Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-08-12; Housing Element Advisory Committee; Minutes August 12, 2020 CALL TO ORDER: 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Committee members Luna, Barnett, Evans, Sachs, Streicher, Weis. Committee member Proulx joined the meeting at 3:04 pm. Committee member Perez joined the meeting at 4:01 pm. (6/0/3 Novak, Perez and Proulx absent). APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Motion by Sachs, seconded by Barnett to approve the committee meeting minutes of July 8, 2020. Motion carried 6/0/3 (Novak, Perez and Proulx absent). PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. NEW BUSINESS: Chair Luna announced that Committee member Perez would like to participate in the discussion regarding item 1 but is unable to participate until 4 p.m. Therefore, Chair Luna reordered the agenda so items 2 and 3 would be discussed first and directed everyone’s attention to the screen for item 2, the CEQA process primer. 1. CEQA Process Primer Consultant Schiffman presented Agenda Item 2. Ms. Schifman described the CEQA portion of the housing element. She gave a brief overview of what CEQA is about and reviewed the environmental topics that are covered under CEQA. Additionally, she gave a brief overview of the regulatory requirements for CEQA and CEQA’s relationship to the housing element. Ms. Schifman described the CEQA documentation that will be conducted for the housing element update and the overall timeline for the project’s CEQA process. Ms. Schiffman responded to questions and comments. Chair Luna requested clarification on the CEQA timeline and the public participation process for the CEQA process. She further requested clarification on how that differs from the public participation portion for the housing element. Committee member Sachs requested clarification on the accompanying EIR and what specifically it will analyze. Additionally, Ms. Sachs requested more information on how long it typically takes to pull together this type of EIR. 2. General Plan Maintenance Primer Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes August 12, 2020 Page 2 Consultant Weatherby presented Agenda Item 3 (taken out of order and discussed as the second agenda item). Ms. Weatherby gave a brief overview of how the General Plan relates to the Housing Element and the seven mandatory elements that fall under the General Plan. Ms. Weatherby provided additional information on the housing element as well as the miscellaneous elements that the city has set forth. Ms. Weatherby discussed how the General Plan and the Housing Element affects one another and provided an overview on the regulatory requirements that require consistency between the general plan and the housing element. Ms. Weatherby concluded with providing a brief overview of what has currently been identified that will need to be changed in the General Plan due to the housing element update. Consultant Weatherby responded to questions and comments. Committee member Barnett requested clarification on the timing of reviewing the General Plan and what may need to be changed due to the Housing Element Update. Chair Luna requested clarification on SB 330 and what that would specifically affect. Community Development Director Jeff Murphy provided information on SB 330 and what cities will need to consider in their Housing Element due to this legislation. Consultant Rust also noted SB 330 does not permit, after certain dates, downzoning of property or changes to design standards, unless those standards are objective. 3. Proposal to Change HEAC Meeting Time Discussion on Agenda Item 4, taken out of order and discussed as the third agenda item, was postponed pending further information. 4. Confirmation of Site Selection Methodologies Proposed to Meet the City’s Housing Obligations Prior to Initiating Public Input on Individual Sites* City Planner Don Neu presented Agenda Item 1 (taken out of order and discussed as the fourth agenda item). Mr. Neu provided a brief overview of RHNA Income Categories and their respective allocated numbers. Mr. Neu reviewed the original seven housing site methodologies that were presented at the July 8th meeting and showed an overview of the July 8th committee rankings. Mr. Neu then presented the four assumed housing site methodologies that are now considered to unnecessary to rank due to state law. Mr. Neu presented the new six housing site methodologies and gave a brief description for each one. . Mr. Neu concluded his presentation and requested the committee find a consensus among the new six housing methodologies. Chair Luna overviewed the differences between the categories considered by the committee on July 8 and the methodologies now presented for consideration. She opened the item for discussion. Committee member Streicher requested clarification on the methodology of commercial to residential. He requested more information as to how acreage and other criteria are involved in regards to looking at specific Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes August 12, 2020 Page 3 housing sites. Mr. Streicher inquired if there is any community vote of the methodology rankings or if the methodologies are just presented to City Council. Mr. Streicher inquired more information on the Up-zoning methodology and how that would potentially affect the General Plan. Community Development Director Jeff Murphy clarified how the voting works with the methodologies compared to how voting works with specific housing sites. Committee member Evans requested clarification on the current order of the new six housing methodologies. Committee member Sachs stated that the methodologies of Planned Projects and City Owned Properties should be towards the top of the rankings list as they seem to be the easiest to achieve. Committee member Streicher requested doing an individual numbered ranking and states that stack ranking may be difficult to achieve a consensus. Committee member