Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-05-12; Housing Commission; MinutesMinutes of: HOUSING COMMISSION Time of Meeting: 6:00 P.M. Date of Meeting: MAY 12, 2011 Place of Meeting: CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Smith called the Meeting to order at 6:01 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Smith led with the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL ^ o ^ Present- Commissioners: Emelda Bradwell Craig Kirk Bobbie Smith Absent: 2"^^".]?°! Hope Wrisley Staff Present: ^. ^ ,^ uu- • • Housing & Neighborhood Services Director: Debbie Fountain Senior Planner: Scott Donnell APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of March 11, 2010, meeting were approved as written. VOTE: 2-0 AYES: Bradwell and Smith NOES: None . ABSTAIN: Kirk (not present at March 11, 2011, meeting) ABSENT: Igoe and Wrisley ITEM NOT ON AGENDA There were no items not on the agenda. NEW BUSINESS Debbie Fountain Director of Housing & Neighborhood Services, said the item on the agenda is an update on our Housing'Element. Scott Donnell. Senior Planner, will give the update and explain the action needed tonight. Mr Donnell said this amendment would affect only one of the programs in the Housing Element. Program 2 1 • In the bigger picture of things, the Housing Element is one of the mandated elements of the General Plan In fact it is the only one that gets scrutinized by the state on a regular basis. Our General Plan is our vision foi^ how Carlsbad should look into the future. The General Plan covers topics such as Land Uses and Circulation and also Housing. The Housing Element is the document that addresses just that. It is the strategy that the city has developed over the years to provide housing for all economic segments; for farm workers, for people of above moderate income, for lower income, etc. That is what the Housing Element is. Our current Housing Element was adopted by our City Council in December of 2009. and just a few months later it was certified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development. Pnor o t^at certification the city was actually sued by a group called Friends of Aviara, which challenged the city s aoprovaro^^^^^^^^ Housing Element on two fronts. One was it alleged that the city^s environmenta docur^enta ion done for the Housing Element was not adequate. It also alleged the Housing Element cS the General Plan to be inconsistent That lawsuit was heard by the San Diego Supenor Court and ?ecenth^ me Superior Court made a ruling on that lawsuit. It determined that the city's action on the HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 12, 2011 PAGE 2 of 5 environmental work for the Housing Element was acceptable. The court also ruled that the city needed to establish timelines or deadlines by which actions identified in Housing Element Program 2.1 need to be completed The reason the court has made that ruling was to ensure that actions the program identifies are completed by a certain time. If that is done, it enables consistency between all the elements of the General Plan Case in point would be, as we will discuss. Housing Element Program 2.1 calls for different amendments to the General Plan Land Use Element That was the case Friends of Aviara brought fonrt/ard By doing so. they alleged an inconsistency because the Housing Element called for changes that weren't reflected in the Land Use Element The court said if the Housing Element established dates to ensure those changes take place, then the city's Housing Element will be consistent with the rest of the Based^on'tTe Superior Court's ruling, the City Council, just last mpnth., directed the Planning Director to look at Program 2.1 and determine what would be necessary to bring it into compliance. The City Council did not direct any other aspect of the Housing Element to be changed, nor did the Superior Court. The amendment that is before you today is a GenerahPlan amendment. It is that because the amendment proposes changes to the Housing Element It focuses only on Program 2.1. There are no other changes to the Housing Element proposed. ' , To give you background on that Program 2.1, it is^ known as the city's Adequate^Sites Program. When cities prepare Housing Elements, they are given growth, projections by the state that comes through our local Council of Govemments, which in this case is the.^an Diego Association of Govemments. Those growth estimates, which are known as theiRegional Housing Needs Assessments, specify how many units the city is expected to accommodate oVerj^a certain period of time. Those units have to be for all economic segments, whether upper incoriiejoV'lower income. t.r 'ilii^H' " Because the city does not have a lot of higher dehsiiyj.land. Program 2.1 says we will go fonward and process General Plan amendments and zoning jordinance, changes to provide more higher density land. The state considers higher, detisityi land to be at certain dei^itiesj^fiat are suitable for lower and moderate incomes So Program.; iilH^ is all ab'duf .increasing! fhe! ?