Costa Mesa City Council
November 15, 2022

11333

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AND

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Agenda September 13, 2021

3. Zoom Webinar:

Please click the link below to join the webinar:
https://zoom.us/j/98376390419?pwd=dnpFelc5TnU4a3BKWVIyRVZMallZZz09 Or sign into Zoom.com and “Join a Meeting”
Enter Webinar ID: 983 7639 0419/ Password: 905283
• If Zoom is not already installed on your computer, click “Download & Run Zoom” on the launch page and press “Run” when prompted by your browser. If Zoom has previously been installed on your computer, please allow a few moments for the application to launch automatically.
• Select “Join Audio via Computer.”
• The virtual conference room will open. If you receive a message reading, “Please wait for the host to start this meeting,” simply remain in the room until the meeting begins.
• During the Public Comment Period, use the “raise hand” feature located in the participants’ window and wait for city staff to announce your name and unmute your line when it is your turn to speak. Comments are limited to 3 minutes, or as otherwise directed.

Participate via telephone:

Call: 1 669 900 6833 Enter Webinar ID: 983 7639 0419/ Password: 905283 During the Public Comment Period, press *9 to add yourself to the queue and wait for city staff to announce your name/phone number and press *6 to unmute your line when it is your turn to speak. Comments are limited to 3 minutes, or as otherwise directed.

4. Additionally, members of the public who wish to make a comment on a specific agenda item, may submit a written comment via email to the City Clerk at [email protected].

Comments received by 12:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting will be provided to the City Council, made available to the public, and will be part of the meeting record.

5. While the City does not expect there to be any changes to the above process for participating in this meeting, if there is a change, the City will post the information as soon as possible to the City’s website.

Note that records submitted by the public will not be redacted in any way and will be posted online as submitted, including any personal contact information. All pictures, PowerPoints, and videos submitted for display at a public meeting must be previously reviewed by staff to verify appropriateness for general audiences. No links to YouTube videos or other streaming services will be accepted, a direct video file will need to be emailed to staff prior to each meeting in order to minimize complications and to play the video without delay. The video must be one of the following formats, .mp4, .mov or .wmv. Only one file may be included per speaker for public comments. Please e-mail to the City Clerk at [email protected] NO LATER THAN 12:00 Noon on the date of the meeting.

21334

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AND

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Agenda September 13, 2021
Note regarding agenda-related documents provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the City Council agenda packet (GC §54957.5): Any related documents provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the City Council Agenda Packets will be made available for public inspection. Such documents will be posted on the city’s website.

All cell phones and other electronic devices are to be turned off or set to vibrate. Members of the audience are requested to step outside the Council Chambers to conduct a phone conversation.

Free Wi-Fi is available in the Council Chambers during the meetings. The network username available is: CM_Council. The password is: cmcouncil1953.

As a LEED Gold Certified City, Costa Mesa is fully committed to environmental sustainability.

A minimum number of hard copies of the agenda will be available in the Council Chambers.

For your convenience, a binder of the entire agenda packet will be at the table in the foyer of the Council Chambers for viewing.

The City of Costa Mesa’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, we will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. Please contact the City Clerk’s office 24 hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible 714-754-5225 or at [email protected]. El objetivo de la ciudad de Costa Mesa es cumplir con la ley de Estadounidenses con Discapacidades (ADA) en todos los aspectos. Si como asistente o participante en esta reunión, usted necesita asistencia especial, más allá de lo que normalmente se proporciona, intentaremos de complacer en todas las maneras. Favor de comunicarse a la oficina del Secretario de la Ciudad con 24 horas de anticipación para informarnos de sus necesidades y determinar si alojamiento es realizable al 714-754-5225 o [email protected]

31335

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AND

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Agenda September 13, 2021

SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT STUDY

SESSION
SEPTEMBER 13, 2021 – 5:00 P.M.

JOHN STEPHENS
Mayor

MANUEL CHAVEZ ANDREA MARR
Council Member - District 4 Mayor Pro Tem - District 3

JEFFREY HARLAN LOREN GAMEROS
Council Member - District 6 Council Member - District 2

ARLIS REYNOLDS DON HARPER
Council Member - District 5 Council Member - District 1 City Attorney City Manager Kimberly Hall Barlow Lori Ann Farrell Harrison

BYRON DE ARAKAL
Chair

JON ZICH DIANNE RUSSELL Vice Chair Planning Commissioner

RUSSELL TOLER ADAM ERETH
Planning Commissioner Planning Commissioner

TARQUIN PREZIOSI JENNIFER LE
Assistant City Attorney Director of Economic and Development Services

41336

REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AND

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND

HOUSING AUTHORITY
Agenda September 13, 2021

CALL TO ORDER

ROLL CALL
NEW BUSINESS:

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
RECOMMENDATION:

Provide feedback on the Public Review Draft Housing Element before its submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

Draft Housing Element
Revised densities for candidates sites (545 & 575 Anton Blvd.) Public Comments
Attachments:

ADJOURNMENT

51337
City of Costa Mesa
Agenda Report
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
TITLE:

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT 2021-2029 HOUSING ELEMENT
DEPARTMENT: ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

DEPARTMENT/PLANNING DIVISION
PRESENTED BY:

JENNIFER LE, DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CONTACT INFORMATION: [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
RECOMMENDATION:

Provide feedback on the Public Review Draft Housing Element before its submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

BACKGROUND:

The basis of the 2021-2029 sixth cycle Housing Element Update is compliance with the State’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the planning and zoning for additional housing units as allocated by the State and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The following table provides a breakdown of Costa Mesa’s final RHNA allocation:

Table 1 - Final RHNA Allocation
Income Category% of Area
Median
Income
(AMI)
Affordable
Monthly
Rent
Income Range Min. -
Max.

RHNA
Allocatio
n
Very Low Income0-50% AMI $961 - $1,281 -- $64,050 2,919 units Low Income 51-80% AMI $2,561 $64,051 $102,450 1,794 units Moderate Income81-120%
AMI
$3,090 $102,451 $123,600 2,088 units
Above Moderate
Income
%120% AMI >$3,090 $123,601 -- 4,959 units
Total 11,760 units
During the past year and a half, the City has held several town hall meetings and study sessions regarding the required Housing Element Update. Study sessions were previously held with the

61338
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
regarding the required Housing Element Update. Study sessions were previously held with the Planning Commission and City Council on March 1, 2021, March 23, 2021, and April 27, 2021. At these study sessions, staff presented information regarding the RHNA process, new State housing regulations, consequences of non-compliance with State Housing Element law, Costa Mesa’s demographics and preliminary Community Profile data, a summary of community outreach efforts and feedback, and an introduction to the housing plan and the sites analysis process. The September 13, 2021 study session is the fourth publicly noticed study session regarding the housing element update and process.

The staff reports and meeting videos for previous study sessions are available at the following links:

March 1, 2021 Planning Commission Study Session Staff Report:
http://ftp.costamesaca.gov/costamesaca/planningcommission/agenda/2021/2021-03-01/SR-1.pdf Meeting Video:
<https://costamesa.granicus.com/player/clip/3670?view_id=10&redirect=true> March 23, 2021 City Council Study Session Staff Report:
<http://ftp.costamesaca.gov/costamesaca/council/agenda/2021/2021-03-23/Item-1.pdf> Meeting Video:
<https://costamesa.granicus.com/player/clip/3697?view_id=10&redirect=true> April 27, 2021 City Council and Planning Commission Joint Study Session Staff Report:
<http://ftp.costamesaca.gov/costamesaca/council/agenda/2021/2021-04-27/Item-1.pdf> Meeting Video:
<https://costamesa.granicus.com/player/clip/3710?view_id=10&redirect=true> ANALYSIS:

At the April 27, 2021 joint Planning Commission/City Council study session, a number of issues were discussed and feedback was received by the public, Planning Commission, and City Council. The purpose of the study session was to provide an opportunity for feedback on the proposed focus areas and corridors for potential housing and the housing opportunity sites and recommended densities within those corridors to finalize the City Council’s high-level housing goals. The following is a summary of general comments received during the study session and how they have been addressed in the Public Review Draft Housing Element.

Planning Commission Comments:
1) Consider 4-plex and 6-plex bungalows in single family neighborhoods since they maintain the same height and streetscape.
· The 4-plex and 6-plex development types can integrate well with established low- density residential neighborhoods. Staff will continue to evaluate how such housing types may be incorporated into the City’s planning and zoning codes. However, for Housing Element purposes, the State requires a minimum density of 30 du/acre to demonstrate compliance with RHNA requirements for the provision of housing in affordable categories. The incremental increase in housing in established single family neighborhoods will be addressed through ADU and JADUs and other incremental

71339
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
changes.
2) Plans for housing should be integrated with more open space and consideration of the existing network of neighborhoods.
· Open space and other development standards will be evaluated with the comprehensive zoning code and general plan updates following adoption of the Housing Element.
3) Encouraged removal of the Mesa West Residential Ownership urban plan. · The Draft Housing Element includes a program for the potential removal of this urban plan following Housing Element adoption.
4) Add residential units on the 17th Street corridor as mixed-use development and around the airport area as alternative housing sites.
· The Draft Housing Element includes programs for further study of these corridors for potential housing opportunities. Even though specific sites in these areas are not identified as housing opportunity sites, the City could consider these locations as potential housing areas in the future.
5) The City should be proactive in its conversation with faith-based organizations for use of their properties for affordable housing.
· Programs to continue the conversation with the faith-based community are included in the Draft Housing Element. Please refer to Program 3J.
6) Infrastructure studies (water, sewer, etc) should be considered in planning for additional housing units.
· As part of the Housing Element Update, the City will prepare an environmental study that will include high-level studies related to infrastructure and public services at a program level. Additional more detailed studies would be undertaken as part of the zoning and General Plan Updates that would be necessary to implement the Housing Element programs.
7) Discussed a citizen advisory committee related to Measure Y. · Staff will be undertaking a larger community conversation about the necessity of a compliant Housing Element and the Measure Y process, which include formation of an advisory group. The City anticipates the General Plan and zoning changes necessary to implement the Housing Element will be subject to Measure Y. 8) Consideration should be given to environmental justice goals and affirmative fair housing related to air quality and quality of life with placement of housing along major freeways, near airports, etc.
· Environmental justice and fair housing goals are incorporated into the fabric of the Housing Element and staff agrees these goals must be a part of future General Plan and zoning actions related to Housing Element implementation. The Draft Housing Element identifies housing opportunity sites along the 405 Freeway such as the Home Ranch and Sakioka sites. These sites are very large and would allow for site planning of mixed-use projects including housing and office use that would allow for site planning solutions including sufficient setbacks for residential units. No housing opportunity sites have been identified along the airport industrial area though staff have included a Housing Element Program to further study this potential. 9) With the potential for housing along Newport Boulevard, Harbor Boulevard and the 17th Street corridors, visioning for these areas and form based codes should be considered to provide flexibility in development while maintaining the streetscape and human scale of development. · Through public outreach and comments received from the City Council and Planning Commission, staff recognizes that there is strong support in the community for

81340
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
Commission, staff recognizes that there is strong support in the community for developing a specific vision for each of the corridors as identified in the Draft Housing Element for future growth. Visioning exercises and the potential for form-based codes will be evaluated during the general plan and zoning changes that follow the Housing Element.

City Council Comments:
1) Is 850 ADUs in relation to the number of residential lots a realistic assumption? · The ADU assumptions are realistic based on the number of applications received in the first 6 months of 2021. The City has also experienced an uptick in the number of ADU proposals in multi-family sites that could lead to even more ADUs than anticipated. 2) The City should consider tracking ADU affordability and data on units occupied by family members.
· Although there is not City specific data for ADU affordability rates, the Draft Housing Element uses the safe harbor assumptions resulting from SCAG a specific study of the Orange County area. The City could request information on anticipated rental prices or family member occupancy figures at the time of application. The Draft Housing Element recognizes that ADU programs will need to be monitored for effectiveness and includes this in Program 3L of the Housing Plan.
3) Understanding the reasons for Costa Mesa having the lowest number of housing development in the neighboring cities.
· The City has experienced a decline in larger development applications in the past several years. Based on general feedback from the development community, this is could be due to the uncertainty introduced by Measure Y. However, smaller developments that are below the 40 dwelling unit threshold have been processed since 2016 including a 38-unit development on Newport Boulevard. The Draft Housing Element refers to Measure Y as a potential constraint for housing development and that a vote of the people will be required to fully implement the adopted housing element as drafted. Please refer to Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3G. 4) Importance of communication with the public on data gathered and how the data is being incorporated.
· The Draft Housing Element includes a comprehensive summary of all public meetings, town halls, surveys and individual submittals. Please refer to Appendix C of the Draft Housing Element.
5) Emphasize the importance of Community Profile and how it is used to formulate the housing plan such as the aging population and their housing needs. · The Community Profile includes detailed data on the population, housing and income levels. Based on this data, the housing programs and policies included in the Housing Element Update recognize the needs of seniors, large households and the affordability needs for various households. Although the Housing Element includes the opportunity sites and the programs to address housing needs, some of the incentive to develop these sites are market driven and may need to be adjusted at project level such as the mix of bedrooms in a development or universal design features, etc. Please refer to Section 4, Housing Plan Program 2D and 2E.
6) Integrate senior housing with the rest of the community to promote healthy aging. · The Draft Housing Element recognizes that specific features of co-housing and multi- generational housing needs to be further studied and included in development

91341
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
generational housing needs to be further studied and included in development standards and guidelines in the general plan and zoning code update. Please refer to Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3E.
7) Consider public gathering spaces as much as open space in planning of housing developments.
· The visioning exercises for specific corridors will include public open spaces and streetscapes studies appropriate for each neighborhood. This effort will be addressed with the General Plan and zoning code amendments following the Housing Element’s adoption.
8) Keep studying the airport area as a potential housing opportunity area for younger professionals.
· As directed by City Council, this area will be evaluated for potential housing opportunities. Coordination with the Airport Land Use Commission will be required.

Please see Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3H.
9) Housing units should include a variety of household types such as singles, single parent households and larger families.
· The Draft Housing Element includes a comprehensive Community Profile that breaks down household types and their housing needs such as non-family households, which have increased in the past decade to more than 40 percent. Please refer to Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3F.
10)Consider hotel/ motel conversion options and using available state funding for such. · The City will evaluate the potential benefits of motel conversion, co-living and efficiency housing options. Please refer to Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3F. 11)Consider pre-approved ADU plans to incentivize ADU development. · The Draft Housing Element includes a program to promote development of ADUs such as permit ready plans, waiver or reduction of permit fees, expedited plan checks and exploring other funding options. Please refer to Chapter 4, Housing Plan, Program 3E. 12) Discuss housing development options with smaller developers and adjust programs and fees to accommodate large and small size developments.
· This would require fee studies and additional analysis to formulate an objective basis for varying housing development types. Local developers have been involved in the outreach process and have stated timing and streamlining of project review as an opportunity to improve the development environment.

Public Review Draft Housing Element
Following the April 27, 2021 study session, staff and the City’sexpert housing consultants prepared the Public Review Draft Housing Element, incorporating feedback from the prior public town halls and study sessions. The Public Review Draft was posted online at the City’swebsite on August 17, 2021 and hardcopies were available at City Hall, the Donald Dungan Library and the Mesa Verde Library.

Approximately 40,000 flyers were mailed to Costa Mesa residents City-wide and the release was widely publicized via social media, community platforms and through local contacts with community organizations. Comments on the public review draft are being accepted through September 15, 2021.

As of the writing of this report, the City has received seven written comments via email and six online submissions. Public comments are provided as an attachment to this report and generally pertain to:
· the inclusion of the Chargers / The Hive site as a housing opportunity site;

101342
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
· the inclusion of local hire requirements for development; · new housing being visually attractive, and include greenbelts, sound walls, be located near jobs, transit stops and high-resource neighborhoods;
· increase densities to make housing projects more financially feasible and encourage mixed income higher density communities, as well as other housing options like co-housing and motel conversions;
· consider whether the Casa Bella Apartments should be listed as an “at risk” affordable housing development (i.e. an affordable housing project “at risk” of converting to market rate units); and
· consider how assisted living and group living are counted toward the City’s housing need.

September 2, 2021 Town Hall Meeting
Staff held a town hall meeting on September 2, 2021 to discuss and receive feedback regarding the Public Review Draft. The meetings were virtual and provided in English and Spanish. More than 60 individuals participated in the English language breakout room and six in the Spanish language break out room.

Topics discussed at the town hall meeting included:
· the need for an inclusionary housing ordinance and requiring affordable housing in conjunction with added densities;
· consideration of potential quality of life impacts that may result from higher densities · use of consistent data related to housing cost burden; · options and incentives for development of Single Room Occupancies (SROs); · number of ADUs assumed in the Draft Housing Element;
· consideration of reduced parking and setbacks to incentivize development; · graphics that show comparison of existing and proposed densities on the identified housing opportunity corridors;
· use of federal monies to encourage higher density development as appropriate; · affordable housing units assumed for the State-owned Fairview Developmental Center; · assumptions regarding affordable housing on sites with Development Agreements; and · consideration of the impacts of added housing units to sewer, water, traffic, other infrastructure and public services including police and fire services.

Housing Element Guiding Principles
Based on input from the community, local officials and business community, and with consideration of the State’srequirements, the City established four guiding principles that were referenced throughout the Housing Element Update process, which shaped the sites analysis process and development of the housing goals, programs, and policies. The guiding principles are rooted in community engagement and local knowledge as follows:
• The City will plan for responsible growth that is fitting for each of the unique areas within the City with the understanding that the different characteristics, even within districts, result in different housing needs and appropriate housing types.
• The City will engage the Costa Mesa community at multiple times throughout the Housing Element update to incorporate local knowledge and input into the planning process.

111343
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
• The City will create a plan, which meets the local needs of the community as well as the requirements of the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). • The City will develop actionable policies and programs that address identified constraints within the community profile analysis.

Based on community feedback, the Housing Element identifies housing opportunity sites within “focus areas” and along major corridors in the City that are most suitable for potential future housing growth. These areas include:
· Area north of the 405 Freeway
· SoBECA
· Harbor Boulevard corridor
· Placentia Avenue corridor
· West 19th Street corridor
· Mesa West Bluffs area/ southern portion of Newport Boulevard Within these corridors and areas, housing opportunity sites were identified for purposes of establishing compliance with RHNA, based on certain criteria.

Housing Element Organization
The Draft Housing Element represents the City’s policy program for the 2021-2029 6th Planning Period. The Draft Housing Element is comprised of the following Chapters:
• Chapter 1: The Introduction contains a summary of the content, organization and statutory considerations of the Housing Element;
• Chapter 2: Community Profile contains an analysis of the City’s population, household and employment base, and the characteristics of the housing stock; • Chapter 3: Housing Constraints, Resources, and Fair Housing examines governmental and non-governmental constraints on production, maintenance, and affordability of housing and provides a summary of housing resources, including sites identification and funding and financial considerations; and
• Chapter 4: Policy Plan addresses Costa Mesa’s identified housing needs, including housing goals, policies, and programs.
• Appendices provide supplementary background resources including:
o Appendix A - Review of Past Performance of 5th Cycle Programs o Appendix B - Summary of Adequate Sites Analysis
o Appendix C - Summary of Outreach
o Appendix D - Glossary of Housing Terms
Chapter 1 - Introduction
The Introduction covers the basics of Housing Element requirements and the related State requirements; includes a reference to all required sections of the Housing Element; and refers to the guiding principles that directed all chapters and the related data sources.

Chapter 2 - Community Profile
The Community Profile provides an analysis of the Costa Mesa population and housing stock for

121344
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
The Community Profile provides an analysis of the Costa Mesa population and housing stock for policy considerations within this Housing Element. The Costa Mesa community’shousing needs are directly correlated to the demographic composition of the population and the conditions of existing housing within the City. The data analyzed in this Community Profile sets the baseline for the Housing Element goals, policies, and programs, which are uniquely adapted to fit the needs of Costa Mesa. The following tables include a few excerpts of the data and highlights specific characteristics of the Costa Mesa population, household types and income levels.

131345
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
For the full analysis of the population, income, household characteristics and housing needs, please refer to Chapter 2 of the Draft Housing Element.

Based on the data presented in Chapter 2, the City will need to consider the following findings in development of the housing programs and policies:
• The Costa Mesa population is showing aging trends - housing goals should consider the needs of seniors who may have less flexible income, need accessibility accommodations, or may seek assisted living options.
• Over a quarter of the Costa Mesa population identifies as Hispanic or Latino - housing needs should account for possible cultural needs such as larger or multigenerational housing units.

Additionally, housing information should be made available in Spanish to assist in the location of appropriate housing within the community.
• Approximately 47 percent of the Costa Mesa population earn a lower income, indicating that production of and access to affordable housing (i.e. housing affordable to Costa Mesa households who earn 80% of the Orange County Area Median or AMI) and homeownership facilitation should be considered.
• Costa Mesa housing units experienced the lowest growth in the past decade in comparison to neighboring cities - the following section analyzes potential constraints, which may be playing a role in the slowing of residential development in Costa Mesa. If identified, housing goals should be considered which look to mitigate or eliminate those constraints. • The majority of housing units in Costa Mesa were built over 30 years ago - households in older homes may benefit from assistance in renovating their homes and ensuring safe living environments with access to all utilities.

Chapter 3 - Housing Constraints, Resources and Fair Housing This section focuses on the variety of factors that could affect the number, type, and affordability of housing and the rate of housing development in a community including governmental housing constraints. Governmental constraints in Costa Mesa may include land use controls, residential development standards, development and permitting fees, and permitting processes, amongst other constraints. Nongovernmental constraints may include the cost of land, construction costs, including materials and labor, availability of financing, and the local economic conditions. These factors could incentivize or create barriers for the maintenance and addition of housing in Costa Mesa, and predominantly affordable housing. This section also identifies Measure Y as a potential constraint to implementation of a compliant Housing Element and the development of housing projects in Costa Mesa. The measure requires significant capital investment while introducing uncertainty for

141346
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
investments due to uncertain election results regardless of the merits of any particular project.

Chapter 4 - Housing Plan
The Housing Plan describes the specific goals, policies, and programs to assist City decision makers to achieve the long-term housing objectives set forth in the Costa Mesa Housing Element. This Plan identifies goals, policies, and programs aimed at providing additional housing opportunities, removing governmental constraints to affordable housing, improving the condition of existing housing, and providing equal housing opportunities for all residents. These goals, policies, and programs are drafted to further a more diverse, sustainable, and balanced community through implementation of strategies and programs that will result in economically and socially diversified housing choices while preserving the special character of Costa Mesa.

The following housing goals have been included in the Draft Housing Element Update:
· Housing Goal #1: Preservation, conservation, and enhancement of existing housing stock and residential neighborhoods within Costa Mesa.
· Housing Goal #2: Providing a range of housing choices for all social and economic segments of the community, including housing for persons with special needs. · Housing Goal #3: Identification of adequate, suitable sites for residential use and development to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) at all income levels. · Housing Goal #4: Existing and future housing opportunities open and available to all social and economic segments of the community without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability/medical conditions, national origin or ancestry, marital status, age, household composition or size, source of income, or any other arbitrary factors.

Each one of the housing goals are implemented through housing programs which are actions the City commits to taking to implement its housing plan within specific timeframes over the 8-year Housing Element planning period. Highlights of the housing programs include:
· Program 2A - Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
· Program 2D - Senior Housing Options
· Program 2E - Housing Options for Large Family Households · Program 3B - Fairview Development Center
· Program 3C - Update the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan · Program 3D - Update the City’s Urban Plans and Overlays · Program 3E - Promote the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units · Program 3F - Motel Conversions/Efficiency Units and Co-Living Housing Types · Program 3G - Measure Y
· Other programs related to evaluating the potential for future housing opportunities along the 17th Street corridor, Airport Industrial Area, and church-owned sites.

Appendix A - Review of Past Performances
This section is an evaluation of the 5th cycle’sPolicy Program and considers all current and existing programs and projects, as well as the most current effectiveness and appropriateness for the 2021-

151347
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
2029 6th Cycle.

Appendix B - Site Analysis
The Housing Element is required to identify potential candidate housing sites by income category to meet the City’sRHNA Allocation. The sites identified within the Draft Housing Element represent the City of Costa Mesa’sability to plan for housing at the designated income levels within the 6th housing cycle planning period (2021-2029). As described in this appendix, the development capacity for each site depends largely on its location within the City, a specific plan or urban plan area as well as known development factors. Where possible, property owners were consulted to help the City better understand potential future housing growth on candidate housing sites within the City.

