Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-18-1994 PC MinutesMINUTES Planning Commission City of Orange PRESENT: Commissioners Bosch Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters Commissioner Walters joined the meeting late.) ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: John Godlewski, Manager of Current Planning; Stan Soo-Hoo, Assistant City Attorney; Gary Johnson, City Engineer; and Sue Devlin, Recording Secretary PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN RE: MINUTES OF JULY 6, 1994 July 18, 1994 Monday - 7:00 p.m. Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Cathcart, to approve the Minutes of July 6, 1994 as corrected by modifying the motion on Page 5, last paragraph, regarding Byblos Restaurant -- "Moved by Commissioner Walters, seconded by Commissioner Pruett, to recommend to the City Council to approve Application 29-79 as submitted by the applicant. It is proposed not to remove the low partition walls. By leaving them in, it softens the alcove and creates a good elevation. There is no precedent for floor to ceiling windows. Amore appropriate /acade would be to raise the window panes up on either side of the entry doors, which would repeat the original facade design." AYES: Commissioners Cathcart, Pruett Walters NOES: Commissioner Smith ABSENT: Commissioner Bosch MOTION CARRIED AYES: Commissioners Cathcart, Pruett, Smith NOES: None ABSTAINED: Commissioner Bosch ABSENT: Commissioner Walters MOTION CARRIED IN RE: NEW HEARING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2-94 -CITY OF ORANGE The Affordable Housing Plan is a voluntary incentive-based plan to be integrated into the existing development review process that encourages and promotes rather than mandates, affordable housing in Orange. The Plan is proposed for adoption by policy to supplement the Orange General Plan Housing Element. An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is also proposed in order to add a reference to the Plan in the residential code sections. NOTE: This item is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15305. Vern Jones presented the staff report to explain the draft Affordable Housing Plan. This Plan has been developed not just in response to the commitment made in the Housing Element, which was adopted last summer, but more importantly to provide an effective tool to assist the City in actually getting affordable housing built. Ensuring there is an adequate supply of housing affordable to the work force is an important part of the City's economic development efforts. The Plan was developed with assistance from those in the housing production business. Earlier in the year two meetings were Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 1994 professionals in the financial, building, non-profit housing and real estate community to solicit their input. The Plan has been modified accordingly. It was further modified following the joint City Council/Planning Commission study session held on May 31, 1994. Staff has tried to develop a plan that has a good balance between being comprehensive enough to provide good direction and yet understandable and straight forward as possible. He acknowledged the excellent efforts of the staff team who helped put together the Plan: Jere Murphy and Mary Ann Chamberlain -Advanced Planning who administer the City's Housing Element; Mary Ellen Laster -Economic Development who administers the Community Development Block Grant funds, as well as the Housing Programs; and Barbara Gander and Vern Jones Community Planning. This effort occurred under the guidance of a steering committee consisting of Chairman Bosch and Councilman Murphy. Barbara Gander reported the Affordable Housing Plan was developed under the premise of being an incentive-based plan that is a voluntary (not mandatory) document in its application. The Plan was also envisioned to be a comprehensive approach to affordable housing, which the Plan has accomplished through combining various components of the Orange 2000, the CHAS, the Needs Assessment Study and the Housing Element. Those documents were combined with the various housing ordinances -- the Senior Housing Ordinance, the Density Bonus Ordinance and the Accessory Second Unit Ordinance -- into asingle source document. Therefore, the Affordable Housing Plan is really the next step after the Housing Element. And it is a step that reinforces the City's commitment to creating affordable housing. She reviewed the components of the Plan: The Plan discusses the housing needs for the City of Orange and organizes it into special needs groups and income groups. It reviews the existing conditions of housing in the City. The Plan then presents the quantified objectives from the Housing Element as a planning guide for the new construction, rehabilitation and conservation of affordable housing.. The primary means of accomplishing those quantified objectives is addressed through the Plan's new construction policy. The policy establishes a target goal of allocating 20% of the annual production of new housing as affordable housing. Developers of new residential developments containing 11 or more units are specifically targeted to participate in discussions with staff to determine whether it would be feasible for them to include affordable