exempts qualifying projects for either “job-rich” or “transit-rich” development zones, as
defined by the bill, from locally developed and adopted re gulations that limit maximum
Resolution No. 7258 Opposing Senate Bill 50
Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives
May 7, 2019
Page 2 of 5
residential density, maximum floor area ratio, minimum parking spaces, and design
review standards. More specifically, this bill:
1. Establishes a building incentive for multi-unit residential projects that are located
within a ½-mile radius of a major transit stop, ¼-mile radius of a high quality
transit corridor, or near a high-volume of jobs.
2. Establishes a “job-rich housing project” and assigns the California Department of
Housing and Community Development and the Office of Planning Research to
identify the criteria needed for a development to qualify as such.
3. Exempts a multi-unit residential project that qualifies as either a “jobs-rich
housing project”, or is located within a ½-mile radius of a major transit stop, or a
¼-mile radius of a high quality transit corridor, from maximum controls on
residential density and minimum automobile parking requirements greater than
0.5 automobile parking spots per unit.
4. In addition to the exemptions listed above, a transit orient ed multi-unit residential
project would be exempted from any local ordinance, resolution, or regulation
related to the height and floor-area ratio of the residential project and establishes
the following height and floor-area regulations:
If a project is within a ½-mile radius, but outside a ¼-mile radius, of a major
transit stop, the maximum height requirements cannot be less than 45 feet
and the maximum floor-area ratio requirements cannot be less than 2.5.
If a project is within a ¼-mile radius of a major transit stop, the maximum
height requirements cannot be less than 55 feet and the maximum floor -area
ratio requirements cannot be less than 3.25.
To be clear, SB 50s application includes the following definitions:
High-Quality Bus Corridor - a corridor with fixed route bus service that has
service intervals of no more than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
Transit Rich Housing Projects - are those within a ½-mile radius of a major
transit stop or a ¼-mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus corridor.
Jobs-Rich Housing Projects - are those with close proximity to jobs, high area
median income relative to the relevant region, and high -quality public schools.
Statewide Concern - the provisions address a matter of statewide concern
and that if enacted its provisions would apply equally to all cities and counties
in this state, including charter cities.
Resolution No. 7258 Opposing Senate Bill 50
Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives
May 7, 2019
Page 3 of 5
DISCUSSION
If approved by the legislature and signed by Governor Newsom, SB 50 would exempt
development in a “jobs-rich” or “transit-rich” development zone from local regulations.
This would allow developers of certain types of housing projects to override locally
developed and adopted regulations without approval of the City of Arcadia. This would
undermine local control of the City’s development authorities as it pertains to height
limitations, density, parking requirements, and design review standards.
While the authors of SB 50 state that the purpose of this legislation is to address the
housing crisis in California through infill housing, the result is that SB 50 would
encourage redevelopment, not infill. SB 50 as presently drafted lacks the flexibility
needed to meet the State’s housing goals while also acknowledging community input
and engagement. While the goal of SB 50 is to establish incentives for the development
of affordable housing near “job-rich” development zones and major transit corridors, the
unintended consequences of any such development would be extreme and severe to
the local community.
The City of Arcadia currently has numerous adopted ordinances related to building
height limitations, densities, parking requirements, and design review standards. These
standards were put in place after considerable study and forethought into the overall
impacts to the community. SB 50 would preempt the ordinances the City has adopted
and leave the City at risk of losing all protections necessary to pre serve the quality of
life residents are accustomed to. To a large extent, this proposed legislation preempts
home rule that allows cities to establish and implement local zoning controls that protect
the shape, form, and character of the community. Under existing law, cities are already
required to zone for densities at levels necessary to meet their entire Regional Ho using
Needs Allocation (“RHNA”). SB 50 would greatly undermine locally adopted General
Plans and Housing Elements which are certified by the Department of Housing and
Community Development, and Sustainable Community Strategies (“SCS”). Exempting
large-scale developments from General Plans, Housing E lements, and zoning
ordinances goes against the principles of local democracy and public engagement.