The analysis within this appendix shows that the City has the capacity to meet 2021-2029 RHNA allocation through a variety of methods, including:
• Identification of development capacity on sites which either currently permit or would be rezoned to permit development of residential uses at or above 30 dwelling units per acre • Identification of City owned properties suitable for the development of housing • Future development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) Appendix C - Community Outreach
As part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update process, the City of Costa Mesa has conducted extensive public outreach activities beginning in fall 2020. These outreach efforts included virtual town hall Meetings, District Specific Workshops, Stakeholder Meetings, City Council and Planning Commission Study Sessions, Online Community Survey, digital media and engagement, and noticed Public Hearings. Project materials, including recordings from town hall and public meetings, notices, and draft public review documents are available on the City’s website:
www.costamesaca.gov/housing-element-update <http://www.costamesaca.gov/housing-element- update>.

Next Steps and Timeline
The study session is the final opportunity for City Council and Planning Commission feedback and revisions to the Public Review Draft Housing Element before staff submits the document to State HCD for review. The State has 60 days to provide comments on the Housing Element.

After staff receives the State’scomments, the Housing Element will be modified to respond and then scheduled for a formal public hearing with the Planning Commission for a recommendation, and City Council afterward for final approval. These hearings are anticipated to occur in December 2021/January 2022. An approved Housing Element must be submitted to the State by February 11, 2022 (which is within 120 days of the statutory deadline of October 15, 2021).

ALTERNATIVES:

No Housing Element decisions are being made at the Study Session; therefore, alternatives are not necessary.

FISCAL REVIEW:

There are no fiscal impacts associated with the study session.

161348
b File #: 21-375 Meeting Date: 9/13/2021
LEGAL REVIEW:

The City Attorney’s Office has reviewed this report and approves it as to form.

CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

Diversify, stabilize and increase housing to reflect community needs.

CONCLUSION:

Staff is seeking additional Planning Commission, City Council and public feedback prior to submission of the Draft Housing Element to the State Department of housing and Community Development for its review and concurrence.

171349
September 13, 2021
City Council/ Planning Commission Joint Study Session
Attachment 1 to Staff Report

The Draft Housing Element is available on the City’s Website. Due to the size of the draft Housing Element, click on the link below to view the document.

1. Cover

2. Introduction

3. Profile

4. Housing Constraints, Resources, and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing

5. Housing Plan

6. Appendix A - Review of Past Performance

7. Appendix B - Candidate Sites Analysis Overview

8. Appendix C - Summary of Community Engagement

9. Appendix D - Glossary of Housing Terms

181350
September 13, 2021
City Council/ Planning Commission Joint Study Session
Attachment 2
During the Public Review period, a discrepancy in the anticipated density for candidate sites 206 and 207 was noticed. Prior to sending the Housing Element to HCD for review, the document will be revised to indicate a development yield on these sites at 90 dwelling units per acre, consistent with the other sites within the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan. Future development on these and all sites within the Housing Element will be subject to the applicable development standards within that area. 90 du/ac is an appropriate planning assumption for the Housing Element document. 191351
APN Unique

ID ADDRESS OWNER ZONING COUNCIL
DISTRICT Specific Plans Size
(Ac) Density Vacant Potential
Consolidation
Used in 5th
Cycle
Total
Units
Very
Low
(20%)
Low
(10%)
Moderate
(20%)
Above
Moderate
(50%)
Notes
410-501-25 206 545 Anton
Blvd
JKS-
CMFV
LLC
PDC 2 North Costa
Mesa 0.74 90 66 13 6 13 34
Small commercial our parcel uses. Property
owner has indicated interest in redeveloping
the site for residential uses.
410-501-36 207 575 Anton
Blvd
JKS-
CMFV
LLC
PDC 2 North Costa
Mesza 1.82 90 164 32 16 32 64
Small commercial our parcel uses. Property
owner has indicated interest in redeveloping
the site for residential uses.
201352
September 13, 2021
City Council/ Planning Commission Joint Study Session
Attachment 3 to Staff Report
A total of 13 written public comments have been received to date which include comments directly emailed to City Staff as well as submittal of the online survey form.

The main topics included in the public comments are:
 The inclusion of the Chargers / The Hive site as a housing opportunity site  The inclusion of local hire requirements
 New housing being visually attractive, and include greenbelts, sound walls, be located near jobs, transit stops and high-resource neighborhoods  Increase densities to make housing projects more financially feasible and encourage mixed income higher density communities, as well as other housing options like co-housing and motel conversions.
 Consider whether Casa Bella Apartments should be listed as an at Risk affordable developments
 Consider how assisted living and group living are counted toward the City’s housing need
Refer to the attached public comments.
211353

Invesco Real Estate

620 Newport Center Drive
Suite 350
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone (949) 222-6380
Facsimile (949) 222-6376

www.invesco.com

August 30, 2021

Mayor John Stephens
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Re: The Hive

Dear Mayor Stephens,

Thank you for taking the time last week to discuss Invesco’s ownership and future growth plans for The Hive and The Press properties. As we discussed, Invesco ($85.8B in Assets Under Management as of June 30, 2021) has made a substantial investment in The Press and The Hive and view these investments as long term in nature. We are very pleased with having Anduril Ind ustries locating their headquarters at The Press. Anduril anticipates over 2,000 employees at this location which is a very strong economic driver for the City of Costa Mesa and surrounding communities.

With respect to The Hive, we acquired this asset with the understanding that the Charger’s tenancy would be temporary in n ature. The Charger’s practice field is not adequate in size to effectively run their practices. We understand that the Chargers are actively seeking alternative locations that are more suitable for their operations. While the Chargers have certain term ination rights, there is the possibility that they may seek to leave earlier than anticipated. For this reason, we need to prepare to plan for that occurrence and plan for a multi-family project on the field site. We have had success in other such mixed- use properties throughout the country and would seek to replicate this at The Hive.

As we discussed, we are prepared to advance a Specific Plan on the site concurrent with the City’s General Plan update. For us to justify investing the funds in this process, it is important we communicate to our investors that the field site has been included in the city’s upcoming Housing Element Update.

From a planning perspective we believe the s ite is ideal. In addition to being located directly adjacent to Anduril, the site in walking distance to a host of current and future employers in North Costa Mesa area.

We appreciate your support to include the site in the Housing Element Update and are hopeful that other Council and Planning Commission Members agree.

If you have any further questions, please contact me at 949-222-6390.

Sincerely,

Peter Cassiano
Managing Director

221354

P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: [email protected]

Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101

VIA E-MAIL
September 1, 2021
Minoo Ashabi, Principal Planner
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Em: [email protected]
RE: City of Costa Mesa Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Commenter” or “Southwest Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of Costa Mesa’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) draft 2021-2029 update to the City’s General Plan Housing Element (“Draft HEU” or “Project”).

The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.

Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s environmental impacts.

Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.

Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121. 231355
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

Commenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties).

Moreover, Commenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s governing body.

The City should require the use of a local skilled and trained workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment. The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California.

Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.
241356
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.

Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words, well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and moving California closer to its climate targets.
1 Local skilled and trained workforce requirements and policies have significant environmental benefits since they improve an area’s jobs-housing balance, decreasing the amount of and length of job commutes and their associated greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.
2 Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”
3 1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10. 3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General_Plan_FINAL.pdf. 251357
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs, . . .”
4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits. As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:

People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to those held by local residents.
7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:

In nearly bu ilt-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,

4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown% 20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C). 6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs- housing.pdf
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs- Housing Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT- 825.pdf.
261358
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational training to ensure residents are employment -ready. While the program is voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than 3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of approval for development permits.

The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality and transportation impacts.

I. CONCLUSION
Commenters request that the City consider the aforementioned issues raised. Please contact my Office if you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

__________________________
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorneys for Southwest Regional
Council of Carpenters
Attached:

March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A); Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B); and Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C). 271359

EXHIBIT A
281360

1 2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
March 8, 2021

Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101

Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the potential GHG impacts.

Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition, truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3

1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 291361

2 Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”) associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT, including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:

Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6 Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.

Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project- specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the

4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15. 5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23. 6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9. 301362

3 number of pieces of equipment for all phases by 1.25, with the exception of worker trips required for the building construction and architectural coating phases.9 Furthermore, the worker trip vehicle class is a 50/25/25 percent mix of light duty autos, light duty truck class 1 and light duty truck class 2, respectively.”10 Finally, the default worker trip length is consistent with the length of the operational home-to-work vehicle trips.11 The operational home-to-work vehicle trip lengths are:
“[B]ased on the location and urbanization selected on the project characteristic screen. These values were supplied by the air districts or use a default average for the state. Each district (or county) also assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings” (emphasis added). 12 Thus, the default worker trip length is based on the location and urbanization level selected by the User when modeling emissions. The below table shows the CalEEMod default rural and urban worker trip lengths by air basin (see excerpt below and Attachment A).13
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
Air Basin Rural (miles) Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Minimum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90

9 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 10 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 11 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14. 12 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 21. 13 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-84 – D-86. 311363

4 As demonstrated above, default rural worker trip lengths for air basins in California vary from 10.8- to 19.8- miles, with an average of 16.47 miles. Furthermore, default urban worker trip lengths vary from 10.8- to 14.7- miles, with an average of 11.17 miles. Thus, while default worker trip lengths vary by location, default urban worker trip lengths tend to be shorter in length. Based on these trends evident in the CalEEMod default worker trip lengths, we can reasonably assume that the efficacy of a local hire requirement is especially dependent upon the urbanization of the project site, as well as the project location.

Practical Application of a Local Hire Requirement and Associated Impact To provide an example of the potential impact of a local hire provision on construction-related GHG emissions, we estimated the significance of a local hire provision for the Village South Specific Plan (“Project”) located in the City of Claremont (“City”). The Project proposed to construct 1,000 residential units, 100,000-SF of retail space, 45,000-SF of office space, as well as a 50-room hotel, on the 24-acre site. The Project location is classified as Urban and lies within the Los Angeles-South Coast County. As a result, the Project has a default worker trip length of 14.7 miles.14 In an effort to evaluate the potential for a local hire provision to reduce the Project’s construction-related GHG emissions, we prepared an updated model, reducing all worker trip lengths to 10 miles (see Attachment B). Our analysis estimates that if a local hire provision with a 10-mile radius were to be implemented, the GHG emissions associated with Project construction would decrease by approximately 17% (see table below and Attachment C).

Local Hire Provision Net Change
Without Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,623
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 120.77 With Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,024
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 100.80 % Decrease in Construction-related GHG Emissions 17%
As demonstrated above, by implementing a local hire provision requiring 10 mile worker trip lengths, the Project could reduce potential GHG emissions associated with construction worker trips. More broadly, any local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.

This serves as an example of the potential impacts of local hire requirements on estimated project-level GHG emissions, though it does not indicate that local hire requirements would result in reduced construction-related GHG emission for all projects. As previously described, the significance of a local hire requirement depends on the worker trip length enforced and the default worker trip length for the project’s urbanization level and location.

14 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-85. 321364

5 Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.

Sincerely,

Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
331365

EXHIBIT B
341366

SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: [email protected]

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist

Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.

M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.

B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.

Professional Experience

Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.

Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.

Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.

351367

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019

Professional History:

Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist

Publications:

Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48

Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342

Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C., (2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.

Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.

Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.

Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.

361368

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527- 000530.

Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.

Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.

Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater, Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.

Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food, Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science and Technology. 49(9),171-178.

Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) 2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities, and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.

Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.

371369

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019

Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users Network, 7(1).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.

Presentations:

Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.

Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.

Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis, Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS) Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

381370

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3- Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala, Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting & Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia, PA.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel, Irvine California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.

Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.

Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.

Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.

Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.

391371

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.

Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.

Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from Indianapolis, Maryland.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Ocean Shores, California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.

401372

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019

Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Teaching Experience:

UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science 100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on the health effects of environmental contaminants.

National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks.

National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.

California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.

UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.

University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.

U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.

Academic Grants Awarded:

California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.

Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.

Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.

Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.

King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.

James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.

United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the Tahoe National Forest. 1995.

Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts in West Indies. 1993
411373

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019

Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:

In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.

Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019

In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido” Defendant.

Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237 Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19

In United States District Court For The District of Colorado Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018

In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017

In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018

In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017

421374

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019

In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015

In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.

Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015

In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015

In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.

Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014

In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City Landfill, et al. Defendants.

Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014

431375

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019

In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.

Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014

In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987) Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012

In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.

Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013

In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013

441376
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: [email protected]
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
G
eologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:

M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.

B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.

Professional Certifications:

California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:

Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.

Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.

Positions Matt has held include:
• Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present); • Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014; • Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003); 461377
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004); • Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989– 1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000); • Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 – 1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995); • Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).

Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:

With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities. • Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. • Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. • Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. • Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation. • Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school. • Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.

With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. • Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. • Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York.
2 471378
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi. • Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. 3 481379
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators.

Executive Director:

As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council.

Hydrogeology:

As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.

At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui.

As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation.
4 491380
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer.

Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.

EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.

With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐ wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan.

Policy:

Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents. 5 501381
Geology:

With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling. • Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6 511382

Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.

Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.

Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report.
7 521383

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.

Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.

Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.

Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996.

Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.

Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.

Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater.

Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐ contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 8 531384
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.

Other Experience:

Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐ 2011.
9 541385

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Diane Kastner <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 12:56 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Feedback-Public Comment
Importance: High
Hello Housing Element-
I have lived in Costa Mesa for well over sixty years. We can all agree, that the main concern should always be quality of life. We can all agree, streets that are clogged with congestion are the first signs of an unhappy living experience (see LA). Irvine is a great model of how to increase housing density without the burden of heavy congestion and traffic. We can all agree, we do not want to see concrete everywhere, housing tracts that are cold, austere, and entirely void of attractive elements such as; trees, bushes and green plant life. We all know that crime, aggressiveness and unhappiness increase when rats are placed in dense housing and are subject to congested living, well it is the same for the human beings.

Quality of Life:

1. Roads must be kept moving freely where new housing is considered. A roadway already fully impacted with rush-hour traffic should not be further burdened by the building of new housing. Areas to consider new housing must have roads that can flow well and handle new traffic going forward, particularly during rush hour.

2. Visually attractive housing is VERY important. People do not want to see housing that encroaches to the edge of a sidewalk with dense concrete built-up 3-6 stories high. Again, the City of Irvine is a great model. All new housing tracts require roadway setbacks where they must build greenbelts and install attractive sound barrier walls that keep housing separated from road noise and roadway views.

3. Housing needs to consider the humans that will live there for multiple generations into the future. Are we building housing environments that support a happy and content life? Or are we letting greed and high density dominate the landscape like a permanent scar in the most beautiful Climate on the planet? Only developers can determine what our future holds.

4. Please see that the City requires greenbelts, set-backs off the road, sound barrier walls, less- dense, less greed driven density with attractive housing that will make living positive for many generations to come.

Thank you for letting me freely share my opinions. Please feel free to share this with the powers that be.

Kind Regards, 551386
Diane Kastner
Diane Kastner
[email protected]
Tel. (949) 378-1067
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
561387

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Matthew Sheehan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 6:02 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL; Housing Element
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Public Comment: City of Costa Mesa Housing Element Update Good evening,
My name is Matthew Sheehan and I live in Costa Mesa (District 48). I believe everyone should have access to housing in our community.

As a child, my family often struggled to pay for housing. My parents had to sign a new lease nearly every other year because they were unable to renew their leases due to rising requested rents and were not able to afford to purchase a house. During my elementary school years, I had to transfer to a new school each year due to our housing instability.

As a current resident of Costa Mesa, this is not the future I want for my family and future children.

Please use our housing element update to boldly plan for more housing near our jobs, transit stops, and high-resource neighborhoods. Let's clearly demonstrate to HCD and to our community that we are affirmatively furthering fair housing in our city.

Best,
Matthew Sheehan
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
571388

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Nancy Henning <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 8:56 AM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Draft Housing Element 2021-2029
Hello,
Regarding Casa Bella Apartments, 1840 Park Ave...

Please check this only if you think it is worth checking into. In the prior housing element, Casa Bella was the most at risk subsidized senior housing in Costa Mesa due to having a for profit owner and due to the Hud contract expiring in 2015. The owner did renew the contract for 10 years at that time. *** Now, the contract expires in Sept 2025. And the for profit owner's mortgage deed restrictions ended in 2020. The owner changed property management companies in Autumn 2020 and beginning April 2021 began renovations to the building.. it appears in order to bring it up to code? All red flags in some of our opinions as tenants here.

I skimmed a few parts of the draft Housing Element and I "think" I read one paragraph that said there is no at risk housing in Costa Mesa in this plan??? My feeling is that Casa Bella is at risk?? But I have no idea. Did anyone check with the actual owner about future plans for this property? Thank you,
N. Henning
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
581389

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Betsy Densmore <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 10:37 PM
To: Housing Element
Cc: CITY COUNCIL
Subject: Comments on Fair Housing Elements Draft
Attachments: CM Housing Element Testimony Take 2.docx
To Whom It May Concern:

I am very sorry that I was unable to attend the public hearing last Thursday. I attach the comments I would have made in person. Please acknowledge receipt of this email and let me know how I can review the discussion and comments which took place.

Best Regards,
Betsy
Betsy Densmore
[email protected]
949-500-2381
"Everything you have in life can be taken from you except one thing, your freedom to choose how you will respond to the situations you face. This is what determines the quality of the life we live-- not whether we've been rich or poor, famous or unknown, healthy or suffering." Viktor Frankls
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
591390
Commentary on the Draft Costa Mesa Housing Element Plan

My name is Betsy Densmore. I live in the Canyon neighborhood and I co-own a restaurant in Mesa Verde Plaza. I also serve on the Board of a local nonprofit affordable housing development company. I fully endorse the goals of the draft Housing Element and carefully read the various strategies for fulfilling those goals. Unfortunately, my take away is that there are several ways that these lofty goals will be thwarted.

The plan as written does not go far enough. New construction is very expensive and providing tenant services drives the cost per unit even higher. I believe that the proposed densities for many of the sites which are identified are not high enough to make the sites financially feasible. Can we find more or be more aggressive about promoting other alternatives to new construction? And too much of the plan hangs on the details of the “inclusionary housing ordinance” which will likely take months to be developed.

Will 25% or more of EACH new development be reserved for very low and low income tenants? Otherwise, won’t we perpetuate the problem we already have which is that service workers we need in Costa Mesa (like the folks who work in my restaurant) have great difficulty living here because moderately priced housing is so scarce. Those who own cars, clog our roads and spend too much of their income on car loans, gas and repairs. I sometimes hear people say that adding more housing and thus more people to Costa Mesa will just make traffic worse. I beg to differ. Those able to live close to work and amenities, can walk or ride their bikes.

We need more residential units for people in ALL income categories. Our market is too tight – shortages in any category have a domino effect on the others. I think we should be allowing multi-unit buildings in all neighborhoods. Moreover, I believe accelerating development of more “granny flats”, in- fill small apartment buildings and planned communities like One Metro West can’t happen fast enough.

How do we pick up the pace?
I also hear people assume that “affordable housing” will only draw undesirables- nonsense! Visit any housing developments with high numbers of subsidized units ( such as Section 8 ) in this area and you will see nothing of the sort. Trellis and SOS have plenty of stories about formerly “normal” citizens who succumb to drugs and mental illness after being traumatized by the loss of their homes. Restoring self- sufficiency for these folks starts with housing them.

Moreover mixed income, high density communities sustain local businesses. Mesa Verde Plaza is a case in point. My fellow tenants provide a wide variety of food, health, educational and personal services to the thousands of apartment dwellers who surround us. I believe every single one of the Plaza’s businesses survived the pandemic. The residents of these apartments are a broad range of old, young, affluent, middle class and working poor. Many stroll our boardwalk and buy from us. We know & support our neighbors and they know and support us.

I grew up in a single-family home and worked hard to my buy own as soon as I got out of college. We are taught that this is fundamental to the American Dream. However, as the years rolled on, my husband and I grew disenchanted with the effort required to maintain it and with the amount of stuff we accumulated to fill and take care of it. First, we downsized to buying a small apartment building and 601391
these days we reside in a town house. The Canyon neighborhood is delightfully diverse, dense and peaceful but someday one or both of us may need to downsize again or invite others to share our home.

For this reason, I am glad to see that the plan includes promoting co-housing, motel conversions to what we used to call SROs (single room occupancy), and other approaches to small, efficiency units. Working with local churches and other non-profits who have a commitment to serving their community is also a good idea.

Congratulations on getting us this far. I welcome any opportunities to help make the vision of nearly 12,000 more housing units by 2029 a reality. You may reach me per the below contact information.

Best Regards,
Betsy
Betsy Densmore
Resident:
1006 Nancy Lane
949-500-2381
[email protected]

Sept 5, 2021

611392

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 4:30 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Community Profile
Dear Sirs:

On page 2-14 of the Community Profile PDF, the section on “Overcrowding” begins and offers its definition as relates to this document. My question here is whether the Assisted Living Facilities and the Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Homes that heavily populate our city are considered in this study as “Residences” or are properly classified as stand- alone businesses excluded from these overall numbers. By the definition offered here, I believe each of those homes could qualify as “overcrowded” and artificially skew the data toward implying a greater need for housing remediation than actually exists.

If you should require a specific person to whom you should submit this question, please forward it to Nick, as he narrated the September 2nd webinar and would probably best know how to rout this request.

Thank you for your efforts on an otherwise thankless endeavor.

Sincerely,
Dr. Ron Housepian
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
621393
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/9/2021
Public Review Draft Community Comments
Chapter 1 (Introduction)
No comments
Chapter 2 (Community Profile)
• On page 2-14 of the Community Profile PDF, the section on “Overcrowding” begins and offers its definition as relates to this document. My question here is whether the Assisted Living Facilities and the Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Homes that heavily populate our city are considered in this study as “Residences” or are properly classified as stand-alone businesses, and are therefore excluded from these overall numbers. By the definition offered here, I believe that each of those homes could qualify as “overcrowded” and artificially skew the data toward implying a greater need for housing remediation than actually exists. I will send the same question above in the form of an e-mail, as I would like to get an answer and this comment format doesn't allow for that. Thank You
Chapter 3 (Housing Constraints, Resources, and AFFH)
No comments
Chapter 4 (Housing Plan)
• Re Fairview Development Center property tagged for mixed use residential/commercial use with amenities, what kind of time frame do you envision for th is redevelopment? It is a very large property with park like characteristics and would lend itself very well if its natural setting was preserved for the enjoyment of residents and commercial tenants. Do you plan a park with walkways, water fountains, sitting areas in your proposed redevelopment? Fairview is a prized piece of real estate in Costa Mesa, so it should be developed with Green in mind. Thank you. Ivan Alexander, CM resident
• Re Fairview Development renewal: Will you be able to preserve the natural beauty and have walking trails and bike trails for CM city residents to enjoy? Will new construction renewal incorporate a green intent with solar energy, water recycling, eco friendly construction materials where possible? Will there be a ‘victory garden’ to produce locally and create an outdoor gathering area?
Appendices
No comments
Additional Comments
• Hi - My name is Walter Chirichigno and live in College Park on Bowling Green. We used to live on the East side on Mesa Drive. The traffic and parking congestion got so bad we moved to our current home. I hope and pray that the proper traffic studies were done using ( pre - Covid 19 ) traffic numbers. I am very concerned that Fair Drive And Fairview will become more of a traffic nightmare than they already are. And of course we know anything being built on Harbor will just ad to the current ugly situation. Allowing Canes to be built with the overflow of drive thru customers stopping on Harbor has basically eliminated one lane from 12pm -2pm and 5pm - 7pm.
• Permitting small home building (used to be called grandmother suites) for any age group is a good idea. This helps with extra housing and permits residents with low income to rent the small house and avoid being forced out by high taxes. The mass building of the 3 story units around Costa Mesa has contributed to heavy traffic, which Costa Mesa now has all year round, instead of summer only. Most residents I've spoken to believe past members of the city council were paid off, which permitted the development of those crowded living spaces. 631394
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/9/2021
True or not, perception is reality for many. The freedom home track (west side) is unique to southern ca. If you over develop it you will ruin the country feel, increase traffic, not to mention increase water use. The element update will be too complicated for most residents to understand. There should be a more simple way of explaining the City's intent so residents completely understand. Overall, I'm discouraged by what I see. I mean no disrespect, but is seems like everything revolves around money and not quality of life. I hope you prove me wrong.
• For the future of Costa Mesa, can we have the city plant ‘fru it trees’ for our insects birds and humans consumption, and enjoyment, that also lower our carbon footprint? Examples, some that are drought tolerant:
tamarind, loquats, figs, guava, natal plum, mango, etc. It would be beautiful to know Costa Mesa is a leading city is planting Green, as well as the city of the arts. :)

641395

Appendix C: Summary of Community Engagement C-13
C.11 Public Comments
The section contains all public comments submitted throughout the Housing Element Update and during the Public Review Period. Comments were submitted through the Public Review Period feedback form and by email to City Staff. Public comments provided during the Townhall Meeting , Subject Matter Expert Meeting, District Meetings, Planning Commission and City Council Study Sessions, and Public Hearings are provided in the sections above.

1396
City of Costa Mesa
2021 -2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 1
Response to Public Comments
Public Comment Response
The Housing Element should plan for more
housing near jobs, transit stops, and high-
resource neighborhoods.