units within the development. The ability to accomplish the 20% goal relies upon cooperation and partnerships between the building community and local government. And it begins with communication. For that reason, staff proposed to include a reference in the Residential Zoning Code to make developers aware of the Plan, it's policies and the incentives that are available. The Zoning Code reference will acknowledge that discussions with staff should occur early in the development process -- preferably prior to filing planning applications. Staff, in discussions with developers, can present the various incentives that are available to support affordable housing development, such as increases to residential density, reductions in development standards and planning assistance. It is in these discussions that the options to providing affordable housing can also be discussed -- rehabilitation of existing units instead of building new units. The discussions with staff are also used to make an early determination of whether it is feasible for developers to develop affordable housin. Feasibility is based on a variety of factors as described in the Plan (Section 3). To review a projects location, the criteria contained in Appendix I will be used. It describes what locations are appropriate for housing based upon their proximity to transportation services or services needed for daily living. Feasibility is also based upon the understanding of the economics of a project -- how affordable housing production can be encouraged by providing incentives to offset the cost of developing affordable vs. market rate units. The City's Density Bonus Ordinance, which is in Appendix A of the document, is the key tool to implement the Plan. It basically allows for increases to residential density and/or reductions to development standards to be granted in exchange for affordable units. Through the development of the Plan, staff identified that supplemental information was needed to help administer the Density Bonus Ordinance. A matrix can be found in Appendix B that helps to determine the number of types of incentives that can be granted in exchange for a certain number of affordable units. The matrix is intended to balance the amount of concessions granted with the amount of affordable housing produced. The other supplemental document is found in Appendix C. It presents a list of suggested reductions to development standards that could be used for affordable housing. The purpose of the list is to identify those standards that could be appropriate for reduction and thus helps streamline the development review process by eliminating the developer's and staff's guess work, which in turn reduces time and expense. It helps reduce the financial gap that is created between producing market rate vs. affordable housing. Commissioner Smith didn't hear the Historic Preservation Element mentioned in the combined documents. She was aware of many R-3 and R-4 zones where affordable housing would be appropriate and are in the historic neighborhoods of Orange -- EI Modena, Olive and Old Towne. How will this Plan impact the historic neighborhoods and what provisions have been made in the Plan to be consistent with the Historic Preservation Element? Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 1994 Ms. Gander explained any application that comes in for a density bonus or an increase for residential density would go through the conditional use permit process. At that time staff would look at the particular project and see how it fits with the Preservation Element (to make sure it's compatible with the goals and policies established), as well as the rest of the Elements in the General Plan. Commissioner Smith noted it might be well to mention that somewhere in the document. There is no reference to the Historic Preservation Element and it should be. The public hearing was opened. Public comments Bob Bennyhoff, 10642 Morada Drive, Orange Park Acres, supported the Plan in general. This is something Orange must have. The City has done some work towards affordable housing. There is a growing number of elderly people. The Plan makes sense and he liked the voluntary idea. Steve McHarris, 485 South Orange, asked if the Commission received the letter from O.T.P.A. concerning the Affordable Housing Plan? (The Commission did not receive a letter.) Will there be some assurance that the Plan would not significantly undermine the Design Guidelines for Old Towne they worked for (particularly the intent), as well as the current Development Standards? It would be helpful for staff to identify the effects of reduction in Development Standards on the draft -- Old Towne Design Guidelines and identify areas in Orange (including Old Towne) that would be eligible for affordable housing incentives. Commissioner Cathcart said the Affordable Housing Plan is a document that is suppose to be used for the entire City of Orange. Perhaps what the staff might want to do is be able to delineate what takes priority when someone comes in? The documents are in the system; they just need to come out correctly in the process. Corrine Schreck, 446 North James, was happy the City put a plan together and she was very much in favor of it. Larry Bond, 332 South Olive, agreed affordable housing was needed in Orange and