The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCORRESPONDENCE - 11CFlores, Dora From: Maria Ceja <ceja.maria95@gmai1.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 11:03 AN To: eComment Subject: item 11a To the Mayor and City Council, I am not in favor of I Ia. First and foremost, I do not understand the logic behind even modifying the Housing Opportunity Ordinance (HOO) in the first place. We are in the middle of a global pandemic with its ending distancing itself more and more. Why would we disrupt any possibility of affordable housing in our city? If developers find interest in our city, they should consider having the money to pay the appropriate fees. These fees fund housing opportunities in our city and it should remain that way. The amount per sq It should be increased, and the funds should continue to fund housing, and maybe can even add money to the city's rental relief fund. Thank you, Maria Ceja Flores, Dora From: Allegra Ringo <allegraringo@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 10:35 AM To: Villegas, Juan; eComment, Pulido, Miguel Subject: Public comments for 9/1 City Council meeting: items 11C, 20A, 85A, 85C, 85D Hello Mayor Mulido and City Council, My name is Allegra Ringo, and I'm a resident of Ward 5 in Santa Ana. I'd like to comment on the following items for the meeting today, Sept. 1st: Item 11C: NO: We need affordable housing more than ever, and this proposed change to the HOO would make it easier for developers to avoid building their required number of affordable units. As rental prices skyrocket and people lose their housing during a pandemic, this is absolutely not what we need. Item 20A: NO: The public has been demanding LESS police funding. They are already way overfunded, they do not need money for their gym. Item 85A: NO: Proposition 20 is regressive and undoes years of progressive work. Every "tougher on crime" law that has passed in the last two decades has consistently made things worse. You represent a predominantly Latinx city, a population that is disproportionately impacted by racist incarceration laws. Do not approve this. Item 85C: NO: During a national pandemic, the last thing we need is harsher enforcement of laws criminalizing homelessness and poverty. Furthermore, these laws do not work and we have seen that time and again. Item 85D: NO: Needle exchange programs have been proven to keep people with drug dependency safer. Prohibiting these programs is the opposite of what is needed. This item is absolutely ridiculous. These items are especially offensive this week. These are extremely regressive ideas and are literally the opposite of what the people have been asking for. Please listen to your constituents. We are eager to vote you out if you don't. Allegra Ringo Ward 5 Orozco, Norma From: Sent: To: Subject: Hello Santa Ana City Council, Julie Herrick <jaherrick@gmail.com> Tuesday, September 01, 2020 2:07 PM eComment Affordable Housing My name is Julie. I am a 12-year Santa Ana resident and I am calling to urge council members to oppose any changes to the Housing Opportunity Ordinance that would reduce in -lieu fees or allow affordable housing funds to be used to fund non -housing programs, especially public safety. Residents in Santa Ana need affordable housing and the need will only increase as we continue to be in this pandemic. Best regards, Julie Herrick August 18, 2020 Mayor Miguel Pulido Honorable Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 www.kennedycommission.org 17701 Cowan Ave., Suite 200 Irvine, CA 92614 949 250 0909 RE: Opposition — Item 75B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2020-03 to Update the Housing Opportunity Ordinance Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, The Kennedy Commission (the Commission) is a broad based coalition of residents and community organizations that advocates for the production of homes affordable for extremely, very low and low -families earning less than $25,000 annually in Orange County. Formed in 2001, the Commission has been successful in partnering and working with Orange County jurisdictions to create effective housing policies that have led to the construction of new homes affordable and investments to improve quality of life for lower income working families. We write to express our strong opposition to amending the Housing Opportunity Ordinance ("HOO") as proposed in Zoning Code Amendment No. 2020-03. As working families in Santa Ana continue to face economic and housing uncertainty as a result of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic it is crucial that the City preserve its Housing Opportunity Ordinance (HOO) as a policy for creating new affordable housing opportunities. The creation of housing at