As part of the Housing Element’s Section 3
on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
(AFFH), the City identifies and analyzes
disparities in access to opportunity,
including: “improving the quality of life for
residents of low-income communities, as
well as supporting mobility and access to
‘high resource’ neighborhoods. This
encompasses education, employment,
economic development, safe and decent
housing, low rates of violent crime,
transportation, and other opportunities,
including recreation, food and healthy
environment” (HCD Guidance on AFFH).

Adopt an inclusionary housing ordinance. The adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance is Program 2A of the Housing
Element Update. The City is currently
working on developing an inclusionary
housing policy.

The City should adopt a program to allow
by-right development for projected
proposing 100% units affordable to very
low- and low-income households.

The City’s Housing Element meets State
requirements to allow by-right development
for sites identified in the Housing Element
that permit at least 20% affordable units as
described in Program 3M.

Create a Specific Plan for the Fairview
Developmental Center site to facilitate the
development of housing affordable to
extremely low-income to moderate income
households.

Program 3B addresses the City’s future
planning actions regarding development of
the Fairview Developmental Center.

Create new overlay zones along major
thoroughfares like Harbor Blvd. to replace
failing strip malls with mixed-use
developments.

Programs 3C and 3D within the Housing
Element will amend the existing specific
plans, urban plans, and overlays, many of
which are within major thoroughfares, to
better suit today’s development climate
1397
City of Costa Mesa
2021- 2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 2
Public Comment Response
while planning responsibly for future
potential growth within these areas.

All City Specific Plans and Overlays should
have densities of 60 DU/Acres and a
requirement of at least 20% affordable
units.

The City has proposed densities which take
into considerations the development
characteristics of each area. Proposed
densities range from 40 du/ac to 90 du/ac.

The City is working to develop an
inclusionary housing policy which will have a
citywide affordability requirement for
projects that meet established
requirements.

Create a land trust to hold donated land. The City is not proposing a policy related to creating a land trust but may consider that
strategy in future implementing efforts.

Add workforce housing. The City has established a housing strategy which looks to address housing for all
segments of the community. More
information can be found within Appendix
B.

The densities proposed in the Public Review
Draft are not high enough to make the sites
financially feasible.

The City worked with members of the
development community to identify
densities which are likely to promote the
development of housing at all income levels.

The City also analyzed past real world
development examples to determine at
what densities different housing types are
typically proposed.

We should be allowing multi-unit buildings
in all neighborhoods.

This is not included as part of the Housing
Element Update sites strategies; however,
Appendix B identifies sites and strategies to
accommodate the development of multi-
unit projects throughout the City.

The City should accelerate the pace of ADU
developments throughout the community.

Appendix B of the Housing Element
discusses projected ADU growth over the
next 8 years. Chapter 4: Housing Plan also
provides policies and programs the City will
1398
City of Costa Mesa
2021 -2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 3
Public Comment Response
implement to track and facilitate the
development of ADUs.

Casa Bella’s subsidized senior housing
contract expires in 2025 and should be
considered at-risk.

Casa Bella is included in Section 3 –
Inventory of Assisted Affordable Housing.

Select part of the Costa Mesa Golf Course
and driving range for candidate sites.

This site is not included as part of the
Housing Element Update sites strategy as
the City is able to meet the RHNA allocation
through the selection of other sites. It is also
important to the City to maintain limited
recreational open space for the community.

Create pathways to home ownership. The City’s Housing Element focuses on strategies for the attainment of both rental
and for sale housing. Strategies specifically
aimed at home ownership are not included.

Create an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to
review Measure Y and potential constraints
on housing.

The City is currently pursuing the creation of
an Advisory Committee to review Measure Y
and its implications for housing
development.

Do not replace El Metate Market with
housing.

This site has been removed from the
Housing Element and is no longer
considered a candidate housing site.

Do not replace the Smart & Final with
affordable high-density housing on 19th
Street.

This site has been removed from the
Housing Element and is no longer
considered a candidate housing site.

Do not propose high density development
on 19th Street.

The City’s sites strategy includes
consideration of the West 19th corridor.

High-density housing on 19th Street will
further the parking shortage and decrease
property value.

Parking standards may be evaluated during
the amendment of the City’s overlays and
urban plans.

Stop the affordable unit tax on developers. The City is considering a inclusionary housing policy to address affordable housing
requirements for future development
projects.

The sites inventory must include probability
of development during the RHNA cycle.

Appendix B of the Housing Element provides
detailed information on the sites analysis
strategies, including the assumed
1399
City of Costa Mesa
2021 -2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 4
Public Comment Response
affordability percentages. The City has
allocated a buffer of units as part of its sites
analysis in order to plan for sites potentially
developing with lower densities than
maximum permitted.

The Housing Element should specify the
current available density and the proposed
new density for each site identified for
rezoning.

Appendix B of the Housing Element includes
a detailed list of all sites identified as part of
the sites analysis, including the current and
proposed densities.

Reduce traffic congestion and consider
parking shortages.

The City has considered mobility and access
to public transportation when identifying
candidate housing sites.

Costa Mesa should be a 15-minute city and
become less car-dependent.

The City has considered mobility and access
to public transportation when identifying
candidate housing sites. In addition, the
development of mixed-use projects
generally facilitates walkability and
sustainable transportation due to the
location of housing units near commercial
and retail uses.

Adopt a form-based code with objective
criteria.

The City will consider different development
strategies as part of the update to its
existing urban plans and overlays. Currently
the urban plans have a form-based like
development criteria.

The City should abandon its RHNA appeal
and add housing affordable to
disadvantaged residents.

The City was not successful in appealing its
RHNA allocation. The final RHNA allocation
was released by SCAG on March 4, 2021.

How much importance is placed on public
comments?
Public participation is critical to the success
of the Housing Element and is a required
component of the Update. All public
comments are included in the Housing
Element and all are provided to the City
Council for consideration.

The City must engage community
participation throughout all stages of the
Housing Element.

Appendix C of the Housing Element includes
all community engagement efforts and
public comments received throughout the
1400
City of Costa Mesa
2021 -2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 5
Public Comment Response
Housing Element Update period. The City
has solicited input from the community,
stakeholders, and local organizations at the
start of the Update process, during the
Public Review period, during public Council
and Commission meetings, as well through
meetings with City Staff and via email and
phone calls.

The City should include affordable housing
advocates and local organizations in
community outreach efforts.

Appendix C of the Housing Element includes
all community engagement efforts and
public comments received throughout the
Housing Element Update period. The City
outreached to and held multiple meetings
with local organizations and housing
advocates throughout the Update process.

The City should provide further analysis on
the constraints for Sakioka Lot 2, Home
Ranch, and Pacific Arts Plaza)
The City has considered known constraints
to development on these sites. Future
implementing projects will be subject to an
objective development review process
which further analyzes potential constraints.

Program 3F should include long-term
resident protections through anti-
displacement, right-of-first refusal, and
relocation benefits strategies.

The City’s Housing Element Draft does not
directly address long-term resident
strategies but does analyze displacement
risk and other environmental justice factors
within Section 3 of the document.

The City should adopt a stand-alone
program to make mid-cycle adjustments if
housing production is not moving forward
on identified large sites.

The City reports to HCD annually on its
progress towards meeting its RHNA
allocation. If HCD determines the City is not
making sufficient progress, the City must
revise its Housing Element in accordance.

Let single-family homes become duplexes
and triplexes.

The Housing Element Update does not
include a rezoning of all single-family
neighborhoods.

Consider the availability of public open
space.

The City has considered the availability of
public open space in its sites analysis.

Additionally, the City currently requires Park
Fees for new residential projects as a
1401
City of Costa Mesa
2021 -2029 Housing Element Update
Response to Public Comments Page 6
Public Comment Response
condition of approval. These fees ensure
compliance with State law and provide
funds to cover the cost of land acquisition
and parkland upgrades to support accessible
public park space as population grows.

Add The Hive as a candidate housing site to
allow for multi-family housing.

The Hive has been added as a candidate
housing site.

1402
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/24/2021
Public Review Draft - Community Comments
Chapter 1 (Introduction)

1. I have lived in Costa Mesa for well over sixty years. We can all agree, that the main concern should alwa ys be quality of life. We can all agree, streets that are clogged with congestion are the first signs of an unhappy living experience (see LA). Irvine is a great model of how to increase housing density without the burden of heavy congestion and traffic. We can all agree, we do not want to see concrete everywhere, housing tracts that are cold, austere, and entirely void of attractive elements such as; trees, bushes and green plant life. We all know that crime, aggressiv eness and unhappiness increase when rats are placed in dense housing and are subject t o congested living, well it is the same for the human beings.

Quality of Life:

Roads must be kept moving freely where new housing is considered. A roadway already fully impacte d with rush-hour traffic should not be further burdened by the building of new housing. Areas to consider new housing must have roads that can flow well and handle new traffic going forward, particularly during rush hour.

Visually attractive housing is VERY important. People do not want to see housing that encroaches to the edge of a sidewalk with dense concrete built-up 3-6 stories high. Again, the City of Irvine is a great model. All new housing tracts require roadway setbacks where they must build greenbelts and install attractive sound ba rrier walls that keep housing separated from road noise and roadw ay views.

Housing needs to consider the humans that will live there for multiple generations into the future. Are w e building housing environments that support a happy and content life? Or are we letting greed and high densit y dominate the landscape like a permanent scar in the most beautiful Climate on the planet? Only developers ca n determine what our future holds.

Please see that the City requires greenbelts, set-backs off the road, sound barrier walls, less-dense, less greed driven density with attractive housing that will make living positive for many generations to come.

Thank you for letting me freely share my opinions. Please feel free to share this with the powers that be.

2. It was very disappointing to see preserve single family neighborhoods (monoplex zoning) as a goal in the Housing element. This is contrary to Costa Mesa's professed values (safe, inclusive, vibrant) and emergent state law. It is also subjective, latently racist and classist. Subjective discretion has historically resulted in treating people with more resources better than those with fewer resources which is another way to say latently racist a nd classist exclusionary practices wrapped in a ball of boring planning language. Costa Mesa should adopt a form- based code, compliant with state law that uses objective criteria to treat everyone equally under the zoning code and law. If the exclusionary neighbors wish to preserve monoplex zoning they may do so by buying t hose properties and preserving those parcels through private action. It is not the city's role to preserve exclusionary, high resource enclaves and concentrate housing growth where pollution burdens are higher (a rterial and freeway corridors).

Chapter 2 (Community Profile)

1. On page 2-14 of the Community Profile PDF, the section on “Overcrowding” begins and offers its definition a s relates to this document. My question here is whether the Assisted Living Facilities and the Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Homes that heavily populate our city are considered in this study as “Residences” or are properly classified as stand-alone businesses, and are therefore excluded from these overall numbers. By the definit ion offered here, I believe that each of those homes could qualify as “overcrowded” and artificially skew the da t a toward implying a greater need for housing remediation than actually exists. I will send the same question above in the form of an e-mail, as I would like to get an answer and this comment format doesn't allow for that. Thank You
1403
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/24/2021
Chapter 3 (Housing Constraints, Resources, and AFFH)

1. The most powerful thing local elected officials can do on climate change is Urban Infill land use planning. https://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/ca-scenarios/index.html. This draft housing element is a swing and a miss that will jeopardize Costa Mesa’s land use authority. This draft is tantamount to climate and racial justice arson. The primary deficiency is a failure to address the primary Governmental constraint on housing, Measure Y. I t is a governmental constraint because it is a referendum embedded in municipal code that can be superseded by State law, interpreted by the Attorney General and the courts all of which are all government agencies. Cit y council through its budgetary authority can also choose to defund anything related to implementation of it.

In light of Title 13, Chapter IX, Article 22 of the municipal code (AKA Measure Y) the Housing Element m ade a lot more sense. This Municipal code conflicts with state law and all cities are subordinate to state law. The City Council and City Management’s unwillingness to confront Measure Y head on leads the this Housing Element to a state of turboparalysis where City Planners and their consultants make vigorous and dramatic motions t o m eet RHNA goals but the end result is the absence of steady movement any particular direction. This unwillingness to con front Measure Y will likely result in City Council and city management eventually losing its land use authority.

A second weakness in the dra ft is the defense of pretextual zoning for parking requirements. This is bad policy and bad planning and pretextual zoning in any form should not be included in any part of Costa Mesa's housing element. Pretextual zoning is contrary to Costa Mesa's values (safe, inclusive and vibrant) and the statut ory requirement to AFFH.
https://slate.com/business/2021/05/california-parking-minumums-planners-housing- ab1401.html.

The fees and services nexus studies will need to be re-done thanks to AB 602 which requires these fees to levied on a per square foot basis. The current and future fee nexus studies should be publicly noticed and freely available for inspection by Costa Mesans.

The Housing element draft makes it difficult to undertake an analysis of these fees to determine if they are a constraint on housing production or if the assumptions made at the times of these studies are still valid. One specific example of this is the DIF for San Joaquin Hills TCA. This fee is antithetical to the principal of a toll road where the users pay. This DIF should be re-visited as an obstacle to the city's climate goals and housing goa ls.

It is ridiculous and tantamount to climate arson that new infill housing (ADUs without parking) in Costa Mesa is used to support toll roads.

2. Parking Standards. My comment: Parking is always a problem in new developments, and also in high densit y residential areas. The City should NOT consider garage parking to be parking at all, since there is nothing assuring the City that is will be used for parking. I believe over half of garages within the city are NOT used for parking, but rather for storage or other uses. I would prefer the City require 1 outdoor parking spa ce per bedroom AND 2-3 public street parking spaces per house/condo specifically for guests. Currently, there are not enough guest parking spaces in new developments or high density (apartment) areas. I always worry a bout going to a party at a new development, or near apartments, because I know parking is a problem. Taking a taxi is not an appropriate solution, this is not New York City. Riding my bike only works if I have extra time, it's daytime, and I am alone, so biking has limitations.

3. ADUs - Costa Mesa should create standardized ADU plans that residents can use. Most people are converting garages and those have set dimensions. So plans for studio and 1-bedrooms would cut down on costs, fast- track the approval process and encourage more ADU builds. Households are becoming more multi - generational. Folks want to move their elderly parents in with them but still give them their own spa ce. Or grown children move back home for whatever reason and also need a space of their own. Also, there a re probably lots of unpermitted ADUs constructed (maybe due to the recession and the need for additional 1404
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/24/2021
income). There needs to be a way to get those permitted after the fact (without punishing the homeow ners).

It'll add to property valuations and increase tax revenue for the city.

4. AFFH - I believe access to affordable utilities applies to this policy. Approvals for solar power and hom e bat t eries should be fast-tracked and permitting should not be cumbersome or cost -prohibitive. Access to affordable energy is also an environmental justice issue. Current incentives for electric vehicles benefit affluent residents who can afford to charge their vehicles. Grants should be issued for lower income residents to install solar Chapter 4 (Housing Plan)

1. Re Fairview Development Center property tagged for mixed use residential/commercial use with amenities, what kind of time frame do you envision for this redevelopment? It is a very large property with park like characteristics and would lend itself very well if its natural setting was preserved for the enjoyment of residents and commercial tenants. Do you plan a park with walkways, water fountains, sitting areas in your proposed redevelopment? Fairview is a prized piece of real estate in Costa Mesa, so it should be developed with Green in mind. Thank you. Ivan Alexander, CM resident

2. Re Fairview Development renewal: Will you be able to preserve the natural beauty and have walking trails a nd bike trails for CM city residents to enjoy? Will new construction renewal incorporate a green intent with solar energy, water recycl ing, eco friendly construction materials where possible? Will there be a ‘victory garden’ to produce locally and create an outdoor gathering area?

3. Regarding the section "PROGRAM 3C: Update the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan", it would be better t o not implement the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan, or to scale the North Costa Mesa Specific Plan back significantly.

Traffic on Bristol Street (and the neighboring streets) is already very congested. The changes proposed by t he North Costa Mesa Specific Plan would worsen the traffic on Bristol Street (and the neighboring streets). Worse traffic reduces the quality of life. Worse traffic is also not "compatible with growth", which is one of the "guiding principles" of the Costa Mesa Housing Plan.

4. HCD requires cities to include a probability weighting of each site in its inventory of actually being developed during the 8 year cycle. Costa Mesa did not do that. Exceeding the city's RHNA goal by 34% addresses t his partially but that still assumes that each of the identified sites has about a two thirds probability of being redeveloped. Based on the literature for California cities indicates the Costa Mesa's assumptions a re optimistically high. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/6786z5j9 .

The housing element spatially concentrated new housing sites along arterial roads and freeway corridors. T his decision places additional noise pollution from cars and particulate matter pollution burdens on those occupants, including low income people. It also concentrates new arrivals in low resource areas and keeps monoplex (single family) zoning exclusionary contrary to the city's values and legal mandate to AFFH.

5. I am not against the City having a Housing Plan in general. The agree that the City should have a "plan" rega rding housing. However, I disagree with the allotted number given to each City (11,760). I disagree with some of t he wording in the Plan that simply agrees with this number without any push-back. Not all residents agree with the proposal to add so many high density living spaces in the City. Many of us think this is a bad idea & do not support it. Where is our voice and our representation? If it's already listed in the document I am apologize, but I have missed that part.

6. Approve more affordable housing, less luxury housing and luxury apartments. Lobby state to remove CE QA requirements for affordable housing
Appendices

1. Site Analysis. My comment, the only site south of the Freeway that has real merit is the Fairview Developmental Hospital. It's a large site, off major streets, and would be a nice spot to live. I lived right off Harbor Blvd for 2 years, with my bedroom window facing the street. I hated living there because the traffic noise was constant . 1405
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/24/2021
I came to the conclusion that nobody wants to live right off a major street, and that people only live t here because it's available. I now see so many little houses and apartments being built right on Harbor Blvd, a nd I scratch my head a little. Who is allowing these places to be built? Have they every lived right on Harbor? Do they know how much is sucks to live there? I have...and I know. The same thing goes for Placentia & 19th St .

Again, these are terrible places for people to live. Who wants their front door opening up to Placentia? I t 's ridiculous. I think all sites within 50 feet of any major street are not fit for anybody to live, not old people, not poor people, not millennials, nobody.

Additional Comments

1. Hi - My name is Walter Chirichigno and live in College Park on Bowling Green. We used to live on the East side on Mesa Drive. The traffic and parking congestion got so bad we moved to our current home. I hope and pra y that the proper traffic studies were done using ( pre - Covid 19 ) traffic numbers. I am very concerned that Fa ir Drive And Fairview will become more of a traffic nightmare than they already are. And of course we know anything being built on Harbor will just ad to the current ugly situation. Allowing Canes to be built wit h t he overflo w of drive thru customers stopping on Harbor has basically eliminated one lane from 12pm -2pm and 5pm - 7pm.

2. Permitting small home building (used to be called grandmother suites) for any age group is a good idea. T his helps with extra housing and permits residents with low income to rent the small house and avoid being forced out by high taxes. The mass building of the 3 story units around Costa Mesa has contributed to heavy tra ffic, which Costa Mesa now has all year round, instead of summer only. Most residents I've spoken to believe pa st members of the city council were paid off, which permitted the development of those crowded living spa ces.

True or not, perception is reality for many. The freedom home track (west side) is unique to southern ca. I f you over develop it you will ruin the country feel, increase traffic, not to mention increase water use. The elem ent update will be too complicated for most residents to understand. There should be a more simple way of explaining the City's intent so residents completely understand. Overall, I'm discouraged by what I see. I mea n no disrespect, but is seems like everything revolves around money and not quality of life. I hope you prove m e wrong.

3. For the future of Costa Mesa, can we have the city plant ‘fruit trees ’ for our insects birds and hum a ns consumption, and enjoyment, that also lower our carbon footprint? Examples, some that are drought tolera nt :
tamarind, loquats, figs, guava, natal plum, mango, etc. It would be beautiful to know Costa Mesa is a lea ding city is planting Green, as well as the city of the arts. :)

4. SB 9, SB 10, SB 477, AB 602 and SB 478 are all on the Governor's desk and polling indicates he will beat the reca ll and is likely to sign these bills. The city should actively embrace and enable the se tools to legalize housing freedom, affirmatively further fair housing and practice Costa Mesa's values (safe, inclusive and vibrant).

5. Housing plan needs to include more dedicated bike paths, similar to the one that runs along the golf course a nd connects Harbor Blvd to Placentia Ave, and the one along Victoria.

6. According to FORBES what makes a great neighborhood/city is o Pride in ownership
o Low crime rate
o Great schools
o Outdoor activities abound
o Stepping back in time (tree lined streets)
o Access to medical care
o Family friendly
o Close to public transportation
o Nearby shopping and restaurants
1406
City of Costa Mesa
2021-2029 Housing Element Update
9/24/2021
o Nightlife and entertainment
o Walkability
Rather than just looking at housing let's consider the above. Although the plan says it is responsible for policies and programs regarding inclusion and diversity I don't see how this is being done. Where is the infrastruct ure like safety, green space, wat er, sewer, schools, police, fire departments that will support any new housing.

Where is climate change and sustainability address in these new spaces. How are we going to attract new and interesting businesses? How are we going to get people to stay rather than be just a stop over (on the way t o Newport Beach). How are we going to live up to our name, "the City of the Arts"? Where is the quality of life in this proposal rather than just getting more funding and adding more houses. Please consider those of u s who really love this City and want to continue to invest it in. I care a lot. 1407

Invesco Real Estate

620 Newport Center Drive
Suite 350
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone (949) 222-6380
Facsimile (949) 222-6376

www.invesco.com

August 30, 2021

Mayor John Stephens
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Re: The Hive

Dear Mayor Stephens,

Thank you for taking the time last week to discuss Invesco’s ownership and future growth plans for The Hive and The Press properties. As we discussed, Invesco ($85.8B in Assets Under Management as of June 30, 2021) has made a substantial investment in The Press and The Hive and view these investments as long term in nature. We are very pleased with having Anduril Ind ustries locating their headquarters at The Press. Anduril anticipates over 2,000 employees at this location which is a very strong economic driver for the City of Costa Mesa and surrounding communities.

With respect to The Hive, we acquired this asset with the understanding that the Charger’s tenancy would be temporary in n ature. The Charger’s practice field is not adequate in size to effectively run their practices. We understand that the Chargers are actively seeking alternative locations that are more suitable for their operations. While the Chargers have certain term ination rights, there is the possibility that they may seek to leave earlier than anticipated. For this reason, we need to prepare to plan for that occurrence and plan for a multi-family project on the field site. We have had success in other such mixed- use properties throughout the country and would seek to replicate this at The Hive.

As we discussed, we are prepared to advance a Specific Plan on the site concurrent with the City’s General Plan update. For us to justify investing the funds in this process, it is important we communicate to our investors that the field site has been included in the city’s upcoming Housing Element Update.

From a planning perspective we believe the s ite is ideal. In addition to being located directly adjacent to Anduril, the site in walking distance to a host of current and future employers in North Costa Mesa area.

We appreciate your support to include the site in the Housing Element Update and are hopeful that other Council and Planning Commission Members agree.

If you have any further questions, please contact me at 949-222-6390.

Sincerely,

Peter Cassiano
Managing Director

1408

P: (626) 381-9248
F: (626) 389-5414
E: [email protected]

Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorney At Law
139 South Hudson Avenue
Suite 200
Pasadena, California 91101

VIA E-MAIL
September 1, 2021
Minoo Ashabi, Principal Planner
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Em: [email protected]
RE: City of Costa Mesa Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (“Commenter” or “Southwest Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of Costa Mesa’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) draft 2021-2029 update to the City’s General Plan Housing Element (“Draft HEU” or “Project”).

The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing more than 50,000 union carpenters in six states and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and addressing the environmental impacts of development projects.

Individual members of the Southwest Carpenters live, work, and recreate in the City and surrounding communities and would be directly affected by the Project’s environmental impacts.

Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121.

Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121. 1409
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

Commenters incorporate by reference all comments raising issues regarding the EIR submitted prior to certification of the EIR for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties).

Moreover, Commenters request that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s governing body.

The City should require the use of a local skilled and trained workforce to benefit the community’s economic development and environment. The City should require the use of workers who have graduated from a Joint Labor Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training program or who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California.

Community benefits such as local hire and skilled and trained workforce requirements can also be helpful to reduce environmental impacts and improve the positive economic impact of the Project. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. Local hire provisions requiring that a certain percentage of workers reside within 10 miles or less of the Project Site can reduce the length of vendor trips, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and providing localized economic benefits. As environmental consultants Matt Hagemann and Paul E. Rosenfeld note:
[A]ny local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.
1410
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling.

