(C) Reduces the costs to a housing development project. (D) Imposes or implements mitigation measures as necessary to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).
(4) This section shall not apply to a housing development project located within a very high fire hazard severity zone. For purposes of this paragraph, “very high fire hazard severity zone” has the same meaning as provided in Section 51177.
(g) This section shall not be construed to void a height limit, urban growth boundary, or urban limit established by the electorate of an affected county or an affected city, provided that the height limit, urban growth boundary, or urban limit complies with subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b).
(h) (1) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of, or the standards of review pursuant to, Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (2) Nothing in this section supersedes, limits, or otherwise modifies the requirements of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). For a housing development project proposed within the coastal zone, nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit an affected county or an affected city from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition necessary to implement or amend a certified local coastal program consistent with the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code).
(i) (1) This section does not prohibit an affected county or an affected city from changing a land use designation or zoning ordinance to a less intensive use if the city or county concurrently changes the development standards, policies, and conditions applicable to other parcels within the jurisdiction to ensure that there is no net loss in residential capacity. (2) This section does not prohibit an affected county or an affected city from changing a land use designation or zoning ordinance to a less intensive use on a site that is a mobilehome park, as defined in Section 18214 of the Health and Safety Code, as of the effective date of this section, and the no net loss requirement in paragraph (1) shall not apply.
(j) Notwithstanding subdivisions (b) and (f), this section does not prohibit an affected city or an affected county from enacting a development policy, standard, or condition that is intended to preserve or facilitate the production of housing for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or housing types that traditionally serve lower income households, including mobilehome parks, single-room occupancy units, or units subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
66301. This chapter shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2025, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 14. The Legislature finds and declares that the provision of adequate housing, in light of the severe shortage of housing at all income 88 Ch. 654 — 34 —
levels in this state, is a matter of statewide concern and is not a municipal affair as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution. Therefore, the provisions of this act apply to all cities, including charter cities.
SEC. 15. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution for certain costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district because, in that regard, this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the meaning of Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution.
However, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this act contains other costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
SEC. 16. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application.
O
88 — 35 — Ch. 654
Senate Bill No. 35
CHAPTER 366
An act to amend Sections 65400 and 65582.1 of, and to add and repeal Section 65913.4 of, the Government Code, relating to housing. [Approved by Governor September 29, 2017. Filed with
Secretary of State September 29, 2017.]
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 35, Wiener. Planning and zoning: affordable housing: streamlined approval process.
(1) The Planning and Zoning Law requires a city or county to adopt a general plan for land use development within its boundaries that includes, among other things, a housing element. The Planning and Zoning Law requires a planning agency, after a legislative body has adopted all or part of a general plan, to provide an annual report to the legislative body, the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development on the status of the general plan and progress in meeting the community’s share of regional housing needs. Existing law requires the housing element portion of the annual report to be prepared through the use of forms and definitions adopted by the department pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act.
This bill would require the housing element portion of the annual report to be prepared through the use of standards, forms, and definitions adopted by the department. The bill would eliminate the requirement that the forms and definitions be adopted by the department pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act and would instead authorize the department to review, adopt, amend, and repeal the standards, forms, or definitions, as provided. The bill would also require the planning agency to include in its annual report specified information regarding units of net new housing, including rental housing and for-sale housing that have been issued a completed entitlement, building permit, or certificate of occupancy. The bill would also require the Department of Housing and Community Development to post an annual report submitted pursuant to the requirement described above on its Internet Web site, as provided.
(2) Existing law requires an attached housing development to be a permitted use, not subject to a conditional use permit, on any parcel zoned for multifamily housing if at least certain percentages of the units are available at affordable housing costs to very low income, lower income, and moderate-income households for at least 30 years and if the project meets specified conditions relating to location and being subject to a discretionary decision other than a conditional use permit. Existing law 87 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUTHENTICATED
ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL
ATTACHMENT 4
provides for various incentives intended to facilitate and expedite the construction of affordable housing.
This bill would authorize a development proponent to submit an application for a multifamily housing development, which satisfies specified planning objective standards, that is subject to a streamlined, ministerial approval process, as provided, and not subject to a conditional use permit.
The bill would require a local government to notify the development proponent in writing if the local government determines that the development conflicts with any of those objective standards by a specified time; otherwise, the development is deemed to comply with those standards. The bill would limit the authority of a local government to impose parking standards or requirements on a streamlined development approved pursuant to these provisions, as provided. The bill would provide that if a local government approves a project pursuant to that process, that approval will not expire if that project includes investment in housing affordability, and would otherwise provide that the approval of a project expire automatically after 3 years, unless that project qualifies for a one-time, one-year extension of that approval. The bill would provide that approval pursuant to its provisions would remain valid for three years and remain valid thereafter so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress, and would authorize a discretionary one-year extension, as provided. The bill would prohibit a local government from adopting any requirement that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project receives ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to these provisions. The bill would repeal these provisions as of January 1, 2026.
(3) The bill would make findings that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern and declare that its provisions would apply to all cities and counties, including a charter city, a charter county, or a charter city and county.
(4) By imposing new duties upon local agencies with respect to the streamlined approval process and reporting requirement described above, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
(5) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65400 of the Government Code proposed by AB 879 to be operative only if this bill and AB 879 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 65582.1 of the Government Code proposed by AB 73 to be operative only if this bill and AB 73 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
87 Ch. 366 — 2 —
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 65400 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65400. (a) After the legislative body has adopted all or part of a general plan, the planning agency shall do both of the following:
(1) Investigate and make recommendations to the legislative body regarding reasonable and practical means for implementing the general plan or element of the general plan, so that it will serve as an effective guide for orderly growth and development, preservation and conservation of open-space land and natural resources, and the efficient expenditure of public funds relating to the subjects addressed in the general plan. (2) Provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to the legislative body, the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development that includes all of the following:
(A) The status of the plan and progress in its implementation. (B) The progress in meeting its share of regional housing needs determined pursuant to Section 65584 and local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.
