Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Position on Legislation as Recommended by the I Council/Agency Meeting Held: 7 T'�'A�Z4 Deferred/Continued to: Approved ❑ Conditionally Approved ❑ Denied e 's Si ature Council Meeting Date: July 16, 2012 Departm n ID Number: AD 12-010 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Fred A. Wilson, City Manager PREPARED BY: Paul Emery, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: Approval of a City Council position on legislation, a regulation, or budget issues pending before a federal, state, or regional government as recommended by the City Council Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC) Statement of Issue: Approval of a City Council position on legislation, a regulation, or budget issues pending before a federal, state, or regional government as recommended by the City Council Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC). Financial Impact: N/A Recommended Action: Motion to: A) OPPOSE AB 2231(as Amended) (Fuentes/Padilla)An act to amend Section 5611 of the Streets and Highways Code, relating to sidewalks. B) OPPOSE AB 904 (Skinner) —This bill could severely affect affordable housing and parking conditions for neighborhoods, businesses and public facilities. Alternative Action(s): Do not take the recommended action on one or all of the above and provide direction to staff on a possible city position. xB -81- Item 11. - 1 REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: 7/16/2012 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD 12-010 Analysis: AB 2231 (Fuentes/Padilla) amends Section 5611 of the Streets and Highways Code. This section of the code provides a mechanism for local jurisdictions to notify and require adjacent property owners to repair damaged and/or unsafe sidewalks. This bill would provide that if a city, county, or city and county has an ordinance in place that requires that local entity to repair sidewalks, a repeal of that ordinance shall become effective only if the repealing ordinance is approved by the majority of voters voting on that measure in a consolidated or general election. The legislation restricts local authority and the ability for city councils and county boards of supervisors to decide how best to balance infrastructure needs. If passed, this bill may affect formation of a special assessment district for sidewalk maintenance currently being studied by the Blue Ribbon Committee. The bill is opposed as amended by the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties. AB 904 (Skinner) is a bill that would remove the city's authority to establish parking requirements for development, and instead impose a statewide, one-size-fits-all policy. AB 904 (Skinner) is a reintroduction of AB 710 (Skinner), which failed last year, and has been resurrected through the gut and amend process and goes directly against local authority. Environmental Status: N/A Strategic Plan Goal: Improve long-term financial sustainability Attachment(s): 1. BILL NUMBER: AB 904 AMENDED 2. BILL NUMBER: AB 2231 Item 11. - 2 HB -82- s 33 7F HB -83- Item 11. - 3 AMENDED IN SENATE JULY 5, 2012 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 27, 2012 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 12, 2012 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY JANUARY 11, 2012 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 10, 2011 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2011 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MARCH 31, 2011 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2011-12 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 904 Introduced by Assembly Member Skinner (Coauthor:Assembly Member Bill Berryhill) February 17, 2011 An act to add Article 2 (commencing with Section 65200)to Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, relating to local government. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 904, as amended, Skinner. Local government: parking spaces: minimum requirements. The Planning and Zoning Law requires specified regional transportation planning agencies to prepare and adopt a regional transportation plan directed at achieving a coordinated and balanced regional transportation system, and requires the regional transportation plan to include,among other things,a sustainable communities strategy, 92 Item 11. - 4 HB -84- AB 904 —2— for the purpose of using local planning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This bill, commencing on January 1, 2014, would prohibit a city or county from requiring a minimum number of off-street parking spaces in transit-intensive areas, as defined, greater than 2 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet in nonresidential projects of 20,000 square feet or less on a single property,one parking space per unit in non-income-restricted residential projects, and specified portions, as applicable, of a parking space per unit for certain affordable housing projects, except as specified. The bill would also make a statement of legislative findings regarding the application of its provisions to charter cities. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. This act shall be known and may be cited as the 2 Sustainable Minimum Parking Requirements Act of 2012. 3 SEC. 2. (a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the 4 following: 5 (1)The state,cities,and counties have invested billions of dollars 6 in transit infrastructure. Land use policies that reduce the cost and 7 complexity of transit-oriented development help ensure a return 8 on that investment. 9 (2) Consistent with Senate Bill 375 and Assembly Bill 32, it is 10 state policy to promote transit-oriented infill development. 11 (3) Existing minimum off-street parking requirements 12 throughout the state are based on low-density and segregated single 13 land uses. 14 (4) Parking is costly to build and maintain and can substantially 15 increase the cost of constructing and operating infill projects. 16 (5) The high cost of the land and improvements required to 17 provide parking significantly increases the cost of transit-oriented 18 development, making lower cost and affordable housing 19 development financially infeasible and hindering economic 20 development strategies. 21 (6) Increasing public transportation options and developing 22 more walkable and bikeable neighborhoods reduce the demand 23 for parking. 92 HB -85- Item 11. - 5 -3— AB 904 1 (7) Excessive governmental parking requirements for infill and 2 transit-oriented development reduce the viability of transit 3 development by limiting the number of households and workers 4 near transit, increasing walking distances, and degrading the 5 pedestrian environment. 6 (8) Reducing excessive minimum parking requirements for infill 7 and transit-oriented development and allowing builders and the 8 market to decide how much parking is needed may do all of the 9 following: 10 (A) Ensure sufficient but not excessive amounts of parking are 11 provided. 12 (B) Reduce the cost of development and increase the number 13 of transit-accessible and affordable housing units. 14 (C) Increase density in areas with the most housing demand, 15 and improve the viability of developing alternate modes of 16 transportation, such as public transit, ridesharing, biking, and 17 walking. 18 (D)Reduce green house gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled 19 by removing an incentive to drive. 20 (b) It is the intent of the Legislature to reduce unnecessary 21 government regulation and to reduce the cost of development by 22 eliminating excessive minimum parking requirements for infill 23 and transit-oriented development. 24 (c) The Legislature further finds and declares that the need to 25 address infill development and excessive parking requirements is 26 a matter of statewide concern and is not a municipal affair, as that 27 term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California 28 Constitution. Therefore, this act shall apply to all cities, including 29 charter cities. 30 SEC. 3. Article 2 (commencing with Section 65200) is added 31 to Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, to 32 read: 33 34 Article 2. Sustainable Minimum Parking Requirements Act of 35 2012 36 37 65200. (a) Commencing on January 1, 2014, in 38 transit-intensive areas,a city,county,or city and county,including 39 a charter city, shall not require projects to provide a minimum 40 number of off-street parking spaces greater than the following: 92 Item 11. - 6 HB -86- AB 904 —4- 1 (1) Two parking spaces per thousand square feet of 2 nonresidential projects of 20,000 square feet or less on a single 3 property. 4 (2) One parking space per unit for non-income-restricted 5 residential projects. 6 (3) Three-quarters parking spaces per unit for projects that 7 include both income-restricted and non-income-restricted units, 8 and which meet the standards in subdivision(b)of Section 65915. 9 (4) One-half parking spaces per unit for units that are restricted 10 by a recorded covenant or a deed that lasts at least 55 years to rents 11 or prices affordable to persons and families making less than 60 12 percent of the area median income. 13 (b) This section shall not be construed as setting a maximum 14 number of spaces a project may provide. 15 (c) This section shall not be construed to limit any local agency's 16 authority to regulate parking impacts from development through 17 exactions, fees, conditions of approval, or other valid exercise of 18 its police power beyond the specific limitations provided in 19 subdivision(a). 20 (d) This section shall not apply to any property that meets any 21 of the following criteria: 22 (1) The property and immediately adjoining properties are 23 restricted to development or redevelopment at a floor area ratio of 24 below 0.75. 