all income levels is vital to our recovery. Creating new affordable housing units needs to continue to be a top housing priority in Santa Ana. Housine Need and Proeress The City of Santa Ana is a renter majority city and despite the City's progress towards meeting its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation for very low and low income housing there continues to be a great need for housing that is affordable to its residents. The current pandemic has increased the economic and housing pressures on low-income families in Santa Ana. As incomes are decreasing and jobs are being lost, many low income families are struggling to remain housed. This is especially true for the majority of Santa Ana's low-income households that are suffering with the impacts of housing cost and economic uncertainty. While the city has seen increased production of affordable housing it has not been enough to address the past deficits and growing needs for affordable housing based on the population's housing needs and incomes of residents in Santa Ana. As an example, according to the City's local data, 80 percent of Santa Ana renters are moderate, low and very low-income renters.' Yet ' City of Santa Ana General Plan Housing Element 2014-2021, p. 14, January 2014. the most significant increase of housing has been in the above moderate housing category. The City's above moderate allocation is 90 units for the current RHNA planning period. To date, the City has approved 2,409 above moderate income units. This means that the City has exceeded its's above moderate income RHNA allocation by 2,677 percent, per the City's RHNA Annual Progress Report submitted to the CA Department of Housing and Community Development 2 With above moderate average rents of $2000 - $4000 in these developments, none of these above market rent units are affordable to most of Santa Ana's working families3. Since 80% of renters in Santa Ana fall into the moderate, low and very low income category and 84 percent of residents hold low-income occupations that pay less than $53,500 per year, the majority of these new rental housing units are not available to address the housing needs of most working families in Santa Ana. 4 The need for affordable housing is now greater than ever, as the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated housing and economic needs that were already impacting low income working families in Santa Ana. Housing costs in Santa Ana have been out of reach and will continue to be out of reach in this current economic climate. Households that live in the 92701 zip code, the city's most affordable zip code, must earn $35.68 an hour to afford two -bedroom housings This housing cost and wage is clearly out of reach for the majority of working families in Santa Ana. New Construction of affordable housing needs to continue to be a priority to address the housing needs of Santa Ana residents. Opposition to Proposed Amendments We have provided public comment and submitted letters to the City Council and informed the Councilmembers of our opposition to efforts to weaken the HOO. The proposed amendments are troubling as there has been no public participation or input on the proposed changes. These proposed changes are advanced by a Council Committee that has created these objectives in nonpublic meetings and has not shared data or allowed public input. The proposal seems to advance a market rate housing agenda without considerations on the impacts of the proposed change on much needed affordable housing for Santa Ana residents. These proposals only incentivize additional new housing units with market rate rents and will not be affordable to the majority of the City's residents. The proposed amendments do not address the city's needs and create further inequity for the city's residents with the greatest housing need. Furthermore, these amendments will compromise the City's ability to reach its Housing Element goals and requirements in the upcoming 6a' Cycle Housing Element. In addition, we believe that the City Council cannot make finding of consistency with its current Housing Element and General Plan policies and objectives. We urge the City Council to vote against these proposed amendments. The proposed changes to the HOO violate the Housing Element for the City of Santa Ana because it directly contravenes the Housing Opportunity Ordinance Program (Program 29) identified in Santa Ana's 2014-2021 Housing Element and it results in the constructive 'City of Santa Ana Housing Element Progress Report 2019, April 2020 ' Rent survey of recent market rate developments - The Marke, Essex Skyline and Broadstone Arden ° City of Santa Ana General Plan Housing Element 2014-2021, p. 12 and 14, January 