everywhere. Not to have affordable housing is in a sense to deny people their basic human rights by default. Many people live on limited incomes or are disabled. The public hearing was closed. Vern Jones addressed the effects on the proposed ordinance and how the process of review and adoption work. He also noted for the record the Irvine Company sent a letter dated July 18, 1994 in support of the Plan. He referred to Appendix J for the development review process. There were a few flow charts to identify how projects work their way through the system. He thought staff could add to the process charts to identify how the various regulatory and planning processes fit together. Commissioner Smith's concern was that this was an incentive based program and they want to encourage additional units. She did not want it perceived that the density bonus would override existing ordinances or development standards in particular areas of town. There are two very large prime areas -- the Depot area and the School District property -- where the City needs to be sensitive. They have been identified in previous reports asrime areas and they are within an area that has a special development standard different from the City in terms of design, density, open space, etc. Also, in the EI Modena area there is a lot of R-3/R-4 zoning with a lot of single family inter-mixed with it. She was looking for more clarification so as not to give away the "whole store" because of a density bonus. Mr. Jones thought staff had the appropriate tools with the conditional use process to make sure there is consistency between what the City is trying to achieve in any particular area and still provide affordable housing. Chairman Bosch thought the key there was the thresholds that were established in terms of eligible minimal number of units for rehabilitation or new projects. The list of potential suggestions for relaxation of development standards within the document in no way address relaxation of Design Standards with regard to historical merit or building design. It has to be considered on an individual basis and how it 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 1994 conforms through the findings of the C.U.P. to the neighborhood plan within which the project is intended. There are adequate protections in place. Commissioner Cathcart could see there could be some concern on the part of some developers that they could be held hostage to do affordable housing in order to make up for the others that aren't. He wanted clarification that this was a voluntary Plan. Mr. Jones said the Plan was voluntary. The only mandatory part is for projects of 11 or more units. Staff is asking the developer to come in and talk to them to see what incentives are available, and how they could help each other to create affordable housing in order to make a successful project. But if they tell the staff no, it's voluntary. One of the concerns raised by the development community was through the process staff not delay the development review process. Staff has tried to do everything they can including introducing apre-application conference. The key is to let people know early in the process the City's goals and get them to work with staff as early in the process as they can to avoid delays. A question was raised about identifying areas in Old Towne and Orange appropriate for affordable housing. As was identified in the staff report, that is the next important step in the process -- to look at those areas to see where affordable housing may be most appropriate. Commissioner Cathcart asked if there were going to be "sacred cow zones"? If someone came in and wanted to develop the area with something other than affordable housing, would there be a less than sensitive point of view from staff? Mr. Jones didn't think they were at a point to create "sacred cow zones" in the process. Staff was looking at all opportunities to create affordable housing in the City. It can be done with good density, design and planning working hand in hand. Commissioner Smith referred to Appendix D-6 regarding senior housing. She asked about on-site services and medical facilities for seniors. Mr. Jones clarified the current ordinance is adopted and staff is not proposing to do anything to the ordinance. They have attempted to weave it into the Affordable Housing Plan to have a comprehensive document. He was not sure if he had a specific interpretation for on-site services and medical facilities other than it identifies for senior citizens there are specific services and facilities needed to accommodate their special needs. This is intended to provide some flexibility under the category of provision of amenities -- to allow some flexibility in the ordinance to allow that to happen. Chairman Bosch added there is a great need with the increasing seniors population to assure independence for as long a period of time as possible. That's why there are congregate care facilities. Seniors can be relatively independent except for certain key things such as transportation or the barber beauty function or a small convenience store for immediate necessities that is not available to the general public. The intent of the Seniors Housing Ordinance was to allow such features because they keep that independence and keep the