CC MIN 02082022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Director Clark reported the goal for tonight's meeting is to identify sites and to assign a realistic capacity estimate to each site. She reported the City has been advised to take a conservative approach to capacity using safe harbor assumptions and to consider low and medium-density sites to be able to develop at the average density within the range and high-density sites to develop at the minimum end of the range, meaning 30 or 45 units per acre. She reported the high-density sites receive extra scrutiny from HCD on its density assumptions. She noted the State also keeps a correlation between density and affordability for low-income and moderate-income developments. She advised the City can go outside of the State's parameters, but it places a higher burden of proof on the City. Director Clark reviewed the presentation at the February 1 meeting, noting the Planning Commission identified 29 sites, recommending 23 of them for an EIR with a capacity of 4,844 units. She reported the meeting did have extensive public comments, but the item was continued ahead of Council questions or discussion. She advised the City has received about 75 additional written comments since the last meeting with the majority focused on the Donlon site. Director Clark reported staff recommends hearing Site 25 (PUSD-District) and Site 26 (St. Augustine) first. City Attorney Sodergren reported his recommendation is to take questions and comments about Site 25 first, followed by Site 26, and then questions and comments on the remaining potential sites. In response to Councilmember Testa, City Attorney Sodergren confirmed his recommendation is to proceed in this order, but it would be up to the City Council if she can ask questions about the overarching process at this time. In response to Councilmember Balch, City Attorney Sodergren advised it is up to the City Council if general questions will be allowed at this time. He reiterated his recommendation would be to take them separately. Councilmember Arkin advised she is fine either way but noted it might be best to take general non-site- specific questions first. Mayor Brown and Councilmember Narum agreed. In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified HCD requires the City to include an inventory with an estimated capacity for each site based on reasonable capacity assumptions. She confirmed the need to have a range does create having a number above and beyond the capacity but added this is an inevitable outcome of the State process. She advised they will end up with more sites than needed because they can only count the conservative estimate for each high-density site. She reported 50% is the initial buffer and noted at this early stage before environmental review, it is sensible to identify more sites than the City will need understanding the list will shrink before the Housing Element is finalized. She advised the City Council will have an opportunity at this meeting to adjust the projected density ranges. In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark confirmed HCD recommends a 25-35% buffer in the final inventory. She advised this is a recommendation from HCD and not statutory and noted so many cities are adopting a narrower buffer. She advised staff recommends it is prudent to go higher at this step because it is likely some of the sites will fall off the list following their CEQA review. Councilmember Testa advised her understanding is that the HCD preferred buffer is 10-15%. She agreed it is prudent to have a buffer at this stage but advised the City Council should be realistic about having a buffer as high as 50%. In response to Councilmember Testa, Director Clark clarified when a site has been included in the Housing Element for two cycles like all of the City's previously identified high-density sites have, the City Council Minutes Page 4 of 27 February 8. 2022