The City of Arcadia takes pride in its quality of life and actively pursues policies which
enhance and maintain its quality of life, particularly those impacting growth and
economic development. The City of Arcadia has embraced the concept of transit
oriented development in several areas throughout the City, including major
thoroughfares and around the City’s Gold Line Station in Downtown Arcadia. The area
around the light rail station allows for higher densities and height limits than any other
portion of the City. In fact, in 2018, the City upzoned a large portion of the area around
the light rail station to allow for 80 dwelling units per acre and up to 60 feet in height. In
addition to these more permissive zoning allowances, the City also adopted a “City
Center Design Plan” which provides a detailed look at how the downtown can be viewed
Resolution No. 7258 Opposing Senate Bill 50
Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives
May 7, 2019
Page 4 of 5
holistically to support growth and new development. This is a project that the City
completed because it is the right thing to do to address the housing issue, and because
it takes a strategically planned and locally appropriate approach to evaluate capacity,
rather than the “one size fits all” approach provided in SB 50. The attached map
(Attachment “C”) shows a ½-mile radius from the City’s Gold Line Station, which would
clearly be subject to SB 50 is zoning standards. It would bring in several single-family
neighborhoods and extend nearly to Foothill Blvd. The impacts would be greater if any
intersections were deemed to be “transit rich” locations or if something like the Santa
Anita Park site were to be developed and considered a jobs -rich site one day. For
reference, also attached (Attachment “D”) is a map showing how far the zoning impacts
would extend from that site.
As a result of the Design Plan and recent zoning changes, several projects are under
construction, approved, awaiting construction, or in the planning stages in Arcadia to
bring new residential units at higher densities to the area around the light rail st ation, as
well as other major corridors. This “one size fits all” approach to local land use
regulation, if enacted as written in SB 50, would have significant adverse impacts on our
established community and its character. Even if the proposed measure perfectly fit
Arcadia’s needs, it should nevertheless be opposed on the simple basis that it wholly
undermines local control of land use decisions – a primary power of local government,
especially charter cities such as Arcadia.
If SB 50 were adopted, the City would have no control over the development pattern in
its transit corridors and the Downtown area, which could significantly change the
character of the City. SB 50 would provide a blanket, simplistic approach to a
complicated and localized question that the City of Arcadia is already addressing.
Housing development should be left to local agencies that are best equipped to
evaluate the impacts of projects, and can require mitigations to protect the health and
safety of the residents they serve.
It is also important to note that, as of this writing, SB 50 is still currently being reviewed
and amended in various committees. There are several housing bills in the works and
the City is aware that the provisions of another housing bill, Senate Bill 4 (“SB 4”), are
being considered for inclusion in SB 50 as amendments. The revised bill would add
several SB 4 provisions including language that would mandate single-family zoning in
California to accommodate up to four units on a single site by-right. If these
amendments are approved, it would essentially re-write zoning laws in Arcadia and
further erode local control.
Therefore, it is recommended that the City of Arcadia oppose SB 50 in its current and
proposed form. Attached to this staff report as Attachment “E” is the draft letter to be
signed by the Mayor urging opposition to this legislation, which erodes local control by
Resolution No. 7258 Opposing Senate Bill 50
Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives
May 7, 2019
Page 5 of 5
interfering with the decision-making authority of municipalities like Arcadia in the area of
local land use.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
This proposed action does not constitute a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (“CEQA”), and it can be seen with certainty that it will have no impact on the
environment. Thus, this matter is exempt under CEQA.
FISCAL IMPACT
The financial impacts to the City, if any, are unknown at this time. While additional
development may result in increased property taxes, it is not known if those increases
would be offset by additional service costs or other impacts to the community from an
increased density that is not fully studied prior to approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 7258 opposing Senate Bill
50 - Planning and Zoning: Housing Development Incentives; and authorize the Mayor to
send a letter to the City’s legislative delegation in Sacramento to vote in opposition to
said legislation.
Attachment “A” - Resolution No. 7258
Attachment “B” - Senate Bill 50 Text
Attachment “C” - Arcadia Transit Station Map
Attachment “D” - Santa Anita Park Map
Attachment “E” - Draft Opposition Letter re SB 50
Attachment "A"
SENATE BILL No. 50
Introduced by Senator Wiener
(Coauthors: Senators Caballero, Hueso, Moorlach, and Skinner)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members Burke, Kalra, Kiley, Low,
Robert Rivas, Ting, and Wicks)
December 3, 2018
An act to add Chapter 4.35 (commencing with Section 65918.50) to
Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, relating to housing.
