The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCorrespondence - Item 30 Becerra, Alexis From: Dale Helvig < Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 2:56 PM To: eComment; Amezcua, Valerie; Phan, Thai; Vazquez, Benjamin; Lopez, Jessie; Bacerra, Phil; Hernandez, Johnathan; Penaloza, David Cc: Nunez, Alvaro; Carvalho, Sonia R.; Thai, Minh; Vazquez, Sylvia; Hall, Jennifer Subject: 2026-08-04 Letter to City Council - Item 30 Attachments: 2026-08-04 Letter to City Council - Item 30.pdf Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana.Use caution when opening attachments or links. See attached file. Dale Helvig Resident, Santa Ana 1 Dale Helvig Resident, Santa Ana CA 92706 August 3, 2026 Mayor Amezcua and Santa Ana City Councilmembers City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza, 81" Floor Santa Ana CA 92702 Subject: Item 30: Density Bonus Agreement No. 2026-03—Watermarke Sandpointe Mixed-Use Development. The City of Santa Ana continues to approve mixed-use developments that have requested a density bonus agreement. This is a trend that is unsustainable. Some questions the city needs to consider: 1) As we continue to exceed RHNA goals, is someone at the city looking at the long-term effect this will have on future RHNA Cycles? 2) Why do we continue to placate every developer's desire to build the maximum size project for any given piece of land? We continue to hear the American dream is to own you own residence. This project does nothing to make that a reality. It also removes much needed parking for adjacent offices. 3) This project should be placed on hold until the next RHNA cycle. Projects such as this only pad the pockets of developers while contributing to the long-term decline of the quality of the residents. DO NOT approve this item, approving this Density Bonus will short-change the City in future RHNA cycles. Respectfully, Dale A Helvig Resident, Santa Ana cc: Alvaro Nunez, Minh Thai, City Manager, Santa Ana Deputy City Manager, Santa Ana Sonia Carvalho, Sylvia Vazquez, City Attorney, Santa Ana Deputy City Manager, Santa Ana Page 1 of 1 2026-08-04 Letter to City Council-Item 30 Becerra, Alexis From: James Lloyd <james@calhdf.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 9:18 AM To: eComment Cc: Carvalho, Sonia R.; !City Clerk; Planning; Nunez, Alvaro Subject: public comment re item 30 for tonight's Council meeting Attachments: Santa Ana - 200 East Sandpointe Avenue - HAA Letter - CC.pdf -Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana.Use caution when opening attachments or links. Dear Santa Ana City Council, The California Housing Defense Fund (CaIHDF) submits this attached public comment re item 30 for tonight's Council meeting,the proposed 400-unit housing development project at 200 East Sandpointe Avenue,which includes 20 extremely low-income units. Sincerely, James M. Lloyd Director of Planning and Investigations California Housing Defense Fund james@calhdf.org CaIHDF is grant&donation funded Donate today- https://calhdf.org/donate/ i CAL HDF Aug 4, 2026 City of Santa Ana 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Re: Proposed Housing Development Project at 200 East Sandpointe Avenue By email: eCommentrasanta-ana.org CC: scarvalho(casanta-ana.orq; cityclerk(casanta-ana.orq; Planning(casanta-ana.orq; ANunez(asanta-ana.org Dear Santa Ana City Council, The California Housing Defense Fund(Ca1HDF)submits this letter to remind the City of its obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluating the proposed 400-unit housing development project at 200 East Sandpointe Avenue,which includes 20 extremely low-income units.These laws include the Housing Accountability Act(HAA),the Density Bonus Law(DBL),AB 130,and California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)guidelines. The HAA provides the project legal protections.It requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific,objective,written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5,subd. (j).)The HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would reduce the project's density unless,again,such written findings are made. (Ibid.)As a development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses,the project falls within the HAA's ambit,and it complies with applicable provisions of the local zoning code and the City's general plan.Increased density,concessions,and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL(Gov. Code, § 65915)do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan,for purposes of the HAA. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3).) The HAA's protections therefore apply,and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards,as outlined above.Furthermore,if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility,it must conduct"a thorough analysis of the economic,social,and environmental effects of the action"(Id. at subd. M. The DBL offers the project certain benefits.(See Gov. Code, § 65915.)The City must respect these benefits.In addition to increased density,the City must grant any requested 2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland,CA 94612 www.calhdf.org concessions and waivers.If the City were to deny the requested waivers, Government Code section 65915,subdivision(e)(1)requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety,and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact.If the City were to deny the requested requested concessions, Government Code section 65915,subdivision(d)(1) requires findings that the concessions would not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions,that the concessions would have a specific,adverse impact on public health or safety,or that the concessions are contrary to state or federal law.The City,if it makes any such findings,bears the burden of proof. (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd.(d)(4).)Of note,the DBL specifically allows for a reduction in required accessory parking in addition to the allowable waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).)Additionally,the California Court of Appeal has ruled that when an applicant has requested one or more waivers and/or concessions pursuant to the DBL,the City"may not apply any development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as designed,even if the building includes `amenities'beyond the bare minimum of building components"(Bankers Hill 150 a City of San Diego(2022)74 Cal.App.Sth 755,775.) Finally,the project is exempt from state environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168(Program EIR).The project is also eligible for an exemption from CEQA pursuant to AB 130 (Pub.Res. Code, § 21080.66). Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err,and may be sued,when they improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA exemption or streamlined CEQA review to which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc.a County of San Diego(2024)99 Cal.App.Sth 890,911.) As you are well aware,California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage.New housing such as this is a public benefit:it will provide badly needed affordable housing; it will bring new customers to local businesses;it will expand the city's tax base;and it will reduce displacement of existing residents by reducing competition for existing housing. Ca1HDF therefore strongly urges the City to approve the project,consistent with its obligations under state law. Ca1HDF is a 501(c)(3)non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels,including low-income households.You may learn more about Ca1HDF at .,, ,: Sincerely, Dylan Casey Ca1HDF Executive Director 2of3 �_ James M.Lloyd Ca1HDF Director of Planning and Investigations 3of3