25 (2) The property includes a parcel or parcels whose dwelling 26 units are subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that 27 restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of low 28 or moderate income, or are subject to other forms of rent or price 29 control imposed through a public entity's valid exercise of its 30 police power, that will be destroyed or removed, unless any 31 proposed development on the property is to include an equal 32 number of bedrooms that shall be made available at affordable 33 housing costs to, and will be occupied by, persons and families in 34 the same or lower income category (extremely low, very low, or 35 low) in the same proportion as the units occupied or last occupied 36 by extremely low, very low, or low-income households in the 37 property. Rental replacement units provided pursuant to this 38 paragraph shall be made available at affordable housing costs for 39 at least 55 years, or at the remaining term of the existing recorded 40 covenants or deed restrictions that require maintenance of 92 HB -87- Item 11. - 7 —5— AB 904 1 affordable housing costs, which are consistent with the parties 2 meeting their contractual obligations.Ownership replacement units 3 provided pursuant to this paragraph shall be made available at 4 affordable housing costs for at least 45 years. 5 (3) The property includes a parcel where the owner withdrew 6 residential rental units pursuant to Chapter 12.75 (commencing 7 with Section 7060) of Division 7 of Title 1, from rental or lease, 8 or offering for rental or lease, pursuant to paragraph (2) of 9 subdivision (a) of Section 7060.2. 10 (4) The property includes a parcel or parcels subject to a specific 11 plan, station area plan, zoning ordinance, or other form of local 12 land-use control that provides for minimum off-street parking 13 requirements for residential, commercial, and mixed-use new 14 construction and reuse projects that are lower than the minimum 15 off-street parking requirements in the same jurisdiction for the 16 same uses outside the transit-intensive area. 17 (e) For purposes of this section, "transit-intensive area" means 18 an area that is within one-half mile of a major transit stop or within 19 one-quarter mile of the center line of a high-quality transit corridor. 20 A major transit stop tis For the purposes of this section "major 21 transit stop"has the same meaning as defined in Section 21064.3 22 of the Public Resources Code. For purposes of this section, a 23 high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with a fixed route 24 bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during 25 peak commute hours.A property shall be considered to be within 26 one-half mile of a major transit stop or within one-quarter mile of 27 the center line of a high-quality transit corridor if all parcels within 28 the property together have no more than 25 percent of their area 29 farther than one-half mile from the stop or within one-quarter mile 30 of the center line of a corridor, and if not more than 10 percent of 31 the residential units or 100 units,whichever is less,in any proposed 32 project are farther than one-half mile from the stop or within 33 one-quarter mile of the center line of a corridor. 34 (f) Consistent with subdivision (g), a city, county, or city and 35 county, including a charter city, that is otherwise subject to this 36 section, shall not be required to apply the minimum off-street 37 parking requirements in subdivision (a) in a transit-intensive area 38 in place of those set forth in its zoning code if it makes at least one 39 of the following written findings, specific to that transit-intensive 40 area,based upon objective criteria and evidence in the record that: 92 Item 11. - 8 xB -88- AB 904 —6— 1 (1) The transit-intensive area does not currently have or cannot 2 reasonably expect to have sufficient walkability to justify reduced 3 off-street parking requirements. 4 (2) The transit-intensive area does not currently have or cannot 5 reasonably expect to have a sufficient level of transit service or 6 bike access to provide for viable alternatives to the car for a 7 significant proportion of the trips generated by new development. 8 (3) The minimum parking requirements set forth in this act 9 would reduce the number of low-income housing units produced 10 in that transit-intensive area through density bonus programs such 11 as the program set forth in Sections 65915 to 65918, inclusive. 12 (4) The transit-intensive area in question will be adversely 13 affected by a reduction in minimum off-street parking 14 requirements. 15 (g) Any action by a city, county, or city and county, including 16 a charter city,pursuant to subdivision(f)to exempt transit-intensive 17 areas from the minimum parking requirements set forth in 18 subdivision (a) and maintain the minimum parking requirements 19 set forth in its local code shall be in the form of a resolution 20 adopted by the legislative body of a city,county,or city and county. 21 (h) Multiple transit-intensive areas may be exempted from the 22 requirements of subdivision (a) by a single resolution, provided 23 that the resolution includes at least one of the findings set forth in 24 subdivision (f) applied to each transit-intensive area to be 25 exempted. 26 (i) (1) Before January 1,2014,a city,county,or city and county 27 may evaluate and approve projects pursuant to the minimum 28 parking requirements under this section. 