Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-07-12; City Council; Resolution 2022-174RESOLUTION NO. 2022-174 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, EXEMPTING STREET FACILITIES FROM THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN VEHICULAR LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD, PURSUANT TO MOBILITY 3-P.9, THEREBY REFOCUSING PLANNING EFFORTS AT THESE STREET FACILITIES TO TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO REDUCE OVERALL TRIP GENERATION, AND ADOPTION OF CEQA FINDINGS WHEREAS, in 1986, the city adopted Proposition E (Growth Management Plan), which amended the city's General Plan to "ensure that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need to serve new development ... ln guaranteeing that facilities will be provided emphasis shall be given to ensuring good traffic circulation, schools, parks, libraries, open space and recreational amenities;" and WHEREAS, the Growth Management Plan or GMP is implemented through Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.90 and the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, or CFIP; and WHEREAS, the GMP makes the approval of new development contingent upon adequacy of public facilities, based on performance standards for 11 identified public facilities incorporated into the CFIP; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Mobility Element and the CFIP include the City's GMP circulation performance standard, which was amended in 2015 to comply with new state planning laws; and WHEREAS, the Legislature adopted the Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill 1358), which requires General Plans "to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan;" and WHEREAS, the Legislature also adopted Senate Bill 375 in 2008 which calls public agencies to consider changes in residential development patterns which provide expanded transit service and accessibility, walkable communities, access to non-vehicular modes of transportation resulting in reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT; and WHEREAS, the Legislature adopted SB 743 in 2013, which explains that "It is the intent of the Legislature to balance the need for level of service standards for traffic with the need to build infill housing and mixed-use commercial developments within walking distance of mass transit facilities, Exhibit 3 July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 69 of 690 downtowns, and town centers and to provide greater flexibility to local governments to balance these sometimes competing needs" (Gov. Code§ 65088.4(a)); and WHEREAS, the State Legislative Analyst's Office 2015 Report on California's High Housing Costs, explains that "Workers in California's coastal communities commute 10 percent further each day than commuters elsewhere, largely because limited housing options exist near major job centers;" and WHEREAS, in 2015 the City amended its General Plan and CFIP Circulation Performance standards to incorporate these new transportation planning strategies to provide access for multi­ modal circulation, which have the benefits of improved air quality, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and reduced trip generation; and WHEREAS, in 2015 the City's CFIP Circulation Performance Standard was revised to state "Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system -vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain LOS Dor better for all modes that are subject to this multi-modal level of service, or MM LOS standard, as identified in Table 3-1 of the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council;" and WHEREAS, in 2015 the City's CFIP Circulation Performance Standard was also revised to further state: "The city's approach to provide livable streets recognizes that optimum service levels cannot be provided for all travel modes on all streets within the city. This is due to competing interests that arise when different travel modes mix. Therefore, the General Plan Mobility Element intends to provide a balanced mobility system that identifies, based on the type of street (street typology), the travel modes for which service levels should be enhanced and maintained per the multi-modal level of service (MM LOS) standard specified in the city's Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan;" and WHEREAS, in 2015 Mobility Policy 3-P.9 was adopted and states in part that the City may "Develop and maintain a list of street facilities where specified modes of travel are exempt from the LOS standard (LOS exempt street facilities), as approved by the City Council. For LOS exempt street facilities, the city will not implement improvements to maintain the LOS standard outlined in Policy 3- P.4 if such improvements are beyond what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case of street facilities where the vehicle mode of travel is exempt from the LOS standard, other non-vehicle capacity-building improvements will be required to improve mobility through implementation of transportation demand and transportation system management measures ... ;" and July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 70 of 690 WHEREAS, in 2015 North County Advocates filed a lawsuit against the City of Carlsbad challenging the amendments to the General Plan and the CFIP, alleging that they violated the City's Growth Management Plan (North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad (San Diego County Superior Court Case No. 37-2015-00035458-CU-WM-NC.); and WHEREAS, in 2017, North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad (San Diego County Superior Court Case No. 37-2015-00035458-CU-WM-NC) was settled and dismissed with prejudice; and WHEREAS, the 2017 Settlement with North County Advocates acknowledged "As part of the development review process the City shall evaluate all discretionary projects for consistency with applicable General Plan policies and CAP measures and actions that aim to reduce roadway congestion and vehicular miles traveled (VMT), through Transportation Demand Management (TOM techniques and multi-modal improvements.") Within twelve (12) months, the City shall update is Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, incorporating multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) analysis to address vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes of travel, and including transportation demand management (TOM) trip reduction methodologies and best practices to reduce automobile trips and improvement travel model shift. The updated TIA Guidelines will also be used to determine requirements for offsetting project impacts and evaluating opportunities for improving project-level connections for all travel modes (vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit). Within twelve (12) months of the state Office of Planning and Research (OPR) issuing final amendments to the CEOA Guidelines regarding the use of VMT as the primary metric to analyze transportation impacts rather than vehicle level of service (LOS), the City, in collaboration with SAN DAG and applicable working groups, will revise the updated TIA Guidelines to be consistent with OPR's final amendments to the CEOA Guidelines" (2017 North County Advocates Settlement, Section 4.3.6); and WHEREAS, the GMP requires annual monitoring to measure adequate performance of various public facilities, including circulation; and WHEREAS, the FY 2020-2021 annual monitoring report identifies the following two street facilities within Zones 3 and 4 as not meeting the vehicular LOS component of the City's Circulation performance standard, including: 1.Eastbound Aviara Parkway from Manzanita Street to El Camino Real; 2.Westbound Aviara Parkway from El Camino Real to Manzanita Street; and July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 71 of 690 WHEREAS, on July 12, 2022, city staff presented recommended actions to City Council to address the vehicular LOS performance standard deficiencies identified in the FY 2020-2021 annual monitoring report for the above-described street facilities; and WHEREAS, when a performance standard is exceeded, Carlsbad Municipal Code §§ 21.90.080 and 21.90.130 state "If at any time after preparation of a local facilities management plan the performance standards established by a plan are not met then no development permits or building permits shall be issued within the local zone until the performance standard is met or arrangements satisfactory to the city council guaranteeing the facilities and improvements have been made;" and WHEREAS, the City interprets Carlsbad Municipal Code § 21.90.080 and § 21.90.130 as providing the City a reasonable period of time for addressing such deficiencies, in keeping with Gov. Code § 65860{c); and WHEREAS, as described in the subsequent recitals, the City Attorney and the California Department of Housing and Community Development, or HCD do not believe the City has the authority to implement a moratorium in response to the vehicular LOS exceedances at roadway facilities, as contemplated as an option under CMC §§ 21.90.080 and 21.90.130; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has a Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA of 3,873 residential units (General Plan Housing Element, table 10-1) which it has not yet been fulfilled, and Zone 6 within the City of Carlsbad would allow development of approximately 358 dwelling units; and WHEREAS, SB 166 of 2017 states that "Each city, county, or city and county shall ensure that its housing element inventory ... can accommodate, at all times throughout the planning period, its remaining unmet share of the regional housing need allocated pursuant to Section 65584" and the HCD has taken the position that exceedances of vehicular Level of Service standards cannot constitute a basis for implementing a moratorium that precludes attainment of a city's RHNA Allocation (Attachment B); and WHEREAS, SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, states that where housing is an allowable use, the city is prohibited from enacting a "development policy, standard or condition" that would have the effect of "imposing a moratorium or similar restriction or limitation on housing development...other than to specifically protect against an imminent threat to the health and safety of persons residing in, or within the immediate vicinity of, the area subject to the moratorium ... ," and any moratorium July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 72 of 690 adopted pursuant to such an exemption would require approval from HCD (Gov. Code, § 66300{b)(l)(B)(i) and (ii)); and WHEREAS, on April 17, 2020, the City of Carlsbad received an opinion from HCD (Attachment A)which states in part that "the housing moratorium adopted pursuant to the City's GMP would be impermissible under Government Code section 66300 ... HCD does not consider, however, that general concerns about the health and welfare of the citizenry-including traffic conditions that cause minor delays-present an imminent threat to health and safety ... ln this case, the City's proposed moratorium would prohibit the issuance of any development or building permits in Local Facilities Management Zone 6 ("LFMZ 6") until two (2) identified street facilities meet the vehicle level of service ("LOS") performance standard of Dor the necessary improvements are guaranteed. (See City of Carlsbad Mun. Code, § 21.90.080.) LOS D simply refers to the rate at which traffic flows on a roadway, and at LOS D there is no longer free flow of traffic but instead congestion that borders on unstable flow ... While such congestion may be uncomfortable, there is no indication in the City's GMP or in the City's Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines that such a standard represents an imminent threat to the health and safety of the residents of LFMZ or those in the immediate area. Accordingly, HCD is of the opinion that such a moratorium cannot permissibly be adopted or enforced consistent with Government Code section 66300;" and WHEREAS, in a concurrently adopted resolution, the City Council determined the following street facilities to be deficient: (1) Aviara Parkway eastbound from Manzanita Street to El Camino Real and (2) Aviara Parkway westbound from El Camino Real to Manzanita Street. This deficiency is due to the short distance (450 feet) between the two intersections of Aviara Parkway at Manzanita Street and El