citizens in town vs. institutionalization before it need be done. Commissioner Smith said another part of the discussion with the document, which was raised at the study session in May, is the question of monitoring -- especially the density bonus units which are suppose to be rented in the very low or low affordable housing category. She couldn't find anything up front in the document that was clear about who monitors these projects or what the process involved. But at the end of the document in the S.R.O. section there was some nice wording for monitoring. Could that wording or that type of plan be incorporated into making sure that the housing the City is allowing to be built is actually being used for what it is suppose to be used for? Ms. Gander responded the wording Commissioner Smith read was from the S.R.O. Ordinance. Staff also, in the Density Bonus Ordinance (Appendix A-7), included a discussion about monitoring and compliance; it's a plan that needs to be developed by a developer and the requirements are spelled out. In addition, in the Affordable Housing Plan, staff added a section to address maintenance of units Page 9). It references back to the Orange Municipal Code, Title 8 -Health & Safety Code that has residential maintenance provisions. Commissioner Smith thought the maintenance provisions were a different issue. Chairman Bosch referred to programs currently in effect that follow the ordinance. There is a track record with the City and they could ask staff to address that. He preferred to see some policy available to the 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 1994 City Council to enforce the day-to-day provisions as they change. It's difficult to change an Ordinance to the fine detail of which forms need to be completed and when vs. a general need for compliance and who will be responsible for it. Mr. Jones thought that was a good suggestion, particularly in light of the fact every single project when it comes to affordable housing is found to be unique. Mary Ellen Laster explained when a density bonus is approved for a specific project, a Declaration of Restrictions is recorded against the property. That Declaration spells out what the affordability covenants are going to be. That is approved at the Planning Commission level and signed by the owner. The deed is forwarded to the Redevelopment Agency and they have a monitoring system in place where on a monthly or cjuarterly basis, depending on the Declaration of Restrictions, it is monitored. The manager of the protect is required to provide staff with reports showing the names of the tenants and the rents to show compliance. For projects assisted with 20% set-aside staff has either an Owner Participation Agreement or a Disposition Development Agreement, which are referred to as OPA's and DDA's. Those documents spell out the affordability terms as well. And that also talks about the monitoring requirements the Agency has for which the owners must abide by. Up to this point there have been no problems with compliance. In many cases they're not asking for 100% affordability, especially with density bonuses where you may only be getting 20% of the units at an affordable rate. It's not difficult to have the owner provide rental information and income verification on the tenants. As far as new projects are concerned, they're only asking for a maximum of 49% of the units to be affordable. Up to this point, staff hasn't worried about the 'teeth" for enforcement, although there are teeth in the agreements. Unless funding can be held back, it's hard to know what type of action the Agency or City would take if non-compliance were to occur. Commissioner Smith asked if deed restrictions applied to all affordable housing projects? Ms. Laster said if any project has received assistance either through a density bonus or receiving financial assistance from the Agency, there are restrictions and recordations against the property. Commissioner Pruett asked who was paying for the monitoring of the projects? Ms. Laster said there was a way to ask the developer to pay for the monitoring. The City, at this point, has chosen not to do that, but other cities have been able to charge a monitoring fee as part of the application process. Commissioner Pruett suggested staff might want to look at that because it's going to be a growing expense to the City. Either it should be looked at from the standpoint of being reimbursed by the developer or possibly having some property taxes set aside to cover that for low cost housing projects. He thought the cost of government should be borne by the appropriate parties. Chairman Bosch thought staff should include that in their report to the City Council identifying current status and options available legally or could be pursued. Commissioner Smith raised the question because she knew of a senior housing unit in town which has been in existence for perhaps 15 years. There is only one unit that seniors live in; the rest of the units are occupied by families. It seems that if they're encouraging the building of hundreds of units, they need to make sure they're being used for the right purpose. Commissioner Walters was troubled with the Affordable Housing Plan because of the experience Santa Ana has had with excessive numbers of people living per