The housing element portion of the annual report, as required by this paragraph, shall be prepared through the use of standards, forms, and definitions adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development. The department may review, adopt, amend, and repeal the standards, forms, or definitions, to implement this article. Any standards, forms, or definitions adopted to implement this article shall not be subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) or Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. Before and after adoption of the forms, the housing element portion of the annual report shall include a section that describes the actions taken by the local government towards completion of the programs and status of the local government’s compliance with the deadlines in its housing element.
That report shall be considered at an annual public meeting before the legislative body where members of the public shall be allowed to provide oral testimony and written comments.
The report may include the number of units that have been substantially rehabilitated, converted from nonaffordable to affordable by acquisition, and preserved consistent with the standards set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.1. The report shall document how the units meet the standards set forth in that subdivision.
(C) The degree to which its approved general plan complies with the guidelines developed and adopted pursuant to Section 65040.2 and the date of the last revision to the general plan.
(D) The number of net new units of housing, including both rental housing and for-sale housing, that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy, thus far in the housing element cycle, and the income category, by area median income category, that each unit of housing, including both rental housing and housing designated for 87 — 3 — Ch. 366
home ownership, satisfies. That production report shall, for each income category described in this subparagraph, distinguish between the number of rental housing units and the number of for-sale housing units that satisfy each income category. The production report shall include, for each entitlement, building permit, or certificate of occupancy, a unique site identifier, which must include an assessor’s parcel number, but may also include street address or other identifiers.
(E) The number of applications submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4, the location and the total number of developments approved pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4, the total number of building permits issued pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4, the total number of units including both rental housing and for-sale housing by area median income category constructed using the process provided for in subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4.
(F) The Department of Housing and Community Development shall post a report submitted pursuant to this paragraph on its Internet Web site within a reasonable time of receiving the report.
(b) If a court finds, upon a motion to that effect, that a city, county, or city and county failed to submit, within 60 days of the deadline established in this section, the housing element portion of the report required pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) that substantially complies with the requirements of this section, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within 60 days. If the city, county, or city and county fails to comply with the court’s order within 60 days, the plaintiff or petitioner may move for sanctions, and the court may, upon that motion, grant appropriate sanctions. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out. If the court determines that its order or judgment is not carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this section are fulfilled. This subdivision applies to proceedings initiated on or after the first day of October following the adoption of forms and definitions by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), but no sooner than six months following that adoption.
SEC. 1.5. Section 65400 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65400. (a) After the legislative body has adopted all or part of a general plan, the planning agency shall do both of the following:
(1) Investigate and make recommendations to the legislative body regarding reasonable and practical means for implementing the general plan or element of the general plan, so that it will serve as an effective guide for orderly growth and development, preservation and conservation of open-space land and natural resources, and the efficient expenditure of public funds relating to the subjects addressed in the general plan. (2) Provide by April 1 of each year an annual report to the legislative body, the Office of Planning and Research, and the Department of Housing and Community Development that includes all of the following:
(A) The status of the plan and progress in its implementation. 87 Ch. 366 — 4 —
(B) The progress in meeting its share of regional housing needs determined pursuant to Section 65584 and local efforts to remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.
The housing element portion of the annual report, as required by this paragraph, shall be prepared through the use of standards, forms, and definitions adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development. The department may review, adopt, amend, and repeal the standards, forms, or definitions, to implement this article. Any standards, forms, or definitions adopted to implement this article shall not be subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2. Before and after adoption of the forms, the housing element portion of the annual report shall include a section that describes the actions taken by the local government towards completion of the programs and status of the local government’s compliance with the deadlines in its housing element.
That report shall be considered at an annual public meeting before the legislative body where members of the public shall be allowed to provide oral testimony and written comments.
The report may include the number of units that have been substantially rehabilitated, converted from nonaffordable to affordable by acquisition, and preserved consistent with the standards set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583.1. The report shall document how the units meet the standards set forth in that subdivision.
(C) The number of housing development applications received in the prior year.
(D) The number of units included in all development applications in the prior year.
(E) The number of units approved and disapproved in the prior year. (F) The degree to which its approved general plan complies with the guidelines developed and adopted pursuant to Section 65040.2 and the date of the last revision to the general plan.
(G) A listing of sites rezoned to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Sections 65583 and 65584.09. The listing of sites shall also include any additional sites that may have been required to be identified by Section 65863.
(H) The number of net new units of housing, including both rental housing and for-sale housing, that have been issued a completed entitlement, a building permit, or a certificate of occupancy, thus far in the housing element cycle, and the income category, by area median income category, that each unit of housing satisfies. That production report shall, for each income category described in this subparagraph, distinguish between the number of rental housing units and the number of for-sale units that satisfy each income category. The production report shall include, for each entitlement, building permit, or certificate of occupancy, a unique site identifier which 87 — 5 — Ch. 366
must include the assessor’s parcel number, but may include street address, or other identifiers.
(I) The number of applications submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 65913.4, the location and the total number of developments approved pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4, the total number of building permits issued pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4, the total number of units including both rental housing and for-sale housing by area median income category constructed using the process provided for in subdivision (b) of Section 65913.4.
(J) The Department of Housing and Community Development shall post a report submitted pursuant to this paragraph on its Internet Web site within a reasonable time of receiving the report.
(b) If a court finds, upon a motion to that effect, that a city, county, or city and county failed to submit, within 60 days of the deadline established in this section, the housing element portion of the report required pursuant to subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) that substantially complies with the requirements of this section, the court shall issue an order or judgment compelling compliance with this section within 60 days. If the city, county, or city and county fails to comply with the court’s order within 60 days, the plaintiff or petitioner may move for sanctions, and the court may, upon that motion, grant appropriate sanctions. The court shall retain jurisdiction to ensure that its order or judgment is carried out. If the court determines that its order or judgment is not carried out within 60 days, the court may issue further orders as provided by law to ensure that the purposes and policies of this section are fulfilled. This subdivision applies to proceedings initiated on or after the first day of October following the adoption of forms and definitions by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a), but no sooner than six months following that adoption.