2014. ' National Low Income Housing Coalition's "Out of Reach: The High Cost of Housing in 2020" Report. elimination of the program. The HOO program specifically states that "[t]he inclusionary requirement is triggered by: a request to increase the permitted density above that permitted in the zone, conversion of commercial or industrial land to residential uses, conversion of rental units to condominiums, and various other conditions." The proposed amendment would only require the inclusion of affordable units where a General Plan amendment is required. This requirement is far more onerous and much less likely to occur than the circumstances triggering the HOO that are identified in the Housing Element, especially in light of the City's proposed General Plan and Land Use Element updates that aim to streamline development and increase densities by rights without an expectation of a community benefit or affordable housing. In addition, the HOO and its funding are a vital tool to the City's future efforts to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing by creating housing opportunities for all income levels throughout the City, especially for lower income families who's housing needs are not being address by the market rate housing that is being incentivized by the proposed changes. New construction of affordable housing is vital to providing affordable housing options and not segregating residents to poverty in lower income neighborhoods that are already impacted and disadvantaged. The City of Santa Ana can only accomplish a diverse housing stock and meet its residents housing needs by preserving the HOO and its affordable housing funding. For these reasons, we urge the City Council to vote against approving Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 2020-03. Should the Council move to consider the proposed amendments, we would request consideration to the following comments: 1. The City Council should delay any action on the HOO to January 2021, given the devastating impacts of the Coronavirus on everyone, and in particular, those who are in lower -income households of the City of Santa Ana. hi addition, there needs to be greater analysis and consideration on the impacts of the proposed amendments. 2. The proposed amendment would reduce the in -lieu fee from $15 to $5. The city must retain a $15 in -lieu fee and secure this funding source for much needed affordable housing. The city risks losing state and federal housing matching funds by lowering the in -lieu fee, at a time we face economic uncertainty as a result of the pandemic. Should the Council consider an in lieu fee change, it should be supported by financial analysis and data. 3. The City should remove the priority on acquisition and rehabilitation and prioritize construction of new affordable housing units. If the City wants to jointly prioritize acquisition/rehabilitation and construction of new units to address the City's housing crisis, it should set goals and percentages in each program to identity how it will help them meet its housing goals and Housing Element requirements. 4. Clarify that where a rehabilitation project results in displacement of tenants, the City will pay relocation costs in line with the requirements of the California Relocation Assistance Act. Ensure that the City and the developer will provide the density bonus affordable housing units in exchange for the development incentives and concessions received in the pipeline and new developments. 6. The proposed amendment allows for the use of inclusionary housing for `one- time programs for code enforcement, and quality of life, and general health and safety activities' The creation of new affordable housing for Santa Ana residents needs to continue to be a priority to address the critical housing shortage for lower income working families. Affordable housing monies should not be diverted to fund code enforcement and health and public safety programs that are funded from the City's budget. The City should not deplete the Inclusionary Housing Fund's limited funds for these programs. Such an amendment goes against the purpose of the HOO. Since its inception the HOO has been clear in its language and purpose in that it states "Monies deposited into the inclusionary housing fund must be used to increase and improve the supply of housing affordable to moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income housings in the city... " (Sec. 41-1909. (a)(1)). We urge you to vote against the proposed amendments to the Housing Opportunity Ordinance. Ca "Aw Cesar Covarrubias Executive Director Orozco, Norma From: Peter Garcia <garciapr25@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 3:58 PM To: eComment Subject: Public Comment on