Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 12b - Support Local Zoning and Housing Issues DATE: November 17, 2020 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Dominic Lazzaretto, City Manager By: Michael Bruckner, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 7343 EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR ACTIONS TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN LOCAL DEMOCRACY, AUTHORITY, AND CONTROL AS RELATED TO LOCAL ZONING AND HOUSING ISSUES Recommendation: Adopt SUMMARY In recent years, the California Legislature has passed a number of bills addressing a range of zoning and housing issues that impact all local agencies. 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 home rule by including provisions in laws that compel cities to do the bidding of the state, or tie a city’s hands completely under the guise that the matter is of statewide concern. At the October 20, 2020, City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Tay, with sufficient support from the City Council, requested that this item be brought forward at a future City Council meeting for consideration. The proposed Resolution (attached) expresses support for actions to strengthen local control as related to local zoning and housing issues. Therefore, its recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 7343 expressing support for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control as related to local zoning and housing issues. BACKGROUND Cities have had to respond to state legislation that undermines the principle of local control over important issues such as land use, housing, finance, infrastructure, elections, labor relations and other issues directly affecting cities. Legislation introduced in 2017-2020 has continually threatened local control in flagrant opposition to the principle of local control. This has included, but not been limited to: Resolution No. 7343 Expressing Support for Local Control November 17, 2020 Page 2 of 4 • Senate Bill 649 (Hueso) Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (“SB 649”) in 2017; • Assembly Bill 252 (Ridley-Thomas) Local Government: Taxation: Prohibition: Video Streaming Services (“AB 252”) in 2017; • Senate Bill 827 (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Transit-Rich Housing Bonus (“SB 827”) in 2018; • Senate Bill 50 (Wiener) Planning and Zoning: Housing Development: Incentives (“SB 50”) in 2019; and • Senate Bill 1120 (Atkins) Subdivision: Tentative Maps (“SB 1120”) in 2020. In 2017, SB 649 would have allowed the use of small cell wireless antennas and related equipment without a local discretionary permit in all zoning districts as a use by-right, subject only to an administrative permit. SB 649 passed out of the State Assembly and the State Senate despite over 300 cities and 47 counties in California providing letters of opposition. Ultimately, Governor Brown vetoed the bill. In 2017, AB 252 would have prohibited any tax on the sale or use of video streaming services, including sales and use taxes and utility user taxes. Prior to its first Committee hearing in 2017, AB 252 received opposition letters from 37 cities, the League of California Cities, South Bay Council of Governments, California Contract Cities Association, and nine other organizations. This bill failed in the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee 8-0-2, which the author of the Committee chaired. In 2018, SB 827 was introduced and would have overridden local control on housing development that was within ½ mile of a major transit stop or ¼ mile from a high-quality bus corridor as defined by the legislation with some limitations. On April 17, 2018, SB 827 failed in the Senate Transportation and failed to move forward during the legislative cycle. In 2018, the City of Beverly Hills sponsored a resolution adopted by the League of California Cities (“League”). The resolution called for the League to assess the increasing vulnerabilities to local authority, control, and revenue. It also called for the League to explore the preparation of a ballot measure and/or constitutional amendment. In 2019, Senator Wiener reintroduced many of the provisions contained in SB 827 in SB 50. The League of California Cities, working in concert with numerous jurisdictions and state elected officials, were able to secure a narrow defeat of this bill in the state Senate in January 2020. In 2020, Senate Pro Tem Atkins introduced SB 1120, which would have, among other things, required a proposed housing development containing two residential units to be considered ministerial in zones where allowable uses are limited to single-family residential development. This bill passed out of the State Senate in 2020. It was then amended in the State Assembly and passed out of the State Assembly very late on August 31, 2020. Due to the midnight deadline to pass bills on August 31, 2020, the Resolution No. 7343 Expressing Support for Local Control November 17, 2020 Page 3 of 4 State Senate was unable to vote on this bill to send it to the Governor’s desk for signature. In response to a request by the City of Torrance and with the support of several other cities, at the October 20, 2020, City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Tay, with sufficient support from City Council, requested that this item be brought forward at a future City Council meeting for consideration. DISCUSSION State legislators have indicated they will continue to introduce legislation that will override local zoning ordinances for the development of affordable housing in conjunction with mixed use and/or luxury condominium and apartment housing. The City of Arcadia has continually updated its zoning codes to respond to market demands as well as the crucial need for housing in the state. Applying a one-size fits all approach statewide undermines good urban planning principles. Thoughtful communities like Arcadia have already taken steps to rezone urban corridors for mixed use and higher densities, allowed for accessory dwelling units, and have made significant improvements to streamline approval processes. As a reminder, earlier this year the City Council approved a 139-unit mixed-use development in our downtown, just two blocks away from the Arcadia Gold Line Station. This was done because it made sense for the community and the developers, not because the date mandated it. The proposed Resolution urges the legislature and the Governor to stop proposing new bills until the recently adopted laws have had a chance to go into effect. As of January 1, 2020, for example, several new laws allowing accessory dwelling units in zones that allow single-family and multi-family uses went into effect. These include AB 68, AB 881, and SB 13 which, explicitly prohibits local agencies from including in development standards for ADUs requirements on minimum lot sizes, among other requirements. Laws like AB 671, which also went into effect this year, now require local agencies’ housing elements to include a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of ADUs that can offer affordable rents for very low, low-, or moderate income households, along with grants and other financial incentives in connection with planning, construction, and operation of affordable ADUs. All of these laws need time to see the full impacts to communities before new proposals are added onto them. In addition, the existing housing element process establishes guidelines that communities to adhere to in order to address their fair share of housing demand. Housing elements must be approved by the state and include significant input from residents, community members, and interested housing advocates. Enacting broad statewide regulations undermines this local, iterative process, which is currently underway. Resolution No. 7343 Expressing Support for Local Control November 17, 2020 Page 4 of 4 Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution expressing support for local control related to housing and other zoning matters. FISCAL IMPACT There is no immediate, direct fiscal impact to the City by passing this resolution. The longer term impact of state legislation which weakens local control as related to zoning and housing issues would need to be evaluated on a case by case basis. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The proposed actions do not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), based on Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, as it can be seen with certainty that they will have no impact on the environment. Thus, these matters are exempt under CEQA. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council determine that this project is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and adopt Resolution 7343 expressing support for actions to further strengthen local democracy, authority, and control as related to local zoning and housing issues. Attachment: Resolution No. 7343