|erisities tor the. allowable number of housing units on a piece of property In various parts pf the city. F.orl^xample. Program 2.1 calls for raising the minimum densities in the Village AVea.^ It alsoldalls for raisihgithe minimum densities in other specific properties such as in the Ponto Area ini^squth,Car]pbaG( and also lin Quarry Creek. Quarry Creek is a large, vacant property near the 6ceanside boVder: ' ^ ' The proposal to comply with the courtior^er and thW 'Ciiy Council direction is simply to amend Program 2.1 bv changing.the timeframes.;!'That is what the Superior Court judge said, the city needs to establish timeframes to ensure all these actions tekfe, place by a certain time. Actually the program already has timeframes iri^place; they have all'passed.'* What we are proposing is to amend the timeframes to look fonfl/ard into the Wture to guarantee that the Various actions in Program 2.1 will be completed either by September 2012 ailittle over a year^lfrom now. or by February 2013. The reason there are two dates is because some of the actions in Pr;6gi:am 2.1 are pretty simple. The changes for the Village, for example, do not require a lot of planning docUhrients to be amended. Some of the actions, however, are much more complex There is a lot of work required to make the changes necessary to Quarry Creek or the Bamo Area The recommendation ybu have before you that is part of this General Plan Amendment would not only establish these new dates of September 2012 and February 2013. but would also change the timeframes for two projects; one is for the Barrio area, because we have realized since the adoption of the Housing Element there is a lot of work necessary to cause the changes to the Barrio Area. Also, an Errata sheet provided before you tonight at your desk shows a change from the Housing Element's Staff Report that vou received earlier this week. It also includes the Ponto Area as another program that we anticipate is ooing to need quite a bit of time through February 2013 in order for the Land Use changes for the Ponto to be completed. The dates that are mentioned here. September 2012 and February 2013 and the addition of the Barrio Area and Ponto Area for Land Use action for those two areas to be completed by Febmary 2013, are the only changes that the city thinks are necessary in order to comply with both Council direction and also the court order. Our recommendation, therefore, is that you approve the Resolution 2011-002. which is a Housing Commission Resolution that recommends approval of the General Plan Amendment 11-04. That HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 12, 2011 PAGE 3 of 5 resolution reflects your action that would be reported to the City Council. Also we are recommending that the action you take on the resolution include mention of the Errata so it is clear that the addition of a later date for completion of Ponto Area land use actions is also referenced. The next steps for this General Plan Amendment are simply once the Housing Commission action is completed, we then go to the City Planning Commission, which is tentatively scheduled for June, and following that perhaps in the month of July, we go on to City Council. The City Council makes the final action on this proposed General Plan Amendment, and they receive, at that time, both the action that Planning Commission took and that the Housing Commission takes. That concludes my report. Commissioner Kirk asked what the process would be if these dates approach and they are still not completed? Would the timeline go through yet another revision procieSs? At what point would that occur? Is there a ooint a year, six months, prior to that when it would ne^tj jto be extended again? Mr Donnell said on the one hand you can say, if the city didnlf^rheet th,e'September 2012 deadline, it is not a problem. They are estimates by when actions will.talfe place. If we were to complete an action by November, for example, it doesn't require the city to <»iT)e back and propose changes to those deadlines. On the other hand, state law requires us to completje- jBife Land Use Actions withii;! our housing cycle. If we have identified that we need to increase the densilii$;in the Village Area in our'H{ousing Element, then we have to do so before the housing cycle ends. We think the housing cycle end date wil| be April 2013. It is not clear It depends on action that SANDAG has to'liake. State! law says, if you don't complete your actions you have identified by that enc^ date, by the end 6irrtheh6i:ising cycle, you mUsi do so within the following year. State law, therefore, would say jf you don't complete it by April 2013, you have to complete it by April 2014. If you don't do that theji'thiel s.tate will not certify your Housing Element for the next housing cycle. That is the