Evans suggested city staff provided its rankings for committee consideration. Mr. Neu and Mr. Murphy commented that the order of the methodologies presented in the written staff report is generally staff’s recommended order. Committee member Weis echoed Committee member Streicher in doing individual rankings and having a follow up discussion to create a further consensus. Committee member Streicher voiced his concern on prioritizing the housing methodologies as different quadrants are suitable for different methodologies. Committee member Weis inquired whether there is any chance of hitting the RHNA numbers without implementing the methodology of Up-zoning. Mr. Neu and Mr. Rust provided clarification on the inputs behind the methodology of Up-zoning. Committee member Barnett voiced his concern on high density development. Mr. Barnett expressed that he would like the methodology of Up-zoning to be moved towards the bottom of the ranking list. Chair Luna requested that Mr. Neu reviews the pros and cons of the six housing methodologies City Planner Don Neu provided an overview of the pros and cons for all the six housing methodologies. Committee member Perez inquired about the methodology of Up-zoning. Mr. Perez requested information on the densities of Quarry Creek and Robertson Ranch. Don Neu provided more information on Robertson Ranch which is at an R-23 category for apartments and R-8 and R-4 for single family homes. Mr. Neu then provided information for Quarry Creek which are at an R-23 density for apartments and R-15 for townhomes. Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes August 12, 2020 Page 4 Committee member Perez requested clarification on the methodology of City-owned Properties. Mr. Perez further requested clarification on what development would look like near sites such as the Shoppes at Carlsbad and other commercial sites. Mr. Perez acknowledged some of the drawbacks of City-owned property sites that are commercial but states that it could potentially reduce things such as VMT in the city. Chair Luna opened discussion on ranking the methodologies. Committee member Barnett expressed his concern for the methodology of Up-zoning and recommended this methodology is put last. Committee member Streicher echoed committee member Barnett regarding the methodology of Up-zoning. Committee member Barnett recommended City-owned Properties moves farther to the top of the rankings list. Committee member Proulx requested clarification on Planned Projects. Ms. Proulx recommended moving up Planned Projects on the rankings list since they are in review and have developers. Committee member Weis expressed his preference on the methodology of Up-zoning and would preferably move it up the rankings list. Additionally, Mr. Weis clarified his density preferences for Up-zoning. Committee member Streicher responded to Committee member Weis and expressed his concern for bumping up densities such as R-4 to R-30. Committee member Perez reviewed his rankings from July 8th. Mr. Perez put forth his preferences and considerations given his past rankings. Additionally, Mr. Perez acknowledged that all of the methodologies overlap and might best be displayed in a Venn-Diagram. Committee member Evans recommended sticking closely with what the city recommends in terms of rankings. Committee member Barnett emphasized the importance of affordability and that it should be something to consider when ranking. He also noted he would like to see Up-zoning near the bottom of the rankings and see if the higher methodologies can provide the needed numbers. Committee member Sachs proposed to go closely with the staff picks due to the knowledge that they have on each of these options. Chair Luna proceeded to collect individual rankings for each committee member on the six housing methodologies. Administrative Secretary Flores read a public comment received from the following individual into the record: Linda Geldner concurred with city staff’s July 8th prioritization recommendations for the housing site selection methodologies. Consultant Brenna Weatherby tallied the individual rankings and provided the group ranking. Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes August 12, 2020 Page 5 Committee member Proulx commented that she would like to see Planned Projects above the methodology Commercial to Residential. Chair Luna presented the final recommendations for City Council. Chair Luna requested that Community Development Director Jeff Murphy share the committee’s concerns with City Council. Additionally, Chair Luna acknowledged that there is a lot of overlap with the different methodologies. Committee member Weis inquired about the methodology Commercial to Residential and whether that would be converting existing commercial development to housing or building on vacant commercially zoned lots. Committee member Weis remarked that he would like Planned Projects to be moved above Commercial to Residential in future rankings. Committee member Perez requested clarification on the past planned projects and whether some of those are included in the current Planned Projects methodology. Mr. Perez inquired whether or not certain sites in Zone 15 would be included in this housing cycle. Chair Luna requested clarification on the intent behind the implementation of these housing methodologies and what the process will look like after the methodologies are brought forth to City Council. Community Development Director Jeff Murphy provided more information on the City Council process regarding the housing site methodologies. COMMITTEE MEMBER COMMENTS: None. STAFF/CONSULTANT COMMENTS: None. CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC COMMENT: None. NEXT REGULATORY SCHEDULED MEETING: September 9, 2020. 3:00 pm. ADJOURNMENT: Motion by Proulx Seconded by Weis. Motion carried 8/0/1 (Novak absent). Housing Element Advisory Committee Minutes August 12, 2020 Page 6 The meeting was adjourned at 5:45 p.m. Jenna Shaw Minutes Clerk