Memorandum - #32 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment 1 Response to Public Comments The City received public comments on Item 32 on the June 20, 2023 City Council Agenda throughout publication of the agenda. Below is a comprehensive list of comments received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting and the City's response to those comments. Comment letters and specific comments within the letter are given letters and numbers for reference purposes. Copies of letters are included as attachments. Table 1 below provides a list of the agencies, organizations, and persons that submitted comments on Item 32. Table 1 Written Comments Received on Item 32 Number Reference Commenting Agency/Persons Date of Comment Page No. Agencies Al California Departmentof Housingand Community Development (HCD) June19, 2023 1 Organization 01 People for Housing June14, 2023 3 02 Allen Matkins June 20, 2023 4 Al. Response to Commentsfrom HCD, dated June 19, 2023. Al-1 This comment states that pursuant Gov. Code sections 65912.114(i) and 65912.124(i), local agencies may exempt a parcel from AB 2011 before a development proponent submits a development application on a parcel pursuant to AB 2011 if a local government makes certain written finding. Since singular, not plural, form of word "parcel" used in statute, the legislature did not intend for local agencies to issue blanket exemptions. Response The comment is incorrect in its assumption that a "blanket" exception is being proposed. As detailed in the staff report, only certain parce I sthat are inconsistent with the approved land use plan are proposed to be exempted. There are hundreds of parcels that are AB 2011 eligible that are not being exempted and are listed in the Attachme nts to the Resol uti ons as be i ng AB 2011 eligible. Moreover, the statute does not prescribe a limit on the numberof parcels that a local jurisdiction can exempt. Underthe logicpresented inthe comment, a local jurisdiction would notbe limited in the numberof parcels itexemptsinthe aggregate as longasa separate action istaken for each individual parcel beingexempted, which could resultin the same numberof exempted parcels. A1-2 This comment states that exemptions pursuant Gov. Code sections 65912.114(i) and 65912.124(i) require different set of criteria for established parcel eligibility and allowable density. The writtenfindings require a level of detail and specificity that are currently not present, and findings should be expanded to al low HCD to make accurate determination about compliance.