penalty. We haVe to cdm|>lete it sooner or.later within the housing cycle or else we run the risk of not having our next HousinfgHlemenl'Bertified. Commissioner Kirk saidi.giv^n>a complexity||C)f QuarryliCreek,,,Ponto and the Barrio, is there any likelihood that we could, approach that'date and go beyoj^d that date? Mr Donnell said as we understand today, of course ,/\pril 2013 is about two years from now, and the changes proposed to the Barrio Area have, actually^Jjaen included as part of the city's General Plan update is,.T]1^lG*erieral Plan "updatelis estimmec^ to go through the hearing process in late 2012, early 2013 WeiHink'It will b^ more or less around AprilJsiPor Quarry Creek, even though it is identified as a city program-^-a developer has;;|submitted,ian application;t6 make those changes identified in Program 2.1. Once agairi'^s best we kno^jjlt.looks'life.those changes could be approved by that date. With Ponto, it is another difficult project with a^lotof changes necessary as well as consultation required with the Coastal Commission.'^iltlts something, hoj^ever. thattp^uld be wrapped up sooner than 2013. We think the 2013 date is more re'alisitic, however, jiisf'to give tlie city more time to ensure it could be done. In two years from now. it may be jpossible thatftose actions are not complete, but we are always striving to do so to complete them within thfe ^housing pycle. Chairperson Smith asked Mr!;Donnell if he was saying the plans have already begun for the Barrio Area? Mr Donnell answered, yes. The city has already started on its General Plan update. We held one neighborhood meeting with residents and property owners in the Barrio, so that process has begun as it also has with Quarry Creek. Commissioner Kirk made a motion to adopt the Resolution 2011-002 for approval to the City Council, changes of the Housing Element Program. Commissioner Bradwell seconded the motion. VOTE: 3-0 AYES: Bradwell. Kirk, and Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Igoe and Wrisley HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 12, 2011 PAGE 4 of 5 Commissioner Kirk further recommended that the Housing Commission approve the Errata to Agenda Item #1 to the Housing Element Program 2.1 Commissioner Bradwell seconded that motion. VOTE: 3-0 AYES: Bradwell, Kirk, and Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Igoe and Wrisley M^ Fou^t^n^ai^tSs Ll move fonA/ard to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval. Then we will have our Housing Element wrapped up and wait for the next one to begin. I missed the last meeting because I was at the Barrio Workshop fbr input fronri the community on what should happen in the Barrio. It was a good workshop with a lot of ^good feedback. Our Planning Sment is working on the report and how to .proceed with that. We are also working on he amendments that we need to make to the Village Master Plan to increase the minimum densities for the It is not a major effort that we need to make in terms of different dobuments that have to be approved. We already approved maximum densities: We had a minimum densi^ of 15 units and we have to increase that for some of our Land Use Districts.' ^, t Commissioner Kirk asked about the preservation of the Barrio community, he knows there is an effort So^ard^ the museum; doing renovation .and improving the quality. Is there anything being done fn assistance with that since it is likely that.the f^ce of the Barrio will evolve over time to preserve the heritage of the Barrio? ' Ms Fountain said staff thinks that is some of the issues that carne up at the Barrio Workshop. The report fVom the workshop has lBe^n completed and will be used to update the General Plan. We can get you some of the highlights that came out of that workshop. Those were some of the issues that were raised about where higher density! housing should go, if it is going to go in the area, it raised about what type of frnorovements they might Want:to see;Un.the Barrio A ea in terms of streetscape improvements or how S wou^d Tike^i^^^ some'of tHbk'e^ heritage components. We can share some of tha with you so vou can see what came\out of that^ workshop! We had a good tum out over 100 people. It was at the Senior Center and it was well facilitated. They got a lot of good input regarding the differences between the newer^fa^ moving and^the families who have lived there for some time. You see where their priorities are. ', We had the final grand opening of all the unit's at the Habitat for Humanity prefects. Those have all been sow and all the families have moved in. They had a ceremony to v^elcome the new residents into their new homes Nomiaiiyi:ihey send out invitations to the Housing Commission and we assumed you had received them. If you haven't be^ftdown there to see the new units, I would encourage you to see them. Tonight the city is having a''Fair Housing Workshop. We try to put those on periodically to help the proplmr owners