Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-07-08 Special Agenda PacketIN-PERSON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Members of the public are welcome to attend City Council meetings in person. Alternate ways to view meetings live or on-demand include: livestreamed on HBTV Channel 3 (replayed on Wednesday at 10:00 a.m. and Thursday at 6:00 p.m.); live and archived meetings for on-demand viewing accessed from https://huntingtonbeach.legistar.com/calendar , https://bit.ly/SurfCityTV, or the City's YouTube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/cityofhb , or from any Roku, Fire TV or Apple device by downloading the Cablecast Screenweave App and searching for the City of Huntington Beach channel. PRESENTATION MATERIAL: Presentations/AV materials shall be submitted to staff no later than 9AM the day of the meeting to PublicPresentations@huntingtonbeachca.gov . Members of the audience and speakers shall not wear or display signs that obstruct the view of other audience members. Signs shall remain with the holder and shall not be placed in adjacent seats or in common areas. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Individuals wishing to provide a comment on agendized or non-agendized items including Study Session, Closed Session, and Public Hearing, may do so in person in the City Council Chambers by completing a Request to Speak form delivered to the City Clerk. Sign-ups to Request to Speak will begin in person 30 minutes prior to the start of Study Session, Closed Session, or Regular City Council Meeting, whichever comes first. Sign-ups will be accepted until the commencement of the public comment period. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION: Members of the public unable to personally participate in the meeting but interested in communicating with the City Council on agenda-related items are encouraged to submit a written (supplemental) communication to the Council via email at SupplementalComm@Surfcity-hb.org . Supplemental Communications are public record, and if received by 9:00 AM on the day of the meeting, will be distributed to the City Council prior to consideration of agenda-related items, posted to the City website, and announced, but not read, at the meeting. Communications received after the 9:00 AM deadline will be incorporated into the administrative record. Members of the public are also welcome to communicate with the City Council (and staff supporting Council) at City.Council@surfcity-hb.org . MEETING ASSISTANCE NOTICE: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, services are available to members of our community who require special assistance to participate in public meetings. If you require special assistance, 48-hour prior notification will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for an assisted listening device (ALD) for the hearing impaired, American Sign Language interpreters, a reader during the meeting and/or large print agendas. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (714) 536-5227 for more information. AGENDA City Council/Public Financing Authority Monday, July 8, 2024 Special Meeting - 4:00 PM Council Chambers 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL GRACEY VAN DER MARK, Mayor PAT BURNS, Mayor Pro Tem RHONDA BOLTON, Councilmember DAN KALMICK, Councilmember CASEY McKEON, Councilmember NATALIE MOSER, Councilmember TONY STRICKLAND, Councilmember STAFF ERIC G. PARRA, Interim City Manager MICHAEL E. GATES, City Attorney ROBIN ESTANISLAU, City Clerk ALISA BACKSTROM, City Treasurer 1 AGENDA July 8, 2024City Council/Public Financing Authority 4:00 PM - COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER SPECIAL MEETING ROLL CALL Moser, Bolton, Burns, Van Der Mark, Strickland, McKeon, Kalmick PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ANNOUNCEMENT OF SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS (Received After Agenda Distribution) PUBLIC COMMENTS (3-Minute Time Limit) At this time, the City Council will receive comments from members of the public regarding topic(s) included on the special agenda. Individuals wishing to provide a comment may do so in person by filling out a Request to Speak form delivered to the City Clerk. All speakers are encouraged, but not required to identify themselves by name. Each speaker may have up to 3 minutes unless the volume of speakers warrants reducing the time allowance. Please note that the Brown Act does not allow discussion or action on topics that are not on the special agenda. Members of the public who would like to speak directly with a Councilmember on an item not on the special agenda may consider scheduling an appointment by contacting the City Council's Administrative Assistant at (714) 536-5553 or emailing the entire City Council at city.council@surfcity-hb.org. While the City Council welcomes public involvement and supports and defends free speech, the City Council rejects comments from anyone that are discriminatory, defamatory or otherwise not protected free speech. Those comments will not inform nor be considered by the City Council and may be cause for the Mayor to interrupt the public speaker. Such public comments will not be consented to or otherwise adopted by the City Council in its discussions and findings for any matter tonight. ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS 24-4651.Consider the Submission of One Charter Amendment Ballot Measure for Voter Approval for the November 5, 2024, General Election and the Adoption of Resolution Nos. 2024-38, 2024-39, and 2024-40 A) Consider the proposed Charter amendment ballot measure, ballot language, and exhibits for placement on the November 5, 2024 , General Municipal Election ballot for voter approval; and B) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-38, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Recommended Action: Page 1 of 2 2 AGENDA July 8, 2024City Council/Public Financing Authority Huntington Beach, California, Ordering the Submission to the Qualified Electors of the City a Certain Charter Amendment Measure Relating to Environmental Protection at the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election as Called by Resolution 2024-34;” and C) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-39, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis of the Measure to be Submitted to the Voters at the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024;” and D) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-40, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for a City Measure Submitted at Municipal Elections.” ADJOURNMENT The next regularly scheduled meeting of the Huntington Beach City Council/Public Financing Authority is Tuesday, July 16, 2024, in the Civic Center Council Chambers, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California. INTERNET ACCESS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AGENDA AND STAFF REPORT MATERIAL IS AVAILABLE PRIOR TO CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AT http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov Page 2 of 2 3 City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 File #:24-465 MEETING DATE:7/8/2024 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY:Eric G. Parra, Interim City Manager VIA:Travis K. Hopkins, Assistant City Manager PREPARED BY:Jane Chung, Assistant to the City Manager Jennifer Carey, Acting Deputy City Manager Subject: Consider the Submission of One Charter Amendment Ballot Measure for Voter Approval for the November 5, 2024, General Election and the Adoption of Resolution Nos. 2024-38, 2024-39, and 2024-40 Statement of Issue: On July 2, 2024, the City Council voted to place one Charter amendment ballot measure for voter approval on the November 5, 2024, General Election. The City Attorney’s Office has since prepared the following Resolutions, which contain the proposed amendment to the City Charter, ballot question, and exhibit for final consideration by the City Council. 1.Resolution 2024-38 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Ordering the Submission to the Qualified Electors of the City a Certain Charter Amendment Measure Relating to Environmental Protection at the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election as Called by Resolution 2024-34 2.Resolution 2024-39 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis of the Measure to be Submitted to the Voters at the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 3.Resolution 2024-40 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for a City Measure Submitted at Municipal Elections To place this measure on the ballot, the City Council must vote to approve or amend the proposed ballot question and exhibit available in Resolution No. 2024-38; set priorities for written arguments and rebuttal arguments in Resolutions Nos. 2024-39 and 2024-40; and adopt all three resolutions. City of Huntington Beach Printed on 7/5/2024Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™4 File #:24-465 MEETING DATE:7/8/2024 Following adoption, the City Attorney’s Office will prepare an impartial analysis for the measure per Resolution 2024-39. Furthermore, the City Clerk’s Office will gather the written arguments and rebuttals for the measure and all other required election material for submittal to the OC Registrar of Voters (ROV) by their filing deadlines. Financial Impact: The estimated additional cost to place one Charter amendment measure on the November 5, 2024 General Election ballot is $10,000, bringing the total estimated cost for the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election to $310,000. Funds to cover this amount are budgeted in FY 2024/25 Election Account No. 10010201.69505. Recommended Action: A) Consider the proposed Charter amendment ballot measure, ballot language, and exhibits for placement on the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election ballot for voter approval; and B) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-38, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Ordering the Submission to the Qualified Electors of the City a Certain Charter Amendment Measure Relating to Environmental Protection at the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election as Called by Resolution 2024-34;” and C) Adopt Resolution No. 2023-39, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis of the Measure to be Submitted to the Voters at the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024;” and D) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-40, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for a City Measure Submitted at Municipal Elections.” Alternative Action(s): Do not approve one or more recommended actions and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: On July 2, 2024, Mayor Van Der Mark, Mayor Pro Term Burns, and Council Member McKeon submitted a Council Member Item to place on the November 5, 2024 ballot a proposed Charter Amendment stating that "No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents ‘significant and unavoidable’ negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by a vote of the people." The proposed Charter amendment should include language to the effect of "City Planning and Zoning is a local, ‘municipal affair,’ beyond the reach of State control or interference; and City Planning and Zoning is a local activity reserved for the City and its people, and not the State." The City Council directed staff to City of Huntington Beach Printed on 7/5/2024Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™5 File #:24-465 MEETING DATE:7/8/2024 bring back a proposed November 2024 ballot initiative within thirty (30) days for City Council approval. The proposed ballot measure language and Resolution were developed by the City Attorney’s Office. If approved this language will be placed before the voters. Proposed Ballot Language for Consideration (max 75 words): “Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1, which would amend the City Charter to state that City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, and require voter approval of City initiated general plan amendments or zoning changes when such items present significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, be approved?” YES NO Redlined Charter text with the proposed amendment will be attached to the ballot measure language (see Attachment 4) to help voters visualize and better comprehend this change. Following adoption of the Resolution, the City will prepare an impartial analysis for the measure and gather arguments and rebuttals. Please note the following timelines for all items to be submitted to the City Clerk’s Office, should the Council approve the recommended action today: Timeline for Impartial Analysis and Written Arguments:July 8, 2024 - July 22, 2024 Timeline for Rebuttal Arguments:July 22, 2024 - August 1, 2024 Environmental Status: This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable - Administrative Item For details, visit www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/strategicplan <http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/strategicplan>. Attachment(s): 1. Resolution 2024-38 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Ordering the Submission to the Qualified Electors of the City a Certain Charter Amendment Measure Relating to Environmental Protection at the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election as Called by Resolution 2024-34 2. Resolution 2024-39 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, City of Huntington Beach Printed on 7/5/2024Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™6 File #:24-465 MEETING DATE:7/8/2024 California, Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare Impartial Analysis of the Measure to be Submitted to the Voters at the General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024 3. Resolution 2024-40 - A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for a City Measure Submitted at Municipal Elections 4. Redline of Proposed Charter Amendment 5. July 2, 2024, Council