Camino Real, which results in significantly reduced vehicle speeds. As discussed in the Staff Report for this action, the Vehicular LOS Sensitivity Analysis for the Deficient Facilities demonstrates that adding vehicular lanes would not reduce vehicular congestion; and WHEREAS, city staff recommended addressing the LOS deficiencies at (1) Aviara Parkway eastbound from Manzanita Street to El Camino Real and (2) Aviara Parkway westbound from El Camino Real to Manzanita Street through an exemption to the vehicular LOS D standard pursuant to Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9; and WHEREAS, for the street facilities of (1) Aviara Parkway eastbound from Manzanita Street to El Camino Real and (2) Aviara Parkway westbound from El Camino Real to Manzanita Street, staff July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 73 of 690 recommended that the City Council determine the deficient street facility to be exempt from the vehicular LOS D standard and apply TDM and transportation system management (TSM) strategies to new development that adds vehicle traffic to the exempt street facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows that: 1.The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference as findings set forth in full. 2.The City finds that Gov. Code§ 65863(a) (SB 166 [2017)) and Gov. Code,§ 66300(b)(l)(B)(i) (SB 330 [2019)) preempt the City from implementing a moratorium pursuant to Carlsbad Municipal Code§§ 21.90.080 and 21.90.130 and GMP regulations; 3.The City Council finds, pursuant to General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9(a) and (d), that wi_dening Aviara Parkway to three lanes in both directions between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real would require the acquisition of additional right-of-way and would not improve the facility vehicular level of service. This street segment is congested because of the closely spaced intersections that limit vehicle speeds and capacity, not due to a lack of vehicle lanes (See Vehicular LOS Sensitivity Analysis for the Deficient Facilities referenced in the Staff Report for this item). Therefore, consistent with Policy 3-P.9(a) and (d), the acquisition or right away is not feasible, as it would not address the deficiency. 4.The City Council further finds, pursuant to Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9(b) and (c), the continued expansion of roadways leads to secondary impacts to alternate modes of transportation, such as pedestrian access. More specifically, the improvements would present unacceptable impacts to the following community values and General Plan policies: The Carlsbad Community Vision core value of "Walking, biking, public transportation and connectivity" calls for increasing travel options through enhanced walking, bicycling and public transportation systems and enhancing mobility through increased connectivity and intelligent transportation management. Accommodating three through lanes in each direction on Aviara Parkway between Manzanita Street and El Camino Real would also create longer crossing distances at two intersections for pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Aviara Parkway. From a policy perspective, this would July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 74 of 690 adversely affect pedestrian travel modes. Additionally, an increase vehicular traffic would also affect the bicycle lanes by narrowing or removing the dedicated bike lanes. From a policy perspective, this would adversely affect bicycles. 5.Pursuant to the findings above, the City Council determines the vehicular street facilities of (1) Aviara Parkway eastbound from Manzanita Street to El Camino Real and (2) Aviara Parkway westbound from El Camino Real to Manzanita Street to be exem.pt from the Mobility Element and the CFIP vehicular LOS D performance standard pursuant to Mobility Element Policy 3-P.9. The City Council's findings and sub-findings in paragraphs 3 and 4, each independently support this exemption. Any future development which adds vehicle traffic to these exempt street facilities shall implement TDM and TSM strategies in accordance with General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.ll. 6.The City finds that exempting these roadways from the vehicular Level of Service performance standard would not result in any significant environmental impacts because (1)this would maintain existing conditions and would therefore not result in an environmental impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2), and (2) vehicular Level of Service is no longer considered an environmental impact under CEQA (Pub. Res. Code § 21099(b)(2)). Therefore, the City finds that exemption of such street facilities from vehicular LOS standards is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Pub. Res. Code § 21080(b)(5), and CEQA Guidelines§§ 15305, 15061(b)(3)). 7.If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Attachment A: April 17, 2020, Opinion from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Regarding Senate Bill 330 July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 75 of 690 Attachment B: January 2, 2018, HCD Letter to City of Redondo Beach Regarding Senate Bill 166 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 12th day of l!!!Y, 2022, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Hall, Blackburn, Bhat-Patel, Acosta. None. Norby. MATT H1{_1(//LI lli t FAVIOLA MEDINA, City Clerk Services Manager (SEAL) July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 76 of 690 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 (916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453www.hcd.ca.gov April 17, 2020 Celia A. Brewer, City Attorney Office of the City Attorney City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Celia Brewer: RE: Housing Crisis Act of 2019, Request for Opinion Under Government Code Section 66300 et seq. The purpose of this letter is to assist the City of Carlsbad (City) in the implementation of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (Gov. Code, § 66300) as requested in your letter dated February 27, 2020. In that letter, the City requested the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) opinion