Skilled and trained workforce requirements promote the development of skilled trades that yield sustainable economic development. As the California Workforce Development Board and the UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education concluded:
. . . labor should be considered an investment rather than a cost – and investments in growing, diversifying, and upskilling California’s workforce can positively affect returns on climate mitigation efforts. In other words, well trained workers are key to delivering emissions reductions and moving California closer to its climate targets.
1 Local skilled and trained workforce requirements and policies have significant environmental benefits since they improve an area’s jobs-housing balance, decreasing the amount of and length of job commutes and their associated greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, on May 7, 2021, the South Coast Air Quality Management District found that that the “[u]se of a local state-certified apprenticeship program or a skilled and trained workforce with a local hire component” can result in air pollutant reductions.
2 Cities are increasingly adopting local skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements into general plans and municipal codes. For example, the City of Hayward 2040 General Plan requires the City to “promote local hiring . . . to help achieve a more positive jobs-housing balance, and reduce regional commuting, gas consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions.”
3 1 California Workforce Development Board (2020) Putting California on the High Road: A Jobs and Climate Action Plan for 2030 at p. ii, available at https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/ wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Putting-California-on-the-High-Road.pdf. 2 South Coast Air Quality Management District (May 7, 2021) Certify Final Environmental Assessment and Adopt Proposed Rule 2305 – Warehouse Indirect Source Rule – Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions Program, and Proposed Rule 316 – Fees for Rule 2305, Submit Rule 2305 for Inclusion Into the SIP, and Approve Supporting Budget Actions, available at http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/Agendas/Governing-Board/2021/2021-May7-027.pdf?sfvrsn=10. 3 City of Hayward (2014) Hayward 2040 General Plan Policy Document at p. 3-99, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/General_Plan_FINAL.pdf. 1411
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

In fact, the City of Hayward has gone as far as to adopt a Skilled Labor Force policy into its Downtown Specific Plan and municipal code, requiring developments in its Downtown area to requiring that the City “[c]ontribute to the stabilization of regional construction markets by spurring applicants of housing and nonresidential developments to require contractors to utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs, . . .”
4 In addition, the City of Hayward requires
all projects 30,000 square feet or larger to “utilize apprentices from state-approved, joint labor-management training programs.”5
Locating jobs closer to residential areas can have significant environmental benefits. As the California Planning Roundtable noted in 2008:

People who live and work in the same jurisdiction would be more likely to take transit, walk, or bicycle to work than residents of less balanced communities and their vehicle trips would be shorter. Benefits would include potential reductions in both vehicle miles traveled and vehicle hours traveled.6
In addition, local hire mandates as well as skill training are critical facets of a strategy to reduce vehicle miles traveled. As planning experts Robert Cervero and Michael Duncan noted, simply placing jobs near housing stock is insufficient to achieve VMT reductions since the skill requirements of available local jobs must be matched to those held by local residents.
7 Some municipalities have tied local hire and skilled and trained workforce policies to local development permits to address transportation issues. As Cervero and Duncan note:

In nearly bu ilt-out Berkeley, CA, the approach to balancing jobs and housing is to create local jobs rather than to develop new housing.” The city’s First Source program encourages businesses to hire local residents,

4 City of Hayward (2019) Hayward Downtown Specific Plan at p. 5-24, available at https://www.hayward-ca.gov/sites/default/files/Hayward%20Downtown% 20Specific%20Plan.pdf.
5 City of Hayward Municipal Code, Chapter 10, § 28.5.3.020(C). 6 California Planning Roundtable (2008) Deconstructing Jobs-Housing Balance at p. 6, available at https://cproundtable.org/static/media/uploads/publications/cpr-jobs- housing.pdf
7 Cervero, Robert and Duncan, Michael (2006) Which Reduces Vehicle Travel More: Jobs- Housing Balance or Retail-Housing Mixing? Journal of the American Planning Association 72 (4), 475-490, 482, available at http://reconnectingamerica.org/assets/Uploads/UTCT- 825.pdf.
1412
City of Costa Mesa – Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update September 1, 2021

especially for entry- and intermediate-level jobs, and sponsors vocational training to ensure residents are employment -ready. While the program is voluntary, some 300 businesses have used it to date, placing more than 3,000 city residents in local jobs since it was launched in 1986. When needed, these carrots are matched by sticks, since the city is not shy about negotiating corporate participation in First Source as a condition of approval for development permits.

The City should consider utilizing skilled and trained workforce policies and requirements to benefit the local area economically and mitigate greenhouse gas, air quality and transportation impacts.

I. CONCLUSION
Commenters request that the City consider the aforementioned issues raised. Please contact my Office if you have any questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

__________________________
Mitchell M. Tsai
Attorneys for Southwest Regional
Council of Carpenters
Attached:

March 8, 2021 SWAPE Letter to Mitchell M. Tsai re Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling (Exhibit A); Air Quality and GHG Expert Paul Rosenfeld CV (Exhibit B); and Air Quality and GHG Expert Matt Hagemann CV (Exhibit C). 1413

EXHIBIT A
1414

1 2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Matt Hagemann, P.G, C.Hg.
(949) 887-9013
[email protected]
Paul E. Rosenfeld, PhD
(310) 795-2335
[email protected]
March 8, 2021

Mitchell M. Tsai
155 South El Molino, Suite 104
Pasadena, CA 91101

Subject: Local Hire Requirements and Considerations for Greenhouse Gas Modeling Dear Mr. Tsai,
Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (“SWAPE”) is pleased to provide the following draft technical report explaining the significance of worker trips required for construction of land use development projects with respect to the estimation of greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions. The report will also discuss the potential for local hire requirements to reduce the length of worker trips, and consequently, reduced or mitigate the potential GHG impacts.

Worker Trips and Greenhouse Gas Calculations
The California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) is a “statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with both construction and operations from a variety of land use projects.”1 CalEEMod quantifies construction-related emissions associated with land use projects resulting from off-road construction equipment; on-road mobile equipment associated with workers, vendors, and hauling; fugitive dust associated with grading, demolition, truck loading, and on-road vehicles traveling along paved and unpaved roads; and architectural coating activities; and paving.2
The number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.3

1 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 2 “California Emissions Estimator Model.” CAPCOA, 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/caleemod/home. 3 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 1415

2 Specifically, the number and length of vehicle trips is utilized to estimate the vehicle miles travelled (“VMT”) associated with construction. Then, utilizing vehicle-class specific EMFAC 2014 emission factors, CalEEMod calculates the vehicle exhaust, evaporative, and dust emissions resulting from construction-related VMT, including personal vehicles for worker commuting.4
Specifically, in order to calculate VMT, CalEEMod multiplies the average daily trip rate by the average overall trip length (see excerpt below):
“VMTd = Σ(Average Daily Trip Rate i * Average Overall Trip Length i) n Where:
n = Number of land uses being modeled.”5
Furthermore, to calculate the on-road emissions associated with worker trips, CalEEMod utilizes the following equation (see excerpt below):
“Emissionspollutant = VMT * EFrunning,pollutant
Where:

Emissionspollutant = emissions from vehicle running for each pollutant VMT = vehicle miles traveled
EFrunning,pollutant = emission factor for running emissions.”6 Thus, there is a direct relationship between trip length and VMT, as well as a direct relationship between VMT and vehicle running emissions. In other words, when the trip length is increased, the VMT and vehicle running emissions increase as a result. Thus, vehicle running emissions can be reduced by decreasing the average overall trip length, by way of a local hire requirement or otherwise.

Default Worker Trip Parameters and Potential Local Hire Requirements As previously discussed, the number, length, and vehicle class of worker trips are utilized by CalEEMod to calculate emissions associated with the on-road vehicle trips required to transport workers to and from the Project site during construction.7 In order to understand how local hire requirements and associated worker trip length reductions impact GHG emissions calculations, it is important to consider the CalEEMod default worker trip parameters. CalEEMod provides recommended default values based on site-specific information, such as land use type, meteorological data, total lot acreage, project type and typical equipment associated with project type. If more specific project information is known, the user can change the default values and input project- specific values, but the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) requires that such changes be justified by substantial evidence.8 The default number of construction-related worker trips is calculated by multiplying the

4 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14-15. 5 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 23. 6 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 7 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 8 CalEEMod User Guide, available at: http://www.caleemod.com/, p. 1, 9. 1416

3 number of pieces of equipment for all phases by 1.25, with the exception of worker trips required for the building construction and architectural coating phases.9 Furthermore, the worker trip vehicle class is a 50/25/25 percent mix of light duty autos, light duty truck class 1 and light duty truck class 2, respectively.”10 Finally, the default worker trip length is consistent with the length of the operational home-to-work vehicle trips.11 The operational home-to-work vehicle trip lengths are:
“[B]ased on the location and urbanization selected on the project characteristic screen. These values were supplied by the air districts or use a default average for the state. Each district (or county) also assigns trip lengths for urban and rural settings” (emphasis added). 12 Thus, the default worker trip length is based on the location and urbanization level selected by the User when modeling emissions. The below table shows the CalEEMod default rural and urban worker trip lengths by air basin (see excerpt below and Attachment A).13
Worker Trip Length by Air Basin
Air Basin Rural (miles) Urban (miles)
Great Basin Valleys 16.8 10.8
Lake County 16.8 10.8
Lake Tahoe 16.8 10.8
Mojave Desert 16.8 10.8
Mountain Counties 16.8 10.8
North Central Coast 17.1 12.3
North Coast 16.8 10.8
Northeast Plateau 16.8 10.8
Sacramento Valley 16.8 10.8
Salton Sea 14.6 11
San Diego 16.8 10.8
San Francisco Bay Area 10.8 10.8
San Joaquin Valley 16.8 10.8
South Central Coast 16.8 10.8
South Coast 19.8 14.7
Average 16.47 11.17
Minimum 10.80 10.80
Maximum 19.80 14.70
Range 9.00 3.90

9 “CalEEMod User’s Guide.” CAPCOA, November 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/01_user-39-s-guide2016-3-2_15november2017.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. 34. 10 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 15. 11 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 14. 12 “Appendix A Calculation Details for CalEEMod.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at:
http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/02_appendix-a2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=6, p. 21. 13 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-84 – D-86. 1417

4 As demonstrated above, default rural worker trip lengths for air basins in California vary from 10.8- to 19.8- miles, with an average of 16.47 miles. Furthermore, default urban worker trip lengths vary from 10.8- to 14.7- miles, with an average of 11.17 miles. Thus, while default worker trip lengths vary by location, default urban worker trip lengths tend to be shorter in length. Based on these trends evident in the CalEEMod default worker trip lengths, we can reasonably assume that the efficacy of a local hire requirement is especially dependent upon the urbanization of the project site, as well as the project location.

Practical Application of a Local Hire Requirement and Associated Impact To provide an example of the potential impact of a local hire provision on construction-related GHG emissions, we estimated the significance of a local hire provision for the Village South Specific Plan (“Project”) located in the City of Claremont (“City”). The Project proposed to construct 1,000 residential units, 100,000-SF of retail space, 45,000-SF of office space, as well as a 50-room hotel, on the 24-acre site. The Project location is classified as Urban and lies within the Los Angeles-South Coast County. As a result, the Project has a default worker trip length of 14.7 miles.14 In an effort to evaluate the potential for a local hire provision to reduce the Project’s construction-related GHG emissions, we prepared an updated model, reducing all worker trip lengths to 10 miles (see Attachment B). Our analysis estimates that if a local hire provision with a 10-mile radius were to be implemented, the GHG emissions associated with Project construction would decrease by approximately 17% (see table below and Attachment C).

Local Hire Provision Net Change
Without Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,623
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 120.77 With Local Hire Provision
Total Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e) 3,024
Amortized Construction GHG Emissions (MT CO2e/year) 100.80 % Decrease in Construction-related GHG Emissions 17%
As demonstrated above, by implementing a local hire provision requiring 10 mile worker trip lengths, the Project could reduce potential GHG emissions associated with construction worker trips. More broadly, any local hire requirement that results in a decreased worker trip length from the default value has the potential to result in a reduction of construction-related GHG emissions, though the significance of the reduction would vary based on the location and urbanization level of the project site.

This serves as an example of the potential impacts of local hire requirements on estimated project-level GHG emissions, though it does not indicate that local hire requirements would result in reduced construction-related GHG emission for all projects. As previously described, the significance of a local hire requirement depends on the worker trip length enforced and the default worker trip length for the project’s urbanization level and location.

14 “Appendix D Default Data Tables.” CAPCOA, October 2017, available at: http://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default- source/caleemod/05_appendix-d2016-3-2.pdf?sfvrsn=4, p. D-85. 1418

5 Disclaimer
SWAPE has received limited discovery. Additional information may become available in the future; thus, we retain the right to revise or amend this report when additional information becomes available. Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable environmental consultants practicing in this or similar localities at the time of service. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the scope of work, work methodologies and protocols, site conditions, analytical testing results, and findings presented. This report reflects efforts which were limited to information that was reasonably accessible at the time of the work, and may contain informational gaps, inconsistencies, or otherwise be incomplete due to the unavailability or uncertainty of information obtained or provided by third parties.

Sincerely,

Matt Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg.

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D.
1419

EXHIBIT B
1420

SOIL WATER AIR PROTECTION ENTERPRISE
2656 29th Street, Suite 201
Santa Monica, California 90405
Attn: Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D.

Mobil: (310) 795-2335
Office: (310) 452-5555
Fax: (310) 452-5550
Email: [email protected]

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 1 of 10 June 2019

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Chemical Fate and Transport & Air Dispersion Modeling Principal Environmental Chemist Risk Assessment & Remediation Specialist

Education
Ph.D. Soil Chemistry, University of Washington, 1999. Dissertation on volatile organic compound filtration.

M.S. Environmental Science, U.C. Berkeley, 1995. Thesis on organic waste economics.

B.A. Environmental Studies, U.C. Santa Barbara, 1991. Thesis on wastewater treatment.

Professional Experience

Dr. Rosenfeld has over 25 years’ experience conducting environmental investigations and risk assessments for evaluating impacts to human health, property, and ecological receptors. His expertise focuses on the fate and transport of environmental contaminants, human health risk, exposure assessment, and ecological restoration. Dr.

Rosenfeld has evaluated and modeled emissions from unconventional oil drilling operations, oil spills, landfills, boilers and incinerators, process stacks, storage tanks, confined animal feeding operations, and many other industrial and agricultural sources. His project experience ranges from monitoring and modeling of pollution sources to evaluating impacts of pollution on workers at industrial facilities and residents in surrounding communities.

Dr. Rosenfeld has investigated and designed remediation programs and risk assessments for contaminated sites containing lead, heavy metals, mold, bacteria, particulate matter, petroleum hydrocarbons, chlorinated solvents, pesticides, radioactive waste, dioxins and furans, semi- and volatile organic compounds, PCBs, PAHs, perchlorate, asbestos, per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFOA/PFOS), unusual polymers, fuel oxygenates (MTBE), among other pollutants. Dr. Rosenfeld also has experience evaluating greenhouse gas emissions from various projects and is an expert on the assessment of odors from industrial and agricultural sites, as well as the evaluation of odor nuisance impacts and technologies for abatement of odorous emissions. As a principal scientist at SWAPE, Dr. Rosenfeld directs air dispersion modeling and exposure assessments. He has served as an expert witness and testified about pollution sources causing nuisance and/or personal injury at dozens of sites and has testified as an expert witness on more than ten cases involving exposure to air contaminants from industrial sources.

1421

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 2 of 10 June 2019

Professional History:

Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE); 2003 to present; Principal and Founding Partner UCLA School of Public Health; 2007 to 2011; Lecturer (Assistant Researcher) UCLA School of Public Health; 2003 to 2006; Adjunct Professor UCLA Environmental Science and Engineering Program; 2002-2004; Doctoral Intern Coordinator UCLA Institute of the Environment, 2001-2002; Research Associate Komex H2O Science, 2001 to 2003; Senior Remediation Scientist National Groundwater Association, 2002-2004; Lecturer
San Diego State University, 1999-2001; Adjunct Professor Anteon Corp., San Diego, 2000-2001; Remediation Project Manager Ogden (now Amec), San Diego, 2000-2000; Remediation Project Manager Bechtel, San Diego, California, 1999 – 2000; Risk Assessor King County, Seattle, 1996 – 1999; Scientist
James River Corp., Washington, 1995-96; Scientist
Big Creek Lumber, Davenport, California, 1995; Scientist Plumas Corp., California and USFS, Tahoe 1993-1995; Scientist Peace Corps and World Wildlife Fund, St. Kitts, West Indies, 1991-1993; Scientist

Publications:

Remy, L.L., Clay T., Byers, V., Rosenfeld P. E. (2019) Hospital, Health, and Community Burden After Oil Refinery Fires, Richmond, California 2007 and 2012. Environmental Health. 18:48

Simons, R.A., Seo, Y. Rosenfeld, P., (2015) Modeling the Effect of Refinery Emission On Residential Property Value. Journal of Real Estate Research. 27(3):321-342

Chen, J. A, Zapata A. R., Sutherland A. J., Molmen, D.R., Chow, B. S., Wu, L. E., Rosenfeld, P. E., Hesse, R. C., (2012) Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compound Exposure To A Community In Texas City Texas Evaluated Using Aermod and Empirical Data. American Journal of Environmental Science, 8(6), 622-632.

Rosenfeld, P.E. & Feng, L. (2011). The Risks of Hazardous Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2011). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Agrochemical Industry, Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Gonzalez, J., Feng, L., Sutherland, A., Waller, C., Sok, H., Hesse, R., Rosenfeld, P. (2010). PCBs and Dioxins/Furans in Attic Dust Collected Near Former PCB Production and Secondary Copper Facilities in Sauget, IL.

Procedia Environmental Sciences. 113–125.

Feng, L., Wu, C., Tam, L., Sutherland, A.J., Clark, J.J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Dioxin and Furan Blood Lipid and Attic Dust Concentrations in Populations Living Near Four Wood Treatment Facilities in the United States. Journal of Environmental Health. 73(6), 34-46.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2010). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Wood and Paper Industries. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Cheremisinoff, N.P., & Rosenfeld, P.E. (2009). Handbook of Pollution Prevention and Cleaner Production: Best Practices in the Petroleum Industry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Air Pollution, 123 (17), 319-327.

1422

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 3 of 10 June 2019

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). A Statistical Analysis Of Attic Dust And Blood Lipid Concentrations Of Tetrachloro-p-Dibenzodioxin (TCDD) Toxicity Equivalency Quotients (TEQ) In Two Populations Near Wood Treatment Facilities. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 002252-002255.

Tam L. K.., Wu C. D., Clark J. J. and Rosenfeld, P.E. (2008). Methods For Collect Samples For Assessing Dioxins And Other Environmental Contaminants In Attic Dust: A Review. Organohalogen Compounds, 70, 000527- 000530.

Hensley, A.R. A. Scott, J. J. J. Clark, Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Attic Dust and Human Blood Samples Collected near a Former Wood Treatment Facility. Environmental Research. 105, 194-197.

Rosenfeld, P.E., J. J. J. Clark, A. R. Hensley, M. Suffet. (2007). The Use of an Odor Wheel Classification for Evaluation of Human Health Risk Criteria for Compost Facilities. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 345-357.

Rosenfeld, P. E., M. Suffet. (2007). The Anatomy Of Odour Wheels For Odours Of Drinking Water, Wastewater, Compost And The Urban Environment. Water Science & Technology 55(5), 335-344.

Sullivan, P. J. Clark, J.J.J., Agardy, F. J., Rosenfeld, P.E. (2007). Toxic Legacy, Synthetic Toxins in the Food, Water, and Air in American Cities. Boston Massachusetts: Elsevier Publishing

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash. Water Science and Technology. 49(9),171-178.

Rosenfeld P. E., J.J. Clark, I.H. (Mel) Suffet (2004). The Value of An Odor-Quality-Wheel Classification Scheme For The Urban Environment. Water Environment Federation’s Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) 2004. New Orleans, October 2-6, 2004.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet, I.H. (2004). Understanding Odorants Associated With Compost, Biomass Facilities, and the Land Application of Biosolids. Water Science and Technology. 49(9), 193-199.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Suffet I.H. (2004). Control of Compost Odor Using High Carbon Wood Ash, Water Science and Technology, 49( 9), 171-178.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M. A., Sellew, P. (2004). Measurement of Biosolids Odor and Odorant Emissions from Windrows, Static Pile and Biofilter. Water Environment Research. 76(4), 310-315.

Rosenfeld, P.E., Grey, M and Suffet, M. (2002). Compost Demonstration Project, Sacramento California Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6), Sacramento, CA Publication #442-02-008.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Characterization of odor emissions from three different biosolids. Water Soil and Air Pollution. 127(1-4), 173-191.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2000). Wood ash control of odor emissions from biosolids application. Journal of Environmental Quality. 29, 1662-1668.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry and D. Bennett. (2001). Wastewater dewatering polymer affect on biosolids odor emissions and microbial activity. Water Environment Research. 73(4), 363-367.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (2001). Activated Carbon and Wood Ash Sorption of Wastewater, Compost, and Biosolids Odorants. Water Environment Research, 73, 388-393.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and Henry C. L., (2001). High carbon wood ash effect on biosolids microbial activity and odor.

Water Environment Research. 131(1-4), 247-262.

1423

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 4 of 10 June 2019

Chollack, T. and P. Rosenfeld. (1998). Compost Amendment Handbook For Landscaping. Prepared for and distributed by the City of Redmond, Washington State.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1992). The Mount Liamuiga Crater Trail. Heritage Magazine of St. Kitts, 3(2).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1993). High School Biogas Project to Prevent Deforestation On St. Kitts. Biomass Users Network, 7(1).

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions From Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Doctoral Thesis. University of Washington College of Forest Resources.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1994). Potential Utilization of Small Diameter Trees on Sierra County Public Land. Masters thesis reprinted by the Sierra County Economic Council. Sierra County, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (1991). How to Build a Small Rural Anaerobic Digester & Uses Of Biogas In The First And Third World. Bachelors Thesis. University of California.

Presentations:

Rosenfeld, P.E., Sutherland, A; Hesse, R.; Zapata, A. (October 3-6, 2013). Air dispersion modeling of volatile organic emissions from multiple natural gas wells in Decatur, TX. 44th Western Regional Meeting, American Chemical Society. Lecture conducted from Santa Clara, CA.

Sok, H.L.; Waller, C.C.; Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sutherland, A.J.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Atrazine: A Persistent Pesticide in Urban Drinking Water.

Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Feng, L.; Gonzalez, J.; Sok, H.L.; Sutherland, A.J.; Waller, C.C.; Wisdom-Stack, T.; Sahai, R.K.; La, M.; Hesse, R.C.; Rosenfeld, P.E. (June 20-23, 2010). Bringing Environmental Justice to East St. Louis, Illinois. Urban Environmental Pollution. Lecture conducted from Boston, MA.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Perfluoroctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluoroactane Sulfonate (PFOS) Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting, Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (April 19-23, 2009). Cost to Filter Atrazine Contamination from Drinking Water in the United States” Contamination in Drinking Water From the Use of Aqueous Film Forming Foams (AFFF) at Airports in the United States. 2009 Ground Water Summit and 2009 Ground Water Protection Council Spring Meeting. Lecture conducted from Tuscon, AZ.

Wu, C., Tam, L., Clark, J., Rosenfeld, P. (20-22 July, 2009). Dioxin and furan blood lipid concentrations in populations living near four wood treatment facilities in the United States. Brebbia, C.A. and Popov, V., eds., Air Pollution XVII: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Modeling, Monitoring and Management of Air Pollution. Lecture conducted from Tallinn, Estonia.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Moss Point Community Exposure To Contaminants From A Releasing Facility. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). The Repeated Trespass of Tritium-Contaminated Water Into A Surrounding Community Form Repeated Waste Spills From A Nuclear Power Plant. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Platform lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

1424

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 5 of 10 June 2019

Rosenfeld, P. E. (October 15-18, 2007). Somerville Community Exposure To Contaminants From Wood Treatment Facility Emissions. The 23rd Annual International Conferences on Soils Sediment and Water. Lecture conducted from University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Production, Chemical Properties, Toxicology, & Treatment Case Studies of 1,2,3- Trichloropropane (TCP). The Association for Environmental Health and Sciences (AEHS) Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Rosenfeld P. E. (March 2007). Blood and Attic Sampling for Dioxin/Furan, PAH, and Metal Exposure in Florala, Alabama. The AEHS Annual Meeting. Lecture conducted from San Diego, CA.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (August 21 – 25, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. The 26th International Symposium on Halogenated Persistent Organic Pollutants – DIOXIN2006. Lecture conducted from Radisson SAS Scandinavia Hotel in Oslo Norway.

Hensley A.R., Scott, A., Rosenfeld P.E., Clark, J.J.J. (November 4-8, 2006). Dioxin Containing Attic Dust And Human Blood Samples Collected Near A Former Wood Treatment Facility. APHA 134 Annual Meeting & Exposition. Lecture conducted from Boston Massachusetts.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (October 24-25, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

Mealey’s C8/PFOA. Science, Risk & Litigation Conference. Lecture conducted from The Rittenhouse Hotel, Philadelphia, PA.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel, Irvine California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 19, 2005). Fate, Transport, Toxicity, And Persistence of 1,2,3-TCP. PEMA Emerging Contaminant Conference. Lecture conducted from Hilton Hotel in Irvine, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (September 26-27, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PDBEs. Mealey’s Groundwater Conference. Lecture conducted from Ritz Carlton Hotel, Marina Del Ray, California.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (June 7-8, 2005). Fate, Transport and Persistence of PFOA and Related Chemicals.