Member Item 24-479 6. Presentation City of Huntington Beach Printed on 7/5/2024Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™7 8 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA ORDERING THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY A CERTAIN CHARTER AMENDMENT MEASURE RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AT THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024, GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION AS CALLED BY RESOLUTION NO. 2024-34 WHEREAS, on July 2, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2024-34 calling a General Municipal Election for Tuesday, November 5, 2024; and On July 2, 2024, the City Council also adopted Resolution No. 2024-35 requesting that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the Statewide General Election to be held on November 5, 2024, and requested assistance of the Orange County Registrar of Voters; and Pursuant to authority provided by the California Constitution, Article XI and the Government Code, Title 4, Division 2, Chapter 2 ( commencing at § 34450) and the Election Code Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 3 (commencing at§ 9255) of the State of California, and under the provisions of the laws relating to Charter cities in the State of California, the City Council desires to submit to the voters of the City, at the General Municipal Election to be held on November 5, 2024, a proposed Chatter Amendment related to Environmental Protection, The City Council is authorized and directed by statute to submit the proposed Charter Amendment to the voters, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, does hereby resolve, declare, determine and order as follows: SECTION 1. That the above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein. SECTION 2. That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to Charter Cities, and pursuant to the California Constitution, A1ticle XI and the Government Code, Title 4, Division 2, Chapter 2 ( commencing at § 34450) and the Election Code Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 3 (commencing at§ 9255) of the State of California, the City Council does hereby order submitted to the voters at the General Municipal Election to be held on November 5, 2024, the following question: "Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1, which would amend the City Charter to state that City Yes Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, and require voter approval of City initiated general plan amendments or zoning changes when such items No present significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, be approved?" SECTION 2. That the complete text of the Chatter Amendment submitted to the voters 9 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-38 is attached as Exhibit A. SECTION 3. That the vote requirement for the measure to pass is a majority (50%+ 1) of the votes cast. SECTION 4. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution with the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange and the Registrar of Voters of the County of Orange. SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a special meeting thereof held on July 8, 2024. Mayor REVIEWED AND APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: ~~lf==== 2 24-14888/345858 10 EXHIBIT A CHARTER AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-38 PROPOSED ADDITIONS SHOWN AS UNDERLINED PROPOSED DELETIONS SHOWN AS STRIKETHROUGH Charter Amendment Measure No. 1 Section 807. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the electors voting on such proposition at a general or special election at which such proposition is submitted. City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, beyond the reach of State control or interference, a local activity reserved for the City and its people, not the State. 3 24-14888/345858 11 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING A CITY MEASURE AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS OF THE MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE VOTERS AT THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 2024 WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Huntington Beach, California, on November 5, 2024, at which there will be submitted to the voters a ballot measure related to an amendment to the City Charter regarding environmental protection; and The City Council wishes to authorize arguments in favor of and in opposition to this measure and authorize the preparation of an impartial analysis of this measure, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California, does hereby resolve, declare, determine and order as follows: SECTION 1. That with respect to the following measure (hereafter, the "Measure"): "Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1, which would amend the City Charter to state that City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, and require voter YES approval of City initiated general plan amendments or zoning changes when such items present significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, be approved?" NO a. That the City Council authorizes the following member(s) of its body: (Councilmember In Favor/ Against) (Councilmember In Favor/ Against) (Councilmember In Favor/ Against) (Councilmember In Favor/ Against) (Councilmember In Favor/Against) (Councilmember In Favor/Against) (Councilmember In Favor/ Against) to file a written argument not exceeding 300 words regarding the Measure as specified above, accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, in accordance with Article 4, Chapter 3, Division 9 of the Elections Code of the State of California. The 12 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-39 arguments may be changed or withdrawn until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk after which no arguments for or against the Measure may be submitted to the City Clerk. Said argument to be accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the authors(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers. The arguments shall be accompanied by the Form of Statement to be Filed by Author(s) of Argument as provided for in California Elections Code Section 9600. SECTION 2. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the Measure to the City Attorney. a. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the Measure not exceeding 500 words showing the effect of the Measure on the existing law and the operation of the Measure. If the Measure affects the organization or salaries of the office of the City Attorney, the City Council may direct the City Clerk to prepare the impartial analysis. b. The analysis shall include a statement indicating whether the Measure was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters or by the governing body of the city. c. In the event the entire text of the Measure is not printed on the ballot, nor in the voter information portion of the voter information guide, there shall be printed immediately below the impaitial analysis, in no less than 10-point type, the following: "The above statement is an impartial analysis of Charter Amendment Measure 1. If you desire a copy of the Measure, please call the election official's office at 714-536-5405 and a copy will be emailed at no cost to you." d. The impartial analysis shall be filed by the date set by the City Clerk for the filing of primary arguments. SECTION 3. That if more than one argument for or against the Measure is submitted to the City Clerk within the time prescribed, she shall give preference and priority, in the order set forth in California Elections Code Section 9287, to the arguments in favor/against submitted by: 1) the legislative body, or member(s) of the legislative body authorized by that body, 2) individual voter or bona J7de association of citizens or combination of voters and associations, who are the bona fide sponsors or proponents of the Measure, 3) bona fide associations of citizens, 4) individual voters who are eligible to vote on the Measure. REST OF PAGE NOT USED 2 24-14888/345857 13 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-39 SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a special meeting thereof held on July 8, 2024. Mayor REVIEWED AND APPROVED: APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: 3 24 -14888/345857 14 ARGUMENTS FORM OF STATEMENT TO BE FILED BY AUTHORS OF ARGUMENTS All arguments concerning measures filed pursuant to Division 9, Chapter 3 (beginning with§ 9200) of the Elections Code shall be accompanied by the following form statement to be signed by each proponent, and by each author, if different, of the argument: The undersigned proponent (s) or author(s) of the (primary/rebuttal) argument (in favor of/against) ballot proposition (name or number) at the (title of election) election for the Uurisdiction) to be held on ____ , 20 ____ hereby state that the argument is true and correct to the best of (his/her/their) knowledge and belief. Print Name Signature Title (If applicable):Submitted on behalf of: Date (name of organization) Print Name Signature Title (If applicable):Submitted on behalf of: Date (name of organization) Print Name Signature Title (If applicable):Submitted on behalf of: Date (name of organization) Print Name Signature Title (If applicable):Submitted on behalf of: Date (name of organization) Print Name Signature Title (If applicable):Submitted on behalf of: Date (name of organization) 15 All Authors must print his/her name and sign this form (EC 9600) AND Print his/her name and sign the Argument itself (EC 9283) AND Print his/her name and sign the Rebuttal Argument itself (EC 9285) Further, pursuant to Election Code § 9282, printed arguments submitted to the voters shall be titled either "Argument In Favor Of Measure_" or "Argument Against Measure_". Likewise, printed rebuttal arguments submitted pursuant to Election Code§ 9285 shall be titled either "Rebuttal To Argument In Favor Of Measure_" or "Rebuttal to Argument Against Measure_,~ § 9200, 9282, 9283, 9285, 9600 E.G. Statement of Authors of Arguments § 9600, E.C. and (Steven Vargas v. Cheryl Baiz and City of Brea; Revised 10/2009) F - A - 1 16 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURE SUBMITTED AT MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WHEREAS, § 9282 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides for written arguments to be filed in favor of or against City measures not to exceed 300 words in length; and WHEREAS, § 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California authorizes the City Council, by majority vote, to adopt provisions to provide for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to Section 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California, when the elections official has selected the arguments for and against each measure (not exceeding 300 words each) which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the elections official shall send a copy of an argument in favor of the proposition to the authors of any argument against the measure and a copy of an argument against the measure to the authors of any argument in favor of the measure immediately upon receiving the arguments. The author or a majority of the authors of an argument relating to a city measure may prepare and submit a rebuttal argument not exceeding 250 words or may authorize in writing any other person or persons to prepare, submit, or sign the rebuttal argument. A rebuttal argument shall not be signed by more than five authors. The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers, not more than 10 days after the final date for filing direct arguments. The rebuttal arguments shall be accompanied by the Form of Statement To Be Filed By Author(s) of Argument. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut. SECTION 2. That all previous resolutions providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures are repealed. SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions. 24-14888/345859 17 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-40 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a special meeting thereof held on July 8, 2024. Mayor REVIEWED AND APPROVED : APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager City Attorney INITIATED AND APPROVED: ~ ,if Manager 1¥ 2 24 -14 888 /3 45859 18 ARGUMENTS AUTHORIZATION FOR ANOTHER PERSON TO SIGN REBUTTAL ARGUMENT The following majority of __ authors of the Argument □ In Favor of □ Against Measure __ authorize the following person(s) to prepare, submit or sign the Rebuttal to the Argument □ In Favor of □ Against Measure __ for the City of _________ Election to be held on ____ , 20 __ . Signatures of a majority of the authors of the Argument □ In Favor of □ Against Measure __ are required: Name (Print) Signature Date Name (Print) Signature Date Name (Print) Signature Date The following authors are authorized to prepare, submit or sign the Rebuttal to the Argument □ In Favor of □ Against Measure ___ _ Print Name Signature Title Date Print Name Signature Title Date Print Name Signature Title Date Print Name Signature 19 Title Date Print Name Signature Title Date Attach this form to the Form of Statement of Authors Form submitted with the Argument □ In Favor of □ Against Measure § 9285, E.C. (Added 10/2016) Authorization for Others to Sign Rebuttal Argument 10/2008, Amended F-A-2 20 EXHIBIT A CHARTER AMENDMENT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-38 PROPOSED ADDITIONS SHOWN AS UNDERLINED PROPOSED DELETIONS SHOWN AS STRIKETHROUGH Charter Amendment Measure No. 1 Section 807. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the electors voting on such proposition at a general or special election at which such proposition is submitted. City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, beyond the reach of State control or interference, a local activity reserved for the City and its people, not the State. 