SEC. 2. Section 65582.1 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65582.1. The Legislature finds and declares that it has provided reforms and incentives to facilitate and expedite the approval and construction of affordable housing. Those reforms and incentives can be found in the following provisions:
(a) Housing element law (Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3).
(b) Extension of statute of limitations in actions challenging the housing element and brought in support of affordable housing (subdivision (d) of Section 65009).
(c) Restrictions on disapproval of housing developments (Section 65589.5).
(d) Priority for affordable housing in the allocation of water and sewer hookups (Section 65589.7).
(e) Least cost zoning law (Section 65913.1).
(f) Density bonus law (Section 65915).
(g) Accessory dwelling units (Sections 65852.150 and 65852.2). 87 Ch. 366 — 6 —
(h) By-right housing, in which certain multifamily housing are designated a permitted use (Section 65589.4).
(i) No-net-loss-in zoning density law limiting downzonings and density reductions (Section 65863).
(j) Requiring persons who sue to halt affordable housing to pay attorney fees (Section 65914) or post a bond (Section 529.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
(k) Reduced time for action on affordable housing applications under the approval of development permits process (Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) of Chapter 4.5).
(l) Limiting moratoriums on multifamily housing (Section 65858). (m) Prohibiting discrimination against affordable housing (Section 65008).
(n) California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3).
(o) Community redevelopment law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code, and in particular Sections 33334.2 and 33413).
(p) Streamlining housing approvals during a housing shortage (Section 65913.4).
SEC. 2.5. Section 65582.1 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65582.1. The Legislature finds and declares that it has provided reforms and incentives to facilitate and expedite the construction of affordable housing. Those reforms and incentives can be found in the following provisions:
(a) Housing element law (Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3).
(b) Extension of statute of limitations in actions challenging the housing element and brought in support of affordable housing (subdivision (d) of Section 65009).
(c) Restrictions on disapproval of housing developments (Section 65589.5).
(d) Priority for affordable housing in the allocation of water and sewer hookups (Section 65589.7).
(e) Least cost zoning law (Section 65913.1).
(f) Density bonus law (Section 65915).
(g) Accessory dwelling units (Sections 65852.150 and 65852.2). (h) By-right housing, in which certain multifamily housing are designated a permitted use (Section 65589.4).
(i) No-net-loss-in zoning density law limiting downzonings and density reductions (Section 65863).
(j) Requiring persons who sue to halt affordable housing to pay attorney fees (Section 65914) or post a bond (Section 529.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
(k) Reduced time for action on affordable housing applications under the approval of development permits process (Article 5 (commencing with Section 65950) of Chapter 4.5).
87 — 7 — Ch. 366
(l) Limiting moratoriums on multifamily housing (Section 65858). (m) Prohibiting discrimination against affordable housing (Section 65008).
(n) California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Part 2.8 (commencing with Section 12900) of Division 3).
(o) Community redevelopment law (Part 1 (commencing with Section 33000) of Division 24 of the Health and Safety Code, and in particular Sections 33334.2 and 33413).
(p) Streamlining housing approvals during a housing shortage (Section 65913.4).
(q) Housing sustainability districts (Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 66200)).
SEC. 3. Section 65913.4 is added to the Government Code, to read:
65913.4. (a) A development proponent may submit an application for a development that is subject to the streamlined, ministerial approval process provided by subdivision (b) and not subject to a conditional use permit if the development satisfies all of the following objective planning standards:
(1) The development is a multifamily housing development that contains two or more residential units.
(2) The development is located on a site that satisfies all of the following:
(A) A site that is a legal parcel or parcels located in a city if, and only if, the city boundaries include some portion of either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or, for unincorporated areas, a legal parcel or parcels wholly within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau.
(B) A site in which at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels that are developed with urban uses. For the purposes of this section, parcels that are only separated by a street or highway shall be considered to be adjoined.
(C) A site that is zoned for residential use or residential mixed-use development, or has a general plan designation that allows residential use or a mix of residential and nonresidential uses, with at least two-thirds of the square footage of the development designated for residential use. (3) If the development contains units that are subsidized, the development proponent already has recorded, or is required by law to record, a land use restriction for the following applicable minimum durations:
(A) Fifty-five years for units that are rented.
(B) Forty-five years for units that are owned.
(4) The development satisfies both of the following:
(A) Is located in a locality that the department has determined is subject to this subparagraph on the basis that the number of units that have been issued building permits is less than the locality’s share of the regional housing needs, by income category, for that reporting period. A locality shall remain eligible under this subparagraph until the department’s determination for the next reporting period. A locality shall be subject to this subparagraph if it has not submitted an annual housing element report 87 Ch. 366 — 8 —
to the department pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400 for at least two consecutive years before the development submitted an application for approval under this section.
(B) The development is subject to a requirement mandating a minimum percentage of below market rate housing based on one of the following:
(i) The locality did not submit its latest production report to the department by the time period required by Section 65400, or that production report reflects that there were fewer units of above moderate-income housing approved than were required for the regional housing needs assessment cycle for that reporting period. In addition, if the project contains more than 10 units of housing, the project seeking approval dedicates a minimum of 10 percent of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income. If the locality has adopted a local ordinance that requires that greater than 10 percent of the units be dedicated to housing affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income, that zoning ordinance applies. (ii) The locality did not submit its latest production report to the department by the time period required by Section 65400, or that production report reflects that there were fewer units of housing affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income that were issued building permits than were required for the regional housing needs assessment cycle for that reporting period, and the project seeking approval dedicates 50 percent of the total number of units to housing affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income, unless the locality has adopted a local ordinance that requires that greater than 50 percent of the units be dedicated to housing affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income, in which case that ordinance applies.