International Society of Environmental Forensics: Focus On Emerging Contaminants. Lecture conducted from Sheraton Oceanfront Hotel, Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Fate Transport, Persistence and Toxicology of PFOA and Related Perfluorochemicals. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water And Environmental Law Conference.

Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld Ph.D. (July 21-22, 2005). Brominated Flame Retardants in Groundwater: Pathways to Human Ingestion, Toxicology and Remediation. 2005 National Groundwater Association Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Wyndham Baltimore Inner Harbor, Baltimore Maryland.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. and Rob Hesse R.G. (May 5-6, 2004). Tert-butyl Alcohol Liability and Toxicology, A National Problem and Unquantified Liability. National Groundwater Association. Environmental Law Conference. Lecture conducted from Congress Plaza Hotel, Chicago Illinois.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (March 2004). Perchlorate Toxicology. Meeting of the American Groundwater Trust.

Lecture conducted from Phoenix Arizona.

Hagemann, M.F., Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and Rob Hesse (2004). Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River.

Meeting of tribal representatives. Lecture conducted from Parker, AZ.

1425

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 6 of 10 June 2019

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (April 7, 2004). A National Damage Assessment Model For PCE and Dry Cleaners.

Drycleaner Symposium. California Ground Water Association. Lecture conducted from Radison Hotel, Sacramento, California.

Rosenfeld, P. E., Grey, M., (June 2003) Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Seventh International In Situ And On Site Bioremediation Symposium Battelle Conference Orlando, FL.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. and James Clark Ph.D. (February 20-21, 2003) Understanding Historical Use, Chemical Properties, Toxicity and Regulatory Guidance of 1,4 Dioxane. National Groundwater Association. Southwest Focus Conference. Water Supply and Emerging Contaminants.. Lecture conducted from Hyatt Regency Phoenix Arizona.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (February 6-7, 2003). Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. California CUPA Forum. Lecture conducted from Marriott Hotel, Anaheim California.

Paul Rosenfeld, Ph.D. (October 23, 2002) Underground Storage Tank Litigation and Remediation. EPA Underground Storage Tank Roundtable. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Understanding Odor from Compost, Wastewater and Industrial Processes. Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Suffet, M. (October 7- 10, 2002). Using High Carbon Wood Ash to Control Compost Odor.

Sixth Annual Symposium On Off Flavors in the Aquatic Environment. International Water Association. Lecture conducted from Barcelona Spain.

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (September 22-24, 2002). Biocycle Composting For Coastal Sage Restoration.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association. Lecture conducted from Vancouver Washington..

Rosenfeld, P.E. and Grey, M. A. (November 11-14, 2002). Using High-Carbon Wood Ash to Control Odor at a Green Materials Composting Facility. Soil Science Society Annual Conference. Lecture conducted from Indianapolis, Maryland.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (September 16, 2000). Two stage biofilter for biosolids composting odor control. Water Environment Federation. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Rosenfeld. P.E. (October 16, 2000). Wood ash and biofilter control of compost odor. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Ocean Shores, California.

Rosenfeld, P.E. (2000). Bioremediation Using Organic Soil Amendments. California Resource Recovery Association. Lecture conducted from Sacramento California.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., and C.L. Henry. (1999). An evaluation of ash incorporation with biosolids for odor reduction. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Salt Lake City Utah.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Comparison of Microbial Activity and Odor Emissions from Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Brown and Caldwell. Lecture conducted from Seattle Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry. (1998). Characterization, Quantification, and Control of Odor Emissions from Biosolids Application To Forest Soil. Biofest. Lecture conducted from Lake Chelan, Washington.

1426

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 7 of 10 June 2019

Rosenfeld, P.E, C.L. Henry, R. Harrison. (1998). Oat and Grass Seed Germination and Nitrogen and Sulfur Emissions Following Biosolids Incorporation With High-Carbon Wood-Ash. Water Environment Federation 12th Annual Residuals and Biosolids Management Conference Proceedings. Lecture conducted from Bellevue Washington.

Rosenfeld, P.E., C.L. Henry, R. B. Harrison, and R. Dills. (1997). Comparison of Odor Emissions From Three Different Biosolids Applied to Forest Soil. Soil Science Society of America. Lecture conducted from Anaheim California.

Teaching Experience:

UCLA Department of Environmental Health (Summer 2003 through 20010) Taught Environmental Health Science 100 to students, including undergrad, medical doctors, public health professionals and nurses. Course focused on the health effects of environmental contaminants.

National Ground Water Association, Successful Remediation Technologies. Custom Course in Sante Fe, New Mexico. May 21, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of fuel contaminants associated with underground storage tanks.

National Ground Water Association; Successful Remediation Technologies Course in Chicago Illinois. April 1, 2002. Focused on fate and transport of contaminants associated with Superfund and RCRA sites.

California Integrated Waste Management Board, April and May, 2001. Alternative Landfill Caps Seminar in San Diego, Ventura, and San Francisco. Focused on both prescriptive and innovative landfill cover design.

UCLA Department of Environmental Engineering, February 5, 2002. Seminar on Successful Remediation Technologies focusing on Groundwater Remediation.

University Of Washington, Soil Science Program, Teaching Assistant for several courses including: Soil Chemistry, Organic Soil Amendments, and Soil Stability.

U.C. Berkeley, Environmental Science Program Teaching Assistant for Environmental Science 10.

Academic Grants Awarded:

California Integrated Waste Management Board. $41,000 grant awarded to UCLA Institute of the Environment.

Goal: To investigate effect of high carbon wood ash on volatile organic emissions from compost. 2001.

Synagro Technologies, Corona California: $10,000 grant awarded to San Diego State University.

Goal: investigate effect of biosolids for restoration and remediation of degraded coastal sage soils. 2000.

King County, Department of Research and Technology, Washington State. $100,000 grant awarded to University of Washington: Goal: To investigate odor emissions from biosolids application and the effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions. 1998.

Northwest Biosolids Management Association, Washington State. $20,000 grant awarded to investigate effect of polymers and ash on VOC emissions from biosolids. 1997.

James River Corporation, Oregon: $10,000 grant was awarded to investigate the success of genetically engineered Poplar trees with resistance to round-up. 1996.

United State Forest Service, Tahoe National Forest: $15,000 grant was awarded to investigating fire ecology of the Tahoe National Forest. 1995.

Kellogg Foundation, Washington D.C. $500 grant was awarded to construct a large anaerobic digester on St. Kitts in West Indies. 1993
1427

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 8 of 10 June 2019

Deposition and/or Trial Testimony:

In the United States District Court For The District of New Jersey Duarte et al, Plaintiffs, vs. United States Metals Refining Company et. al. Defendant.

Case No.: 2:17-cv-01624-ES-SCM
Rosenfeld Deposition. 6-7-2019

In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division M/T Carla Maersk, Plaintiffs, vs. Conti 168., Schiffahrts-GMBH & Co. Bulker KG MS “Conti Perdido” Defendant.

Case No.: 3:15-CV-00106 consolidated with 3:15-CV-00237 Rosenfeld Deposition. 5-9-2019

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica Carole-Taddeo-Bates et al., vs. Ifran Khan et al., Defendants Case No.: No. BC615636
Rosenfeld Deposition, 1-26-2019

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Los Angeles – Santa Monica The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments et al. vs El Adobe Apts. Inc. et al., Defendants Case No.: No. BC646857
Rosenfeld Deposition, 10-6-2018; Trial 3-7-19

In United States District Court For The District of Colorado Bells et al. Plaintiff vs. The 3M Company et al., Defendants Case: No 1:16-cv-02531-RBJ
Rosenfeld Deposition, 3-15-2018 and 4-3-2018

In The District Court Of Regan County, Texas, 112th Judicial District Phillip Bales et al., Plaintiff vs. Dow Agrosciences, LLC, et al., Defendants Cause No 1923
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-17-2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California In And For The County Of Contra Costa Simons et al., Plaintiffs vs. Chevron Corporation, et al., Defendants Cause No C12-01481
Rosenfeld Deposition, 11-20-2017

In The Circuit Court Of The Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St Clair County, Illinois Martha Custer et al., Plaintiff vs. Cerro Flow Products, Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 0i9-L-2295
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-23-2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California, For The County of Los Angeles Warrn Gilbert and Penny Gilber, Plaintiff vs. BMW of North America LLC Case No.: LC102019 (c/w BC582154)
Rosenfeld Deposition, 8-16-2017, Trail 8-28-2018

In the Northern District Court of Mississippi, Greenville Division Brenda J. Cooper, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Meritor Inc., et al., Defendants Case Number: 4:16-cv-52-DMB-JVM
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2017

1428

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 9 of 10 June 2019

In The Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Snohomish Michael Davis and Julie Davis et al., Plaintiff vs. Cedar Grove Composting Inc., Defendants Case No.: No. 13-2-03987-5
Rosenfeld Deposition, February 2017
Trial, March 2017

In The Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda Charles Spain., Plaintiff vs. Thermo Fisher Scientific, et al., Defendants Case No.: RG14711115
Rosenfeld Deposition, September 2015

In The Iowa District Court In And For Poweshiek County
Russell D. Winburn, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Doug Hoksbergen, et al., Defendants Case No.: LALA002187
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Jerry Dovico, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Valley View Sine LLC, et al., Defendants Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Wapello County
Doug Pauls, et al.,, et al., Plaintiffs vs. Richard Warren, et al., Defendants Law No,: LALA105144 - Division A
Rosenfeld Deposition, August 2015

In The Circuit Court of Ohio County, West Virginia
Robert Andrews, et al. v. Antero, et al.

Civil Action N0. 14-C-30000
Rosenfeld Deposition, June 2015

In The Third Judicial District County of Dona Ana, New Mexico Betty Gonzalez, et al. Plaintiffs vs. Del Oro Dairy, Del Oro Real Estate LLC, Jerry Settles and Deward DeRuyter, Defendants
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2015

In The Iowa District Court For Muscatine County
Laurie Freeman et. al. Plaintiffs vs. Grain Processing Corporation, Defendant Case No 4980
Rosenfeld Deposition: May 2015

In the Circuit Court of the 17th Judicial Circuit, in and For Broward County, Florida Walter Hinton, et. al. Plaintiff, vs. City of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a Municipality, Defendant.

Case Number CACE07030358 (26)
Rosenfeld Deposition: December 2014

In the United States District Court Western District of Oklahoma Tommy McCarty, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Oklahoma City Landfill, LLC d/b/a Southeast Oklahoma City Landfill, et al. Defendants.

Case No. 5:12-cv-01152-C
Rosenfeld Deposition: July 2014

1429

Paul E. Rosenfeld, Ph.D. Page 10 of 10 June 2019

In the County Court of Dallas County Texas
Lisa Parr et al, Plaintiff, vs. Aruba et al, Defendant.

Case Number cc-11-01650-E
Rosenfeld Deposition: March and September 2013
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2014

In the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County Ohio
John Michael Abicht, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Republic Services, Inc., et al., Defendants Case Number: 2008 CT 10 0741 (Cons. w/ 2009 CV 10 0987) Rosenfeld Deposition: October 2012

In the United States District Court of Southern District of Texas Galveston Division Kyle Cannon, Eugene Donovan, Genaro Ramirez, Carol Sassler, and Harvey Walton, each Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. BP Products North America, Inc., Defendant.

Case 3:10-cv-00622
Rosenfeld Deposition: February 2012
Rosenfeld Trial: April 2013

In the Circuit Court of Baltimore County Maryland
Philip E. Cvach, II et al., Plaintiffs vs. Two Farms, Inc. d/b/a Royal Farms, Defendants Case Number: 03-C-12-012487 OT
Rosenfeld Deposition: September 2013

1430

EXHIBIT C
1431
1640 5th St.., Suite 204 Santa
Santa Monica, California 90401
Tel: (949) 887‐9013
Email: [email protected]
Matthew F. Hagemann, P.G., C.Hg., QSD, QSP
G
eologic and Hydrogeologic Characterization
Industrial Stormwater Compliance
Investigation and Remediation Strategies
Litigation Support and Testifying Expert
CEQA Review
Education:

M.S. Degree, Geology, California State University Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, 1984.

B.A. Degree, Geology, Humboldt State University, Arcata, CA, 1982.

Professional Certifications:

California Professional Geologist
California Certified Hydrogeologist
Qualified SWPPP Developer and Practitioner
Professional Experience:

Matt has 25 years of experience in environmental policy, assessment and remediation. He spent nine years with the U.S. EPA in the RCRA and Superfund programs and served as EPA’s Senior Science Policy Advisor in the Western Regional Office where he identified emerging threats to groundwater from perchlorate and MTBE. While with EPA, Matt also served as a Senior Hydrogeologist in the oversight of the assessment of seven major military facilities undergoing base closure. He led numerous enforcement actions under provisions of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) while also working with permit holders to improve hydrogeologic characterization and water quality monitoring.

Matt has worked closely with U.S. EPA legal counsel and the technical staff of several states in the application and enforcement of RCRA, Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Water Act regulations. Matt has trained the technical staff in the States of California, Hawaii, Nevada, Arizona and the Territory of Guam in the conduct of investigations, groundwater fundamentals, and sampling techniques.

Positions Matt has held include:
• Founding Partner, Soil/Water/Air Protection Enterprise (SWAPE) (2003 – present); • Geology Instructor, Golden West College, 2010 – 2014; • Senior Environmental Analyst, Komex H2O Science, Inc. (2000 ‐‐ 2003); 1432
• Executive Director, Orange Coast Watch (2001 – 2004); • Senior Science Policy Advisor and Hydrogeologist, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989– 1998);
• Hydrogeologist, National Park Service, Water Resources Division (1998 – 2000); • Adjunct Faculty Member, San Francisco State University, Department of Geosciences (1993 – 1998);
• Instructor, College of Marin, Department of Science (1990 – 1995); • Geologist, U.S. Forest Service (1986 – 1998); and
• Geologist, Dames & Moore (1984 – 1986).

Senior Regulatory and Litigation Support Analyst:

With SWAPE, Matt’s responsibilities have included:
• Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of over 100 environmental impact reports since 2003 under CEQA that identify significant issues with regard to hazardous waste, water resources, water quality, air quality, Valley Fever, greenhouse gas emissions, and geologic hazards. Make recommendations for additional mitigation measures to lead agencies at the local and county level to include additional characterization of health risks and implementation of protective measures to reduce worker exposure to hazards from toxins and Valley Fever.
• Stormwater analysis, sampling and best management practice evaluation at industrial facilities. • Manager of a project to provide technical assistance to a community adjacent to a former Naval shipyard under a grant from the U.S. EPA.
• Technical assistance and litigation support for vapor intrusion concerns. • Lead analyst and testifying expert in the review of environmental issues in license applications for large solar power plants before the California Energy Commission. • Manager of a project to evaluate numerous formerly used military sites in the western U.S. • Manager of a comprehensive evaluation of potential sources of perchlorate contamination in Southern California drinking water wells.
• Manager and designated expert for litigation support under provisions of Proposition 65 in the review of releases of gasoline to sources drinking water at major refineries and hundreds of gas stations throughout California.
• Expert witness on two cases involving MTBE litigation. • Expert witness and litigation support on the impact of air toxins and hazards at a school. • Expert witness in litigation at a former plywood plant.

With Komex H2O Science Inc., Matt’s duties included the following:
• Senior author of a report on the extent of perchlorate contamination that was used in testimony by the former U.S. EPA Administrator and General Counsel. • Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of MTBE use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in the development of a comprehensive, electronically interactive chronology of perchlorate use, research, and regulation.
• Senior researcher in a study that estimates nationwide costs for MTBE remediation and drinking water treatment, results of which were published in newspapers nationwide and in testimony against provisions of an energy bill that would limit liability for oil companies. • Research to support litigation to restore drinking water supplies that have been contaminated by MTBE in California and New York.
2 1433
• Expert witness testimony in a case of oil production‐related contamination in Mississippi. • Lead author for a multi‐volume remedial investigation report for an operating school in Los Angeles that met strict regulatory requirements and rigorous deadlines. 3 1434
• Development of strategic approaches for cleanup of contaminated sites in consultation with clients and regulators.

Executive Director:

As Executive Director with Orange Coast Watch, Matt led efforts to restore water quality at Orange County beaches from multiple sources of contamination including urban runoff and the discharge of wastewater. In reporting to a Board of Directors that included representatives from leading Orange County universities and businesses, Matt prepared issue papers in the areas of treatment and disinfection of wastewater and control of the discharge of grease to sewer systems. Matt actively participated in the development of countywide water quality permits for the control of urban runoff and permits for the discharge of wastewater. Matt worked with other nonprofits to protect and restore water quality, including Surfrider, Natural Resources Defense Council and Orange County CoastKeeper as well as with business institutions including the Orange County Business Council.

Hydrogeology:

As a Senior Hydrogeologist with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Matt led investigations to characterize and cleanup closing military bases, including Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, Treasure Island Naval Station, Alameda Naval Station, Moffett Field, Mather Army Airfield, and Sacramento Army Depot. Specific activities were as follows:
• Led efforts to model groundwater flow and contaminant transport, ensured adequacy of monitoring networks, and assessed cleanup alternatives for contaminated sediment, soil, and groundwater.
• Initiated a regional program for evaluation of groundwater sampling practices and laboratory analysis at military bases.
• Identified emerging issues, wrote technical guidance, and assisted in policy and regulation development through work on four national U.S. EPA workgroups, including the Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum and the Federal Facilities Forum.

At the request of the State of Hawaii, Matt developed a methodology to determine the vulnerability of groundwater to contamination on the islands of Maui and Oahu. He used analytical models and a GIS to show zones of vulnerability, and the results were adopted and published by the State of Hawaii and County of Maui.

As a hydrogeologist with the EPA Groundwater Protection Section, Matt worked with provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act and NEPA to prevent drinking water contamination. Specific activities included the following:
• Received an EPA Bronze Medal for his contribution to the development of national guidance for the protection of drinking water.
• Managed the Sole Source Aquifer Program and protected the drinking water of two communities through designation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. He prepared geologic reports, conducted public hearings, and responded to public comments from residents who were very concerned about the impact of designation.
4 1435
• Reviewed a number of Environmental Impact Statements for planned major developments, including large hazardous and solid waste disposal facilities, mine reclamation, and water transfer.

Matt served as a hydrogeologist with the RCRA Hazardous Waste program. Duties were as follows:
• Supervised the hydrogeologic investigation of hazardous waste sites to determine compliance with Subtitle C requirements.
• Reviewed and wrote ʺpart Bʺ permits for the disposal of hazardous waste. • Conducted RCRA Corrective Action investigations of waste sites and led inspections that formed the basis for significant enforcement actions that were developed in close coordination with U.S.

EPA legal counsel.
• Wrote contract specifications and supervised contractor’s investigations of waste sites.

With the National Park Service, Matt directed service‐wide investigations of contaminant sources to prevent degradation of water quality, including the following tasks:
• Applied pertinent laws and regulations including CERCLA, RCRA, NEPA, NRDA, and the Clean Water Act to control military, mining, and landfill contaminants. • Conducted watershed‐scale investigations of contaminants at parks, including Yellowstone and Olympic National Park.
• Identified high‐levels of perchlorate in soil adjacent to a national park in New Mexico and advised park superintendent on appropriate response actions under CERCLA. • Served as a Park Service representative on the Interagency Perchlorate Steering Committee, a national workgroup.
• Developed a program to conduct environmental compliance audits of all National Parks while serving on a national workgroup.
• Co‐authored two papers on the potential for water contamination from the operation of personal watercraft and snowmobiles, these papers serving as the basis for the development of nation‐ wide policy on the use of these vehicles in National Parks. • Contributed to the Federal Multi‐Agency Source Water Agreement under the Clean Water Action Plan.

Policy:

Served senior management as the Senior Science Policy Advisor with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9. Activities included the following:
• Advised the Regional Administrator and senior management on emerging issues such as the potential for the gasoline additive MTBE and ammonium perchlorate to contaminate drinking water supplies.
• Shaped EPA’s national response to these threats by serving on workgroups and by contributing to guidance, including the Office of Research and Development publication, Oxygenates in Water: Critical Information and Research Needs.
• Improved the technical training of EPAʹs scientific and engineering staff. • Earned an EPA Bronze Medal for representing the region’s 300 scientists and engineers in negotiations with the Administrator and senior management to better integrate scientific principles into the policy‐making process.
• Established national protocol for the peer review of scientific documents. 5 1436
Geology:

With the U.S. Forest Service, Matt led investigations to determine hillslope stability of areas proposed for timber harvest in the central Oregon Coast Range. Specific activities were as follows:
• Mapped geology in the field, and used aerial photographic interpretation and mathematical models to determine slope stability.
• Coordinated his research with community members who were concerned with natural resource protection.
• Characterized the geology of an aquifer that serves as the sole source of drinking water for the city of Medford, Oregon.

As a consultant with Dames and Moore, Matt led geologic investigations of two contaminated sites (later listed on the Superfund NPL) in the Portland, Oregon, area and a large hazardous waste site in eastern Oregon. Duties included the following:
• Supervised year‐long effort for soil and groundwater sampling. • Conducted aquifer tests.
• Investigated active faults beneath sites proposed for hazardous waste disposal.

Teaching:

From 1990 to 1998, Matt taught at least one course per semester at the community college and university levels:
• At San Francisco State University, held an adjunct faculty position and taught courses in environmental geology, oceanography (lab and lecture), hydrogeology, and groundwater contamination.
• Served as a committee member for graduate and undergraduate students. • Taught courses in environmental geology and oceanography at the College of Marin.

Matt taught physical geology (lecture and lab and introductory geology at Golden West College in Huntington Beach, California from 2010 to 2014.

Invited Testimony, Reports, Papers and Presentations:

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Presentation to the Public Environmental Law Conference, Eugene, Oregon.

Hagemann, M.F., 2008. Disclosure of Hazardous Waste Issues under CEQA. Invited presentation to U.S.

EPA Region 9, San Francisco, California.

Hagemann, M.F., 2005. Use of Electronic Databases in Environmental Regulation, Policy Making and Public Participation. Brownfields 2005, Denver, Coloradao.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Nevada and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Las Vegas, NV (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Invited testimony to a California Senate committee hearing on air toxins at schools in Southern California, Los Angeles.
6 1437

Brown, A., Farrow, J., Gray, A. and Hagemann, M., 2004. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells.

Presentation to the Ground Water and Environmental Law Conference, National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2004. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in Arizona and the Southwestern U.S. Presentation to a meeting of the American Groundwater Trust, Phoenix, AZ (served on conference organizing committee).

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River and Impacts to Drinking Water in the Southwestern U.S. Invited presentation to a special committee meeting of the National Academy of Sciences, Irvine, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a tribal EPA meeting, Pechanga, CA.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate Contamination of the Colorado River. Invited presentation to a meeting of tribal repesentatives, Parker, AZ.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Impact of Perchlorate on the Colorado River and Associated Drinking Water Supplies. Invited presentation to the Inter‐Tribal Meeting, Torres Martinez Tribe.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. The Emergence of Perchlorate as a Widespread Drinking Water Contaminant.

Invited presentation to the U.S. EPA Region 9.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. A Deductive Approach to the Assessment of Perchlorate Contamination. Invited presentation to the California Assembly Natural Resources Committee.

Hagemann, M.F., 2003. Perchlorate: A Cold War Legacy in Drinking Water. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater and an Estimate of Costs to Address Impacts to Groundwater. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Society of Environmental Journalists.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of the Cost to Address MTBE Contamination in Groundwater (and Who Will Pay). Presentation to a meeting of the National Groundwater Association.

Hagemann, M.F., 2002. An Estimate of Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Underground Storage Tanks and the Resulting Impact to Drinking Water Wells. Presentation to a meeting of the U.S. EPA and State Underground Storage Tank Program managers.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. From Tank to Tap: A Chronology of MTBE in Groundwater. Unpublished report.
7 1438

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Cleanup Cost for MTBE in Groundwater Used as Drinking Water.

Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., 2001. Estimated Costs to Address MTBE Releases from Leaking Underground Storage Tanks. Unpublished report.

Hagemann, M.F., and VanMouwerik, M., 1999. Potential Water Quality Concerns Related to Snowmobile Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

VanMouwerik, M. and Hagemann, M.F. 1999, Water Quality Concerns Related to Personal Watercraft Usage. Water Resources Division, National Park Service, Technical Report.

Hagemann, M.F., 1999, Is Dilution the Solution to Pollution in National Parks? The George Wright Society Biannual Meeting, Asheville, North Carolina.

Hagemann, M.F., 1997, The Potential for MTBE to Contaminate Groundwater. U.S. EPA Superfund Groundwater Technical Forum Annual Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Hagemann, M.F., and Gill, M., 1996, Impediments to Intrinsic Remediation, Moffett Field Naval Air Station, Conference on Intrinsic Remediation of Chlorinated Hydrocarbons, Salt Lake City.