Sept 1 2020 Agenda Item 11C Attachments: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportunity Ordinance is Bad Policy and Bad Politics.pdf Hello, Please find the attached document to add to public comment concerning the City's decision on the Housing Opportunity Ordinance. Best, Peter Garcia Title: The dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportunity Ordinance is bad policy and bad politics. Excerpt: The Santa Ana City Council is abandoning the City's commitment to affordable housing by gutting the Housing Opportunity Ordinance (HOO) at a time when rent -burdened residents struggle to pay rent. The City Council is granting millions of dollars in unnecessary handouts to developers instead of maximizing the public benefit of the City's valuable land. Social media line: "In the coming months the Santa Ana Arts Collective and Tiny Tim Plaza projects funded by HOO fees will be completed. We have no doubt that each of the Council Members that voted to cut their source funding will also show up to cut the ribbons on opening day." Manny Escamilla Bio: Manny Escamilla is a local historian, urban planner, and lifelong Santa Ana resident. He's a graduate from SAC, UC Berkeley, and UCLA. Manny worked with the City of Santa Ana for 14 years prior to transitioning into public policy advocacy with fellow residents. Peter Bio: Peter Garcia is a transportation planner and mobility justice advocate with Santa Ana Active Streets Coalition. A graduate of the University of California, Los Angeles's Luskin School of Public Affairs, Garcia analyzes how race, class, and power interact with transportation policy and finance. What is the Housing Opportunity Ordinance? The Housing Opportunity Ordinance (HOO) is a City of Santa Ana policy where certain new developments in Santa Ana are required to either create onsite affordable units, refurbish older housing units, or contribute to an in -lieu fee reserved for building affordable housing. On September 1st, the Santa Ana City Council will hold a second reading of an ordinance that effectively destroys this program. While most of the public conversation focused on the reduction of the in -lieu fee from $15 to $5, other proposed changes completely eliminate the application of the HOO to new projects within all zoning changes after November 28, 2011. The City Council did this in the most bureaucratic and opaque way possible, by striking section 41-1902 (b) (2) and section 41-1902 (b) (4) of the HOO. These simple deletions mean that new projects within the Metro East Overlay Zone, the Transit Zoning Code (Downtown), and the Harbor Transit Corridor will no longer have to contribute to local affordable housing if they comply with the adopted plans. This current City Council is also rushing the adoption of the new General Plan update before the November election. The HOO will no longer cover `by -right' projects in the West Santa Ana/Streetcar Corridor, South Bristol Street, Grand Avenue/17th Street, South Main Street, and the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road focus areas once the City adopts its new General Plan. See the map below for the newly exempted areas. 0 0.5 1 mmmoff-= LL rc Ir Where the HOO Will No Longer Apply <tn Legend Specific Plans(SP), Focus Areas (FA). Special Districts (SD), end Overlay Zones (OZ) Metro East Mixed Use CZ Harbor Mixed Use Transit Corridor SP Downtown Santa Ana SD 01. South Main St. Focus Area ger 2. Grand Ave/17th St Focus Area Q 3. West Santa Ana Blvd. Focus Area 04. 55 Fwy/ Dyer Rd. Focus Area Q 5. South Bristol St. All other zones Map by Peter Garcia sources: Focus Areas: Santa Ana Dart Gererel Plan update Specific Pleas & Oe'erlays: City of Santa Ana Caning Map Zoning Sniper le: Santa Ana Open Data Portal The Current Proposal's Financial Impacts Our review of publicly available reports show a $25,263,001 decline in in -lieu fees from `pipeline' (currently approved) projects and $15,133,310 from anticipated projects. It is important to note that some of these pipeline projects are already exempt from the HOO and that the number of exempt anticipated projects will grow under the proposed revisions. Pipeline Projects Project Current HOO In -lieu Proposed HOO Difference Fee Estimate In -lieu Fee Estimate Mainplace $20,776,500 $6,925,500 Redevelopment' [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $13,851,000 The Legad02 $0 $0 $0 $3,334,000 $1,111,333 The Madison [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $2 222,667 $2,813,000 $937,666 Legacy Sunflower [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $1,875,33 2 units and 2 units and Hapham Residential $34,000 $34,000 $0 [$5 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $3,930,000 $3,930,000 $0 One