(iii) The locality did not submit its latest production report to the department by the time period required by Section 65400, or if the production report reflects that there were fewer units of housing affordable to any income level described in clause (i) or (ii) that were issued building permits than were required for the regional housing needs assessment cycle for that reporting period, the project seeking approval may choose between utilizing clause (i) or (ii).
(5) The development, excluding any additional density or any other concessions, incentives, or waivers of development standards granted pursuant to the Density Bonus Law in Section 65915, is consistent with objective zoning standards and objective design review standards in effect at the time that the development is submitted to the local government pursuant to this section. For purposes of this paragraph, “objective zoning standards” and “objective design review standards” mean standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal. These standards may be embodied in alternative objective land use specifications adopted by a 87 — 9 — Ch. 366
city or county, and may include, but are not limited to, housing overlay zones, specific plans, inclusionary zoning ordinances, and density bonus ordinances, subject to the following:
(A) A development shall be deemed consistent with the objective zoning standards related to housing density, as applicable, if the density proposed is compliant with the maximum density allowed within that land use designation, notwithstanding any specified maximum unit allocation that may result in fewer units of housing being permitted.
(B) In the event that objective zoning, general plan, or design review standards are mutually inconsistent, a development shall be deemed consistent with the objective zoning standards pursuant to this subdivision if the development is consistent with the standards set forth in the general plan.
(6) The development is not located on a site that is any of the following:
(A) A coastal zone, as defined in Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code.
(B) Either prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance, as defined pursuant to United States Department of Agriculture land inventory and monitoring criteria, as modified for California, and designated on the maps prepared by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Department of Conservation, or land zoned or designated for agricultural protection or preservation by a local ballot measure that was approved by the voters of that jurisdiction.
(C) Wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2 (June 21, 1993).
(D) Within a very high fire hazard severity zone, as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 51178, or within a high or very high fire hazard severity zone as indicated on maps adopted by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 4202 of the Public Resources Code. This subparagraph does not apply to sites excluded from the specified hazard zones by a local agency, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 51179, or sites that have adopted fire hazard mitigation measures pursuant to existing building standards or state fire mitigation measures applicable to the development. (E) A hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Section 65962.5 or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code, unless the Department of Toxic Substances Control has cleared the site for residential use or residential mixed uses.
(F) Within a delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law (Part 2.5 (commencing with Section 18901) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), and by any local building department under Chapter 12.2 (commencing with Section 8875) of Division 1 of Title 2.
87 Ch. 366 — 10 —
(G) Within a flood plain as determined by maps promulgated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, unless the development has been issued a flood plain development permit pursuant to Part 59 (commencing with Section 59.1) and Part 60 (commencing with Section 60.1) of Subchapter B of Chapter I of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (H) Within a floodway as determined by maps promulgated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, unless the development has received a no-rise certification in accordance with Section 60.3(d)(3) of Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(I) Lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan pursuant to the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 2800) of Division 3 of the Fish and Game Code), habitat conservation plan pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.), or other adopted natural resource protection plan.
(J) Habitat for protected species identified as candidate, sensitive, or species of special status by state or federal agencies, fully protected species, or species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531 et seq.), the California Endangered Species Act (Chapter
1.5 (commencing with Section 2050) of Division 3 of the Fish and Game Code), or the Native Plant Protection Act (Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 1900) of Division 2 of the Fish and Game Code). (K) Lands under conservation easement.
(7) The development is not located on a site where any of the following apply:
(A) The development would require the demolition of the following types of housing:
(i) Housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income.
(ii) Housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power.
(iii) Housing that has been occupied by tenants within the past 10 years. (B) The site was previously used for housing that was occupied by tenants that was demolished within 10 years before the development proponent submits an application under this section.
(C) The development would require the demolition of a historic structure that was placed on a national, state, or local historic register. (D) The property contains housing units that are occupied by tenants, and units at the property are, or were, subsequently offered for sale to the general public by the subdivider or subsequent owner of the property. (8) The development proponent has done both of the following, as applicable:
(A) Certified to the locality that either of the following is true, as applicable:
87 — 11 — Ch. 366
(i) The entirety of the development is a public work for purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1720) of Part 7 of Division 2 of the Labor Code.
(ii) If the development is not in its entirety a public work, that all construction workers employed in the execution of the development will be paid at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for the type of work and geographic area, as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations pursuant to Sections 1773 and 1773.9 of the Labor Code, except that apprentices registered in programs approved by the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards may be paid at least the applicable apprentice prevailing rate. If the development is subject to this subparagraph, then for those portions of the development that are not a public work all of the following shall apply:
(I) The development proponent shall ensure that the prevailing wage requirement is included in all contracts for the performance of the work. (II) All contractors and subcontractors shall pay to all construction workers employed in the execution of the work at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages, except that apprentices registered in programs approved by the Chief of the Division of Apprenticeship Standards may be paid at least the applicable apprentice prevailing rate. (III) Except as provided in subclause (V), all contractors and subcontractors shall maintain and verify payroll records pursuant to Section 1776 of the Labor Code and make those records available for inspection and copying as provided in therein.
(IV) Except as provided in subclause (V), the obligation of the contractors and subcontractors to pay prevailing wages may be enforced by the Labor Commissioner through the issuance of a civil wage and penalty assessment pursuant to Section 1741 of the Labor Code, which may be reviewed pursuant to Section 1742 of the Labor Code, within 18 months after the completion of the development, by an underpaid worker through an administrative complaint or civil action, or by a joint labor-management committee though a civil action under Section 1771.2 of the Labor Code.
If a civil wage and penalty assessment is issued, the contractor, subcontractor, and surety on a bond or bonds issued to secure the payment of wages covered by the assessment shall be liable for liquidated damages pursuant to Section 1742.1 of the Labor Code.