Hagemann, M.F., Fukunaga, G.L., 1996, The Vulnerability of Groundwater to Anthropogenic Contaminants on the Island of Maui, Hawaii. Hawaii Water Works Association Annual Meeting, Maui, October 1996.

Hagemann, M. F., Fukanaga, G. L., 1996, Ranking Groundwater Vulnerability in Central Oahu, Hawaii. Proceedings, Geographic Information Systems in Environmental Resources Management, Air and Waste Management Association Publication VIP‐61.

Hagemann, M.F., 1994. Groundwater Characterization and Cleanup a t Closing Military Bases in California. Proceedings, California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting.

Hagemann, M.F. and Sabol, M.A., 1993. Role of the U.S. EPA in the High Plains States Groundwater Recharge Demonstration Program. Proceedings, Sixth Biennial Symposium on the Artificial Recharge of Groundwater.

Hagemann, M.F., 1993. U.S. EPA Policy on the Technical Impracticability of the Cleanup of DNAPL‐ contaminated Groundwater. California Groundwater Resources Association Meeting. 8 1439
Hagemann, M.F., 1992. Dense Nonaqueous Phase Liquid Contamination of Groundwater: An Ounce of Prevention... Proceedings, Association of Engineering Geologists Annual Meeting, v. 35.

Other Experience:

Selected as subject matter expert for the California Professional Geologist licensing examination, 2009‐ 2011.
9 1440

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Nancy Henning <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 8:56 AM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Draft Housing Element 2021-2029
Hello,
Regarding Casa Bella Apartments, 1840 Park Ave...

Please check this only if you think it is worth checking into. In the prior housing element, Casa Bella was the most at risk subsidized senior housing in Costa Mesa due to having a for profit owner and due to the Hud contract expiring in 2015. The owner did renew the contract for 10 years at that time. *** Now, the contract expires in Sept 2025. And the for profit owner's mortgage deed restrictions ended in 2020. The owner changed property management companies in Autumn 2020 and beginning April 2021 began renovations to the building.. it appears in order to bring it up to code? All red flags in some of our opinions as tenants here.

I skimmed a few parts of the draft Housing Element and I "think" I read one paragraph that said there is no at risk housing in Costa Mesa in this plan??? My feeling is that Casa Bella is at risk?? But I have no idea. Did anyone check with the actual owner about future plans for this property? Thank you,
N. Henning
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1441

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Aaron Klemm <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 5:48 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL; Housing Element
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Costa Mesa Draft Housing element study session City Council members and Planning staff and consultants:

I live in Westside Costa Mesa and vote in District 5.

Costa Mesa should live up to its professed values to be safe, inclusive and vibrant by updating the draft housing element to include the high resource neighborhoods that are studiously avoided in the draft Housing Element but required by state law to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing.

The draft housing element is problematic because it doesn't follow the law or HCD's guidance. The sites inventory needs to include a probability of development during the RHNA cycle (AB 1397). The draft Housing element doesn't do that.

The housing element describes Measure Y as a growth management initiative. This is incorrect, it is a government constraint on housing. If the city continues to tiptoe around Measure Y allowing this governmental constraint on housing the remedies of the Housing Accountability Act will kick in up to by-right affordable housing that city council and city management cannot reject.

Both San Mateo and Huntington Beach have lost major court cases that firmly established the constitutionality of the Housing Accountability Act. I encourage Costa Mesa to not waste scarce time and money on another fruitless legal challenge and get started legalizing housing in all neighborhoods.

The city should live up to its professed values and embrace the positive vision of a safe, inclusive and vibrant Costa Mesa.

1. Safety achieved by reducing speeds and the number of cars on the city's public property.

2. Inclusive by updating the zoning to a form based code that uses objective criteria to allow the full RHNA allocation plus 20% to be built in this cycle in all neighborhoods.

3. Vibrant by moving to a form based code that allows services in all neighborhoods to reduce car dependence.

Aaron Klemm
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1442
Paul Dumont
6535 Lankershim Boulevard
North Hollywood CA 91609
[email protected]
818.968.5627

September 13, 2021

Costa Mesa City Council
and Planning Commission
via [email protected]

RE: Public Comment on the Draft Housing Element & Regional Housing Needs

Dear Costa Mesa:

I have worked to provide housing for special needs, low income people for 20 years.

Many come from Orange County in general and many are from Costa Mesa specifically.

They all suffer from a lack of affordable housing options in their community of choice.

I am writing on their behalf to encourage you to abandon the appeal of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment determination required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Besides the sound legal reasoning behind the assessment, you should act in your constituent’s best interests by facing reality: there is simply not enough affordable housing for the people who already live in Costa Mesa.

My experience is that when low income Costa Mesa residents can’t find housing there, they migrate to other communities - even though Costa Mesa has been their home.

And that is the precise reason you, along with other Orange County communities, are pushing back on the requirement that you plan for housing for all of your residents.

Pushing “undesirable” people out of town is not only morally reprehensible; it’s illegal.

Planning to make housing unavailable for already disadvantaged residents will not pass constitutional muster, and it certainly will not improve your City in the long term.

Providing all people with housing opportunities will improve Costa Mesa for everyone.

The incredible amount of taxpayer money you spend to harm poor people’s ability to live and thrive in Costa Mesa is fiscally irresponsible. Moving your perceived “problem people” to other jurisdictions is incredibly selfish and solves nothing. You have a duty to make room for everyone. I encourage you to plan accordingly – it’s the law.

Sincerely,
Paul Dumont
Paul Dumont
1443

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Betsy Densmore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 10:04 PM
To: Housing Element; CITY COUNCIL
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on Fair Housing Elements Draft
Good evening,

It was a pleasure to attend this evening's study session and observe the high degree of well-informed, thoughtful discussion by my representatives.

Since protocol prevents observers from speaking at the end, I am writing again to especially applaud Commissioner's Zich's suggestion that we put more attention creating pathways to home ownership as an alternative to privately developed apartment complexes. Many developers are not even local so the money they collect in rent leaves town and the tenants are at the mercy of rent increases.that currently consume much too much of their income.

I also appreciated Commissioner Toler and Flo Martin's comments which favored looking for more ways to create additional housing in R-1 zones. Both these ideas are potential strategies for reducing housing instability.

Finally, I hope that the idea of starting an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to address the constraints posed by Measure Y is implemented. As Mayor Stephens said, this seems most pressing if we need another referendum in 2022.

Thank you for serving us!

Best Regards,
Betsy

Elizabeth Densmore, Business Manager/Co-owner
Great Mex Grill LLC
www.greatmexgrill.com
[email protected]
949-500-2381

On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 10:37 PM Betsy Densmore <[email protected]> wrote:

To Whom It May Concern:

I am very sorry that I was unable to attend the public hearing last Thursday. I attach the comments I would have made in person. Please acknowledge receipt of this email and let me know how I can review the discussion and comments which took place.

Best Regards,
Betsy

Betsy Densmore
[email protected]
949-500-2381

"Everything you have in life can be taken from you except one thing, your freedom to choose how you will respond to the situations you face. This is what determines the quality of the life we live-- not whether we've been rich or poor, famous or unknown, healthy or suffering." Viktor Frankls 1444

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:02 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: 19th Street - Housing Element Draft Proposal (September 13, 2021) Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing Element Draft Proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. I request/vote to; deny the Housing Element Draft Proposal to tear down Smart & Final and El Metate Market and replace it with ‘affordable’ high density housing on 19th Street.

2. Local residents in our neighborhood depend on Smart & Final for groceries with a large number of residents commuting on foot. Smart & Final has little competition as it is the largest grocery store serving the community of Costal Mesa on 19th Street west of Harbor Blvd.

3. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem. Adding high density developments in place of the Smart & Final and the Soup Kitchen presents instability within an already high-density zoned neighborhood. This is a recipe for crime and overcrowding. There is already a shortage of parking within our residential streets and authorizing additional high-density housing will further ruin property values.

4. There are other properties identified and proposed which are much more appropriate to re-zone for high-density housing.
a. Golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18-hole golf courses. Partial use of this property of 100-acres would easily hold 4000 affordable homes which the state law requires. Building out just the practice area is a much better option than ruining an already stressed neighborhood. b. Another potential location identified for these proposed units would be the Fairview Development Center.

5. Either of the properties identified in paragraph 3. above impacts our already high-density zoned neighborhood community of Costa Mesa in the least possible way.

6. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Regards,
Bryan Markle
717 Center St.

Costa Mesa, Ca 92627
[email protected]

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1445

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Eric Markle <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 5:55 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: 19th Street
As a home owner there is already to many people around the 19th st. area. Street parking is very limited, traffic in the neighborhood streets is high. This is not an acceptable place to add low income homes. This will also eliminate markets that the community uses.

The Golf course is a better option.

19th street has to high a population. Its unsafe for my wife to run in the mornings alone and my kids to play in front yard. Due to all the traffic. More housing in this area will make it worse for existing residents.

Low income housing needs to be in a location that can handle the increase in population. 19th is not the place!

Eric Markle
--
Eric Markle
His Word Your Story Podcast
LinkedIn
Instagram
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1446

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Holly Rahill <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:38 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Concerns regarding Proposed W 19th Street Development

Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing element draft proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. Many people walk to Smart & Final and El Metate Market to get their groceries. I request that to deny the proposal to tear both of these down and put hundreds of high-density units in their place. Where will the residents buy their food? Do not tear down the grocery store and replace it with 'affordable' high-density housing on 19th Street.

2. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem, and adding high density development in the soup kitchen neighborhood smacks of instability over a multi-year period. Do not force higher density in here. It is a recipe for a slum and overcrowding. Currently, there is a shortage of parking on the residential streets that will be overrun if this plan moves forward.

3. Use the golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18 hole golf courses.

These 100 acres will easily hold the 4000 affordable homes state law requires to be planned for. This will give certainty that the required 4000 affordable homes will be built at all. All 100 acres don't need to be taken, and the 2 18 hole courses are totally separate from the practice area.

3.1 The proposed plan contains no certainty at all, and a lot of wishful thinking that the hundreds of retrofit projects actually take place. Utilizing the raw land that the practice area provides will impact the community in the least possible way.

4. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Sincerely,
Holly Rahill
Costa Mesa Resident & Home Owner

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1447

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Kyle Harper <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:47 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Proposed W 19th Street Development
Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing element draft proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. Many people walk to Smart & Final and El Metate Market to get their groceries. I request that to deny the proposal to tear both of these down and put hundreds of high-density units in their place. Where will the residents buy their food? Do not tear down the grocery store and replace it with 'affordable' high-density housing on 19th Street.

2. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem, and adding high density development in the soup kitchen neighborhood smacks of instability over a multi-year period. Do not force higher density in here. It is a recipe for a slum and overcrowding. Currently, there is a shortage of parking on the residential streets that will be overrun if this plan moves forward.

3. Use the golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18 hole golf courses.

These 100 acres will easily hold the 4000 affordable homes state law requires to be planned for. This will give certainty that the required 4000 affordable homes will be built at all. All 100 acres don't need to be taken, and the 2 18 hole courses are totally separate from the practice area.

3.1 The proposed plan contains no certainty at all, and a lot of wishful thinking that the hundreds of retrofit projects actually take place. Utilizing the raw land that the practice area provides will impact the community in the least possible way.

4. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Kyle Harper
HarperPromotional
949.278.1055

Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1448

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:33 PM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Proposed W 19th Street Development
Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing element draft proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. Many people walk to Smart & Final and El Metate Market to get their groceries. I request that to deny the proposal to tear both of these down and put hundreds of high-density units in their place. Where will the residents buy their food? Do not tear down the grocery store and replace it with 'affordable' high-density housing on 19th Street.

2. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem, and adding high density development in the soup kitchen neighborhood smacks of instability over a multi-year period. Do not force higher density in here. It is a recipe for a slum and overcrowding. Currently, there is a shortage of parking on the residential streets that will be overrun if this plan moves forward.

3. Use the golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18 hole golf courses. These 100 acres will easily hold the 4000 affordable homes state law requires to be planned for. This will give certainty that the required 4000 affordable homes will be built at all. All 100 acres don't need to be taken, and the 2 18 hole courses are totally separate from the practice area.

3.1 The proposed plan contains no certainty at all, and a lot of wishful thinking that the hundreds of retrofit projects actually take place. Utilizing the raw land that the practice area provides will impact the community in the least possible way.

4. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Best,

Ryan Forman, Resident
Brentwood Property Appraisal
Lic. #3004308

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1449

ARIOS, JUSTIN
From: Eleanor Markle <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2021 5:31 AM
To: Housing Element
Subject: Housing element draft proposal
Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing Element Draft Proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. I request/vote to; deny the Housing Element Draft Proposal to tear down Smart & Final and El Metate Market and replace it with ‘affordable’ high density housing on 19th Street.

2. Local residents in our neighborhood depend on Smart & Final for groceries with a large number of residents commuting on foot. Smart & Final has little competition as it is the largest grocery store serving the community of Costal Mesa on 19thStreet west of Harbor Blvd.

3. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem. Adding high density developments in place of the Smart & Final and the Soup Kitchen presents instability within an already high-density zoned neighborhood. This is a recipe for crime and overcrowding. There is already a shortage of parking within our residential streets and authorizing additional high-density housing will further ruin property values.

4. There are other properties identified and proposed which are much more appropriate to re-zone for high-density housing.
a. Golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18-hole golf courses.

Partial use of this property of 100-acres would easily hold 4000 affordable homes which the state law requires. Building out just the practice area is a much better option than ruining an already stressed neighborhood.
b. Another potential location identified for these proposed units would be the Fairview Development Center.

5. Either of the properties identified in paragraph 3. above impacts our already high-density zoned neighborhood community of Costa Mesa in the least possible way.

6. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Regards,
Eleanor Markle
717 Center St.

Costa Mesa, Ca 92627
[email protected]
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department.
1450
1451
1452
1453

Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition

September 10, 2021

Ms. Minoo Ashabi, Principal Planner
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

RE: Comments on Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element Update (August 2021)

Dear Ms. Ashabi:

On behalf of the Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition (the Coalition), we thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the city of Costa Mesa’s draft Housing Element—6th cycle—2021-2029. As you know, the Coalition is a local advocacy group which for many years has been encouraging Costa Mesa to actively facilitate the construction of affordable homes for the city’s lower income residents. We submit this letter as part of our public comments on the draft Housing Element.

First of all, we congratulate the city for its success in conducting a remarkably robust, open, and serious process of public engagement. The Coalition had the opportunity to meet several times with you and your excellent consultant, Kimley-Horn, in both small and large group settings.

Throughout this process, we have been impressed with the city’s willingness to listen to our concerns and consider our ideas for spurring the development of homes affordable to the city’s lower income residents.

In this letter, we recommend a few important substantive changes to the draft Housing Element and seek clarification on a number of important issues. We begin with recommendations on our two most pressing concerns: the need for the city to adopt expeditiously an effective inclusionary zoning ordinance, and the related need to postpone until after adoption of the inclusionary zoning ordinance all zoning changes the Housing Element identifies as essential for meeting the city’s 2021-2029 RHNA.

Recommendations and Requests for Clarification

1. The city must move expeditiously to adopt an effective inclusionary zoning ordinance. It is widely understood such an ordinance is one of the most important tools available to a city for spurring the construction of affordable housing for lower income households. We are aware the city has engaged a consultant to help draft an inclusionary zoning ordinance, and the ordinance is nearly ready for presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption.
a. We recommend the draft Housing Element be revised to include a deadline of the end of October 2022 for adoption of an inclusionary zoning ordinance. b. Given the city’s high 2021-2029 RHNA for lower income units and the city’s persistent failure to produce any significant amount of lower income units through the last three planning periods, we recommend the city’s 1454

inclusionary zoning ordinance contain provisions for setting aside a minimum of 15% of the units for lower income households.

2. The city must postpone enactment of any zoning changes or other land use changes affecting allowable residential densities identified in the draft Housing Element as necessary to meet the city’s 2021-2029 RHNA until after the city adopts the inclusionary zoning ordinance.
a. It would be a grave mistake for the city to enact any zoning or land use changes which increase residential densities without first ensuring those changes are tied to housing affordability requirements. Otherwise, developers could lock in the new increased densities by entering into a development agreement which would not be bound by the new inclusionary zoning ordinance.
b. Assuming the city meets its October 2022 deadline for adoption of the inclusionary zoning ordinance, we believe the city will be able to meet its obligation to accomplish the specified zoning and other land use changes within three years of certification of the Housing Element.

3. The city should create a stand-alone program that allows by-right development for new construction projects which make 100% of the units affordable to low-, very low- and extremely low-income households.

4. The city should provide additional analysis on the Fairview Developmental Center (FDC) and the implications of SB 82. In the Housing Element, the city identified FDC as a 109-acre opportunity site and assumes 40% of future units on the site will be affordable to lower income households (575 very low and 345 low).1 However, SB 82 states:
“Notwithstanding any other law, the Director of General Services, with the consent of the Director of Developmental Services, may, in the best interests of the state, let to any person or entity real property not exceeding 20 acres located within the grounds of the Fairview Developmental Center for a period not to exceed 55 years, at a price that will permit the development of affordable housing for people with developmental disabilities… A minimum of 20 percent of the housing units developed shall be available and affordable to individuals with developmental disabilities served by a regional center…”2

5. The city should decrease the FDC’s affordability assumption that 40% of the units will be for lower income. A more realistic affordability assumption for FDC is 20% for lower income. While SB 82 indicates that a minimum of 20% of units will be affordable to individuals with developmental disabilities, we are unaware of any written or public statement from the state expressing interest in making more than 20% of homes affordable to lower income households.

6. The city should create a stand-alone program and commit to working with the state to ensure that at least 40% of the total future units on the FDC site will be

1 City of Costa Mesa Housing Element 2021-2029 Public Review Draft, Appendix B Candidate Sites Analysis Overview, August 2021, p. B-16.
2 California Legislative Information, Bill Text SB-82 Developmental Services, June 24, 2015. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB82 1455

affordable to lower income households. There is ample land at FDC to accommodate the affordable housing needs of the city’s developmentally and physically disabled residents and the city’s lower income working families. To further that end, the city should create a specific plan for FDC which would allow high density residential throughout the 109 acres. The city should also issue a request for proposal for the creation of a master plan for a housing village at FDC.

7. Measure Y is Costa Mesa's largest unique constraint to development because it incentivizes less dense, and thus unaffordable development, and perpetuates exclusionary zoning. The city council should adopt a policy to exempt from Measure Y any projects approved under the inclusionary zoning ordinance which contribute units toward meeting the city’s extremely low-, very low-, and low-income RHNA requirements.

8. The city should provide further analysis on the constraints for the three large sites (Sakioka Lot 2, Home Ranch, and Pacific Arts Plaza) which are in the 2021-2029 sites inventory but are currently under development agreements. Specifically, the city should analyze the affordability assumptions of “15% lower income” for these three sites in light of each site’s respective development agreement and whether that development agreement will be affected by the city’s anticipated future adoption of an inclusionary housing ordinance.
a. Sakioka Lot 2 and Home Ranch have been vacant for decades. How realistic is it that these two sites will be developed in the 2021-2029 cycle? b. Though these three large sites are in the 2021-2029 sites inventory, because they are each currently under a development agreement, they will be exempt from the requirements of the inclusionary housing ordinance the city intends to adopt. The only way these sites would be bound by that ordinance is if the property owners opt into future General Plan and zoning regulations. This fact was confirmed during the city’s consideration of the proposal to extend Sakioka Lot 2’s Development Agreement. The city confirmed that “if the Agreement were extended, and if an inclusionary housing ordinance was adopted along with future General Plan and zoning regulations, the developer would need to comply with the inclusionary housing ordinance IF they opted to develop per the future General Plan and zoning regulations.”3
c. On April 6, 2021, the city council extended the Development Agreement for Sakioka Lot 2 for an additional 10 years. Prior to that extension, the city’s Planning Commission recommended the Development Agreement include affordable housing requirements to help achieve the city’s RHNA goals.4 The property owner, however, was only interested in having Sakioka Lot 2 identified as a housing opportunity site; he was not “amenable” to any affordable housing requirements. Given the property owner’s recent strong opposition to including any affordable housing provisions in the extended Development Agreement, it seems unrealistic to assume the property owner will prioritize the

3 Costa Mesa City Council Agenda Report, An Ordinance for an Extension To And Amendment of the Sakioka Farms Development Agreement, March 18, 2021, p. 11.
4 Costa Mesa City Council Agenda Report, An Ordinance for an Extension To And Amendment of the Sakioka Farms Development Agreement, April 6, 2021, p. 9-10.
1456

development of housing affordable to lower income households in developing the property.
d. Similarly, in applying the “15% lower income” assumption to these three large properties, it seems the city is over relying on the assumption that the developers will use the city’s existing density bonus to produce affordable units. It should be noted the density bonus alone has not been effective in producing affordable housing for lower income households. From 2014-2020, only 30 permitted units were issued at low and very low income.5 Of those, only 9 units are deed restricted at very low and 21 units are non-deed restricted ADUs at very low and low income.

9. The city should add a chart specifying both the current allowable density and the proposed new density for each of the sites identified for rezoning to accommodate the city’s 2021-2029 RHNA. This information will help the public understand the proposed zoning changes.

10. The city should strengthen Program 3F: Motel Conversions, Efficiency Units, and Co-living Housing Types to include long-term resident protections through anti- displacement, right-of-first refusal and relocation benefits strategies.

11. The city should include a stand-alone program to make mid-cycle adjustments if production is not moving forward on identified large sites and if production falls short of the expected yield during the first half of the planning period.

Thank you for considering these recommendations for further revisions to and clarifications of the draft 2021-2029 Housing Element update. We welcome the opportunity to continue our dialogue with the city to ensure that the draft Housing Element includes effective policies that will result in new affordable homes for extremely low-, very low- and low-income working families in Costa Mesa.

Sincerely,

Kathy Esfahani

Kathy Esfahani
For The Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition

cc: Paul McDougall, California Housing and Community Development Department Richard Walker, Public Law Center
Cesar Covarrubias, The Kennedy Commission

5 Planning Commission Agenda Report- 2020 Annual Review of the Costa Mesa 2015-2035 General Plan, City of Costa Mesa, p. 5, April 26, 2021.
1457
From: Elizabeth Hansburg P4H
To: Chen, Nick; ASHABI, MINOO
Subject: Examples of Workforce Housing by a Market rate developer Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 2:23:55 PM
Done by a private developer, large, 5+ bedrooms, to serve multi-gen families. The project they did in Fullerton did not have enough open space, IMO, but they hit the product type 100%. https://www.urbanpacific.com/creating-affordable-homes-for-multigenerational-living/ https://www.urbanpacific.com/education/urban-pacific-announces-the-start-of-construction/ --
Elizabeth Hansburg
Co-Founder & Executive Director
c. (714) 872-1418
e. [email protected]
Click here to become a member of People for Housing!
1458
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick
Subject: FW: 19th Street
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 5:59:53 PM
From: Eric Markle <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 5:55 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: 19th Street
As a home owner there is already to many people around the 19th st. area. Street parking is very limited, traffic in the neighborhood streets is high. This is not an acceptable place to add low income homes. This will also eliminate markets that the community uses.

The Golf course is a better option.
19th street has to high a population. Its unsafe for my wife to run in the mornings alone and my kids to play in front yard. Due to all the traffic. More housing in this area will make it worse for existing residents.

Low income housing needs to be in a location that can handle the increase in population. 19th is not the place!
Eric Markle
--
Eric Markle
His Word Your Story Podcast
LinkedIn
Instagram
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1459
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick
Subject: FW: Comments on Fair Housing Elements Draft
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 8:58:09 AM
From: Betsy Densmore <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 10:04 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>; CITY COUNCIL <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Comments on Fair Housing Elements Draft
Good evening,
It was a pleasure to attend this evening's study session and observe the high degree of well- informed, thoughtful discussion by my representatives.

Since protocol prevents observers from speaking at the end, I am writing again to especially applaud Commissioner's Zich's suggestion that we put more attention creating pathways to home ownership as an alternative to privately developed apartment complexes. Many developers are not even local so the money they collect in rent leaves town and the tenants are at the mercy of rent increases.that currently consume much too much of their income.

I also appreciated Commissioner Toler and Flo Martin's comments which favored looking for more ways to create additional housing in
R-1 zones. Both these ideas are potential strategies
for reducing housing instability.

Finally, I hope that the idea of starting an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee to address the constraints posed by Measure Y is implemented. As Mayor Stephens said, this seems most pressing if we need another referendum in 2022.

Thank you for serving us!
Best Regards,
Betsy
Elizabeth Densmore, Business Manager/Co-owner
Great Mex Grill LLC
www.greatmexgrill.com
[email protected]
949-500-2381
On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 10:37 PM Betsy Densmore <[email protected] > wrote:

To Whom It May Concern:

I am very sorry that I was unable to attend the public hearing last Thursday. I attach the comments I would have made in person. Please acknowledge receipt of this email and let me know how I can review the discussion and comments which took place.