3 24-14888/345858 City Council Meeting – Council Member Items Report To: City Council From: Gracey Van Der Mark, Mayor Pat Burns, Mayor Pro Tem C asey McKeon, Council Member Date: July 2, 2024 Subject: PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT – ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONS FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS     2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 | www.huntingtonbeachca.gov   ISSUE STATEMENT The City Council has a duty to protect the City's environment and typically does so by complying with the State’s environmental laws set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As we have seen with recent State mandates for high-density housing, the State of California is imposing a draconian development policy on our City that demonstrates a disregard for our precious environment, natural resources, quality of life, and even for CEQA. The environmental review of the City’s proposed 2023 Housing Element update revealed that the State's high-density housing quota of 13,368 new units, which translates to 41,000 new units at a 20% inclusionary rate of development, would present several "significant and unavoidable" negative impacts to our environment. Those impacts include permanent reduction in our groundwater supply, permanent increase in greenhouse gases and air pollutants, permanent noise pollution, increased traffic and congestion, and threats to our local wildlife and natural undeveloped regions such as wetlands and large parks. The official Environmental Review document is attached to this item as Exhibit A. Further, as part of the City’s Housing Element update, the State expects the City Council to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations that essentially states that "the benefits of the State's proposed high-density housing of 13,368 new units outweighs the known significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the City's environment." The proposed Statement of Overriding Considerations that identifies the harm to our environment is attached to this item as Exhibit B. In April 2023, the City Council was unable to make or adopt this Statement of Overriding Considerations and made clear on the record their unwillingness to "sell out" the City's environment in favor of the State's misguided and onerous high-density development demands. The people of Huntington Beach should have a voice in whether the exchange of the City's current pristine environmental conditions for the State's high-density housing mandates is acceptable. Further, the residents of Huntington 21 •• CITY OF _ HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 | www.huntingtonbeachca.gov   Beach should decide if they are willing to live with the long-term permanent negative impacts to the City's environment that are presented by the State's high-density development scheme. The City has Constitutional rights under Article XI, Section 5 of the California Constitution for local control, just as the City Charter currently sets forth in its Preamble and Sections 103 and 104, that local control, known as "home rule," applies to municipal affairs. For decades, and even now, California law has recognized that a Charter City's planning and zoning of its land is a local, "municipal affair," beyond the reach of State interference and control. This concept was reaffirmed in a recent decision in the City of Redondo Beach, et al., v. Rob Bonta, in his capacity as California Attorney General, Case No. 22STCP1143 (2024), where the State was stopped from imposing its zoning policies on Charter Cities and the State's SB 9 was declared unconstitutional as applied to Charter Cities. The City Charter Preamble states "We, the people of the City of Huntington Beach, State of California believe fiscal responsibility and the prudent stewardship of public funds is essential for confidence in government, that ethics and integrity are the foundation of public trust and that just governance is built upon these values. Through the enactment of this Charter as the fundamental law of the City of Huntington Beach under the Constitution of the State of California, we do hereby exercise the privilege of retaining for ourselves, the benefits of local government, by enacting the laws, rules, regulations and procedures set forth herein pertaining to the governance and operation of our City. It is incumbent upon those who govern and make decisions for and on behalf of the City of Huntington Beach to legally, as well as morally, abide by the provisions of this Charter, in its strictest sense, to ensure the continued success and well-being of our fair City." Huntington Beach City Charter Section 103 states "The City shall have the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to such restrictions and limitations as may be provided in this Charter or in the Constitution of the State of California." Huntington Beach City Charter Section 104 states "The general grant of power to the City under this Charter shall be construed broadly in favor of the City. The specific provisions enumerated in this Charter are intended to be and shall be interpreted as limitations upon the general grant of power and shall be construed narrowly. If any provisions of this Charter, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Charter and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby." RECOMMENDED ACTION Place on the November 2024 Ballot a proposed Charter Amendment stating that "No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents "significant and unavoidable" negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by a vote of the people." The proposed 22 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, CA 92648 | www.huntingtonbeachca.gov   Charter Amendment should include language to the effect of "City Planning and Zoning is a local, "municipal affair," beyond the reach of State control or interference; and City Planning and Zoning is a local activity reserved for the City and its people, and not the State." Direct staff to bring back a proposed November 2024 ballot initiative within thirty (30) days for City Council approval. ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has not potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL Goal 5 - Housing, Strategy A - Take action to maintain local control of land-use planning. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exhibit A – Environmental Review (EIR) 2. Exhibit B – Statement of Overriding Conditions 23 EXHIBIT 1011 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 11 of 40 Page ID #:909 ER-321 24 Resolution No. 2023-15 Exhibit "A" Subsequent Final Environmental Impact Report: Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations SCH #2021080104 2021-2029 Housing Element Update LEAD AGENCY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 2000 MAIN STREET 3RD FLOOR HUNTINGTON BEACH , CA 92648 (714) 536-5721 CONSULTANT Kimlev >>>Horn KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Ms. RITA GARCIA 1100 TOWN AND COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 700 ORANGE , CA 92868 (714) 786-6116 OCTOBER 2022 EXHIBIT 1012 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 12 of 40 Page ID #:910 ER-322 25 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Table of Contents Final Subsequent Env ironmental Impact Report Fi nd ings of Fact/Statement of Overr iding Consideration s 1 .0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 2 2 .0 CEQA FINDINGS .............................................................................................................................. 4 3 .0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ................................................................... 17 3.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 17 3.2. Project Objectives ................................................................................................................... 17 3.3. Selection of Alternatives ......................................................................................................... 18 3.4. Project Alternative Findings .................................................................................................... 18 4 .0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................... 25 4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 25 4.2 . Significant Adverse Cumulative Impact .................................................................................. 25 4 .3. Findings ................................................................................................................................... 26 4 .4. Overriding Considerations ...................................................................................................... 26 List of Tables Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU ........................................................................................................................ 5 Octobe r 202 2 Page 1 EXHIBIT 1013 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 13 of 40 Page ID #:911 ER-323 26 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU 1.0 INTRODUCTION Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations This document presents the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations that must be adopted by the City of Huntington Beach (City) pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15091 and 15093, respectively, of the CEQA Guidelines prior to the approval of the City of of Huntington Beach 2021- 2029 Housing Element Update (otherwise referred to as "HEU" or the "Project"). This document is organized as follows : Chapter 1 Introduction to the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations . Chapter 2 CEQA Findings of the Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR), including the identified significant cumulative impacts . Chapter 3 Summarizes the alternatives to the Project and evaluates them in relation to the findings contained in Section 15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. The City must consider and make findings regarding alternatives when a project would involve environmental impacts that cannot be reduced to a less than significant level, or cannot be substantially reduced, by proposed mitigation measures. Chapter 4 Statement of Overriding Considerations, as required by Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, for significant impacts of a proposed project that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level. The Housing Element, which is a component of the Huntington Beach General Plan, provides direction for implementation of various programs to meet existing and projected future housing needs for all income levels within Huntington Beach . The City's projected housing need for the 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) planning period (2021-2029) is 13,368 dwelling units (11,743 units when accounting for existing applications and projects that are currently under review). State housing law requires the City to specify the number of housing units that can realistically be accommodated on candidate housing sites. The City is not required to build dwelling units in order to meet its RHNA allocation, only to identify potential sites and create the framework to allow the market the opportunity to develop these units. Therefore, the Project, as defined for CEQA purposes, consists of the Housing Program to accommodate the lower-income RHNA units, including amendments to existing land use designations and zoning districts, an affordable housing overlay, and identification of underutilized, residentially-zoned parcels in an inventory of 378 candidate housing sites . The Housing Program specifically addressed in the SEIR includes amendments to the Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance (HBZSO) (Zoning Map Amendment Nos . 22-001 and 22 -002 and Zoning Text Amendment Nos. 22-006, 22-007, 22-008, and 22-009) and the Huntington Beach General Plan Land Use Element (General Plan Amendment No. 22-001) for changes to base/overlay districts and land use October 2022 Page 2 EXHIBIT 1014 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 14 of 40 Page ID #:912 ER-324 27 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations designations, as well amendments to other planning documents, as needed for clarification and consistency purposes and to accommodate future housing sites as part of the HEU's Implementation Program. These amendments provide capacity for future development of approximately 19,738 housing units to meet the City's remaining unmet RHNA of 11,743 housing units. Other Federal, State, and local agencies are involved in the review and approval of the HEU, including those agencies designated as trustee and responsible agencies . A trustee agency is a State agency that has jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project that are held in trust for the people of the State . A responsible agency is an agency, other than the lead agency, that has responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. Responsible and trustee agencies are consulted by the CEQA lead agency to ensure the opportunity for input and also review and comment on the Draft SEIR. Responsible agencies also use the CEQA document in their decision-making. Several agencies other than the City may require permits, approvals, and/or consultation to implement various HEU programs . Responsible/Trustee Agencies for the HEU include, but are not limited to: • South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD); • Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); and • State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Other agencies may use the Final SEIR in exercising their duties even if they do not have discretionary permit approval authority over all or parts of the HEU (or implementation of indiv idual projects developed as a result of the HEU). All projects that are proposed in the future under the HEU will be required to obtain all necessary discretionary actions and environmental clearance , separate from this HEU. October 2022 Pag e 3 EXHIBIT 1015 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 15 of 40 Page ID #:913 ER-325 28 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU 2.0 CEQA FINDINGS Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations This chapter summarizes the potential impacts that were identified in the Draft Subsequent EIR (Draft SEIR) and the findings that are required in accordance with Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines . The possible findings for each significant and/or potentially significant adverse impact are as follows: (a) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into the project which avoid, substantially lessen, or reduce the magnitude of the significant environmental effect as identified in the Draft SEIR ("Finding 1"). (b) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the findings. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency . ("Finding 2") (c) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives in the Draft SEIR ("Finding 3"). CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or project alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or substantially reduce significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur as a result of a project. Project modifications or alternatives are not required where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying a project lies with another agency (CEQA Guidelines §15091, subd . (a), [3]). Public Resources Code Section 21061.1 defines "feasible" to mean "capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social and technological factors." CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 adds : "legal" considerations . (See also Citizens of Goleta Valley v . Board of Supervisors [Goleta II] [1990] 52 Cal.3d 553, 565 (276 Cal. Rptr. 410].) Only after fully complying with the findings requirement can an agency adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. (Citizens for Quality Growth v. City of Mount Shasta (1988] 198 Cal.App.3d 433, 442, 445 (243 Cal. Rptr . 727].) CEQA requires the Lead Agency to state in writing the specific rationale to support its actions based on a Final EIR and/or information in the record . This written statement is known as the Statement of Overriding Considerations . The Statement of Overriding Considerations provides the information that demonstrates the decision making body of the Lead Agency has weighed the benefits of a project against its unavoidable adverse effects in determining whether to approve a project. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse effects may be considered "acceptable." This document presents the findings of the City as required by CEQA, cites substantial evidence in the record in support of each of the findings, and presents an explanation to supply the logical step between the finding and the facts in the record. (CEQA Guidelines §15091.). Additional facts that support the findings are set forth in the Draft SEIR, the Final SEIR, staff reports to the Planning Commission and City Council, and the record of proceedings. Table 1 summarizes the potentially significant impacts that were reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation as well as the significant impacts, as proposed for certification and adoption of the HEU . October 2022 Page 4 EXHIBIT 1016 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 16 of 40 Page ID #:914 ER-326 29 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding Air Quality The project would result in a project- specific significant and unavoidable air quality impacts associated with a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the region is in nonattainment. The project would result in less than significant impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrat ions following incorporation of mitigation measures MM AQ-1 and AQ-2 . Octobe r 2022 Air pollutant emissions associated with implementation of the HEU would result from construction activities and operation of uses allowed under the HEU . The amount of emissions generated by future development projects would vary depending on its size, the land area that would need to be disturbed during construction , the length of the construction schedule, and the number of developments being constructed concurrently . Due to the speculative nature of estimating emissions from individual projects at the programmatic level of the HEU, emissions cannot be quantified (as there is no project-level data) to establish whether the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) thresholds would be exceeded . Despite compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .2-1 through MM 4 .2-14, the HEU would result in a significant and unavoidable air quality impact due to the violation of an air quality standard and exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations . As previous ly stated , air pollutant emissions associated with implementation of the HEU would result from construction activities and operation of uses allowed under the HEU . The amount of emissions generated by future development projects would vary depending on its size , the land area that would need to be disturbed during construction, the length of the construction schedule, and the number of developments being constructed concurrently . Future applicants for development projects facilitated by the HEU would be required to implement mitigation measures MM AQ-1 and AQ-2 , which would require project-specific health risk assessments to minimize impacts associated with Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, emissions associated with the HEU could result in an exceedance of established thresholds for daily emissions due to the speculative nature of future projects . No mitigation measures in addition to GPU PEIR MM 4 .2-1 through MM 4 .2-14 are feasible to reduce construction or operational air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation mitigation measures MM AQ -1 and AQ-2 . Page 5 EXHIBIT 1017 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 17 of 40 Page ID #:915 ER-327 30 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding The project would result in a cumulative contribution to an air quality impact, resulting in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact to air quality . Cultural Resources Construction activities assoc iated with implementation of the Project could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical and/or an, archaeolog ical resource and may result in the disturbance of unknown human remains . With incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4- 1, MM 4.4-2, and MM 4.4-3, these October 2022 the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants and to ensure that construction emissions do not result in the exceedance of localized significance thresholds . With implementation of these measures, impacts would be reduced to a less than sign ificant level. Cumulative development could violate an air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation because the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) is currently in nonattainment for ozone, PM1 0, and PM 2.s . Concerning daily emissions and the cumulative net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the region is in nonattainment, the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable increase to nonattainment of ozone, PM2 s, and PM10 standards in the SCAB. Because no information on individual projects is currently available, cumulative construction and operational emissions cannot be accurately quantified . Despite compliance with General Plan goals and policies and implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .2-1 through MM 4 .2-14, daily construction and operational air quality emissions would be considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable . It is currently infeasible to determine whether future development under the Project would result in demolition or removal of historical or archaeological resources, or the disturbance of unknown human remains , within the planning area . However, future projects would be required to implement mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4-1 , MM 4.4-2, and MM 4.4- 3, which outline procedures to be followed duri ng future construction activities to ensure compliance with local , State , and Federal regulations pertaining to Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all fea sible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, implementation of the HEU could result significant unavoidable impacts related to a cumulative increase in construction and operational emissions due to the speculative nature of future projects . No mitigation measures in addition to GPU PEIR MM 4 .2-1 through MM 4 .2-14 are feasible to reduce cumulative air quality impacts to a less than significant level. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a le ss than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4-1 , MM 4.4-2, and MM 4.4-3 . Page 6 EXHIBIT 1018 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 18 of 40 Page ID #:916 ER-328 31 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Finding s of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerat ions Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Geology and Soils Future development under the HEU could expose people and/or structures to potentially substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death , involving fault rupture, expansive soils, strong seismic groundshaking and/or seismic-related ground failure , including liquefaction . Future development under the HEU also has the potential to disturb unknown paleontological resources . With implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR 4.5 -1 through MM 4.5-3 and MM 4.4-4, as well as compliance with applicable State and City regulations, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The project would result in project-level and cumulative significant and unavo idable impacts due to the generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the potential conflict w ith an applicable plan . October 2022 such requires . Implementation of these measures would ensure that Project impacts with respect to archaeological and historical resources, as well as unknown human remains, would be less than significant . All future housing development subject to rezoning and within overlay zones would be required to comply with applicable General Plan goals and policies related to geology and soils and would also be required to implement mitigation measures GPU PEIR 4 .5-1 through MM 4 .5-3 , which require that relevant geotechnical studies be undertaken prior to issuance of grading and construction permits . Future development projects would also be required to implement mitigation measures GPU MM 4.4-2 through 4 .2-4, which require site-specific studies and compliance with existing regulations to minimize impacts to unknown paleontological resources . Implementation of these measures and compliance with General Plan goals and policies would reduce impacts associated with the exposure of people to significant risk of geological failures, as well as impacts to unknown paleontological resources, to a less than significant level. The Project would potentially generate GHG emissions that could have a significant impact on the environment and could conflict w ith applicable plans for reducing GHG emissions . Although the Project would aim to comply with GHG reduction strategies outlined in the GPU PEIR , these strategies require additional action by City staff and officials, and the feasibility of implementing these strategies and specific implementation details rely on numerous factors that cannot be adequate ly forecasted at th is time . Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level , are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation mitigation measures GPU PEIR 4 .5-1 through MM 4.5-3 and MM 4 .4-4 . Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all GHG reduction measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goal s and policies, GHG emissions associated with the HEU could would be significant and unavoidable . No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce GHG impacts to a less than significant level. Page 7 EXHIBIT 1019 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 19 of 40 Page ID #:917 ER-329 32 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2 029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overrid i ng Conside r ations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding Hazards Implementation of future projects under the HEU could create a potential significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. However, with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.7-1, this impact would Furthermore, GHG em1ss1ons may differ from actual Project future emissions due to various factors . As such, the Project's potential to generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, and potential to conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable . Although both future housing development facilitated by the Project and cumulative projects are required to quantify project- specific GHG emissions associated with construction and operational activities and implement feasible mitigation measures and/or GHG reduction strategies to reduce GHG emissions, the contribution of daily construction and operational GHG emissions has the potential to create a significant impact . Thus, the Project's GHG impacts would be cumulatively significant and unavoidable . Future housing development facilitated by the Project would not involve ongoing or routine use of substantial quantities of hazardous materials during operations . All future housing development subject to rezoning and within overlay zones would be subject to compliance with General Plan policies aimed at reducing impacts from hazardous materials. All future housing development subject to rezoning and within overlay zones would also be subject to compliance with GPU PEIR MM 4 .7 -1 , wh ich requires compliance with with be reduced to a less than significant Huntington Beach Fire Department specifications level. related to the potential to encounter methane gas . October 2022 Compliance with City regulations, General Plan policies, and implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-1 would ensure Project impacts would r emain less than significant . Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-1. Page 8 EXHIBIT 1020 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 20 of 40 Page ID #:918 ER-330 33 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding Individual sites within the planning area are included on a list of hazardous materials sites that could result in the accidental spread of contamination and could create a significant hazard to the public or environment. However, with implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-2 and 4.7-3, this impact would be reduced to a less than significant level. Implementation of the HEU could impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan . However, with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-4, this impact is considered less than significant. Octo ber 2022 Development of any identified sites of contamination would be required to undergo remediation and clean up before construction activities can begin . If contamination at any future project site were to exceed regulatory action levels, a future project would be required to undertake remediation procedures prior to grading and development under the supervision of appropriate regulatory oversight agencies . Compliance with City standards and implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-2 and MM 4 .7-3, which require preparation of a preliminary environmental site assessment to determine the potential for onsite contamination, would ensure that the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment, resulting in a less than significant level. Future development facilitated by the Project would increase housing density in certain areas of the City, resulting in greater population concentrations within certain areas . This increased density could interfere with emergency evacuation in the event of a City-wide emergency. However, the Project would not result in changes to the City's existing circulation network. No land uses are proposed that would impair the implementation of, or physically conflict with, the Huntington Beach Emergency Operations Plan/Hazard Mitigation Plan. As a result, the Project would not conflict with any State or local plan aimed at preserving and maintaining adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plans . Notwithstanding, to minimize all potential impacts, all future housing development subject to rezoning and within overlay zones would be required to adhere to GPU PEIR MM Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.7-2 and MM 4 .7- 3 . Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project. No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .7-4. Page 9 EXHIBIT 1021 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 21 of 40 Page ID #:919 ER-331 34 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding Hydrology and Water Quality Future development under the HEU could result in violations of water qual ity standard or waste discharge that could degrade surface or groundwater quality and could conflict with a water quality control plan. Implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.8-1 would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Future development under the HEU could result in substantial groundwater dewatering and could deplete groundwater supplies, which in turn could result in conflicts with water quality control plans and/or sustainable groundwater management plans. Octobe r 2022 4 .7-4, which requires future housing developments to consult with the City of Huntington Beach Police or Fire Departments to disclose temporary lane or roadway closures and alternative travel routes during construction, to ensure that there are no conflicts with emergency response and evacuation plans, thereby resulting in a less than significant impact . It is anticipated that construction activities for future housing development facilitated by the Project would include excavation, grading, and trenching, which could displace soils and temporarily increase the potential for soils to be subject to wind and water erosion . Therefore, construction activities from future housing development could violate water quality standards or otherwise degrade water quality. However, construction activities that could affect water quality would be addressed through compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program's Construction General Permit . Future housing development would also be subject to mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-1 , which requires new development projects to prepare project-specific Water Quality Management Plans . Compliance with this measure would reduce potential impacts associated with water quality violations and conflicts with a water quality control plan to a less than significant level. As discussed under Utilities and Service systems, there may not be sufficient water supplies available to serve the Project . Therefore, Project-related water demands from future development would result in a significant and unavoidable impact concerning water supplies . For this reason, the Project could substantially decrease groundwater supplies resulting in a significant and Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.8-1. Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, implementation of the HEU could result in significant and unavoidable impacts concerning groundwater supplies and the sustainable management of the groundwater Basin . No mitigation measures i n Pa ge 10 EXHIBIT 1022 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 22 of 40 Page ID #:920 ER-332 35 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Find ings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding Despite implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-2 Project- level and cumulative impacts would be significant and unavoidable . Future development under the HEU could increase stormwater runoff, exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, and cause on -or off-site flooding . With implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-3, this impact is considered less than significant. Noise The Project would result in an increase in ambient noise levels during construction of future housing developments and would also result in an increase in ambient noise levels during operation due to an increase in vehicle trips during operation that would result in a Project- specific sign ificant and unavoidable impact despite implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .10- 1 through 4 .10-4. October 2022 unavoidable impact concerning sustainable management of the Basin . Although future housing projects would be required to comply with City, state and federal goals and policies requiring water conservation, mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-2 would also be required to ensure that applicants of future developments p r epare a groundwater hydrology study to ensure that dewatering activities do not interfere with groundwater supplies . Despite compliance with this measure and until water supply i mproves, both Project-level and cumulative water demands would result in a significant unavoidable impact concerning groundwater supplies. Development under the HEU could result in an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces compared to existing conditions, thereby increasing stormwater runoff. Incorporation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-3, which requires each future, project-level development application to demonstrate adequate capacity in the storm drain system and provide for mitigation of constraints, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. Construct ion activities associated with future individual developments could occur near noise-sensitive receptors and noise disturbances could occur for prolonged periods of time , thereby resulting in potential construction noise impacts . In add ition , future housing developments facilitated by the Project have the potential to introduce and increase new roadway noise , thereby increasing ambient noise levels . As such , future projects would be required to comply with mitigation measures GPU PEIR 4 .10-1 through 4 .10-4, which include construction-level and operational noise reduction measures to reduce addition to GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-2 are feasible to reduce Project-level or cumulative impacts to a less than significant level. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .8-3 . Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, the Project could result in a significant and unavoidable impact due to an increase in the ambient noise levels. No mitigation measures in addition to mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.10 -1 through MM 4 .10-4 are feasible to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Page 11 EXHIBIT 1023 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 23 of 40 Page ID #:921 ER-333 36 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding The Project would result in a Project- specific significant and unavoidable impact due to the exposure of persons to excessive groundborne vibration during future construction activities despite implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .10-5 . Public Services Future development under the HEU would increase the demand on public services including fire , police, schools, October 2022 ambient noise levels associated with the Project . Despite compliance with General Plan goals and policies aimed at reducing noise and implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR 4 .10-1 through 4.10-4, the Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts concerning construction-related and operational noise levels . The Project's impact concerning the substantial temporary and permanent increase of ambient noise levels would be cumulatively considerable . Future development under HEU has the potential to generate construction vibration levels in exceedance of established thresholds at nearby sensitive receptors. Although future development would comply with General Plan policies to reduce ground borne vibration, mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.10-5, which requires new development projects that include pile driving activities to incorporate vibration -reduction techniques to help to reduce impacts, construction vibration levels would not be reduced to a level that would be less than significant. Compliance with General Plan policies and implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.10-5 would reduce potential groundborne vibration impacts associated with future construction activities, but not to a level that would be less than significant because certain construction activities may still be required in proximity to nearby sensitive receptors. Therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable and would remain cumulatively significant and unavoidable despite implementation of mitigation. Future development under the HEU would increase the demand on public services including fire, police, schools , parks/recreational facilities, and libraries . Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, the Project could result in a significant and unavoidable impact due exposure of persons to the generation of groundborne vibration during construction . No mitigation measures in addition to mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4.10-5 are feasible to reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, Pa ge 12 EXHIBIT 1024 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 24 of 40 Page ID #:922 ER-334 37 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Find i ngs of Fact/Statement of Overrid ing Cons iderations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding parks/recreational facilities, and libraries . However, with incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.12- 1 through MM 4.12-7, impacts to these public services would be reduced to a less than significant level Recreation Future development under the HEU would increase the demand for and on parks and recreational services . However, with incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .13 - 1 and MM 4 .13-2, impacts related to parks and recreational facilities would be reduced to a less than significant level Transportation Future development under the HEU would increase the number of vehicular trips in the Project area, which could conflict with City goals and policies aimed at maintaining specific performance thresholds address ing circulation in the City . However, with i ncorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .13-1 through MM 4 .13- 3, impacts to the circulation system would be reduced to a les s than significant level Future development under the HEU would increase the number of vehicular October 2022 However, with incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .12-1 through MM 4 .12-7, which require future projects to pay applicable development impact fees related to each of these serves, impacts to these public services would be reduced to a less than significant level. Future development under the HEU would increase the demand on recreational services . However, with incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .13-1 and MM 4 .13-2, which require compliance with City parkland requirements and payment of park fees, impacts to parks and recreational facilities would be reduced to a less than significant level. Future development under the HEU could potentially worsen levels of service (LOS) for various intersections in the City, which could conflict with the City's policy to maintain specified performance standards for citywide LOS at traffic-signal-controlled intersections during peak hours . Therefore, all future housing facilitated by the HEU would be required to comply with General Plan goals and policies pertaining to LOS and would be subject to compliance with mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.14.1 through 4.14-3, which require future projects near specified intersections to make fair share contributions toward specified improvements. Compliance with these goals and policies and implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .14.1 through 4 .14-3 would ensu r e that impacts related to the City's circulat ion system would be reduced to a less than significant level. A total of 325 candidate housing sites would not require preparation of a VMT analysis based on Small Project are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional m itigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .12-1 through MM 4 .12-7. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4 .13-1 and MM 4 .13-2 . Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level , are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measures MM 4 .13-1 through MM 4.13-3. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which Page 13 EXHIBIT 1025 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 25 of 40 Page ID #:923 ER-335 38 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Fi ndings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding trips in the Project area, which would generate additional vehicle miles travelled (VMT) that could result in conflicts with State guidelines pertaining to VMT . However, with incorporation of mitigation measure MM TRANS-1, impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level Tribal Cultural Resources Construction activities associated with implementation of the HEU could cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of tribal remains on a Project-level basis . With incorporation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4-2 and MM 4.4-3, these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant leve l. Oct ober 2022 screening (<110 daily trips), low VMT area screening; or proximity to transit screening . A total of 53 candidate housing sites would not be screened out, thereby requiring additional VMT analysis at the time of development application. Candidate housing sites that identify significant VMT impacts would require feasible mitigation measures to reduce the project's VMT impacts . Consequently, future housing development on these 53 sites would be required to reduce their average home-based VMT through compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies and implementation of mitigation measure MM TRANS-1, which identifies feasible mitigation strategies that could help projects avoid or substantially reduce VMT- related impacts to a less than significant level. Furthermore, future housing development would be subject to all State and local requirements for minimizing VMT-related impacts. Therefore, future housing developments on the 53 candidate housing sites that were not screened out are presumed to result in a less than significant with mitigation incorporated . It is currently infeasible to determine whether future development under the Project would result in the disturbance of tribal cultural resources within the planning area. However, future projects would be required to implement mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4-2 and MM 4.4-3, which require project applicants to retain a qualified professional and/or Native American monitors to determine if the project could result in impacts to tribal cultural resources and also require the halting of all earth-disturbing activities within 100-feet of a known discovery while data recovery and other methods are implemented. Implementation of these measures would ensure that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project. No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure MM Trans-1. Finding 1. The City of Huntington Beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level, are hereby incorporated into the Project. No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measures GPU PEIR MM 4.4-2 and MM 4.4- 3 . Page 14 EXHIBIT 1026 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 26 of 40 Page ID #:924 ER-336 39 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Utilities and Service Systems Future development under HEU could require new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas , or telecommunication facilities . However, with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-1, this impact would be considered less than significant. The Project would result in a significant and unavoidable project-specific impact on existing water supplies despite implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-2 . The Project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to water demand and a corresponding significant and unavoidable cumulative impact with respect to water supply. Octobe r 2022 would be less than significant. Future development under the HEU could introduce the need for additional infrastructure or connections to existing infrastructure . With incorporation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-1, which requires future projects to demonstrate that there is adequate capacity in the wastewater collection system to accommodate discharges from future projects, and adherence to General Plan policies and existing City of Huntington Beach processes, impacts to water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities would be reduced to a less than significant level. Given the uncertainty of water supplies across the western United States and throughout the state of California, a future supply deficit would result in a significant and unavoidable impact associated with water demands from future development facilitated by the proposed Project . Until such t ime as greater confidence in and commitment from water suppliers can be made, even with implementation of mitigation measure MM 4 .15-2, which requires project-specific applicants to incorporate water conservation measures as part of future projects, and adherence to General Plan policies and existing regulations, the HEU would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to water supplies. As with the Project-specific impact, given the uncertainty of water supply across the western United States and throughout the state of California, a future supply deficit would result in a significant and unavoidable impact . Until such time as greater Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Find ings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations Finding 1. The City of Huntington beach finds that the identified changes or alterations in the Project, which would reduce this impact to a less than significant level , are hereby incorporated into the Project . No additional mitigation measures are necessary with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-1. Finding 3. The City of Huntington Beach finds that even with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, the Project could result in a significant and unavoidable impact to water supplies . No mitigation measures in addition to GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-2 are feasible to reduce water supply impacts to a less than sign ificant level. Finding 3 . The City of Huntington Beach finds that even w ith implementation of all feasible mitigation measures and compliance with applicable General Plan goals and policies, the Project could result in a significant and unavoidable impact to water supplies . No mitigation Page 15 EXHIBIT 1027 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 27 of 40 Page ID #:925 ER-337 40 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Table 1: CEQA Findings for the HEU Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Find ing s of Fact/Statement of Overriding Cons iderations Impact Statement Impact Summary Impact Finding October 2022 confidence in and commitment from water suppliers can be made, even with implementation of mitigation measure GPU PEIR MM 4 .15-2, the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to water supplies, resulting in a significant and unavoidab le cumulative impact. measures in addition to MM 4 .15-2 are feasible to reduce cumulative water supply impacts to a less than significant level. Page 16 EXHIBIT 1028 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 28 of 40 Page ID #:926 ER-338 41 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Env iro nmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Over r iding Consideration s 3.0 FINDINGS REGARDING PROJECT ALTERNATIVES 3.1. Introduction The Draft SEIR prepared for the HEU considered two alternatives to the Project as proposed. Pursuant to Section 15126.G(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the primary intent of an alternatives evaluation is to "describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives." This chapter describes the project objectives and criteria used to develop and evaluate project alternatives presented in the Draft SEIR . A description of the alternatives compared to the Project and the findings regarding the feasibility of adopting the described alternatives is presented for use by the City in the decision-making process. 3.2. Project Objectives In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines §15124, the following primary objectives support the HEU 's purpose, assist the City, as the lead agency, in developing a reasonable range of alternatives to be evaluated in this SEIR, and ultimately aid decision-makers in preparing findings and overriding considerations, if necessary . The HEU's purpose is to address the housing needs and objectives of the City and to meet the State Housing law requirements . The HEU has the following goals : • Adopt State-mandated and locally desired programs to implement the City's Housing Element . • Maintain and enhance the quality and affordability of existing housing in Huntington Beach. • Provide adequate sites to accommodate projected housing unit needs at all income levels identified by the 2021-2029 RHNA . • Provide for safe and decent housing for all economic segments of the community. • Reduce governmental constraints to housing production, with an emphasis on improving processes for projects that provide on-site affordable units. • Promote equal hous i ng opportunities for all residents, including Huntington Beach 's special needs populations. • Promote a healthy and sustainab le Huntington Beach through support of housing at all income levels that minimizes reliance on natural resources and automobile use . • Maximize solutions for those experiencing or at risk of homelessness . • Improve quality of life and promote placemaking . • Affirmatively further fair housing. October 2022 Page 17 EXHIBIT 1029 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 29 of 40 Page ID #:927 ER-339 42 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program 3.3. Selection of Alternatives Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations The range of feasible alternatives was selected and discussed in a manner to foster meaningful public participation and informed decision-making. Among the factors that were taken into account when considering the feasibility of alternatives (as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f][l]) were environmental impacts, economic viability, availability of infrastructure, regulatory limitations, jurisdictional boundaries, and attainment of project objectives. As stated in Section 15126.G(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the Draft SEIR need not consider an alternative whose effects could not be reasonably identified, whose implementation is remote or speculative, or one that would not achieve the basic project objectives. The analysis includes sufficient information about each alternative to provide meaningful evaluation, analysis and comparison with the proposed project. 3.4. Project Alternative Findings The following is a description of the alternatives evaluated in comparison to Project, as well as a description of the specific economic, social, or other considerations that make them infeasible for avoiding or lessening the impacts. As shown below and in Chapter 7.0 (Alternatives) of the Draft SEIR, two alternatives were evaluated in comparison to the Project, including the No Project Alternative required by CEQA . The two alternatives analyzed represent a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project. The analysis in this section focuses on significant and unavoidable impacts attributable to each alternative and the ability of each alternative to meet basic project objectives. "No Project" Alternative (Alternative 1) According to State CEQA Guidelines §15126 .G(e), the specific alternative of "No Project" shall also be evaluated along with its impact. The purpose of describing and analyzing a No Project Alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed Project with impacts of not approving the Project. The No Project Alternative analysis is required to discuss the existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation is published (August 4, 2021), as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future, if the Project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services. Under Alternative 1, development within the City would proceed pursuant to the adopted City General Plan and zoning. The City's projected regional housing need for the 6th Cycle RHNA planning period (2021 - 2029) is 13,368 dwelling units (11,743 units when accounting for existing applications and pipeline projects). Under Alternative 1, the City would not implement the Housing Program required to comply with State law, to accommodate the lower-income RHNA units, including amendments to existing land use designations and zoning districts, an affordable housing overlay, and identification of underutilized, residentially-zoned parcels in an inventory of candidate housing sites. In total, the HEU identifies 378 candidate housing sites (approximately 419 acres). The proposed