(V) Subclauses (III) and (IV) shall not apply if all contractors and subcontractors performing work on the development are subject to a project labor agreement that requires the payment of prevailing wages to all construction workers employed in the execution of the development and provides for enforcement of that obligation through an arbitration procedure.
For purposes of this clause, “project labor agreement” has the same meaning as set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 2500 of the Public Contract Code.
(VI) Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 1773.1 of the Labor Code, the requirement that employer payments not reduce the obligation to pay the hourly straight time or overtime wages found to be prevailing shall 87 Ch. 366 — 12 —
not apply if otherwise provided in a bona fide collective bargaining agreement covering the worker. The requirement to pay at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages does not preclude use of an alternative workweek schedule adopted pursuant to Section 511 or 514 of the Labor Code.
(B) (i) For developments for which any of the following conditions apply, certified that a skilled and trained workforce shall be used to complete the development if the application is approved:
(I) On and after January 1, 2018, until December 31, 2021, the development consists of 75 or more units that are not 100 percent subsidized affordable housing and will be located within a jurisdiction located in a coastal or bay county with a population of 225,000 or more. (II) On and after January 1, 2022, until December 31, 2025, the development consists of 50 or more units that are not 100 percent subsidized affordable housing and will be located within a jurisdiction located in a coastal or bay county with a population of 225,000 or more. (III) On and after January 1, 2018, until December 31, 2019, the development consists of 75 or more units that are not 100 percent subsidized affordable housing and will be located within a jurisdiction with a population of fewer than 550,000 and that is not located in a coastal or bay county. (IV) On and after January 1, 2020, until December 31, 2021, the development consists of more than 50 units and will be located within a jurisdiction with a population of fewer than 550,000 and that is not located in a coastal or bay county.
(V) On and after January 1, 2022, until December 31, 2025, the development consists of more than 25 units and will be located within a jurisdiction with a population of fewer than 550,000 and that is not located in a coastal bay county.
(ii) For purposes of this section, “skilled and trained workforce” has the same meaning as provided in Chapter 2.9 (commencing with Section 2600) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code.
(iii) If the development proponent has certified that a skilled and trained workforce will be used to complete the development and the application is approved, the following shall apply:
(I) The applicant shall require in all contracts for the performance of work that every contractor and subcontractor at every tier will individually use a skilled and trained workforce to complete the development. (II) Every contractor and subcontractor shall use a skilled and trained workforce to complete the development.
(III) Except as provided in subclause (IV), the applicant shall provide to the locality, on a monthly basis while the development or contract is being performed, a report demonstrating compliance with Chapter 2.9 (commencing with Section 2600) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code. A monthly report provided to the locality pursuant to this subclause shall be a public record under the California Public Records Act (Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 6250) of Division 7 of Title 1) and shall be open to public inspection. An applicant that fails to provide a 87 — 13 — Ch. 366
monthly report demonstrating compliance with Chapter 2.9 (commencing with Section 2600) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code shall be subject to a civil penalty of ten thousand dollars ($10,000) per month for each month for which the report has not been provided. Any contractor or subcontractor that fails to use a skilled and trained workforce shall be subject to a civil penalty of two hundred dollars ($200) per day for each worker employed in contravention of the skilled and trained workforce requirement.
Penalties may be assessed by the Labor Commissioner within 18 months of completion of the development using the same procedures for issuance of civil wage and penalty assessments pursuant to Section 1741 of the Labor Code, and may be reviewed pursuant to the same procedures in Section 1742 of the Labor Code. Penalties shall be paid to the State Public Works Enforcement Fund.
(IV) Subclause (III) shall not apply if all contractors and subcontractors performing work on the development are subject to a project labor agreement that requires compliance with the skilled and trained workforce requirement and provides for enforcement of that obligation through an arbitration procedure. For purposes of this subparagraph, “project labor agreement” has the same meaning as set forth in paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) of Section 2500 of the Public Contract Code.
(C) Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (B), a development that is subject to approval pursuant to this section is exempt from any requirement to pay prevailing wages or use a skilled and trained workforce if it meets both of the following:
(i) The project includes 10 or fewer units.
(ii) The project is not a public work for purposes of Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 1720) of Part 7 of Division 2 of the Labor Code. (9) The development did not or does not involve a subdivision of a parcel that is, or, notwithstanding this section, would otherwise be, subject to the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)) or any other applicable law authorizing the subdivision of land, unless either of the following apply:
(A) The development has received or will receive financing or funding by means of a low-income housing tax credit and is subject to the requirement that prevailing wages be paid pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (8).
(B) The development is subject to the requirement that prevailing wages be paid, and a skilled and trained workforce used, pursuant to paragraph (8).
(10) The development shall not be upon an existing parcel of land or site that is governed under the Mobilehome Residency Law (Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 798) of Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code), the Recreational Vehicle Park Occupancy Law (Chapter 2.6 (commencing with Section 799.20) of Title 2 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Civil Code), the Mobilehome Parks Act (Part 2.1 (commencing with Section 18200) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code), or the Special 87 Ch. 366 — 14 —
Occupancy Parks Act (Part 2.3 (commencing with Section 18860) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code).
(b) (1) If a local government determines that a development submitted pursuant to this section is in conflict with any of the objective planning standards specified in subdivision (a), it shall provide the development proponent written documentation of which standard or standards the development conflicts with, and an explanation for the reason or reasons the development conflicts with that standard or standards, as follows:
(A) Within 60 days of submittal of the development to the local government pursuant to this section if the development contains 150 or fewer housing units.
(B) Within 90 days of submittal of the development to the local government pursuant to this section if the development contains more than 150 housing units.