Best Regards,
Betsy
Betsy Densmore
[email protected]
949-500-2381
"Everything you have in life can be taken from you except one thing, your freedom to choose how you will respond to the situations you face. This is what determines the quality of the life we live-- not whether we've been rich or poor, famous or unknown, healthy or suffering." Viktor Frankls CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1460
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; ARIOS, JUSTIN; Chen, Nick
Subject: FW: Community Profile
Date: Monday, September 6, 2021 10:39:17 AM
Please add to public comments.

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 4:30 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Community Profile
Dear Sirs:

On page 2-14 of the Community Profile PDF, the section on “Overcrowding” begins and offers its definition as relates to this document. My question here is whether the Assisted Living Facilities and the Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Homes that heavily populate our city are considered in this study as “Residences” or are properly classified as stand-alone businesses excluded from these overall numbers. By the definition offered here, I believe each of those homes could qualify as “overcrowded” and artificially skew the data toward implying a greater need for housing remediation than actually exists.

If you should require a specific person to whom you should submit this question, please forward it to Nick, as he narrated the September 2nd webinar and would probably best know how to rout this request.

Thank you for your efforts on an otherwise thankless endeavor.

Sincerely,
Dr. Ron Housepian
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1461
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick
Subject: FW: Concerns regarding Proposed W 19th Street Development Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:45:10 PM
From: Holly Rahill <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:38 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Concerns regarding Proposed W 19th Street Development 
Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing element draft proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. Many people walk to Smart & Final and El Metate Market to get their groceries. I request that to deny the proposal to tear both of these down and put hundreds of high-density units in their place. Where will the residents buy their food? Do not tear down the grocery store and replace it with 'affordable' high-density housing on 19th Street.

2. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem, and adding high density development in the soup kitchen neighborhood smacks of instability over a multi-year period. Do not force higher density in here. It is a recipe for a slum and overcrowding. Currently, there is a shortage of parking on the residential streets that will be overrun if this plan moves forward.

3. Use the golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18 hole golf courses. These 100 acres will easily hold the 4000 affordable homes state law requires to be planned for. This will give certainty that the required 4000 affordable homes will be built at all. All 100 acres don't need to be taken, and the 2 18 hole courses are totally separate from the practice area.

3.1 The proposed plan contains no certainty at all, and a lot of wishful thinking that the hundreds of retrofit projects actually take place. Utilizing the raw land that the practice area provides will impact the community in the least possible way.

4. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Sincerely,
Holly Rahill
Costa Mesa Resident & Home Owner
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1462
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick; ARIOS, JUSTIN
Subject: FW: Costa Mesa Draft Housing element study session Date: Monday, September 13, 2021 6:00:16 PM
From: Aaron Klemm [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2021 5:48 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <[email protected]>; Housing Element <housing- [email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Costa Mesa Draft Housing element study session City Council members and Planning staff and consultants:

I live in Westside Costa Mesa and vote in District 5.

Costa Mesa should live up to its professed values to be safe, inclusive and vibrant by updating the draft housing element to include the high resource neighborhoods that are studiously avoided in the draft Housing Element but required by state law to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing.

The draft housing element is problematic because it doesn't follow the law or HCD's guidance.

The sites inventory needs to include a probability of development during the RHNA cycle (AB 1397). The draft Housing element doesn't do that.

The housing element describes Measure Y as a growth management initiative. This is incorrect, it is a government constraint on housing. If the city continues to tiptoe around Measure Y allowing this governmental constraint on housing the remedies of the Housing Accountability Act will kick in up to by-right affordable housing that city council and city management cannot reject.

Both San Mateo and Huntington Beach have lost major court cases that firmly established the constitutionality of the Housing Accountability Act. I encourage Costa Mesa to not waste scarce time and money on another fruitless legal challenge and get started legalizing housing in all neighborhoods.

The city should live up to its professed values and embrace the positive vision of a safe, inclusive and vibrant Costa Mesa.

1. Safety achieved by reducing speeds and the number of cars on the city's public property.

2. Inclusive by updating the zoning to a form based code that uses objective criteria to allow the full RHNA allocation plus 20% to be built in this cycle in all neighborhoods.

3. Vibrant by moving to a form based code that allows services in all neighborhoods to reduce car dependence.

Aaron Klemm
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1463
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: Chen, Nick; LE, JENNIFER
Subject: FW: Draft Housing Element 2021-2029
Date: Thursday, September 2, 2021 9:20:50 AM
From: Nancy Henning <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 8:56 AM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Draft Housing Element 2021-2029
Hello,
Regarding Casa Bella Apartments, 1840 Park Ave...

Please check this only if you think it is worth checking into. In the prior housing element, Casa Bella was the most at risk subsidized senior housing in Costa Mesa due to having a for profit owner and due to the Hud contract expiring in 2015. The owner did renew the contract for 10 years at that time.
*** Now, the contract expires in Sept 2025. And the for profit owner's mortgage deed restrictions ended in 2020. The owner changed property management companies in Autumn 2020 and beginning April 2021 began renovations to the building.. it appears in order to bring it up to code? All red flags in some of our opinions as tenants here.

I skimmed a few parts of the draft Housing Element and I "think" I read one paragraph that said there is no at risk housing in Costa Mesa in this plan??? My feeling is that Casa Bella is at risk?? But I have no idea. Did anyone check with the actual owner about future plans for this property?
Thank you,
N. Henning
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1464
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick; ARIOS, JUSTIN
Subject: Fw: Housing Element comments
Date: Thursday, November 19, 2020 8:17:37 AM
From: Russell Toler <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 9:01 PM
To: Housing Element
Cc: CITY COUNCIL; HARLAN, JEFFREY; PERKINS, MARC; TOURJE, JENNA; ZICH, JON; COLBERT, KEDARIOUS; DEARAKAL, BYRON; RUSSELL, DIANNE
Subject: Housing Element comments
Hello,
I wanted to provide some comments on the Housing Element update.

There is a full range of historic housing types in between the single family home and the big ugly apartment complex. The “Missing Middle Housing” types – duplexes, quadplexes, rowhouses, and other small multi-family buildings – with good development standards, can all fit well within whatever shades of neighborhood character we’re hoping to create or preserve, including our R-1 neighborhoods. Without assaulting the cherished feel of our surroundings, these can help us increase the amount of housing, while also allowing neighborhoods to accommodate people of all ages, incomes, and family sizes (so that families can stay close and people can age in place, among other benefits). I hope that through this update, we focus not just on big projects on big sites, but on facilitating organic and stable neighborhood growth from local, small developers through many small projects. A big reason this sort of incremental development often doesn’t pencil out because of parking requirements, which brings me to my next point: cars.

As we grow, we need to figure out how to become less of a car-depended and car-oriented city ,
otherwise the NIMBYs are right – we’ll be a tangled mess of traffic, which no one wants. So to what extent is this new document going to deal with the question of how to uncouple housing from the car demand (or toll) that unnecessarily comes with it? As we try to accommodate 11,000 units over the next 10 years, what are we doing to ensure that owning a car and is optional rather than virtually required?
Lastly, I hope that the discussion over housing and the resulting decisions we make reflect some sort of unified vision for how we want to grow. While it may be necessary to balance out our spreadsheets and zone for the necessary amount of units, it is crucial that this is all decided within the context of how we want our city to look, feel, and function. How will the occupants of the new housing get around? How will the developments fit into the existing urban fabric and contribute to the neighborhood they’re in? How will the new buildings relate to and shape the public space they sit on? We don’t want islands of amenity-rich high-density housing fortressed in from bleak rights of way and full of people who never leave the property without a car (if you want to know what I’m describing, drive up Jamboree
in Irvine some time). The sustainable, equitable, fair, and good way to approach this is not to resist growth, but to plan for it, so that as we inevitably grow, we grow well. I hope that we can approach our housing need holistically, taking more into consideration than where we can allow the spaceship developments to land, and nesting the whole conversation into a greater discussion about what our physical vision is for our city.

Thank you for reading. I look forward to participating in this process. 1465
Russell Toler (lifelong Costa Mesa resident, husband, father, car driver, bike rider, walker, and renter, who can barely afford to stay)
1466
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick; EMERY, SUSAN; ARIOS, JUSTIN Subject: FW: Opinión
Date: Monday, February 15, 2021 8:09:30 AM
FYI,
We had a comment submitted in Spanish that Andy translated for us. -----Original Message-----
From: GODINEZ, ANDY
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2021 11:15 PM
To: ASHABI, MINOO <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Opinión
Minoo,
To the best of my ability I translated the email below:
"I just wanted to know how much importance will be placed on the comments that are posed by tenants? The importance shouldn't just be placed on the comments posed by business and property owners, but also the people who inhabit those properties. Because without the tenants, the property owners cannot prosper." Please note that LOA I QUIMONOS is not a word, so I am assuming they meant LOS INQUILINOS, which means THE TENANTS.

Also, it seemed to be one run on sentence so I had to break it into a question and two sentences.

The last portion seems to be a Bible verse and I believe it is being used as part of their signature, so I didn't feel the need to translate that.

Andy Godinez
Code Enforcement Officer
Community Improvement Division
77 Fair Drive
City of Costa Mesa, CA 92626
OFFICE HOURS:

MON.-THURS. 7:00 AM – 5:30 PM
Office: (714) 754-5209
Fax: (714) 754-4856
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: ASHABI, MINOO
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2021 11:24 AM
To: GODINEZ, ANDY <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: Opinión
Hi Andy,
We have received this email; could you please translate? -----Original Message-----
From: Dalia Silva [mailto:[email protected]
]
1467
Sent: Saturday, February 13, 2021 3:31 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Opinión
Solo quería saber que tan importante son los comentarios de loa i quimonos, porque no solo importa la opinión de los comerciantes y dueños de casa sino del que los habita, porque sin el inquilino, los arrendatarios no pueden prosperar.

Juan 3:16
Porque de tal mantra amo Dios al hombre que dio a su hijo unigenito para que todo aquel que en El crea no se pierda mas tengo vida eterna.
1468
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: LE, JENNIFER; Chen, Nick
Subject: FW: Proposed W 19th Street Development
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 4:00:53 PM
From: Kyle Harper <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2021 3:47 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed W 19th Street Development
Please enter these comments into the public record regarding the Housing element draft proposal presented September 13, 2021.

1. Many people walk to Smart & Final and El Metate Market to get their groceries. I request that to deny the proposal to tear both of these down and put hundreds of high-density units in their place. Where will the residents buy their food? Do not tear down the grocery store and replace it with 'affordable' high-density housing on 19th Street.

2. So many units proposed for 19th Street will not fix the homeless problem, and adding high density development in the soup kitchen neighborhood smacks of instability over a multi-year period. Do not force higher density in here. It is a recipe for a slum and overcrowding. Currently, there is a shortage of parking on the residential streets that will be overrun if this plan moves forward.

3. Use the golf course practice area/driving range which is raw land next to the 2 (two) 18 hole golf courses. These 100 acres will easily hold the 4000 affordable homes state law requires to be planned for. This will give certainty that the required 4000 affordable homes will be built at all. All 100 acres don't need to be taken, and the 2 18 hole courses are totally separate from the practice area.

3.1 The proposed plan contains no certainty at all, and a lot of wishful thinking that the hundreds of retrofit projects actually take place. Utilizing the raw land that the practice area provides will impact the community in the least possible way.

4. Stop the affordable unit tax on developers and they will build better market rate projects that build neighborhood value.

Kyle Harper
HarperPromotional
949.278.1055
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1469
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: ARIOS, JUSTIN; Chen, Nick; LE, JENNIFER
Subject: FW: Public Comment: City of Costa Mesa Housing Element Update Date: Thursday, September 2, 2021 6:02:55 PM
From: Matthew Sheehan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 6:02 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <[email protected]>; Housing Element <housing- [email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Public Comment: City of Costa Mesa Housing Element Update Good evening,
My name is Matthew Sheehan and I live in Costa Mesa (District 48). I believe everyone should have access to housing in our community.

As a child, my family often struggled to pay for housing. My parents had to sign a new lease nearly every other year because they were unable to renew their leases due to rising requested rents and were not able to afford to purchase a house. During my elementary school years, I had to transfer to a new school each year due to our housing instability. As a current resident of Costa Mesa, this is not the future I want for my family and future children.

Please use our housing element update to boldly plan for more housing near our jobs, transit stops, and high-resource neighborhoods. Let's clearly demonstrate to HCD and to our community that we are affirmatively furthering fair housing in our city.

Best,
Matthew Sheehan
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Report any suspicious activities to the Information Technology Department. 1470

August 17, 2020

Dear City of Costa Mesa:

St. Joseph Hospital is an acute-care not-for-profit faith-based hospital founded in 1929 by the Sisters of St. Joseph of Orange, located in the City of Orange, California. St. Joseph Hospital has 465 licensed beds, 379 of which are currently available, and a campus that is approximately 38 acres in size. The hospital’s Primary Service Area includes the cities of Orange, Santa Ana, Tustin, Anaheim, Garden Grove, Villa Park, and Westminster. Major programs and services include cardiac care, critical care, diagnostic imaging, emergency medicine, obstetrics and behavioral/psychiatric services. St.

Joseph Hospital dedicates resources to improve the health and quality of life for the communities it serves, with special emphasis on the needs of the economically poor and vulnerable.

Over the past two years, St. Joseph Hospital along with 13 other Community-based Organizations have been working together to address the issues of Economic Development, Housing, and Mental Health. In Central Orange County. The goal is to impact systemic change and determinants of health. In addition, St. Joseph Hospital has identified Homeless & Housing as one its key priorities of focus over the next three years. We will develop strategies to address lack of affordable housing under the framework of equity and racial disparities. We firmly believe that in order for communities to thrive, there must be equitable systems in place that support social consciousness, economic stability, and diverse development.

As you are aware, Housing Elements for the 6
th cycle period (2021-29) are due to the California Department of Housing and Community Development by October 2021. St. Joseph Hospital understands the importance of each city’s Housing Element in guiding housing programs, policies, zoning, and funding, as well as in reducing current obstacles to affordable housing development. We also understand the importance of Housing Elements in addressing racial equity in housing, particularly with the new statutory requirements mandating the inclusion of programs that affirmatively further fair housing in 6th cycle Housing Elements.¹ Together with local housing advocate groups, we support their efforts on ensuring that each jurisdiction increases affordable housing opportunities by implementing proven strategies, policies, and incentives that encourage affordable housing development.

St. Joseph Hospital seeks to ensure that jurisdictions engage the public in revising their Housing Elements. Public engagement is a necessary component of the Housing Element process as California Housing Element law states: “The local government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element…” Broad participation and true engagement of the public increases the likelihood that the community members involved in the discussion and planning processes will support new housing strategies and housing developments. Public engagement should include participation from residents of diverse communities, housing consumers, service providers, and advocates.

As the City embarks upon the 2021-29 Housing Element update, St. Joseph Hospital requests that the City include us and our local housing advocates in the upcoming Housing Element review and evaluation of the current 5th cycle planning period goals, policies, and accomplishments.

St. Joseph Hospital further requests that the City conduct a robust public participation process for the 6th cycle Housing Element update and that it incorporate St. Joseph Hospital, affordable housing advocates, and residents of low-income communities in this process. We believe that you will achieve a stronger Housing Element update through diverse community participation, outreach and community planning process.

1471
To ensure adequate public participation St. Joseph Hospital recommends the following:

1. The City should engage community participation and feedback at all stages of the Housing Element review and update. Participation should not be limited to public hearings.

2. The City should allow for various methods of engagement to encourage public participation. For instance, for members of the public who may not have access to the internet or a computer, or who are unable to use video applications, consistently provide an adequate telephone option – available in multiple languages – and generally ensure that members of the community who lack adequate technology can participate in meetings about the Housing Element review.

3. The City’s public participation and outreach opportunities should be meaningful and create various platforms (for example, virtual, written, workshops, webinars, community meetings, and public hearings) for the engagement of community members who reside in lower-income communities, affordable housing partners, Legal Aid organizations, and advocates.

4. The City should create a diverse Housing Element Working Group to evaluate the current Housing Element policies and accomplishments. This Working Group could help create policies and recommendations for the new Housing Element update to ensure that you meet the housing needs of those who are most vulnerable in the City.

5. The City should include affordable housing advocates in any anticipated Housing Element Work Group and provide the opportunity for them to provide their analysis on 5 th cycle RHNA progress and be a part of
developing policy recommendations on the 6th cycle update.

6. The City should engage community organizations representing and advocating for families and individuals residing in lower-income communities to ensure that members of these communities can directly participate and that the City considers their perspective as part of the evaluation and creation of policies that create affordable housing.

We would appreciate the City giving us notice of any public meetings regarding the Housing Element. We look forward to working with the City to encourage effective housing policies that will help create balanced housing development and create much-needed affordable housing in our local communities. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (714) 771-8000 Ext. 17535 or [email protected] .

Sincerely,

Cecilia Bustamante Pixa, MPH, MHCML
Director, Community Health Investment

¹California Government Code § 8899.50 (Assembly Bill 686). 1472
Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council,
I felt that it would be helpful to write out some
thoughts on the Housing Element in hopes
that it might both shape the document and help keep
the conversation going in what I
believe to be a good direction. Although much of what
I say in this letter is aspirational, I
truly believe that Costa Mesa - much more than most
of our neighbors - is set up to grow
well
into a leafy, sustainable, interesting, and beautiful
urban city. Some of what is written
below is immediately applicable to the task at hand
(updating the Housing Element), while
some of it is applicable to the larger task of updating the Circulation Element and Title 13 of
the Municipal Code (zoning) in the wake of the updated
Housing Element.

Please note that the ever-present risk of discussing
these things is that certain terms and
ideas are likely to present themselves very differently
in each of our heads. To keep this
letter from getting too long, I’m taking that risk.

I’ve provided links throughout and
resources at the bottom that might help refine the
things I’m trying to say, and I’m also
always available to chat.

The entire planning profession can be boiled down
to "how do we fix the problems
caused by cars and apartment bans without banning
cars or allowing apartments"
-
Someone on Twitter

1. The shape of the city
A good, healthy city is a collection of complete neighborhoods.

Complete
neighborhoods
are geographically finite areas with civic, cultural,
and commercial uses embedded into
them. They also have a variety of housing types (among
other benefits, like the mixing of
ages and socio-economic status, this allows people
to move through stages of life without
having to leave their neighborhoods behind). This
idea that neighborhoods are limited in
size
1 is key. We often talk about how complete our
city
is (citing the number of dwellings,
amount of office and commercial space, etc.), but
what
matters
is the
proximity of
everything
. That is really the whole point of a city.

But when we disregard the
human scale
,
we create a contradiction of a city. When civic, cultural, and commercial uses, and different
housing options are embedded into our neighborhoods
and within comfortable walking
1 A complete neighborhood should roughly have a ¼ mile
radius (5-minute walk), since that is the
distance that people are generally willing to walk
before opting to drive instead.
1473
distance of each other, the city can flourish. But when they are grouped into sectors, miles away from each other and only accessible by car, the
city
cannot
function well.

I say this because we need to think about what each neighborhood is lacking before designating vacant or underutilized lots as “opportunity sites” for housing.
2 This is
important to remember, because once land is developed,
it stays like that for a very long
time. However good an increase in housing supply may
be, a neighborhood which contains
nothing but housing - or worse: nothing but one master-planned, centrally-managed
product - is an incomplete neighborhood. Density
without amenity is just car-dependent
density. See this
great blog post
on the 5 Cs of neighborhood
planning by urban designer
Howard Blackson.

My point:

We need to make sure that this Housing Element
is actively helping make all of our
neighborhoods
more
complete. And we need to make sure
that we aren’t precluding the future
“completion” of neighborhoods by planning for every
last bit of available land to be filled in with
nothing but more housing.

2. Regulating What Matters
As with many other cities, it’s our development standards that are largely responsible for
our shortage of housing. Pre-WWII neighborhoods that
represent the best of what we’re
trying to imitate with our R-1 standards contained
a variety of building types, densities, and
even uses. What we like about them is that the streets
are lined with shade trees, cars
move slowly, the buildings are mostly one or two stories and aren’t too wide, they have
conspicuous front doors and big front windows, they
have porches and small gardens in
front that make for comfortable transitions between
private and public space, etc. If these
(and whatever else we identify as the features that
make such places desirable) successfully
embody the spirit of what R-1 is intended to be, then
these
are the things that we should be
regulating. And the same principle applies to whichever type of environment we’re trying to
achieve - whether we’re talking about R-1-type streets
or whatever the subsequent “clicks
up” are.
3 3
The subsequent “clicks up” shouldn’t be on their
own, far away: they should be embedded into the
same neighborhoods - or even blocks!
2 This requires a lot-by-lot analysis, but for a simple example - have we identified any land as an
“opportunity site” that is in a park-poor neighborhood? (see General Plan
Figures OS-R 2 & 3
).
1474
But rather than regulating the physical things that matter, we’ve been regulating the abstract things that no one actually cares about.

Density caps,
minimum lot sizes
, and
costly parking mandates
are three principal zoning
culprits that have kept traditional
American housing types - those that can deliver good
density at multiple scales - out of our
city.
4 As a result, our neighborhoods are frozen:
single-family homes are selling for millions
of dollars, and the only other product that gets built are distorted variants of the single-family home - crammed together unnaturally
on jointly-owned lots, often turned
away from the public realm. But we need to get our
development codes right (code the
things that we actually care about) so that our “built-out” parts can be liberated to evolve
incrementally and organically
.

There are many potential housing types that should
be embedded into our neighborhoods,
but are simply coded out. Missing middle housing traditionally refers to multiplexes that
are the general size and shape as houses and therefore
integrate seamlessly into R-1-type
environments. But there are many other possibilities
of types that are larger than missing
middle products, but smaller than wraps or podiums,
that - if done well - can work just fine
in the
right parts
of each of our neighborhoods. We
need to not only allow, but actively
facilitate these “small” multi-family, or even mixed-use, infill projects. See
here
for some
examples. We should not be depending on mega-projects
to deliver all of our new housing.

Much of what I’m trying to get at is summed up in
this line from
a great Strong Towns post
by Daniel Herriges:

Let single-family homes become duplexes and triplexes.

Let small apartment buildings, 8
to 12 units, go up on corner lots. Let mom-and-pop
stores and cafes open in these areas
to serve growing populations.

Then there are the large parcels in the city - both
those still undeveloped and those that are
ripe for redevelopment. Historically, large sites
have been developed as sealed off pods of
a single building type.

Monticello
- the 20 acre mega-project
that turns its back on 3,000
feet of public streets - may have been the first of
this type in town, and until recently have
been in the form of garden apartments, like
these
,
these
,
these
,
these
, and
these
. But this
model of development neglects the most
fundamental
principles of city-making:
urban
4 To take the simplest example: currently, how could you build a duplex in R-2? To subdivide your land, each new parcel would need 12,000 square feet
and 100 feet of frontage(!) To build on an
existing, smaller parcel, you would be allowed one
unit per 3,630 square feet of lot area (meaning
that you would not be able to build a duplex on a
typical 6,000 square foot lot). If your lot has been
that size since 1992, however, you can build a duplex
- but only if you can fit 5 parking spaces on it.
1475
land should be carved into small, walkable blocks, public open spaces, and streets of shared use; buildings should address, and take pedestrian access off those spaces.

These are the characteristics that every desirable
urban environment shares. But look what
we’re still allowing to happen with
Superior Pointe
,
17th West
,
The Enclave
, and
Miraval
.

The edge buildings in the first two at least address and take access off the street (though with questionable frontages), while The Enclave and
Mirval have followed in the tradition of
walling themselves off from the outside world. Rather
than authentic places, these are all
homogenous (in so many ways) faux-“communities” -
unstitched from the fabric of the
surrounding environment, impenetrable by the public,
and wholly unable to evolve. You
have to leave the whole project if your financial
situation changes, if your family grows, or if
it’s time for grandma to be closer. We are making
static, stagnant
projects
rather than
places
- despite how they are branded and marketed.
5 This
is largely a matter of getting our codes
right, and it should not have to require a colossal
effort.

My point:

Our existing neighborhoods cannot be frozen
and protected from any change. We
need to make sure that our code is set up so that
the change that does happen is incremental,
context-sensitive, and in the right parts of each
neighborhood. For the bigger projects, we need
to especially make sure we have better subdivision
standards. In all contexts, we should be
regulating the things we actually care about, so that
each project contributes to the aesthetic
quality of our “urban commons.”