amendments to the Huntington Beach October 2022 Page 18 EXHIBIT 1030 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 30 of 40 Page ID #:928 ER-340 43 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations General Plan and the City of Huntington Beach Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance of the City of Huntington Beach Municipal Code (Zoning Text and Zoning Map amendments) for changes to land use designations and base/overlay districts, as well as ancillary amendments to other planning documents, would not be implemented. These amendments, which are needed to accommodate future housing sites as part of the HEU's Implementation Program, would not be implemented at the 378 identified candidate housing sites . The capacity to develop 11,743 additional housing units that would be facilitated by Project implementation would not be provided under the No Project Alternative . Because the Project proposes only three candidate housing sites (Sites 3, 4, and 5) for rezoning, and all other sites would retain their existing underlying zoning, under Alternative 1, rezoning of Sites 3, 4, and 5 would not occur and existing zoning would remain in place. Under this alternative, State Housing Law and legislative requirements for implementation of the Project's proposed programs and strategies to increase housing capacity and the production of affordable dwelling units in the City would not occur. Overall, Alternative 1 would not consider the candidate housing sites and adoption of the land use amendments and rezones necessary to achieve the City's RHNA . As a result, the capacity for 11,743 multi-family housing units would not be created . This alternative would not satisfy the Project objectives stated above because implementation of Alternative 1 would not facilitate the development of sufficient residential units to meet the City's RHNA allocation and would not satisfy legislative mandates for the HEU. Findings The No Project Alternative would result in fewer impacts than the Project. Although this Alternative could reduce environmental impacts from future housing development facilitated by the HEU, the No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the project objectives. The No Project Alternative would not provide adequate housing sites to meet the City's 6th Cycle RHNA allocation or satisfy State housing law including AB 1397 . Under the No Project Alternative, the City would not meet its RHNA obligations . Thus, this Alternative would directly conflict with California Government Code §65583, which stipulates that a jurisdiction must assess its housing element every eight years and identify adequate sites for housing and provide for the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community . Beach and Edinger Corridors Alternative (Alternative 2) As with the proposed Project, the Beach and Edinger Corridors Alternative (Alternative 2) would meet the City's RHNA . However, residential development under Alternative 2 would be concentrated around the Beach and Edinger Corridors area of the Beach and Edinger Corridors Specific Plan (Specific Plan 14). More specifically, new residential development would occur in portions of Specific Plan 14's Transition Corridor Areas (TCAs), which would support transit-oriented communities, and on fewer total parcels. This would have the effect of further reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT), transportation-related energy demands, and associated criteria air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions associated with housing development. However, this approach would require taller building heights and higher densities to achieve the target housing production in this area necessary to meet the RHNA, which could result in increased aesthetic October 2022 Page 19 EXHIBIT 1031 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 31 of 40 Page ID #:929 ER-341 44 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations impacts as compared to the Project . This alternative would also create dense/confined residential development and not expand housing opportunities across the City and would not affirmatively further fair housing to the same degree as the Project . Findings Alternative 2 would meet the majority of the project objectives as it is assumed that development under this alternative would meet the 6th Cycle RHNA housing needs. However, Alternative 2 would fail to affirmatively further fair housing since this alternative would not provide new housing within highest resources areas with access to highly rated schools, parks and community amenities. New housing would be concentrated within one area of the City. Furthermore, Alternative 2 could result in additional constraints to housing because the densities necessary to accommodate all of the RHNA within the Specific Plan may not be supported by the market (e.g., land and construction costs), which could potentially make it cost-prohibitive for developers to construct housing. As such, because Alternative 2 would fail to affirmatively further fair housing and could result in additional constraints to the construction of housing, this alternative would likely not be certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), as it would not substantially conform to Housing Element Law . Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Future Consideration Five additional alternatives were initially considered during the scoping and planning process, but were not selected for detailed analysis in the Draft SEIR. These included: Reduced Dwelling Units Alternative, Alternate Housing Sites Alternative, Palm/Goldenwest Specific Plan (SP 12) Alternative, Huntington Harbour Area Sites Alternative, and McDonnell Centre Business Park Specific Plan (SP 11) Alternative. Reduced Dwelling Units Alternative A Reduced Dwelling Units Alternative was considered, but rejected from further consideration . This alternative was considered to assess if it would help mitigate the significant and unavoidable impact to potable water resources associated with the proposed Project, as future housing development facilitated by the Project would incrementally increase the demand for potable water. The projected water demand associated with Project implementation at buildout would increase water demand in the City by approximately 2,905 acre-feet per year (AFY), or approximately 11 percent over existing 2022 and projected 2030 City demands . While the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) did not specifically account for the population growth associated with the Project, it did project that the City would serve a population of 206,499 persons by 20301, which is an additional 9,625 persons over the City's existing population of 196,874 persons . 2 Therefore, it can be inferred that at least a portion (approximately 54 percent 3, or 949 AFY) of the water demand associated with the Project population growth was accounted 1 UWMP Table 3-2 : Reta il: Population -Current and Projected. 2 State of California Department of Finance . 2021. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2021 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://www.dof.ca .gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/e-5/ (accessed June 2021). 3 Based on 25,020 persons/9,625 persons . October 2022 Page 20 EXHIBIT 1032 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 32 of 40 Page ID #:930 ER-342 45 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Env ironmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overri ding Considerations for in the UWMP's anticipated 2030 future water demand . Thus, after considering the existing water demand associated with the displaced land uses that would be removed, the approximately 54 percent assumed to be already accounted for in the UWMP's anticipated population growth, and unaccounted for net Project water demand of approximately 46 percent or 823 AFY which would remain unmet. In order to not exceed the projected water resources for the City, the Reduced Dwelling Units Alternative would have to reduce the number of housing units to a number that would fail to meet the basic RHNA requirements. Alternate Housing Sites Alternative The Alternate Housing Sites Alternative was considered, but rejected from further consideration. This alternative was determined to be infeasible during the scoping process because alternative housing sites not included in the scope of the Project were found to be infeasible due to regulations, site constraints, property owner interest in developing housing, community input, and existing uses. Additionally, some candidate housing sites were considered, but rejected because potentially significant effects of future housing development would be avoided or substantially lessened by rejecting those sites . Examples of alternative sites initially considered are discussed below. Palm/Goldenwest Specific Plan (SP 12} Alternative This is a 96-acre area bordered by Pacific Coast Highway, Goldenwest Street, and Seapoint Street and is located entirely within the Coastal Zone. The property is designated for visitor serving commercial uses within the Palm/Goldenwest Specific Plan . At the time the specific plan was adopted in 2000, the property was an active oil field . Aera Energy owned the property and indicated that the property would remain in oil production for the next 15 to 20 years. As such, the specific plan was adopted to plan for reuse of the site after oil production activities ceased . Palm/Goldenwest Specific Plan 12 This site was originally identified as a candidate housing site in the 6th Cycle Housing Element because of its large size and its potential availability for residential development within the planning period (based on the information in SP 12). Housing capacity on the site, when applying the proposed Affordable October 2022 Pag e 21 EXHIBIT 1033 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 33 of 40 Page ID #:931 ER-343 46 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Env ironmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Consideration s Housing Overlay, would accommodate 40 to 50 percent of the City's total RHNA (96 acres x 55 du/acre up to 96 acres x 70 du/acre). Although this site could accommodate residential uses, the site is located within higher resource areas that could result in greater environmental impacts than other sites included in the scope of the Project. The following are reasons why this alternative was rejected : The location of the site within the Coastal Zone would require the California Coastal Commission to approve the Affordable Housing Overlay designation; timing of the "rezoning" effort could be lengthy with no guarantee of approval from the Coastal Commission . The potential for costly remediation of the site due to its historic use as oil field. The property owner no longer anticipates oil production activities to cease as described in SP 12. Therefore, the property is not expected to be available for development prior to 2030. The concentration of almost 50 percent of RHNA allocation on one site may lead to overconcentration of affordable housing in one area . Huntington Harbour Area Sites Alternative There are two commercial areas in the Huntington Harbour area with a combined acreage of 21.5 acres . One area is the Huntington Harbour mall, which is an older mall developed in the 1960s . This 10.8-acre site was identified as a potential candidate housing site because it is underutilized with one and two -s tory buildings developed at a relatively low floor-area-ratio (FAR) considering that the maximum allowed FAR is 1.5 . The site has potential to be redeveloped as a mixed-use project with the inclusion of residential units at 30 du/acre . The site has close access to Warner Avenue, a major arterial. The second area is Peter's Landing . This site includes the Peter's Landing commercial center and adjacent properties along Pacific Coast Highway, and has been studied for mixed use (residential/commercial) in prior General Plan planning efforts . In addition, the property owners previously showed interest in adding residential uses in existing or new development projects on the sites . Previous site analyses on th is site indicate that residential could be accommodated at higher densities . Peter's Landing Area Huntington Harbour Mall October 2022 Pa ge 22 EXHIBIT 1034 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 34 of 40 Page ID #:932 ER-344 47 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations The following are reasons why this alternative was rejected: The location of these sites within the Coastal Zone would require the California Coastal Commission to approve any changes to the zoning/land use designation including an Affordable Housing Overlay designation . As such, the timing of the "rezoning" effort could be length with no guarantee that the Coastal Commission would approve the amendments, particularly because residential is a lower priority use in the Coastal Zone. These sites, in conjunction with the general Huntington Harbour area, are shown in the City's Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment as one of the most vulnerable areas in the City with development in this area having the highest exposure to sea level rise hazards (e .g., storm and non-storm flood projections becoming widespread with 1.6-foot and 3.3-foot sea level rise, respectively). McDonnell Centre Business Park Specific Plan (SP 11) Alternative The McDonnell Centre Business Park Specific Plan encompasses 307 acres in the northwestern portion of the City. It has access from Bolsa Chica Street and Bolsa Avenue, both major arterials, with close access to the 405 freeway. The area was first developed for the aerospace industry in the 1960s and a specific plan was adopted in 1997 with amendments in 2002 and 2006 that allowed for approximately eight million square feet of industrial, office, and ancillary uses (including the existing development). Boeing has been the primary landowner in the area, although other major business tenants have moved into