that rent units understand their rights and responsibilities under fair housing Also as I meSed to you before, we had the senior project on Harding that was going to be 100% affordable SScted incomelrestricted and rent-restricted. They are trying for their fourth round on tax S T>iing 0 get the financing for that project. They have received some additional funding since Seir last application. They received a state grant and they have also received some supportive housing funding which means if they have a disabled person within the project, there are additional seivices that can be made available to the seniors. The economy really still hasn't taken off when it comes to housing so it is still slow until the market-rate housfna is getting built it is hard for the affordable to move fonsrard. I have been speaking with developers of the Robertson Ranch, the second part, I spoke with someone today who is moving forward on an fffortable housing projed. We have also had a couple of other ones that have expressed some interest. We are hoping some of them will move forward. HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 12, 2011 PAGE 5 of 5 Through our CDBG and HOME allocation process this year, we had two additional developers that came foHA/ard to request funding under CDBG for affordable housing. One is Solutions for Change that has proposed to acquire a small project on Roosevelt Street or somewhere else in the Village Area; 10 or 11 units that they would use for permanent housing for homeless families that have gone through their programs and their transitional housing and they are now ready to move into permanent housing. They are going to buy a project, acquire and rehab units, so they can provide some permanent affordable housing We have another developer that also proposed to do the same thing. Both developers were awarded funding for their projects. If they can pull all their funding they need together, we may see some units acquired and rehabbed and made permanent affordable housing with income restrictions and rental restrictions. They are small projects, but a different product with a different form of assistance. To be able to help some homeless families is a big plus. We did see a cut in our CDBG funds this year; about 16% cut is what is currently estimated. We still haven't gotten the final numbers, but we think that is probably what it.is going to be. There may be some possibility of cuts in the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program, but we are still waiting for the final budget decisions by the federal government It is a little disheartening, but it is not totally unexpected with the economy the way it is and revenues are lower than they have been in the past year. We are keeping our fingers crossed that we will be able to manage those and we'll have to wait and s6e the extent of the cuts. We still have not received our new income levels for^this year. They are supposed to come out in January, but the last few years they have been out in the middle :of May. We don't know if income levels are going to go up or down or what will happen. That always impacts who is eligible and not eligible for projects. , 1 On the Neighborhood Services side, wehad talked; before about,,what kind of role the Housing Commission might have infthe Neighborhood .Services. We still haven't figured out anything specific, but it is one of the things I want|tb vvbrk^on this yeariib see what kinid^pf role will be played. We are starting to move fonvard with sorne different'idpas for some|t)rpgrams. We are actually going to start a Mediation Program in Carisbad tH^t-Would be frih'Xo its resid^rif$l-We would use our volunteers that are going to be trained as mediators. We^liqp^e that will'be helpful in'resolving some neighbor-to-neighbor disputes; things that aren't code,,enforcement violationjs or criminal, but just neighbors not getting along and wanting the city todosortieiHing'ab^^ .:"! ' ;^!!.,.,^^ ^ We also just moved Code Enforcement from Community and Economic Development into Housing & Neighborhood Services. Now! Code Enforcement responsibilities are handled through our department That just transitioned the middle of April so,we are still in a transition period. Patti is training for the program to handje all complaints. ,, /; Again if you have any ideas for programs for Neighborhood Services or ways you think the Housing Commission might be able to help put with that please feel free to fonA/ard them to me or call me and talk about it '"<HI!I. ,;t^'.' Chairperson Smith thanked everyone for their work while she has been the Chairperson. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the meeting of May 12, 2011. was adjourned at 6:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted. DeborahTbuntaii Housing & Neighborhood Services Director PATRICIA CRESCENTI MINUTES AR^ ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE WRITTEN MINUTES ARE APPROVED.