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 50, as introduced, Wiener. Planning and zoning: housing
development: equitable communities incentive.
Existing law, known as the Density Bonus Law, requires, when an
applicant proposes a housing development within the jurisdiction of a
local government, that the city, county, or city and county provide the
developer with a density bonus and other incentives or concessions for
the production of lower income housing units or for the donation of
land within the development if the developer, among other things, agrees
to construct a specified percentage of units for very low, low-, or
moderate-income households or qualifying residents.
This bill would require a city, county, or city and county to grant
upon request an equitable communities incentive when a development
proponent seeks and agrees to construct a residential development, as
defined, that satisfies specified criteria, including, among other things,
that the residential development is either a job-rich housing project or
a transit-rich housing project, as those terms are defined; the site does
not contain, or has not contained, housing occupied by tenants or
accommodations withdrawn from rent or lease in accordance with
specified law within specified time periods; and the residential
development complies with specified additional requirements under
99
Attachment "B"
existing law. The bill would require that a residential development
eligible for an equitable communities incentive receive waivers from
maximum controls on density and automobile parking requirements
greater than 0.5 parking spots per unit, up to 3 additional incentives or
concessions under the Density Bonus Law, and specified additional
waivers if the residential development is located within a 1⁄2 -mile or
1⁄4 -mile radius of a major transit stop, as defined. The bill would
authorize a local government to modify or expand the terms of an
equitable communities incentive, provided that the equitable
communities incentive is consistent with these provisions.
The bill would include findings that the changes proposed by this bill
address a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal affair
and, therefore, apply to all cities, including charter cities. The bill would
also declare the intent of the Legislature to delay implementation of
this bill in sensitive communities, as defined, until July 1, 2020, as
provided.
By adding to the duties of local planning officials, this bill would
impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.
Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act
for a specified reason.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: yes.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
line 1 SECTION 1. Chapter 4.35 (commencing with Section
line 2 65918.50) is added to Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government
line 3 Code, to read:
line 4
line 5 Chapter 4.35. Equitable Communities Incentives
line 6
line 7 65918.50. For purposes of this chapter:
line 8 (a) “Affordable” means available at affordable rent or affordable
line 9 housing cost to, and occupied by, persons and families of extremely
line 10 low, very low, low, or moderate incomes, as specified in context,
line 11 and subject to a recorded affordability restriction for at least 55
line 12 years.
99
— 2 — SB 50
line 1 (b) “Development proponent” means an applicant who submits
line 2 an application for an equitable communities incentive pursuant to
line 3 this chapter.
line 4 (c) “Eligible applicant” means a development proponent who
line 5 receives an equitable communities incentive.
line 6 (d) “FAR” means floor area ratio.
line 7 (e) “High-quality bus corridor” means a corridor with fixed
line 8 route bus service that meets all of the following criteria:
line 9 (1) It has average service intervals of no more than 15 minutes
line 10 during the three peak hours between 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., inclusive,
line 11 and the three peak hours between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m., inclusive, on
line 12 Monday through Friday.
line 13 (2) It has average service intervals of no more than 20 minutes
line 14 during the hours of 6 a.m. to 10 a.m., inclusive, on Monday through
line 15 Friday.
line 16 (3) It has average intervals of no more than 30 minutes during
line 17 the hours of 8 a.m. to 10 p.m., inclusive, on Saturday and Sunday.
line 18 (f) “Job-rich housing project” means a residential development
line 19 within an area identified by the Department of Housing and
line 20 Community Development and the Office of Planning and Research,
line 21 based on indicators such as proximity to jobs, high area median
line 22 income relative to the relevant region, and high-quality public
line 23 schools, as an area of high opportunity close to jobs. A residential
line 24 development shall be deemed to be within an area designated as
line 25 job-rich if both of the following apply:
line 26 (1) All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent
line 27 of their area outside of the job-rich area.
line 28 (2) No more than 10 percent of residential units or 100 units,
line 29 whichever is less, of the development are outside of the job-rich
line 30 area.