(2) If the local government fails to provide the required documentation pursuant to paragraph (1), the development shall be deemed to satisfy the objective planning standards specified in subdivision (a). (c) Any design review or public oversight of the development may be conducted by the local government’s planning commission or any equivalent board or commission responsible for review and approval of development projects, or the city council or board of supervisors, as appropriate. That design review or public oversight shall be objective and be strictly focused on assessing compliance with criteria required for streamlined projects, as well as any reasonable objective design standards published and adopted by ordinance or resolution by a local jurisdiction before submission of a development application, and shall be broadly applicable to development within the jurisdiction. That design review or public oversight shall be completed as follows and shall not in any way inhibit, chill, or preclude the ministerial approval provided by this section or its effect, as applicable:
(1) Within 90 days of submittal of the development to the local government pursuant to this section if the development contains 150 or fewer housing units.
(2) Within 180 days of submittal of the development to the local government pursuant to this section if the development contains more than 150 housing units.
(d) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, a local government, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance governing parking requirements in multifamily developments, shall not impose parking standards for a streamlined development that was approved pursuant to this section in any of the following instances:
(A) The development is located within one-half mile of public transit. (B) The development is located within an architecturally and historically significant historic district.
(C) When on-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupants of the development.
(D) When there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the development.
87 — 15 — Ch. 366
(2) If the development does not fall within any of the categories described in paragraph (1), the local government shall not impose parking requirements for streamlined developments approved pursuant to this section that exceed one parking space per unit.
(e) (1) If a local government approves a development pursuant to this section, then, notwithstanding any other law, that approval shall not expire if the project includes public investment in housing affordability, beyond tax credits, where 50 percent of the units are affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income.
(2) If a local government approves a development pursuant to this section and the project does not include 50 percent of the units affordable to households making below 80 percent of the area median income, that approval shall automatically expire after three years except that a project may receive a one-time, one-year extension if the project proponent can provide documentation that there has been significant progress toward getting the development construction ready, such as filing a building permit application.
(3) If a local government approves a development pursuant to this section, that approval shall remain valid for three years from the date of the final action establishing that approval and shall remain valid thereafter for a project so long as vertical construction of the development has begun and is in progress. Additionally, the development proponent may request, and the local government shall have discretion to grant, an additional one-year extension to the original three-year period. The local government’s action and discretion in determining whether to grant the foregoing extension shall be limited to considerations and process set forth in this section. (f) A local government shall not adopt any requirement, including, but not limited to, increased fees or inclusionary housing requirements, that applies to a project solely or partially on the basis that the project is eligible to receive ministerial or streamlined approval pursuant to this section. (g) This section shall not affect a development proponent’s ability to use any alternative streamlined by right permit processing adopted by a local government, including the provisions of subdivision (i) of Section 65583.2. (h) For purposes of this section:
(1) “Department” means the Department of Housing and Community Development.
(2) “Development proponent” means the developer who submits an application for streamlined approval pursuant to this section. (3) “Completed entitlements” means a housing development which has received all the required land use approvals or entitlements necessary for the issuance of building permit.
(4) “Locality” or “local government” means a city, including a charter city, a county, including a charter county, or a city and county, including a charter city and county.
(5) “Production report” means the information reported pursuant to subparagraph (D) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 65400. 87 Ch. 366 — 16 —
(6) “Subsidized” means units that are price or rent restricted such that the units are permanently affordable to households meeting the definitions of very low and lower income, as defined in Sections 50079.5 and 50105 of the Health and Safety Code.
(7) “Reporting period” means either of the following:
(A) The first half of the regional housing needs assessment cycle. (B) The last half of the regional housing needs assessment cycle. (8) “Urban uses” means any current or former residential, commercial, public institutional, transit or transportation passenger facility, or retail use, or any combination of those uses.
(i) The department may review, adopt, amend, and repeal guidelines to implement uniform standards or criteria that supplement or clarify the terms, references, or standards set forth in this section. Any guidelines or terms adopted pursuant to this subdivision shall not be subject to Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code.
(j) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2026, and as of that date is repealed.
SEC. 4. The Legislature finds and declares that ensuring access to affordable housing is a matter of statewide concern, and not a municipal affair. Therefore, the changes made by this act are applicable to a charter city, a charter county, and a charter city and county.
SEC. 5. Each provision of this measure is a material and integral part of this measure, and the provisions of this measure are not severable. If any provision of this measure or its application is held invalid, this entire measure shall be null and void.
SEC. 6. (a) Section 1.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 65400 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 879. That section shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2018, (2) each bill amends Section 65400 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 879, in which case Section 1 of this bill shall not become operative.
(b) Section 2.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 65582.1 of the Government Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 73.
That section shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2019, (2) each bill amends Section 65582.1 of the Government Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 73, in which case Section 2 of this bill shall not become operative.
SEC. 7. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.
O
87 — 17 — Ch. 366
ATTACHMENT 5
Should the City Council decide to allow applicants to request waivers as part of the Ordinance, the following language can be included with the Ordinance E. Waivers
a. Projects eligible for streamlined processing under the Housing Crisis Accountability may request and shall be granted up to three objective design standards from the Site Design Standards category and up to three objective design standards from the Building Design Standards category. No discretionary review shall be required.
b. Requests for waivers shall be submitted in writing as part of the application for the proposed project without the requirement of an additional application. c. Projects not eligible for streamlined processing under the Housing Crisis Accountability shall not be eligible for waivers. Any request for modifications or waivers of any objective design standard will be subject to a Variance per Chapter 18.204.
Agenda Item Staff Report
To: Honorable Chair and Members of Planning Commission
For the Meeting of May 15, 2025
From: Luis Torrico, Director of Community Development
Subject: Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-03: Discussion and Consideration of a Municipal Code Text Amendment to amend the San Dimas Municipal Code, Title 18, Chapter 18.142 Development Standards for Specific Land Uses, to create objective design standards for qualified housing and mixed-use developments. ____________________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY
State laws require local jurisdictions throughout California to apply streamlined review processes for certain qualifying housing projects and review them against objective design and development standards. The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) established limitations to a local government’s ability to deny or reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects that are consistent with objective design standards and contribute to meeting housing needs. In response to the HAA, several other housing bills have been passed such as Senate Bill 330/Housing Crisis Act (HCA) and Senate Bill 35. Both of these Bills require streamlining of affordable housing developments and require that eligible projects be reviewed against objective design review or development standards. In order to maintain some local control and to regulate eligible developments, Staff has prepared objective design standards that will be applicable to eligible multi-family and mixed-use developments.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC-1698 recommending approval of Municipal Code Text Amendment (MCTA) 25-03 to the City Council.