Broadway Plaza [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$15 Sq. Ft.] $3,291,000 $1,097,000 Toms Trucks [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $2,194,000 $7,680,000 $2,560,000 Wermers [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $5,120,000 1 unit and 1 unit and West 5th Villas $14,500 $14,500 $0 [$5 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] TOTAL $41,873,000 $16,609,999 $25,263,001 Estimate based on 1,900 units meeting the regional average size of 729 sq. ft for new apartment units. z Exempt, does not exceed allowable General Plan density. Anticipated Projects Project Current HOO In -lieu Proposed HOO Difference Fee Estimate In -lieu Fee Estimate $12,935,010 $4,311,670 Warner Redhill' [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $g,623,340 $7,107,750 $2,369,250 Central Pointe [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $4,738,500 $2,657,205 $885,735 2700 N Main [$15 Sq. Ft.] [$5 Sq. Ft.] $1,771,470 3rd and Broadway $0 $0 $0 TOTAL $22,669,965 $7,566,655 $15,133,310 z Exempt, does not exceed allowable General Plan density. ' Pending General Plan changes would likely exempt the project. Gutting Affordable Housing in a Rent Burdened City Santa Ana systemically suffers from rent burden, which in turn adds to the severity of the City Council wanting to dismantle HOO. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines a household as rent burdened when the household pays more than 30% of its income for housing. According to American Community Survey data, Santa Ana's rent burden has increased from 33.3% to 36.5% between 2010-2018. Some parts of Santa Ana cross the threshold to severe rent burdened, where households pay more than 50% of their income to rent. Refer to the map below to see the rent burden in Santa Ana. e 0 0.5 1 mi Rent Burden in Santa Ana at the Census Tract Level Legend Median Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income 0 22%- 30% .40%- 45% 30%- 34% - 45%- 51% 0 35%-4O% Santa Ana Harder The US Department of Housing and Urban Develapment defines cost -burdened households as those paying more than 30%of their income in housing Map by Potcr Garcia Census tarts chosen based—theircentroida felling within Sella Ana municipal border Equal Interval clio slflcatlon Sources. Rent Bandar. Ceneua Bureau, 2018 ACS SY Table H450m (Median Goan Rental a Percentage of Household Income In the Past 12 Months) Newer units tend to serve the higher end of the rental market and command a premium price. The oldest units in the city's median rent is $1,367, while those built in 2013 or later have a median rent of $2,539. Median Gross Rent in Santa Ana based on Year Built 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 �m4oy2 100 10y0 1":01 4A11 1°100 1°j00 ryO00 ti010 10�Pa o" o" o" o" o" o" o" ca 19�9 10P 1�h 106 1p11 1,0 1(0 ry�OO ryQ1 010� ti (ACS 5V 2010 - 2C18 Estimates Table B25111) HOO funds from these higher end units are the City of Santa Ana's primary means by which it supports the building of affordable housing. In the coming months the Santa Ana Arts Collective and Tiny Tim Plaza projects funded by HOO fees will be completed. We have no doubt that each of the Council Members that voted to cut their source funding will also show up to cut the ribbons on opening day. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations The City Council's dismantling of the HOO will provide an unnecessary giveaway to developers while robbing itself of vital resources for affordable housing. Santa Ana is currently a hot real estate market. The City Council should take advantage of Santa Ana's position in the market, rather than squandering it, to strengthen its affordable housing stock while adding to housing production. Otherwise, the City Council is exacerbating the displacement of their own residents for no recognizable benefit. We recommend the following alternatives: 1. If the concern is truly about spurring construction during the pandemic, the proposed fee reduction should be applied as a temporary administrative measure. This option is already within the powers of the City Council to direct and approve without changing the rest of the ordinance. 2. Follow best practices by ordering a full study of the market impacts and reasonable fee target. The City has already retained the services of Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) for this in their July 2nd, 2019 review of the HOO. 3. Apply the HOO to all new residential development. 4. Provide exemptions based on desired factors such as sustainable building practices, innovative construction methods, cooperative ownership models, `missing middle' building types, and other public benefit thresholds. 