line 31 (g) “Local government” means a city, including a charter city,
line 32 a county, or a city and county.
line 33 (h) “Major transit stop” means a site containing an existing rail
line 34 transit station or a ferry terminal served by either bus or rail transit
line 35 service.
line 36 (i) “Residential development” means a project with at least
line 37 two-thirds of the square footage of the development designated
line 38 for residential use.
line 39 (j) “Sensitive community” means an area identified by the
line 40 Department of Housing and Community Development, in
99
SB 50 — 3 —
line 1 consultation with local community-based organizations in each
line 2 region, as an area vulnerable to displacement pressures, based on
line 3 indicators such as percentage of tenant households living at, or
line 4 under, the poverty line relative to the region.
line 5 (k) “Tenant” means a person residing in any of the following:
line 6 (1) Residential real property rented by the person under a
line 7 long-term lease.
line 8 (2) A single-room occupancy unit.
line 9 (3) An accessory dwelling unit that is not subject to, or does
line 10 not have a valid permit in accordance with, an ordinance adopted
line 11 by a local agency pursuant to Section 65852.22.
line 12 (4) A residential motel.
line 13 (5) Any other type of residential property that is not owned by
line 14 the person or a member of the person’s household, for which the
line 15 person or a member of the person’s household provides payments
line 16 on a regular schedule in exchange for the right to occupy the
line 17 residential property.
line 18 (l) “Transit-rich housing project” means a residential
line 19 development the parcels of which are all within a one-half mile
line 20 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop
line 21 on a high-quality bus corridor. A project shall be deemed to be
line 22 within a one-half mile radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter
line 23 mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus corridor if both of the
line 24 following apply:
line 25 (1) All parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent
line 26 of their area outside of a one-half mile radius of a major transit
line 27 stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop on a high-quality bus
line 28 corridor.
line 29 (2) No more than 10 percent of the residential units or 100 units,
line 30 whichever is less, of the project are outside of a one-half mile
line 31 radius of a major transit stop or a one-quarter mile radius of a stop
line 32 on a high-quality bus corridor.
line 33 65918.51. (a) A local government shall, upon request of a
line 34 development proponent, grant an equitable communities incentive,
line 35 as specified in Section 65918.53, when the development proponent
line 36 seeks and agrees to construct a residential development that
line 37 satisfies the requirements specified in Section 65918.52.
line 38 (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that, absent exceptional
line 39 circumstances, actions taken by a local legislative body that
99
— 4 — SB 50
line 1 increase residential density not undermine the equitable
line 2 communities incentive program established by this chapter.
line 3 65918.52. In order to be eligible for an equitable communities
line 4 incentive pursuant to this chapter, a residential development shall
line 5 meet all of the following criteria:
line 6 (a) The residential development is either a job-rich housing
line 7 project or transit-rich housing project.
line 8 (b) The residential development is located on a site that, at the
line 9 time of application, is zoned to allow housing as an underlying
line 10 use in the zone, including, but not limited to, a residential,
line 11 mixed-use, or commercial zone, as defined and allowed by the
line 12 local government.
line 13 (c) (1) If the local government has adopted an inclusionary
line 14 housing ordinance requiring that the development include a certain
line 15 number of units affordable to households with incomes that do not
line 16 exceed the limits for moderate-income, lower income, very low
line 17 income, or extremely low income specified in Sections 50079.5,
line 18 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code, and that
line 19 ordinance requires that a new development include levels of
line 20 affordable housing in excess of the requirements specified in
line 21 paragraph (2), the residential development complies with that
line 22 ordinance.
line 23 (2) If the local government has not adopted an inclusionary
line 24 housing ordinance, as described in paragraph (1), and the residential
line 25 development includes ____ or more residential units, the residential
line 26 development includes onsite affordable housing for households
line 27 with incomes that do not exceed the limits for extremely low
line 28 income, very low income, and low income specified in Sections
line 29 50093, 50105, and 50106 of the Health and Safety Code. It is the
line 30 intent of the Legislature to require that any development of ____
line 31 or more residential units receiving an equitable communities
line 32 incentive pursuant to this chapter include housing affordable to
line 33 low, very low or extremely low income households, which, for
line 34 projects with low or very low income units, are no less than the
line 35 number of onsite units affordable to low or very low income
line 36 households that would be required pursuant to subdivision (f) of
line 37 Section 65915 for a development receiving a density bonus of 35
line 38 percent.