GOVERNMENT CODE §84308 APPLIES:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov
No.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact for the recommended action.
ATTACHMENT 6
MCTA 25-03: Objective Design Standards Page 2
For the Meeting of May 15, 2025
BACKGROUND
Over the past several years, the California Legislature has passed a number of housing laws with the intent to alleviate the state’s limited housing supply and affordability crisis. These laws provided statewide initiative and regulations to streamline the process for housing development.
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA) established limitations to a local government’s ability to deny or reduce the density of, or make infeasible housing development projects that are consistent with objective design standards and contribute to meeting housing needs. In response to the HAA, several other housing bills have been passed such as Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) (See Attachment 3) and Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) (See Attachment 4).
SB 330 went into effect in 2020 and was passed to increase residential development, protect existing housing inventory and expedite permit processing for eligible residential developments.
Since its passing, the law has been amended to provide clarifications and extend the sunset date from 2025 to 2030. SB 35 went into effect in 2017 and requires cities to streamline residential developments that meet affordability and prevailing wage requirements, by providing a ministerial process and provides flexibility from local parking requirements. Similar to SB 330, SB 35 has been amended to provide clarifications and extend the sunset date from 2026 to 2036. Each of these bills have different eligibility criteria, but both require streamlining of affordable housing developments and require that eligible projects be reviewed against objective design review or development standards.
State law defines an “objective standard” as one that involves no personal or subjective judgement and can be uniformly verified by reference to external and uniform benchmark criteria.
Therefore, the objective standards must be measurable and have clear criteria that are determined in advance so that Staff and an applicant can communicate about a development’s compliance with the standards with specified timelines under the law. In general, the objective design standards will apply to multi-family housing developments, including mixed-use developments. Cities are not required to adopt objective standards; however, without these standards in place, cities will have no control over the appearance and scale of these developments. Projects that are eligible for streamlining and subject to the objective design standards and development standards must meet certain criterion, including:
• SB 330 Projects
o Multi-family housing projects
o Mixed-use projects with at least 2/3 residential square footage o Comply with objective design standards
o No significant public health and safety impacts
• SB 35 Projects
o Multi-family housing projects
o Mixed-use projects with at least 2/3 residential square footage o Comply with objective design standards
o At least 10% or 50% affordable units
o Pay prevailing rate wages (10 units or more)
o No significant public health and safety impacts
Staff worked with Moule & Polyzoides (Consultant) to assist the City with the development of objective design standards that will be applicable city-wide, unless the property is located within the Downtown Specific Plan zone (DTSP), in which case, those objective design standards will apply.
MCTA 25-03: Objective Design Standards Page 3
For the Meeting of May 15, 2025
On December 12, 2024, Staff presented the design standards to the City Council to seek input and comments. The Council supported adoption of the objective design standards to assist in the development of high quality architectural projects.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The proposed MCTA will create objective design standards (See Attachment 2) will allow City Staff to regulate development applications that are eligible for streamlined, ministerial processing under the HAA, including SB 35 and SB 330 projects. The proposed standards will be applicable city wide, with the exception of properties located within the DTSP boundaries, which have their own standards for this purpose. In addition to projects subject to HAA, these standards will also be applicable to all new and proposed multi-family residential and mixed-use developments, and new additions to existing multi-family residential and mixed use developments located in zones that allow two or more residential units and mixed-use, unless the property is located within the DTSP, in which case those design standards shall apply. The standards are meant to enhance the quality and appearance of development projects. The standards are separated into two (2) categories, i.e. Site Design standards and Building Design standards.
Site design standards are site-specific design criteria that aim to establish consistent guidelines for the look, feel, and functionality of a development site. Elements that are included as part of the site design standards include, but are not limited to parking location and design, circulation, open space, and walls and fences. Similarly, building design standards will regulate the design and appearance of structures in the development related to architectural elements and details, massing and articulation, and colors and materials. Both sets of standards are meant to provide a clear direction for the applicant to ensure well designed and detailed, compatible developments.
Existing development standards such as setbacks and height limits found in the San Dimas Municipal Code will still be applicable all projects. Projects that are not eligible for streamlined review under the HAA, will also be subject to any applicable design review process.
With the passage of several housing laws that are taking away local control, the implementation of these standards is important to ensure developments constructed pursuant to SB 330, SB 35 and any other applicable housing bills result in high-quality multifamily housing and mixed-use projects that the City is accustomed to. While the City may not have control if some of these developments are built, the implementation of these standards will provide some control on the development’s appearance and architectural quality. Furthermore, these standards will also contribute the City’s overall quality development as they will also be applicable to all new and proposed multi-family residential and mixed-use developments, and new additions to existing multi-family residential and mixed use developments located in zones that allow two or more residential units and mixed-use, unless the property is located within the DTSP, in which case those design standards shall apply.
ALTERNATIVES
There are alternatives proposed for this request; however, the Planning Commission may recommend changes to the proposed standards.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Pursuant to CEQA guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3), CEQA does not apply to this item because there is no potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, no additional environmental review is needed at this time.
MCTA 25-03: Objective Design Standards Page 4
For the Meeting of May 15, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
Luis Torrico
Director of Community Development
Attachments:
1. Resolution PC-1698
2. Multi-family Residential & Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards
3. SB 330
4. SB 35
CITY OF SAN DIMAS
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
Regularly Scheduled Meeting
Thursday, May 15, 2025, at 6:00 p.m.