the specific plan area. In 2018, Boeing began marketing some of its properties in the specific plan area. As such, the City evaluated housing potential within portions of the specific plan area for the 6th Cycle, particularly workforce housing and lower income worker housing. The specific plan could accommodate a large capacity of housing units at higher densities due to its size and existing and planned infrastructure. ___ ,...._ 6 H orll't Site Location EJthlbll 1 Vicinity Maps McDonnell Centre Business Park Specific Plan (SP 11) October 2022 Pag e 23 EXHIBIT 1035 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 50-2 Filed 06/06/23 Page 35 of 40 Page ID #:933 ER-345 48 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations The following are reasons why this alternative was rejected: There is a strong market for industrial land in this area of the City. The site was even more attractive to potential developers due to its proximity to the freeway and because zoning and environmental approvals were already in place. Potential conflicts between industrial uses and residential uses. Potential costs to remediate site to residential standards. Properties have already started redeveloping with new industrial buildings recently completed and future phases approved. October 2022 Page 24 EXHIBIT 10230 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 51 Filed 06/06/23 Page 230 of 234 Page ID #:1168 49 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statemen t of Overriding Consideration s 4.0 STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 4.1. Introduction Section 15093 of the CEQA guidelines states : (a) CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project . If the specific economic, legal, social , technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable ." (b) When the lead agency approves a project which will result in the occurrence of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR but are not avoided or substantially lessened, the agency shall state in writing the specific reason to support its actions based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. The statement of overriding considerations shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record . (c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should be mentioned in the notice of determination . The City of Huntington Beach proposes to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the significant cumulative air quality, greenhouse gas, hydrology and water quality, noise, and utilities/water supply impacts of the Project . This section describes the anticipated benefits and other considerations of the Project to support the decision to proceed, even though significant and unavoidable impacts are anticipated . 4.2. Significant Adverse Project and Cumulative Impacts The City of Huntington Beach is proposing to approve the proposed Project, with revisions to reduce environmental impacts, and has prepared a SEIR as required by CEQA. Even with revisions to the Project, the following impacts have been identified as being unavoidable as there are no feasible mitigation measures available to further reduce the impacts. Refer to Chapter 2 (CEQA Findings) for further clarification regarding the impact listed below. Air Quality Despite compliance with General Plan policies, GPU PEIR m itigation, and MM AQ-1 and AQ-2, the Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts concerning construction -related and operational emissions . In addition, sites over two acres could expose sensitive receptors to significant impacts by exceeding construction LST thresholds . The Project -related contribution of daily construction and operational emissions associated with the HEU are considered cumulatively significant and unavoidable. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Despite the recommendation of Greenhouse Gas Reduction program GHG reduction strategies, the Project would generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment and could Octobe r 2022 Page 25 EXHIBIT 10231 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 51 Filed 06/06/23 Page 231 of 234 Page ID #:1169 50 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Env i ronmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Consideration s conflict with applicable plans for reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, impacts on GHG are considered significant and unavoidable, both for the Project and cumulative conditions . Hydrology and Water Quality The Project could substantially decrease groundwater supplies resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact concerning sustainable management of the Basin . The Project's impact concerning groundwater supplies would be cumulatively considerable and a significant unavoidable impact would occur . Noise Despite compliance with GPU PEIR mitigation, the Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts concerning construction-related noise and vibration levels and operational noise levels associated with traffic. The Project's impact concerning the substantial temporary and permanent increase of ambient noise levels would be cumulatively considerable. The Project's impact concerning construction- related noise and groundborne vibration would also be cumulatively considerable. Utilities and Service Systems Despite compliance with GPU PEIR mitigation, until the water supply situation improves, the water demands from future development pursuant to the HEU would result in a significant and unavoidable impact concerning water supplies. Additionally, until such time as greater confidence in and commitment from water suppliers can be made, or the water supply situation improves, the Project's impacts concerning water supplies to serve future development would be cumulatively considerable. 4.3. Findings The City of Huntington Beach has evaluated all feasible mitigation measures and potential changes to the Project with respect to reducing the impacts that have been identified as significant and unavoidable (see Chapter 2, CEQA Findings). The City of Huntington Beach has also examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project as proposed (see Chapter 3, Findings Regarding Project Alternatives). Based on this examination, the City of Huntington Beach has determined that the No Project Alternative is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative. 4.4. Overriding Considerations Specific economic, social, or other considerations outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts stated above. The reasons for proceeding with the proposed project, notwithstanding the identified significant and unavoidable impacts are described below. Proposed Project Benefits 1) The HEU would facilitate the development of a wide range of housing types in sufficient supply to meet the needs of current and future residents, particularly for persons with specific needs, including but not limited to extremely low, very low, and lower income households; seniors; persons October 2022 Page 26 EXHIBIT 10232 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 51 Filed 06/06/23 Page 232 of 234 Page ID #:1170 51 City of Huntington Beach 2021-2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations with disabilities; large households, single-parent households, people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness, and farmworkers. 2) The HEU would increase the supply of affordable housing in high opportunity/resource areas, including areas with access to employment opportunities, community facilities and services, and amenities . 3) The HEU would provide a comprehensive system of support and would expand housing options aimed to prevent and end homelessness. 4) The HEU would reduce constraints to the development of housing, including affordable housing, through programs that allow ministerial approval processes, permit ready plans for Accessory Dwelling Units, a review and update of the City's small lot ordinance, and housing overlays in non- residential areas . 5) The HEU would address planning and monitoring goals for long-term affordability of adequate housing. 6) The HEU would facilitate the development of an accessible housing supply for all persons without discrimination in accordance with State and federal fair housing laws . The HEU would enhance existing lower resource neighborhoods by promoting livable, healthy, and safe housing for all residents. 7) The HEU provides a plan for meeting the City's RHNA goals and to affirmatively further fair housing, which substantially complies with State law, thereby enabling the City to achieve certification of the HEU through the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Certification of the HEU would also enable the City to maintain eligibility for funding programs tied to a compliant HEU. 8) The HEU would allow the City of to revitalize commercial corridors and older industrial areas by allowing for additional housing opportunities in the City while maintaining the character of existing, long-established single-family residential neighborhoods in the City. Consistent with General Plan Implementation Program LU-P.14, the Affordable Housing Overlay allows for housing within the Research and Technology zoned areas, which establishes housing opportunities for employees of business in these areas. The provisions of the Affordable Housing Overlay ensure that potential conflicts between residential and non-residential uses in these areas would be minimized . The City would continue to ensure that all standards for building design, streetscape design, and landscaping would be adhered to and would review development proposals to ensure consistency with the character and visual appearance of the surrounding neighborhood. 9) The HEU would encourage future housing developments to better integrate with alternative modes of traditional transport because over half of the candidate housing sites identified in the HEU are located along High Quality Transit Areas. New development would also be encouraged to promote and support public transit and alternative modes of transportation by incorporating bus turnouts and shaded bus stops (where appropriate) and providing enhanced pedestrian and bicycle facilities . 10) With more organized development and guided use of existing resources, such potential impacts to water supply can be monitored and improved for the health and benefit of residents. Further, park October 2022 Pag e 27 EXHIBIT 10233 Case 8:23-cv-00421-FWS-ADS Document 51 Filed 06/06/23 Page 233 of 234 Page ID #:1171 52 City of Huntington Beach 2021 -2029 HEU Implementation Program Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report Findings of Fact/Statement of Overriding Considerations lands and open spaces can be protected and retained in place throughout the planning horizon to provide recreational benefits to residents, visitors and school aged students. A shift toward sustainable resources and self-sufficiency, as outlined in the HEU, will allow for the continuation of the valued way of life within the City of Huntington Beach throughout the planning horizon. For example, future projects would be required to comply with General Plan Goal ERC-15 and Policies ERC-15.A and ERC-15.B, which aim to maintain an adequate supply of water and distribution facilities capable of meeting existing and future water supply needs and require monitoring to reduce impacts to the water system in an effort to maintain and expand water supply and distribution facilities. October 2022 Pag e 28 Proposed Charter Amendment Measure July 8, 2024 53 _..::-"----- --------=-_--=--= ---=--=---- -....,-~----~ -----~---~ --....::._ --------=;::---~ --=-~=--=- Background •On July 2, 2024, Mayor Van Der Mark, Mayor Pro Te m Burns, and Council Member McKeon submitted a Council Member Item to place on the ballot a proposed Charter Amendment stating: •"No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents ‘significant and unavoidable’negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by a vote of the people.” •The proposed Charter Amendment should include language to the effect of "City Planning and Zoning is a local, ‘municipal affair,’beyond the reach of State control or interference; and City Planning and Zoning is a local activity reserved for the City and its people, and not the State." •The City Council directed staff to bring back a proposed November 2024 ballot initiative within thirty (30) days for City Council approval. 54 Proposed Charter Language •No City initiated general plan amendment or zoning change may be approved by the City where the related environmental review (EIR) finds the same proposed general plan update or zoning change presents significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, without first receiving approval by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the electors voting on such proposition at a general or special election at which such proposition is submitted. City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, beyond the reach of State control or interference, a local activity reserved for the City and its people, not the State. 55 Proposed Ballot Question “Shall proposed Charter Amendment No. 1, which would amend the City Charter to state that City Planning and Zoning is a local, municipal affair, and require voter approval of City initiated general plan amendments or zoning changes when such items present significant and unavoidable negative impacts to the environment, be approved?” ​YES ​NO 56 •Consider the proposed Charter amendment ballot measure, ballot language, and exhibits for placement on the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election for voter approval; and •Adopt Resolution Nos. •2024-38 –Ordering the Submission to the Qualified Electors of the City a Certain Charter Amendment Measure Relating to Environmental Protection at the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election •2024-39 –Setting Priorities for Filing Written Arguments and Impartial Analysis •2024-40 –Filing of Rebuttal Arguments Recommended Action 57