as to the enforceability of a moratorium proposed pursuant to the City’s Growth Management Program (Proposition E or GMP). For the reasons explained below, HCD finds that the housing development moratorium adopted pursuant to the City’s GMP would be impermissible under Government Code section 66300. Should the City decide to adopt a moratorium, notwithstanding this opinion, HCD reminds the City that it cannot legally enforce such a moratorium before obtaining HCD’s approval pursuant to Government Code section 66300, subdivision (b)(1)(B)(ii). HCD’s opinion is based on the mandatory criteria established by the Legislature with the passage of SB 330 in 2019, known as the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, which added section 66300 to the Government Code. The State of California is experiencing a housing supply shortage of crisis proportions. To address this crisis, the Legislature declared a statewide housing emergency until 2025, and suspended certain restrictions on development of new housing during the emergency period. (Housing Crisis Act of 2019, Chapter 654, Statues of 2019, section 2(b).) Among other things, the Legislature suspended the ability of cities and counties to impose moratoria on housing development, including mixed-use development, “other than to specifically protect against an imminent threat to the health and safety of persons residing in, or within the immediate vicinity of, the area subject to the moratorium.” (Gov. Code, § 66300, subd. (b)(1)(B), emphasis added.) Attachment A July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 77 of 690 The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 does not define “imminent threat to the health and safety of persons.” HCD does not consider, however, that general concerns about the health and welfare of the citizenry—including traffic conditions that cause minor delays—present an imminent threat to health and safety. The word imminent suggests something that will happen in the very immediate future. (Black’s Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019) (“Imminent” means “threatening to occur immediately; dangerously impending” or “[a]bout to take place.”); Webster’s New World College Dictionary (4th ed. 2010) (“Imminent” means “likely to happen without delay; impending; threatening”).) Imminent threats to the “health and safety of persons” implies an impending or immediate threat to human life, human health, or human safety. It is a much narrower consideration that notions of “health and welfare” that motivated the adoption of the City’s GMP. The City’s GMP appears to be designed to assure that housing development in the City and the provision of public services are closely aligned (City of Carlsbad Mun. Code, § 21.09.010.) Nothing in the City’s GMP or in its Growth Management Ordinance (City of Carlsbad Mun. Code, Chapter 21.90) indicate that they were adopted with the intent to avert imminent threat to the health and safety of the residents of Carlsbad. Neither do the GMP or the Growth Management Ordinance indicate that imminent threats to health and safety are a mandatory consideration in deciding whether to impose such a moratorium. The purposes of the ordinance are reflected in its placement in the Municipal Code. The ordinance is housed in the Zoning Code, under the chapter for Growth Management, rather than under, for instance, Health and Sanitation, which includes Emergency Services and Health and Sanitation. The overall purpose of the Zoning Code is described as “to provide the economic and social advantages resulting from an orderly planned use of land resources.” (City of Carlsbad Mun. Code, § 21.02.010.) In this case, the City’s proposed moratorium would prohibit the issuance of any development or building permits in Local Facilities Management Zone 15 (“LFMZ 15”) until four (4) identified street facilities meet the vehicle level of service (“LOS”) performance standard of D or the necessary improvements are guaranteed. (See City of Carlsbad Mun. Code, § 21.90.080.) LOS D simply refers to the rate at which traffic flows on a roadway, and at LOS D there is no longer free flow of traffic but instead congestion that borders on unstable flow. (City of Carlsbad, Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (April 2018), p. 22.) While such congestion may be uncomfortable, there is no indication in the City’s GMP or in the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines that such a standard represents an imminent threat to the health and safety of the residents of LFMZ or those in the immediate area. Accordingly, HCD is of the opinion that such a moratorium cannot permissibly be adopted or enforced consistent with Government Code section 66300. Attachment A July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 78 of 690 Thank you for reaching out to HCD for this guidance. We look forward to hearing from the City as to the action it takes on its proposed moratorium. Please contact Melinda Coy of our staff, at Melinda.Coy@hcd.ca.gov with any questions. Sincerely, Zachary Olmstead Deputy Director Attachment A July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 79 of 690 STATE OF CALIFORNIA -BUSINESS CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 (916)263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453 www.hcd.ca.gov January 2, 2018 Mr. Joe Hoefgen, City Manager City of Redondo Beach 415 Diamond Street Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Dear Mr. Hoefgen: RE: Redondo Beach's 5th Cycle (2013-2021) Adopted Four-Year Housing Element Update Thank you for submitting the City of Redondo Beach's housing element adopted September 19, 2017 and received for review on October 4, 2017. The Department also received Ordinance No. 3174-17 pertaining to zoning for emergency shelters on December 20, 2017. Pursuant to Government Code (GC) Section 65585(h), the Department is reporting the results of its review. On July 20, 2017, the Department found the City of Redondo Beach's draft housing element to meet most statutory requirements. The Department also found the element would comply with housing element law once the City has completed zoning amendments to permit emergency shelters and submitted the adopted