3. Corridor Visioning
I have heard the idea from the dais that we might
want to articulate a vision - or visions -
for our corridors, and even regulate them with form-based codes. I want to throw in my
support. Like much of Southern California, our grid
of corridors is a result of the Public
Land Survey System from long before our time. When
the functional classification system
of highways is applied to this pattern, the result
can only be seen as ideal by the most
myopic observer. Look what has happened to places
like
Huntington Beach
. We instantly
recognize this interpretation of what a street is
supposed to be as
not good
, yet we’ve been
allowing the same thing to happen - project-by-project
- along what perhaps is our corridor
with the most potential: Harbor Blvd. Look at all
the new development (for example
Blue
Sol
,
Twenty8
,
Aura
,
Azulon
) and note what they have
in common - they don’t want to have
5 580 Anton
is a different sort of project, but errs
in the same way as many others. The entirety of
the ground floor that is adjacent to the public realm
- 700 feet of frontage - is dead. A lot of planning
energy went into this project, yet the building fails
in its most basic role (from an urban design
perspective): shape and engage with the public space
of the street. In the core of the City of the Arts,
we need to do a better job of communicating our belief
that beauty actually matters.
1476
anything to do with Harbor Blvd. This is understandable, since we’ve allowed Harbor Blvd. to become a high-speed 6+ lane highway (making it
a convenient place to
drive through
, but
a very unpleasant place to
be
). We also - bewilderingly
- have been allowing (even more)
single-family homes to back right up to the boulevard.

Is this consistent with our vision for
our corridors? Is the future of Harbor Blvd.
a high-speed channel of privacy walls
with the
backs of low-density, car-dependent housing on either
side? The Planning Commission
recently reviewed the plans for a new car wash to
be built on a commercially-zoned lot on
Harbor and Dale. I checked the zoning: 2 stories maximum, 20-foot setback required for
both streets, FAR capped at 0.4, etc. It’s no wonder
that a car wash is moving in. Each new
development betrays the embarrassing fact that we
don’t know what we want. We don’t
have a vision.

We would be wise to remember Principle no. 19 of the
Charter of the New Urbanism
(which
is worth reading in its entirety):

A primary task
of all urban architecture and landscape design
is the physical definition of streets and public spaces
as places of shared use.

The establishing of a form-based code would force
us to figure out what the barriers to
development are, what the market can support, and
what ideal-yet-practical buildout
should
look, feel, and function like. The development
code, then, would be set up to deliver
physically-predictable results that are consistent
with that vision, and with as little
headache as possible each time an application comes
in.

My point:

Yes to visioning our corridors, yes to code
revisions in light of those established
visions, yes to form-based zoning if necessary.

4. Open Space
When the countryside is far away, the city becomes
a prison.
-
Christopher Alexander
In Southern California we’ve carpeted the land with
low-density, car-dependent sprawl. In
our worst suburban pockets, we lack both the benefits
of the city
and
the benefits of the
country. A wise response is not to try to freeze growth and long for more rural times. Nor is
it to swing the other way and hastily welcome any
and all growth. Our best approach is to
strategically do what we can to control
the shape
and character
of our city as the market and
the State push us to grow (see No. 1, above). This
obviously applies at all scales and should
permeate all of our discussions about everything planning-related, but what I’m bringing up
1477
here is the topic of semi-wild, easily-accessible open space within
the city. The concept of
“transfer of development rights” (TDR) programs is
traditionally applied to cities that want
to curb outward sprawl and protect surrounding farmland.

It is dependent on the not-ideal
system of regulating the abstract concept of density
via the DUA metric. While I very much
hope that we can stop regulating density through zoning at the parcel level, the DUA caps
at the Land Use Plan
6 level may suffice to make a
program like this viable. We have some
very large vacant and underutilized parcels in the
city, and it would be folly to let them just
get paved over without considering whether they (in
whole or part) might be opportunities
to get more quality open spaces in the city that are
easily-accessible to more people. This
approach has the added benefit of not requiring that
the city purchase the land: the
property owner only sells the
rights
to build a specified
number of units to another
property owner elsewhere, and maintains ownership
of the land - with a newly-recorded
easement. I’ve never seen TDR programs set up like
this before. But I don’t see why the
idea wouldn’t be worth exploring if we are truly interested in rewilding parts of our city and
providing more quality open space to more people as
we densify.
7 Having said that, we also need to recognize the obvious:
the topic of urban open spaces
and the lack of access to them is a modern, self-inflicted problem. The most common open
space is the space between buildings - streets. But
since we’ve allowed most of our streets
to be monopolized by cars - and therefore unsafe and
unpleasant for people outside of
vehicles - none of it “counts.” This really is amazing, considering the amount of open space
there is in the city and how close it is to all of
us! Instead, we provide pockets of turf with
plastic play equipment where we can manage, but leave
it up to residents to figure out how
to navigate to those places safely through a network
of disqualified open space that is
dominated by fast-moving cars. Whenever we talk about
the need for open space, we need
to also talk about the need to
reconceptualize our
streets
.

My point:

We need more public open space, and we need
it more easily-accessible to more
people. This topic increases in importance as we increase in population. A TDR program might be
one means towards this end, or maybe we have better
ideas. Our streets should serve as public
open space too, but they cannot fulfill this basic
role when driving convenience is treated as the
highest good.
7 I am using semi-wild spaces (like Canyon, Talbert,
and Fairview Parks) as a gold standard here, but
other forms of accessible open space may work well
too - especially those that might provide some
revenue to the property owner.
6 Using DUA at the Land Use Plan level is fine. It
should
inform
our zoning. But when the metric is
being applied parcel-by-parcel through zoning, it
is being used inappropriately.
1478

5. Parking & Mobility
In The High Cost of Free Parking, which the American
Planning Association published in
2005, I argued that minimum parking requirements subsidize cars, increase traffic
congestion, pollute the air, encourage sprawl, increase housing costs, degrade urban design, prevent walkability, damage the economy, and
penalize poor people. Since then,
to my knowledge, no member of the planning profession
has argued that parking
requirements do not cause these harmful effects. Instead, a flood of recent research has
shown they do cause these harmful effects. Parking
requirements in zoning ordinances
are poisoning our cities with too much parking. Minimum parking requirements are a
fertility drug for cars.
- Donald Shoup
The right to access every building in a city by private motorcar, in an age when everyone
owns such a vehicle, is actually the right to destroy
the city.
-
Lewis Mumford
Before we go too deep in our analysis of how much
and what sort of housing is possible,
we need to figure out what we’re going to do about
our costly on-site car storage
mandates, AKA
parking minimums
. Arguments in favor
of keeping them can only be from
the myopic perspective of the driver who has been
accustomed to free and easy parking
(and no traffic) wherever they go, despite how unrealistic and unsustainable that
expectation may be. Arguments for their reduction
or removal include
sound logic
and
big-picture thinking
.

As we grow, our dependence on cars
needs
to weaken,
and the comfort and convenience of
getting around in more spatially-efficient ways
needs
to become more viable for more
people. Right now, despite our aspirational statements
about being a multi-modal city, our
codes ensure that driving remains the most convenient
option to get around - through the
continued use of LOS, high on-site parking requirements, the limitation of FAR and DUA by
estimated trip generation, etc.
8 As we prepare for
this growth spurt, we need to figure out
8 Donald Shoup:

Consider the three main elements of
city planning. First, divide the city into separate
zones (housing here, jobs there, shopping somewhere
else) to create travel between the zones. Second,
limit density to spread everything apart and further
increase travel. Third, require ample off-street
parking
to spread everything even farther apart and make cars
the easiest and cheapest way to travel. Cities have
unwisely adopted these three car-friendly policies.

Separated land uses, low density, and ample free
parking create drivable cities but prevent walkable
neighborhoods. Although city planners did not intend
to enrich the automobile and oil industries, they
have shaped our cities to suit our cars.
1479
what we need to do to function and thrive as a car-lite city. If we allow the accommodation of cars to shape (and price) the development of 11,760
units, then
this problem
will be
further entrenched for decades, and we will be marching away from our city and state
climate goals. Now is the time to decide that we are
going to grow sustainably (both
spatially and environmentally), and calibrate our
codes around more noble needs like
beauty, green and active mobility, and affordable housing.

My point:

If we plan for cars and traffic, we’ll get
cars and traffic. Right now, despite what we
say, we are still very much planning for cars and
traffic. The discussion of the future of local
housing must be intertwined with the discussion of
the future of local
access and mobility
.

I don’t want any of the above points to be construed
as hard-edged propositions. They are
not intended as solutions, only ideas in an attempt
to move the conversation in what I
believe is the right direction. I want to push them
to the front of our discourse over the
vision of our city, and I hope that they can be on
our minds as we continue to work out our
future.

Thanks for reading,
Russell Toler
Resources●
Blog Post: Density Done Well●
Publication: Density Done Well●
Book: Soft City●
Missing Middle Housing●
AARP Handbook for Improved Neighborhoods●
Users Guide to Zoning Reform●
Lean Code Tool●
Biophilic Cities●
Residential Infill Project (Portland)
(Oregon City)●
Random examples of new “small” infill
1480
From: ASHABI, MINOO
To: "[email protected]"
Cc: ARIOS, JUSTIN; Chen, Nick
Subject: RE: Housing Element Comments
Date: Monday, May 3, 2021 3:00:01 PM
Hello Riley,
Thank you for your interest in the Housing Element Update. We will add your name to the interest list for future email blasts. You could also check the City’s website for periodic updates including two new videos:
https://www.costamesaca.gov/city-hall/city-departments/development-services/planning/housing- element-update
Your comment below is noted and will be included in the public comments provided to the City Council.

Minoo Ashabi, AIA
Principal Planner
City of Costa Mesa
714/754-5610
[email protected]
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2021 2:54 PM
To: Housing Element <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Housing Element Comments
Hello,
I have been watching the recorded community meetings on District 4 & 5, and I would like to be included in future meetings or information updates.

I am a home owner and live in the freedom homes in district 5. I am very busy with young children, as are many of my neighbors, and hence I don’t have allot of time for city involvement. However, this housing issue has been a hot topic for the 10+ years I have lived in Costa Mesa. After listening to these meetings, I feel like people like me were not well represented, and I would like to share a few of my own comments. I bought my house in 2015 for $570K. An average lot in my neighborhood is 0.2 acres, so that makes 5 houses per acre. When I heard the State has decided that 30 “housing units” per acre is the only way to have “affordable” housing, my jaw dropped a little. 30 “housing units” per acre is 6X the housing density of my neighborhood. Pause a little and contemplate 6X the density of my neighborhood as the new “norm” & it will make your head spin a little. I am biased like everyone, and I enjoy the lifestyle that a less dense neighborhood provides. I also feel that the majority of my neighbors do as well. I am not excited to think about the entire lower west-side of Costa Mesa be transformed into high density neighborhoods, but I truly feel powerless to fight the state. I would only like to offer my suggestions to this conversation:

1. Consider the parking situation! Please! Do not believe that people bike or walk & don’t have cars, that’s a ridiculous idea. Go to any high density area (like district 4), and you find parking is very hard to find. I love walking & biking around town, but also realize most people do not, and most times biking & walking is not possible (ex: night time…raining…doctors appt… 1481
errands…the list goes on & on).

2. We must set a housing “unit” to Park space ratio! If you want to attract families, you must have local park space! No exceptions. And I’m not talking about the little tiny parks they put in those high density neighborhoods with only 1 play structure & no swings or space to run around. Those are not sufficient & should not count towards park space.

3. Please realize these 3 story + rooftops places that are popping up everywhere are selling for MORE money than small houses in my spacious neighborhood. So it is NOT TRUE that high density = less cost.

4. If you really wanted to build affordable houses, you would build a simple house (1 or 2 stories, Asphalt driveway, formica countertops, simple fixes, 1 bathroom, etc…) That is the only really affordable house. All other types are not affordable. And government assistance does not mean affordable. If you need help to pay for something, is it affordable?
Thank you,
Riley Watson
NOTICE: The information contained in this email, and attachment(s) thereto, is confidential and may contain attorney - client privileged citation. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the email from your computer system without retaining any copies. 1482
From: Cash Rutherford
To: Kathy Esfahani; Elizabeth Hansburg P4H
Cc: Chen, Nick; ASHABI, MINOO; Rutherford Cassuis; Dianne Russell Subject: RE: Sharing Willowick proposal
Date: Thursday, February 11, 2021 12:32:27 PM
Attachments: image001.jpg
Thanks to Minoo, Nick and TeamCM for meeting with us on the housing element update. Please do keep Kathy and the CM affordable housing coalition apprised of the process at is unfolds. We are eager to stay engaged.

Kudos to Elizabeth for sharing the info about Willowick – I think there are definitely some lessons learned in how to approach developing FDC.

All the best,
Cash
Cash Rutherford
Field Coordinator, United to End Homelessness
Orange County United Way­
18012 Mitchell South, Irvine, CA 92614
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 949.477.4502
Mobile: 951.265.0461
From: Kathy Esfahani <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 11:44 AM
To: Elizabeth Hansburg P4H <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; ASHABI, MINOO <[email protected]>; Cash Rutherford <[email protected]>; Rutherford Cassuis <[email protected]>; Dianne Russell <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Sharing Willowick proposal
Thanks very much, Elizabeth, for sending this. And thanks to Nick, Minoo, and all involved for hosting such a productive and satisfying meeting. We look forward to participating further in the Housing Element Update process.

Kathy
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 3:10 PM Elizabeth Hansburg P4H
<[email protected]
> wrote:

To be clear, this is a PROPOSAL, and no decision has been made, but for proof of concept, Willowick is a comparable site in size for FDC. It would be an interesting exercise to analyze how these partners are proposing to use the 90+ acres. The partners are City Ventures and Jamboree Housing.
--
Elizabeth Hansburg
1483
Co-Founder & Executive Director
Image removed by sender.
c. (714) 872-1418
e. [email protected]
Click here to become a member of People for Housing!
1484
© 2018 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2019159 | 06-28-19

SANTA ANA, CA
Massing Model

WILLOWICK
1485
36 © 2018 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCHITECTS, INC. DBA WHA. | 2019159 | 06-28-19

SANTA ANA, CA

ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN

WILLOWICK

WILLOWICK

4.2 INSPIRATIONAL IMAGERY

RIVERFRONT PARK

COMMUNITY PARK

NEIGHBORHOOD VIBE
3 4
4 5
5 3
1486

WILLOWICK

COMMUNITY

PARTNERS

CONCEPTUAL LAND USE PLAN

WILLOWICK
Summary
Residential
2-Story SFD
2-Story T ownhomes
3-Story T ownhomes
4-Story M/U Apartments Over Retail*
4-Story M/U Apartments Over Cultural*
Non-Residential
Retail
Rec Center
Community Park
Roads and Misc Open Space
To t a l
* Includes provision of 423 Affordable Homes in total (25%) PA-1
2-Story T ownhomes
± 10.6 Acres

15.2 Homes/ Acre
±160 Homes
PA-2
3-Story T riplex
± 5.0 Acres

15.6 Homes/ Acre
±80 Homes
PA-3
2-Story SFD
± 7.2 Acres

11.2 Homes/ Acre
±80 Homes
PA-4
3-Story T ownhomes
± 5.7 Acres

19.2 Homes/ Acre
±110 Homes
PA-5
3-Story T ownhomes
± 5.7 Acres

24.2 Homes/ Acre
±140 Homes
PA-6
Community Park
± 5.1 Acres
PA-7
4-Story M/U Apartments
Over Cultural*
± 4.9 Acres
± 77,000 SF

61.2 Homes/ Acre
±300 Homes
PA-8
2-Story SFD
± 5.0 Acres

11.8 Homes/ Acre
±60 Homes
PA-9
3-Story T ownhomes
± 5.1 Acres

19.2 Homes/ Acre
±100 Homes
PA-10
3-Story T ownhomes
± 3.5 Acres

24.6 Homes/ Acre
±90 Homes
PA-11
4-Story M/U Apartments
Over Retail*
± 5.4 Acres

60.0 Homes/ Acre
±320 Homes PA-12
4-Story M/U Apartments
Over Retail*
± 4.1 Acres

60.0 Homes/ Acre
±250 Homes
PA-13
Rec Center
± 2.7 Acres
PA-14
Campesino Park
± 6.4 Acres
PA-15
Retail
± 6.6 Acres
± 70,000 SF
PA-16
Riverfront Park
± 16.8 Acres
Acres

62.2 12.2

10.6 25.0

9.5 4.9

61.9 6.6

2.7 32.1

20.5 124.1
± 5,000 SF
± 20,000 SF
Homes
1,390
140
160
520
570
300
1,690
SF
102,000
25,000
77,000
70,000
70,000
172,000
Santa Ana
River
Spurgeon
Intermediate
School
Spurgeon
Park
OC Street Car Alignment
Hazard Ave.
11th St.

W. Washington Ave.
5th St.

W. 7th St.

N. Jackson St.

N. Jackson St.

Proposed
OC Street
Car Station
1487

WILLOWICK

COMMUNITY

PARTNERS

PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ANALYSIS

WILLOWICK
Proposed
OC Street
Car Station
Summary
Within Golf Course Boundary
Community Park
Rec Center
Riverfront Park
Linear Park/ T rails
Outside Golf Course Boundary
Campesino Park
Riverfront Park
To t a l
Net Area (Golf Boundary Area)
Gross Area (Includes Outside Areas)
Community Park
± 5.1 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.38 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.71 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.93 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.59 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.25 Acres
Linear Park
± 0.69 Acres
Linear Park
±0.24 Acres
Rec Center
± 2.7 Acres
Campesino Park
± 6.4 Acres
Riverfront Park
± 3.7 Acres
Riverfront Park
± 13.1 Acres
Acres

15.3 5.1

2.7 3.7

3.8 19.5

6.4 13.1

34.8 101.8
124.1
Percent O.S.

15.1%

5.0%

2.7%

3.6%

3.7%

15.1%

28.0%
Santa Ana
River
Spurgeon
Intermediate
School
Spurgeon
Park
OC Street Car Alignment
Hazard Ave.
11th St.

W. Washington Ave.
5th St.

W. 7th St.

N. Jackson St.

N. Jackson St.
1488
From: Brent Stoll
To: Chen, Nick
Subject: SCMW
Date: Friday, March 12, 2021 9:31:04 AM
Something to think about. Most of the council members and some of the planning commissioners have seen versions of this over the years.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/khkj4sk4j5e6qzz/AAAj7go8lWZBJ8804ndhkwcGa?dl=0 1489
From: LE, JENNIFER
To: ASHABI, MINOO; ARIOS, JUSTIN; EMERY, SUSAN
Cc: Chen, Nick
Subject: Update
Date: Friday, January 15, 2021 11:35:49 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Hi—
I had a meeting with Kathy Esfahani today of the Affordable Housing Coalition. They are gearing up to participate in the Housing Element and to launch an outreach effort asking Costa Mesa residents to support some bold policies they will be advocating for. Their outreach focus is on promoting understanding of who affordable housing residents are (workforce housing) and confronting density with visuals of example affordable projects. Although we have a different role than an advocacy group, their messaging is in line with ours in terms of promoting an understanding of density and affordable housing issues. These are both topics for our short videos being developed.

Their top 3 policy asks are:
·
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
· A land use plan for Fairview Development Center that incorporates a master planned housing village of sorts with a mix of densities including rentals and low to mod affordable housing mix including a PSH component. Current cap of 500 units and “golf course” style housing is not their vision. Possibly lobbying the State to put the property in a land trust.
·
Amending Measure Y so as not to function as a barrier to housing. · Not top 3 but other things that are priorities for them: Preserving affordable MH parks and motel conversions and ADUs as a potential part of a solution for affordable housing. Offered to be a facilitator of conversations on motel conversions with Hotel owners who they had a relationship with from past efforts (Mike Lin owner of Travelodge was mentioned).

We already have them on our list I’m sure, but they will be one to include in our stakeholders meeting and possibly a one-on-one meeting in the future as we develop our adequate sites analysis and policy plan.

Jennifer Le
Director of Economic and Development Services
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, 92626
(714) 754-5617
Development Services staff are available to assist you Monday through Thursday, 8AM to 5PM. Please note: Until further notice, Costa Mesa City Hall is closed to the public in keeping with Governor Newsom’s direction regarding COVID-19. The City is committed to continuing to provide essential services and will be providing services to the public online, via telephone, and via email in order to follow the Governor’s guidance and reduce the potential spread of COVID-19.
1490
Pa ge 1 of 2

Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition

March 23, 2021

Mayor John Stephens and City Council Members
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Re: Our Public Comments for the Housing Element Study Session

Dear Mayor Stephens and City Council Members:

The Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition (the Coalition) applauds the extensive outreach efforts of city planning staff and the consultant in attempting to involve the community in the 2021-2029 Housing Element update . The Coalition has been glad to participate in many of these efforts and we appreciate the open minds and skillful listening displayed on the part of the city’s agents.

Given the huge RHNA numbers assigned to Costa Mesa in the new planning period, and our community’s despe rate need for affordable housing, we urge the city to adopt in its Housing Element Update bold policies aimed at ensuring affordable housing actually gets built here. These are our major policy suggestions:

1. Adopt a highly effective inclusionary housi ng ordinance. The affordability requirement must hit the sweet spot: It should be high enough that it will help the city meet its RHNA numbers for low and very low income households, but not too high as to di scourage development. We believe an excellent model is the inclusionary ordinance which works so well in Irvine. We note it is imperative the ordinance’s in lieu fee is high enough to encourage developers to include affordable units in their project, rat her than opt for paying the fee.

2. Amend Measure Y so it does not constrain the building of affordable housing.

Additionally, we urge the city to interpret Measure Y as written as exempting from the “voter approval” requirement all developments which make at least 20% of their units affordable to low and very low income households.

3. Create a specific plan for the 100 -acre Fairview Developmental Center site. The plan should allow densities of at least 60 units to the acre, with at least 20 percent of all units affordable to low and very low income households. Also, lobby the Governor’s office to 1491
Pa ge 2 of 2

get the state to either donate the property to the city for affordable housing development or sell the property at a discount to nonprofit developers for that purpose.

4. Create new overlay zones along major thoroughfares like Harbor Blvd. where mixed use development can replace failing strip malls with vibrant new communities of apartments, restaurants and small businesses, incorporating walking and bike trails. These overlays should require at least 20% of the housing to be affordable for low and very low income households.

5. Review and amend all specific plans and overlays in the city to include increased densities of 60 units/acre and a requirement of at least 20% affordable units.

6. Create a housing trust fund to hold the in- lieu fees generated by our new inclusionary ordinance, and prioritize in-lieu fees for use at the Fairview Developmental Center site/city - owned sites/affordable housing in overlay zones.

7. Create a land trust to hold donated land.

Thank you for considering our input on this crucial planning document. We look forward to partnering with you to increase affordable housing in Costa Mesa . Please let us know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,

Kathy Esfahani
Kathy Esfahani, on behalf of the Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition

cc: Mayor John Stephens and City Council Members
Cesar Covarrubias, Kennedy Commission
Richard Walker, Public Law Center
1492

August 3, 2020

City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Dr
Costa Mesa, CA 92626

Dear City of Costa Mesa:

The Kennedy Commission (the Commission) , a broad-based coalition of residents and community organizations , advocates for the production of homes affordable for families earning less than $20,000 annually in Orange County. Formed in 2001, the Commission has successfully partnered and worked with Orange County jurisdictions to create effective housing and land-use policies that have led to the new construction of homes affordable to lower-income working families.

As you are aware, Housing Elements for the 6th cycle planning period (2021-29) are due to the California Department of Housing and Community Development by October 2021. The Commission understands the importance of each city’s Housing Element in guiding housing programs, policies, zoning, and funding, as well as in reducing current obstacles to affordable housing development . We also understand the importance of Housing Elements in addressing racial equity in housing, particularly with the new statutory requirements mandating the inclusion of programs that affirmatively further fair housing in 6th cycle Housing Elements. 1 Our work focuses
on ensuring that each jurisdiction increases affordable housing opportunities by implementing proven strategies, policies , and incentives that encourage affordable housing development.

Further, the Commission seeks to ensure that jurisdictions engage the public in revising their Housing Elements. Public engagement is a necessary component of the Housing Element process as California Housing Element law states: “The local government shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element ...” Broad participation and true engagement of the public increases the likelihood that the community members involved in the discussion and planning processes will support new housing strategies and housing developments. Public engagement should include participation from residents of diverse communities, housing consumers, service providers, and advocates.

As the City embarks upon the 2021 -29 Housing Element update, the Commission requests that the City include us in the upcoming Housing Element review and evaluation of the current 5th cycle planning period goals , policies, and accomplishments. The Commission further requests that the City conduct a robust public participation process for the 6 th cycle Housing Element update and that it incorporate the Commission, affordable housing advocates, and residents of low-income communities in this process. We believe that you will achieve a stronger Housing Element update through diverse community participation, outreach, and community planning process.

To ensure adequate public participation the Commission recommends the following:

1 Ca lifornia Government Code § 8899.50 (Assembly Bill 686). www.kennedycommission.org
17701 Cowan Ave., Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
949 250 0909

1493
Housing Element Update Recommendations
July 30, 2020July 30, 202030, 2020y 30, 2020