line 39 (d) The site does not contain, or has not contained, either of the
line 40 following:
99
SB 50 — 5 —
line 1 (1) Housing occupied by tenants within the seven years
line 2 preceding the date of the application, including housing that has
line 3 been demolished or that tenants have vacated prior to the
line 4 application for a development permit.
line 5 (2) A parcel or parcels on which an owner of residential real
line 6 property has exercised his or her rights under Chapter 12.75
line 7 (commencing with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1 to
line 8 withdraw accommodations from rent or lease within 15 years prior
line 9 to the date that the development proponent submits an application
line 10 pursuant to this chapter.
line 11 (e) The residential development complies with all applicable
line 12 labor, construction employment, and wage standards otherwise
line 13 required by law and any other generally applicable requirement
line 14 regarding the approval of a development project, including, but
line 15 not limited to, the local government’s conditional use or other
line 16 discretionary permit approval process, the California
line 17 Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section
line 18 21000) of the Public Resources Code), or a streamlined approval
line 19 process that includes labor protections.
line 20 (f) The residential development complies with all other relevant
line 21 standards, requirements, and prohibitions imposed by the local
line 22 government regarding architectural design, restrictions on or
line 23 oversight of demolition, impact fees, and community benefits
line 24 agreements.
line 25 (g) The equitable communities incentive shall not be used to
line 26 undermine the economic feasibility of delivering low-income
line 27 housing under the state density bonus program or a local
line 28 implementation of the state density bonus program, or any locally
line 29 adopted program that puts conditions on new development
line 30 applications on the basis of receiving a zone change or general
line 31 plan amendment in exchange for benefits such as increased
line 32 affordable housing, local hire, or payment of prevailing wages.
line 33 65918.53. (a) A residential development that meets the criteria
line 34 specified in Section 65918.52 shall receive, upon request, an
line 35 equitable communities incentive as follows:
line 36 (1) Any eligible applicant shall receive the following:
line 37 (A) A waiver from maximum controls on density.
line 38 (B) A waiver from maximum automobile parking requirements
line 39 greater than 0.5 automobile parking spots per unit.
99
— 6 — SB 50
line 1 (C) Up to three incentives and concessions pursuant to
line 2 subdivision (d) of Section 65915.
line 3 (2) An eligible applicant proposing a residential development
line 4 that is located within a one-half mile radius, but outside a
line 5 one-quarter mile radius, of a major transit stop and includes no
line 6 less than ____ percent affordable housing units shall receive, in
line 7 addition to the incentives specified in paragraph (1), waivers from
line 8 all of the following:
line 9 (A) Maximum height requirements less than 45 feet.
line 10 (B) Maximum FAR requirements less than 2.5.
line 11 (C) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), any
line 12 maximum automobile parking requirement.
line 13 (3) An eligible applicant proposing a residential development
line 14 that is located within a one-quarter mile radius of a major transit
line 15 and includes no less than ____ percent affordable housing units
line 16 shall receive, in addition to the incentives specified in paragraph
line 17 (1), waivers from all of the following:
line 18 (A) Maximum height requirements less than 55 feet.
line 19 (B) Maximum FAR requirements less than 3.25.
line 20 (C) Notwithstanding subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1), any
line 21 maximum automobile parking requirement.
line 22 (4) Notwithstanding any other law, for purposes of calculating
line 23 any additional incentive or concession in accordance with Section
line 24 65915, the number of units in the residential development after
line 25 applying the equitable communities incentive received pursuant
line 26 to this chapter shall be used as the base density for calculating the
line 27 incentive or concession under that section.
line 28 (5) An eligible applicant proposing a project that meets all of
line 29 the requirements under Section 65913.4 may submit an application
line 30 for streamlined, ministerial approval in accordance with that
line 31 section.
line 32 (b) The local government may modify or expand the terms of
line 33 an equitable communities incentive provided pursuant to this
line 34 chapter, provided that the equitable communities incentive is
line 35 consistent with, and meets the minimum standards specified in,
line 36 this chapter.