element. While the City has completed zoning for emergency shelters and submitted the adopted element, the Department understands the City, sometime shortly after July 20, 2017, has adopted an ordinance imposing a moratorium on mixed use development, including multifamily. The moratorium significantly limits the availability of sites identified in the element to accommodate lower-income households and constrains a variety of housing types, including multifamily and supportive housing. As a result, the element does not comply with housing element law and the following revisions are necessary: 1.Include an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sitesand sites having the potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship ofzoning and public facilities and services to these sites (Section 65583(a)(3)). The inventory of land suitable for residential development shall be used to identify sites thatcan be developed for housing within the planning period (Section 65583.2). The City has a total regional housing need of 1,397 units, including 595 for lower­income households. To accommodate the projected housing need for lower-income households, the City identified a capacity for 938 to 1,290 units with appropriate densities to accommodate lower-income households. However, the recently imposed moratorium precludes multifamily development on over two-thirds (640 units) of the identified capacity for lower-income households. Further, the remaining identified capacity for lower-income households appears attributed to Site #5 where the Department understands the City is processing a residential development application. While the Department acknowledges the City's efforts to process a residential EXHIBIT 3, ATTACHMENT B Attachment B July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 80 of 690 Mr. Hoefgen, City Manager Page 2 development application, the Department understands the application does not include housing for lower-income households; leaving potentially no capacity remaining to accommodate lower-income households. As a result, the element must list and analyze sufficient and suitable sites to accommodate the regional housing need for lower-income households and include program(s), as appropriate, to address a shortfall of capacity. The site listing and analysis and programs must address all the requirements of GC Se ction 65583.2. For more information, see http://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/index.shtml. In addition, please be aware housing element law and other housing related laws have been changed or added and take effect January 1, 2018. For example, no net loss law (GC Section 65863) was amended to clarify "At no time, ... shall ... " a local government take action to cause an inventory to be insufficient to accommodate housing for lower-income households. In addition, housing element law was amended regarding analysis and programs related to the suitability and availability of sites (AB 1397). For more information, see the Department's website at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/lhp.shtml. 2.Analyze potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance,improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including land-usecontrols, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and otherexactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures (Section 65583(a)(5)). Taking actions to prohibit, even temporarily, multifamily development is viewed as aserious constraint and contrary to planning and zoning law, particularly housingelement and related laws. This is particularly important since the recently adoptedelement makes no mention of imposing a moratorium, nor was the Department madeaware of this crucial information prior to its July 2017 findings. Further, GC Section65858 was amended in 2001 for the purpose of heightening the standard of findingswhen imposing moratoriums on multifamily development. The City's findings do notappear to meet this heightened standard. For example, the City appears to bemerely relying on a level of service (LOS) standard as a proxy for having a "specific,adverse impact upon the public health or safety standards" with little or no analysis tosupport making such a finding. Given the importance of encouraging multifamilydevelopment and not imposing constraints, the element must be revised to analyzethe moratorium as a constraint on the cost, supply and timing of housing and includeprograms as appropriate to address and remove the constraint. 3.Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate zoning anddevelopment standards and with public services and facilities needed to facilitate andencourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels,including rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, and emergency sheltersand transitional housing. Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) ofsubdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groupsof all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall providefor sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental multifamily ATTACHMENT B July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 81 of 690 Mr. Hoefgen, City Manager Page 3 residential use by right, including density and development standards that could accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low-and low-income households (Section 65583(c)(1)). The housing element shall contain programs which address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing (Section 65583(c)(3)). As noted above, the element does not list and analyze sufficient sites to accommodate the regional housing need and does not include analysis of imposing a moratorium as a potential constraint. Based on the results of complete analyses, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types and address and remove governmental constraints. Once the element has been revised and adopted to address the above requirements, it will comply with State housing element law. For more information or assistance, please contact Greg Nickless, of our staff, at (916) 274-6244. Sincerely, Jennifer Seeger Assistant Deputy Director ATTACHMENT B July 12, 2022 Item #15 Page 82 of 690