5. Tackle the financing issue head on by working towards the creation of a public bank to help fund high quality local standards. This would have the added benefit of making the actual financial estimates of developers more transparent to policy makers. We agree that Santa Ana shouldn't shoulder the responsibility for the regional housing crisis, but the City should remember that it is beholden to the well-being of its residents, not the policy failures of neighboring cities. As members of the current Council can attest, the most significant barrier to development in Santa Ana is political opposition. Dismantling the HOO only adds to the number of politically organized residents who will oppose all new development. Flores, Dora From: Karla Navarro <karma_karla@icloud.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 4:00 PM To: eComment Subject: Agenda 20A,11C, 85A My name is Karla Navarro, and I am a lifelong resident of Santa Ana Once again we are urging you to defund police and the militarization of our city. I am against item 20A Can that money be used for ANYTHING else ? ? Why will their fitness center be in a residential area, this further more endangers our community. I am against the approval of 11c I am against the approval of 85 A Sent from my iPad Araiza, Fatima From: Oscar Grajecla <info@email.actionnetwork.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 4:12 PM To: eComment Subject: OPPOSITION to Agenda Item 7513: AMENDMENTS to Housing Opportunity Ordinance and Affordable Housing Funds Policies and Procedures E Comments System, AlcaMe PUkdo y miembros dell Coincflio L.e es&lbo este imeinsaje ein contra de Ilas einimienclas a Ila Iley de Oportuiniclades de Vivienda (Housing Opportui6lty Oir6inace) y uirglhdes que votein ein contra de 61klos. Cirear vllvieinda de Ibajo costo ein Sainta Aina fiene que sear una afta Iprliorlidad. L.a Ipaindemlia actual) Iha liincreirnentado Ilas Ipresiones ecoin6rnllcas y de vllvieinda ein faimllfias coin Ibayos �lingiresos ein Sainta Aina. B costo de Ila vllvieinda Iha estado fueira dell aIlcaince de iresidentes y coinfiinuair6 estaindo ein este chima ecoin6mico. Mientras que Ilos llingiresos est6in Ibajaindo y Ilos trabajos est6in siendo Ipeirdlidos, muchas faimllfias de Ibajos llingiresos est6in Ibatallllaindo Ipaira �peirmaineceir aIlojados. Alh&lta se6a 61 Ipeor morneinto Iposible Ipaira debifitair Ila Oirdeinainza de Oportuiniclades de Vivienda (Housing Opportui6lty Oir6inaince) y Ipaira agotair Ilos foindos que Ila ciudad fiene Ipaira coinstrUhr vivienda de Ibajo costo. Es inecesairlio que: 1. Mainteinga Ila cuota a $15 por Ipie cuadirado Ipaira todos Ilos Iproyectos de vllvieinda cuaindo las desairirollladores ino quierein IiincVuliir vllvieinda de Ibajo costo ein sus desairirolllos. 2. PiroNibir que 61neiro Ipaira vllvieinda de Ibajo costo se usa Ipaira Iprogiraimas de seguiriclad �p6blica. 3. Peirrnllfir que 61neiro Ipaira vllvieinda de Ibajo costo se use Ipaira Iprogiraimas de Coopeirativas de Vivienda que Ipuedein crear inueva vllvieinda de Ibajo costo. Y auinque ino sabeimos cu6into it duirair6 Ila ordein de it ainteineirnos ein casa, yo s6 coin ceirtitud que 61 llimpacto ecoin6mlco que inuestras farm plies est6in Ipasaindo se seinfir6 Igor imeses y winos Igor ve16lir. Residentes de Sainta Aina, ino desarroHadores, inecesitain dhVio ecoin6mico. L.e uirjo que vote ein contra de Ilas einimiendas Ipropuestas a &I Housing Opportui6lty Ordinance y 61 Affordable Housing Po ivies and Procedures Oscair Girajeda oscair—g'714@yalhoo.com 650 N. IL.acy St. U61t 237 Sainta Aina, Cdhifornia 92701 Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... 1 Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportunity Ordinance is Bad Policy and Bad Politics By Manny Escamilla and Peter Garcia 12 hours ago 6-8 minutes a Tiny Tim Plaza 'La Placita Cinco' What is the Housing Opportunity Ordinance? 1 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... The Housing Opportunity Ordinance (HOO) is a City of Santa Ana policy where certain new developments in Santa Ana are required to either create onsite affordable units, refurbish older housing units, or contribute to an in -lieu fee reserved for building affordable housing. On September 1st, the Santa Ana City Council will hold a second reading of an ordinance that effectively destroys this program. While most of the public conversation focused on the reduction of the in -lieu fee from $15 to $5, other proposed changes completely eliminate the application of the HOO to new projects within all zoning changes after November 28, 2011. The City Council did this in the most bureaucratic and opaque way possible, by striking section 41-1902 (b) (2) and section 41-1902 (b) (4) of the HOO. These simple deletions mean that