line 37 65918.54. The Legislature finds and declares that this chapter
line 38 addresses a matter of statewide concern rather than a municipal
line 39 affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the
99
SB 50 — 7 —
line 1 California Constitution. Therefore, this chapter applies to all cities,
line 2 including charter cities.
line 3 65918.55. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature that
line 4 implementation of this chapter be delayed in sensitive communities
line 5 until July 1, 2020.
line 6 (b) It is further the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation
line 7 that does all of the following:
line 8 (1) Between January 1, 2020, and ____, allows a local
line 9 government, in lieu of the requirements of this chapter, to opt for
line 10 a community-led planning process aimed toward increasing
line 11 residential density and multifamily housing choices near transit
line 12 stops.
line 13 (2) Encourages sensitive communities to opt for a
line 14 community-led planning process at the neighborhood level to
line 15 develop zoning and other policies that encourage multifamily
line 16 housing development at a range of income levels to meet unmet
line 17 needs, protect vulnerable residents from displacement, and address
line 18 other locally identified priorities.
line 19 (3) Sets minimum performance standards for community plans,
line 20 such as minimum overall residential development capacity and
line 21 the minimum affordability standards set forth in this chapter.
line 22 (4) Automatically applies the provisions of this chapter on
line 23 January 1, 2025, to sensitive communities that do not have adopted
line 24 community plans that meet the minimum standards described in
line 25 paragraph (3), whether those plans were adopted prior to or after
line 26 enactment of this chapter.
line 27 SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to
line 28 Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because
line 29 a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service
line 30 charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or
line 31 level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section
line 32 17556 of the Government Code.
O
99
— 8 — SB 50
Attachment "C"
Attachment "D"
[Date] DRAFT
[Name]
[Title]
[Address]
[Address]
RE: Opposition Letter to SB 50 – Erosion of Local Control
Dear [Name]:
The City of Arcadia City Council strongly opposes Senate Bill (SB) 50 (Wiener), which
would exempt certain housing projects from locally developed and adopted height
limitations, densities, parking requirements, and design review standards. Under
California’s constitution, charter cities are granted exclusive authority over municipal
affairs, which include zoning and housing regulations. Increasingly, the California
Legislature is pre-empting our home rule by including provisions in laws that compel us
to do the bidding of the state, or tie our hands completely under the guise that the
matter is of statewide concern. This is nothing short of legislative overreach.
Specifically, SB 50 would undermine locally adopted general plans and housing
elements. SB 50 allows private for-profit housing developers and transit agencies to
determine housing densities, parking requirements, and design review standards
within one-half mile of a “major transit stop,” or along a “high-quality transit corridor”
which could be miles away from an actual bus stop. Under existing law, cities are
already required to zone for densities at levels necessary to meet their entire Regional
Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).
The City of Arcadia currently has numerous adopted ordinances related to building
height limitations, densities, parking requirements, and design review standards. The
City of Arcadia has embraced the concept of transit oriented development in several
areas throughout the City, including major thoroughfares and around the City’s Gold
Line station in Downtown Arcadia. The area around the light rail station allows for
higher densities and height limits than any other portion of the City. In fact, in 2018,
the City upzoned a large portion of the area around the light rail station to allow for 80
dwelling units per acre and up to 60 feet in height. In addition to these more
permissive zoning allowances, the City also adopted a “City Center Design Plan” which
provides a detailed look at how the downtown can be viewed holistically to support
growth and new development.
SB 50 would preempt the ordinances the City of Arcadia City Council has adopted and
leave the City at risk of losing all protections necessary to preserve the quality of life
Attachment "E"
residents are accustomed to. Exempting large-scale developments from General Plans,
Housing Elements, and zoning ordinances goes against the principles of local
democracy and public engagement. Public hearings allow members of the community
to inform their representative of their support or concerns when planning documents
are developed. Public engagement also often leads to better projects. Disregarding
such processes will increase public distrust in government and could lead to additional
ballot measures dealing with growth management.
For these reasons, the City of Arcadia opposes SB 50 and urges you to vote No.
Sincerely,
April Verlato
Mayor