room in the apartments. He didn't see anything mentioned about monitoring the number of people living in each of the units. Will the number of people living in a dwelling be enforced? Chairman Bosch said it definitely was a concern, but was a separate issue from tonight's discussion. They looked to the City Attorney for an update of the overcrowding issue. Mr. Soo-Hoo explained the Santa Ana overcrowding ordinance was reviewed by the State Court of Appeals and was overturned just on their determination that it violated State law (Urnform Housing Code provisions). There has been no update on that. However, there might be opportunities to incorporate some measures in the Affordable Housing Plan to address that. But, at this time, the City cannot strictly impose overcrowding measures that are over and above that in State law. 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 1994 Commissioner Walters said there was a major project in EI Modena that has been a problem of crime and density/overuse. There is nothing wrong with giving a housing density to encourage low rent or affordable housing. The abuse comes when the head count within the law is not monitored and it reaches high levels (more than 8 people per room). He stressed they needed to be careful and not spread the abuse of the system. At least by monitoring the project, the City would be in a position to know what the number of tenants are per apartment unit. And if any cutback at some point is allowed, the City would know where they stand. He asked that it be added as one of the monitoring features the City is looking to create. Mr. Jones believed staff could continue working with the City Attorney's office to follow that case and look at the feasibility somehow and incorporating it into the ordinance. Commissioner Smith asked what does Orange accomplish by having an incentive-based affordable housing program rather than a mandated program? What are the options and what are the benefits to the incentive plan? Mr. Jones said that was something staff struggled with when they started the Plan over a year ago in terms of mandatory vs. voluntary programs. They've come to the conclusion that it doesn't really matter whether it is mandated or whether it is voluntary because the key elements that actually create affordable housing have to be the same. If you mandate the developers provide 20%, but there are no incentives or profit in it for the builders, affordable housing will be non-existent. The elements staff has heard from talking with the building community and non-profit housing advocates/housing consultants all come back to the same thing. You have to provide incentives in order to create affordable housing. Staff tried to create a document that recognizes what the key elements are in order to actually get affordable housing built. It really doesn't have to do with mandatory or voluntary -- it's things like creating a process that is fast and efficient, providing incentives, as well as Design Guidelines to ensure there is a quality living environment. Even the best ordinance gets down to the people administering the Plan and it comes back to the people. It's going to take work on everyone's part in order to make affordable housing happen. The fundamental elements are included to help get affordable housing built; that's an incentive-based document, working together with an organizational structure, and linking funding sources to affordable housing projects. Staff has combined all of that in anon-threatening way to the building community. Chairman Bosch stated the key to this was providing a voluntary basis so people's property rights and individual choice in terms of whether or not they desired to develop units could be undertaken. At the same time incentives through the good old American way of indicating how there are ways to provide affordable housing and at the same time making it economical for the developer, and allowing affordable housing to fit appropriately into Orange's community plan rather than a mandated plan. Hopefully, this will work. Commissioner Pruett was very supportive of the incentive approach. To mandate a program, it takes away creativity. An incentive program will allow people to come forward with ideas in how to approach this and it will add value to the community and the projects. Moved by Commissioner Smith, seconded by Commissioner Bosch, to recommend to the City Council to approve the Affordable Housing Plan for adoption by resolution to supplement the Orange General Plan Housing Element and also to recommend an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance be made in order to add a reference to the Plan in the Residential Code section of the Ordinance. It is requested of staff to spell out in more specific detail what the process will be to monitor the use of the density bonus units and a plan to monitor overcrowding in the particular units. AYES: Commissioners Bosch, Cathcart, Pruett, Smith, Walters NOES: None MOTION CARRIED Chairman Bosch announced the Commission would be reconvening in the Weimer Room for a study session with regard to interfacing with the Police Department concerning recommendations and information for better planning in the key commercial areas of the City of Orange. The public hearing adjourned at 8:05 p.m. sld 6