new projects within the Metro East Overlay Zone, the Transit Zoning Code (Downtown), and the Harbor Transit Corridor will no longer have to contribute to local affordable housing if they comply with the adopted plans. This current City Council is also rushing the adoption of the new General Plan update before the November election. The HOO will no longer cover `by -right' projects in the West Santa Ana/Streetcar Corridor, South Bristol Street, Grand Avenue/17th Street, South Main Street, and the 55 Freeway/Dyer Road focus areas once the City adopts its new General Plan. See the map below for the newly exempted areas. Where the HOO Will No Longer Apply NLoge+id 2 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... s� 4 AL The Current Proposal's Financial Impacts .--•t �r.l�.•rr ww 4.4 roi+ikRro�s�lor; � waam Las Rlr�!» CC :fyi�otilr-7.vu ern 0G k�'' ,�4Y.ndx.Remulwr p] k�d. 4 rh do Fws 4r- Q] ~ kr 16d Fux 6*1, C33So-a k ±� xxr aowr ww�r Our review of publicly available reports show a $25,263,001 decline in in -lieu fees from `pipeline' (currently approved) projects and $15,133,310 from anticipated projects. It is important to note that some of these pipeline projects are already exempt from the HOO and that the number of exempt anticipated projects will grow under the proposed revisions. Pipeline Projects F'rofmi turr8=hi MUU I4-hilu VCOP "O HUU LIirmn i• F" 19411rn410 IM-1100 Fi$ F#1ieA M WMpiam PD. rT6,NxO S-Jan- DW Ibdo-wiapm r [515 FA. F1 ] SS sq. Fq 513 Onl,mo TM Leondaii, so so so TN 9664W 13.3U.No VA11.'= I$15 sq Pt Ll mssa Fl•I lacy Su4mw $Z&U3 WD U3T 5% li,tKf!k33 Jill Sq Ft I WSq dri 1 2 WO W 2 rhdA anA HM~RMWIental $34.DW %3i??] �Sa 115sq. Ft3 S5-"3'II $3,Op0,= S3 KID D_0 �. Ona f3rvWMEF Pkbs [L95Sq. F1.1 [$15 `-vc ]I I 3 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... t7,d6&= SI5{A7,Oviti 4'r@rNW r N [SI5 5+4 F11 15 341 FI I #5.12�.4�4 1 irwl and 1 ui Ord YAW WVi 914.5m #14M #A "ft 04 1 M 9q F1-1 slap"" " I M ' Estimate based on 1,900 units meeting the regional average size of 729 sq. ft for new apartment units. 2 Exempt, does not exceed allowable General Plan density. Anticipated Projects Fii E4111,1AUP tti:liw Fri EM1r11ai i $12,9v31kVI1) 54311,67a y ��. R�h�A` rS16S4. FLI 1 P5Sq. rLI C<+d+al Rarle I �y5Sq ] I I ii.73&.3CC� ►+a•y I [E'�M�] I Q FI I ,kdaud Duadw4y, I M I so I %U 2 Exempt, does not exceed allowable General Plan density. 3 Pending General Plan changes would likely exempt the project. Gutting Affordable Housing in a Rent Burdened City Santa Ana systemically suffers from rent burden, which in turn 4 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... adds to the severity of the City Council wanting to dismantle HOO. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development defines a household as rent burdened when the household pays more than 30% of its income for housing. According to American Community Survey data, Santa Ana's rent burden has increased from 33.3% to 36.5% between 2010-2018. Some parts of Santa Ana cross the threshold to severe rent burdened, where households pay more than 50% of their income to rent. Refer to the map below to see the rent burden in Santa Ana. Rent Burden in Santa Aria at the Census Tract Level rws� i.vio F.•s. r.o a . SA fR ! iTi ii4 ]Cti f11i � •fi IR 3kM1 I Syr 1� �liY del rYi N. IL wai o�.w�rr.ri rAw� � iirwM heuM� �a *wr e�ey'r*�r�b�lP4� .trams W !sm-. in As %1 C 4a-1�.1 Newer units tend to serve the higher end of the rental market and command a premium price. The oldest units in the city's median rent is $1,367, while those built in 2013 or later have a median rent of $2,539. Median Gross Rent in Santa Ana based on Year I3llll[ 2001D 5 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... 2soo 2000 1500 100 D 500 0 41: 1W -N, I+'LA." saw bxocratia ,khv G 12 N de qVI, HOO funds from these higher end units are the City of Santa Ana's primary means by which it supports the building of affordable housing. In the coming months the Santa Ana Arts Collective and Tiny Tim Plaza projects funded by HOO fees will be completed. We have no doubt that each of the Council Members that voted to cut their source funding will also show up to cut the ribbons on opening day. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations The City Council's dismantling of the HOO will provide an unnecessary giveaway to developers while robbing itself of vital resources for affordable housing. Santa Ana is currently a hot real estate market. The City Council should take advantage of Santa Ana's position in the market, rather than squandering it, to strengthen its affordable housing stock while adding to housing production. Otherwise, the City Council is exacerbating the displacement of their own residents for no recognizable benefit. We recommend the following alternatives: 1. If the concern is truly about spurring construction during the 6 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... pandemic, the proposed fee reduction should be applied as a temporary administrative measure. This option is already within the powers of the City Council to direct and approve without changing the rest of the ordinance. 