My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 12 - Density Bonus Agreement No. 2025-03
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2025
>
07/15/2025
>
Item 12 - Density Bonus Agreement No. 2025-03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/9/2025 10:17:50 AM
Creation date
7/9/2025 10:01:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
Planning & Building
Item #
12
Date
7/15/2025
Destruction Year
P
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Ca1HDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain <br />protections. The City must respect these protections. In addition to granting the increase in <br />residential units allowed by the DBL, the City must not deny the project the proposed waivers <br />and concessions with respect to public open space, private open space, parking study, and <br />common open space. If the City were to deny the requested waivers, Government Code <br />section 65915, subdivision (e)(1) requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, <br />adverse impact upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to <br />satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. If the City were to deny the <br />requested requested concessions, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (d)(1) <br />requires findings that the concessions would not result in identifiable and actual cost <br />reductions, that the concessions would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or <br />safety, or that the concessions are contrary to state or federal law. The City, if it makes any <br />such findings, bears the burden of proof. (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(4).) Of note, the DBL <br />specifically allows for a reduction in required accessory parking in addition to the allowable <br />waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).) Additionally, the California Court of Appeal has <br />ruled that when an applicant has requested one or more waivers and/or concessions <br />pursuant to the DBL, the City "may not apply any development standard that would <br />physically preclude construction of that project as designed, even if the building includes <br />`amenities' beyond the bare minimum of building components" (Bankers Hill 150 a City of <br />San Diego (2022) 74 Ca1.App.5th 755, 775.) <br />Finally, the project is exempt from state environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines <br />section 15168 (Program EIR). Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local <br />governments err, and may be sued, when they improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA <br />exemption or streamlined CEQA review to which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of <br />San Diego (2024) 99 Ca1.App.5th 890, 911.) <br />As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis -level housing <br />shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit: it will provide badly needed affordable <br />housing; it will bring new customers to local businesses; it will expand the city's tax base; and <br />it will reduce displacement of existing residents by reducing competition for existing <br />housing. Ca1HDF therefore strongly urges the City to approve the project, consistent with its <br />obligations under state law. <br />Ca1HDF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for <br />increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income <br />households. You may learn more about Ca1HDF at www.calhdf.org. <br />2of3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.