AgdaPkt 2003-03-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

A , 72 Legislative Bill Action ................................ ............................... The following are summaries of just a few of the legislative bills that are currently being acted upon by the League of California Cities. For more information about these and other bills, please visit the League website's new "Issues and Advocacy" page (www.cacities.oml issuesandadvocacv) — a one -stop location to access information about legislation, policy issues' and related developments. You can track information on bills (www.cacities.orgAegtracking), locate legislators and legislative committees, send letters to legislators or the media through the online Advocacy Center, research League policy positions, access useful related links, and much more. HOUSING AND LAND USE ; B 619 (Ducheny) Land Use Authority: No Public Hearings /Litigation: This bill removes local land use authority in a variety of areas, expands opportunities for litigation, and makes a number of changes to the Cal -Home program. In brief, this bill: 1) Eliminates public hearings for any residential developments up to 150 units, or any commercial mixed use project at least two stories tall, where the commercial uses are restricted to the first floor. These proposals can only be reviewed or disap- proved by planning staff. 2) Appears to state that the above projects must be "consistent with the applicable general plan land use designation, zoning ordinance, and development standards," but then undercuts that language in the following way: a) States that the above development stan- dards apply provided that they are implementec :n a manner consistent with language opposed by the League, CSAC, APA in AB 1866 (Wright). The language cited is a definition of "development standard" in Density Bonus Law which prohibits a local government from applying "any ordinance, general plan element specific plan charter amend ment or other local condition law, nn /icy resolutio or regulation. "that a developer demands to be waived, or the city may be sued and face manda- tory attorney fees. b) Limits the application of CEQA mitigation to those measures applicable to a plan or program, as they existed on the date that the development application was deemed complete. This language is inconsistent with Sections 15182 and 15183 of the CEQA guidelines, which acknowledges that a development project may have environmental effects not previously analyzed in the plan or program. c) In a provision apparently aimed at charter cities, the bill states that consistency with the zoning is not required if the property has not been rezoned to conform to the general plan. d) Uses a special definition of affordable hous- ing that ensures that "middle income" housing, housing affordable up to 150% of median income, is covered under the bill. In some communities this could be most of their housing stock. 2) Adds commercial mixed -use projects (at least two stories tall) to density bonus law. Once under this law, developers of these projects would be able to demand the waiver of "any ordinance, general plan element, specific plan, charter amendment, or c ier local condition, law, policy, resolution or regulation, "or the city may be sued and face mandatory attorney fees. In addition, the sponsors of this measure are also amending this same law through another bill, AB 1160 (Steinberg), to re- quire a local government to grant a 25 percent reduction in parking standards, and a 50 percent parking reduction if the project is within one -half mile of a rail station, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes. 3) Amends an existing section of law which protects local governments from CEQA litigation when they have approved affordable housing and authorizes a court to grant attorney's fees to the PAGE 8 /PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site-- www.cacities.org