29 (2) After January 1,2014,but before the adoption of a resolution 30 pursuant to subdivision (g), development projects shall not be 31 subject to minimum off-street parking requirements higher than 32 those set forth in subdivision(a). 33 0) This section shall not apply to any city, county, or city and 34 county that has no transit-intensive areas within its jurisdiction. O 92 HB -89- Item 11. - 9 �k IV 'fix � •,. ��,�� � � Item 11. - 10 xs -90- AMENDED IN SENATE JUKE 28, 2012 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 31, 2012 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 25, 2012 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 23, 2012 CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE-2011-12 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2231 Introduced by Assembly Member Fuentes (Principal coauthor: Senator Padilla) February 24, 2012 An act to amend Section 5611 of the Streets and Highways Code, relating to sidewalks. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2231, as amended, Fuentes. Sidewalks: repairs. Existing law requires the owners of lots or portions of lots fronting on any portion of a public street or place to maintain any sidewalk in such condition that the sidewalk will not endanger persons or property and maintain it in a condition that will not interfere with the public convenience in the use of those works or areas, except as to those conditions created or maintained by persons other than the owner. Existing law requires the superintendent of streets, as defined, to provide specified notice to the owner or person in possession of the property fronting on that portion of the sidewalk so out of repair or pending reconstruction, to repair the sidewalk. Under existing law, if the repair is not commenced within 2 weeks after the notice has been provided, the superintendent of streets shall make the repair and the cost of the repair shall be imposed as a lien on the property. 95 HB -9 1- Item 11. - 11 AB 2231 —2— This bill would provide that if a city, county, or city and county has an ordinance in place that requires that local entity to repair sidewalks, a repeal of that ordinance shall become effective only if the repealing ordinance is approved by the majority of voters voting on that measure in a consolidated or general election. The bill would prohibit a city, county, or city and county that has an ordinance in place that requires that local entity to repair sidewalks,from imposing a fee, charge, or assessment, except a voluntary contractual assessment, for sidewalk repairs against an owner of private property fronting on any portion of a sidewalk, unless a repeal of that local entity's sidewalk repair ordinance is approved by the voters, as specified. The bill would make these provisions applicable to charter cities and counties. By imposing new duties on cities, counties, and cities and counties, the 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: 1 SECTION 1. Section 5611 of the Streets and Highways Code 2 is amended to read: 3 5611. (a) When any portion of the sidewalk is out of repair or 4 pending reconstruction and in condition to endanger persons or 5 property or in condition to interfere with the public convenience 6 in the use of the sidewalk,the superintendent of streets shall notify 7 the owner or person in possession of the property fronting on that 8 portion of the sidewalk so out of repair, to repair the sidewalk. 9 (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a) or any other provision of 10 this article, if a city, county, or city and county has an ordinance 11 in place that requires that city, county,or city and county to repair 12 sidewalks, a repeal of that ordinance shall become effective only 13 if the repealing ordinance is approved by the majority of voters 14 voting on that measure, in a consolidated or general election. 95 Item 11. - 12 HB -92- —3— AB 2231 1 (c) Except as provided in Chapter 29(commencing with Section 2 5898.10), no city, county, or city and county that has an ordinance 3 in place that requires that city, county, or city and county to repair 4 sidewalks shall impose a fee, charge, or assessment against a 5 private owner of property fronting on any portion of a sidewalk. 6 for sidewalk repairs under this section, unless a repeal of the 7 sidewalk repair ordinance of that city, county, or city and county 8 is approved by a majority of the voters pursuant to subdivision 9 (b). 10 (0 11 (d) The Legislature finds and declares that this section 12 constitutes a matter of statewide concern, and shall apply to charter 13 cities and charter counties. The provisions of this section shall 14 supersede any inconsistent provisions in the charter of any county 15 or city. 16 SEC. 2. If the Commission on State Mandates determines that 17 this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to 18 local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made 19 pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 20 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code. O 95 xB -93- Item 11. - 13