2. Follow best practices by ordering a full study of the market impacts and reasonable fee target. The City has already retained the services of Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) for this in their July 2nd, 2019 review of the HOO. 3. Apply the HOO to all new residential development. 4. Provide exemptions based on desired factors such as sustainable building practices, innovative construction methods, cooperative ownership models, `missing middle' building types, and other public benefit thresholds. 5. Tackle the financing issue head on by working towards the creation of a public bank to help fund high quality local standards. This would have the added benefit of making the actual financial estimates of developers more transparent to policy makers. We agree that Santa Ana shouldn't shoulder the responsibility for the regional housing crisis, but the City should remember that it is beholden to the well-being of its residents, not the policy failures of neighboring cities. As members of the current Council can attest, the most significant barrier to development in Santa Ana is political opposition. Dismantling the HOO only adds to the number of politically organized residents who will oppose all new development. Manny Escamilla is a local historian, urban planner, and lifelong Santa Ana resident. He's a graduate from SAC, UC Berkeley, and UCLA. Manny worked with the City of Santa Ana for 14 years prior 7 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Escamilla and Garcia: The Dismantling of Santa Ana's Housing Opportu... about:reader?url=https://voiceofoe.org/2020/09/escamilla-and-garcia-the... to transitioning into public policy advocacy with fellow residents. Peter Garcia is a transportation planner and mobility justice advocate with Santa Ana Active Streets Coalition. A graduate of the University of California, Los Angeles's Luskin School of Public Affairs, Garcia analyzes how race, class, and power interact with transportation policy and finance. Opinions expressed in community opinion pieces belong to the authors and not Voice of OC. Voice of OC is interested in hearing different perspectives and voices. If you want to weigh in on this issue or others please email opinions@voiceofoc.org. 8 of 8 9/l/2020, 4:18 PM Orozco, Norma From:Luz Maria Martinez <info@email.actionnetwork.org> Sent:Tuesday, September 01, 2020 5:50 PM To:eComment Subject:OPPOSITION to Agenda Item 75B: AMENDMENTS to Housing Opportunity Ordinance and Affordable Housing Funds Policies and Procedures E-Comments System, Alcalde Pulido y miembros del Concilio Le escribo este mensaje en contra de las enmiendas a la ley de Oportunidades de Vivienda (Housing Opportunity Ordinace) y urgirles que voten en contra de ellos. Crear vivienda de bajo costo en Santa Ana tiene que ser una alta prioridad. La pandemia actual ha incrementado las presiones económicas y de vivienda en familias con bajos ingresos en Santa Ana. El costo de la vivienda ha estado fuera del alcance de residentes y continuará estando en este clima económico. Mientras que los ingresos están bajando y los trabajos están siendo perdidos, muchas familias de bajos ingresos están batallando para permanecer alojados. Ahorita sería el peor momento posible para debilitar la Ordenanza de Oportunidades de Vivienda (Housing Opportunity Ordinance) y para agotar los fondos que la ciudad tiene para construir vivienda de bajo costo. Es necesario que: 1. Mantenga la cuota a $15 por pie cuadrado para todos los proyectos de vivienda cuando las desarrolladores no quieren incluir vivienda de bajo costo en sus desarrollos. 2. Prohibir que dinero para vivienda de bajo costo se usa para programas de seguridad pública. 3. Permitir que dinero para vivienda de bajo costo se use para programas de Cooperativas de Vivienda que pueden crear nueva vivienda de bajo costo. 1 Y aunque no sabemos cuánto más durará la orden de mantenernos en casa, yo sé con certitud que el impacto económico que nuestras familias están pasando se sentirá por meses y años por venir. Residentes de Santa Ana, no desarrolladores, necesitan alivio económico. Le urjo que vote en contra de las enmiendas propuestas a él Housing Opportunity Ordinance y el Affordable Housing Policies and Procedures Luz Maria Martinez luzmmartinez83@yahoo.com Santa Ana Blvd Santa Ana, California 92703 2