245 East Bonita Avenue, City Council Chamber
PRESENT
Chairman David Bratt
Vice-Chairman John Davis
Commissioner Margie Green
Commissioner James Shirley
Commissioner Doran Barnes
Director of Community Development Luis Torrico
Director of Public Works Shari Garwick
Planning Manager Marco Espinoza
Assistant Engineer Peter Jacoy
Assistant Planner Taylor Galindo
Senior Management Analyst Kimberly Neustice
CALL TO ORDER AND FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Bratt called the regular meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 6:00 p.m. and Commissioner Barnes led the flag salute.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CC 1. Approval of April 17, 2025 minutes.
MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Green, seconded by Commissioner Shirley to approve the consent calendar. Motion carried 5-0.
PUBLIC HEARING
PH 1 Continued from the April 17, 2025 meeting. Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-01, Consideration and discussion of a City-initiated Municipal Code Text Amendment of Title 18, Chapter 18.40 Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, modification of the boundary lines for Affordable Housing Overlay Zone No. 2 (AHO-2)
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
May 15, 2025
Staff report presented by Assistant Planner Galindo recommending Planning Commission approve Resolution PC-1694 recommending City Council adopt Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-01.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked if this MCTA is reducing the affordable housing overlay Site 2 to only cover the one section where the Grove Station and Village Walk are and not to cover Housing Element Site 5 and asked why are we making this change.
Assistant Planner Galindo stated that was correct. Under the current code, if a developer came in to develop the site, they would fall under the Transit Village standards in the Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP) which specifies a maximum of thirty dwelling units per acre. The Housing Element Site 5 is zoned in the Housing Element as thirty-five to forty-five units per acre. With the overlay still over the Housing Element Site 5 area it’s setting a maximum of thirty dwelling units per acre which is downzoning the site from what was set in the Housing Element. Staff would also like to add a note to the DTSP for Staff to be reminded that for this specific parcel the density requirement would be referred to in the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone No. 2 (AHO-2).
Community Development Director Torrico stated that in the DTSP the Director is allowed to make changes to the document for clarification and so staff will be making a note in the DTSP regarding this change.
Commissioner Barnes stated that he felt from a development standpoint the higher density would work well in this area.
Chairman Bratt asked if the Affordable Housing Overlay No. 1 (AHO-1), which is the school district property, was going to change.
Assistant Planner Galindo stated that no changes were being proposed to AHO-1.
Chairman Bratt opened the public hearing
No communications made.
Chairman Bratt closed the public hearing.
RESOLUTION PC-1694
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN
DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 25-01, WHICH AMENDS TITLE 18 - ZONING, CHAPTER 18.40 AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE,
TO MODIFY THE BOUNDARY LINES OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSIN OVERLAY ZONE 2 (AHO-2).
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
May 15, 2025
MOTION: Moved by Vice-Chairman Davis, seconded by Commissioner Shirley to approve Resolution PC-1694 recommending City Council adopt MCTA 25-01.
Motion carries 5-0.
PH 2. Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-03, Discussion and consideration of a Municipal Code Text Amendment to amend the San Dimas Municipal Code, Title 18, Chapter 18.142 Development Standards for Specific Lan Uses, to create objective design standards for qualified housing and mixed-use developments.
Staff report presented by Community Development Director Torrico recommending Planning Commission approve Resolution PC-1698 recommending City Council adopt Municipal Code Text Amendment 25-03.
Commissioner Barnes stated in the agenda on page 43 item 5B it states that garage doors shall be recessed at least twelve to twenty-four inches from the adjacent wall plane. He feels that twelve inches is a sensible offset for a garage door but feels it might add an additional financial impact to the developers.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that this standard is to create some articulation to the development. Recessing the garage doors gives depth. It might cost more to meet some of these standards but overall it would make the project look better.
Commissioner Barnes asked for more clarification on item 6 on page 43.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that this item addresses situations where projects have a portion of the parking garage below grade and some above grade. The intent of this standard is to screen the above grade garage area by adding landscaping for coverage.
Commissioner Barnes asked if he built a trellis and some landscaping around the area that would satisfy this requirement.
Community Development Director Torrico stated yes.
Commissioner Barnes stated on page 56, item F1 it states that buildings shall have a color palette that consists of a main color and accent color. He asked if there was a level of review for the paint colors the developer chooses or can they choose whatever colors they want.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that these standards were put in place to create some interest on the facades. Staff would work with the developer to come up with color palettes that are aesthetically pleasing, and hopefully the developer will want that as well.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked if these standards will be applicable to DTSP areas.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4
May 15, 2025
Community Development Director Torrico stated that this document will be applicable to all areas of the City except the DTSP areas because the DTSP has it’s own set of standards for development but are similar to these standards.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked how many parcels are there in the City that might accommodate these types of projects.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that there are not a lot of parcels outside of the DTSP unless a developer comes in and demolishes large developed areas to build a new project.
These standards are being put in place more so for the type of projects that would be part of the State streamlining process.
Chairman Bratt asked if the general consensus between the Consultants and our City Attorneys is that this document meets the objective design standards.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that Staff worked really closely with the consultant on this project. The City Attorney didn’t review the whole document but Staff made sure that there are clear and concise objectives to follow. The initial thought was that these standards would apply to these streamlined projects but then realized that these could be applicable to other projects in the city as well. The State Law does allow developers to ask for waivers from things such as the development standards if the project is a Density Bonus Law project. As proposed, the ordinance does not allow waivers or modifications to be requested. If the Commission would like us to include language into the code regarding review of waivers, it certainly can be added.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that he feels that waivers should be written into the code giving review authority to the Planning Commission.
Community Development Director Torrico stated if Planning Commission would like to review all waiver requests we can put that in the code or we can do a tiered system where maybe up to three waivers are reviewed by staff and over three is reviewed by Planning Commission.
Commissioner Barnes stated that if the project is coming to Planning Commission anyways, then maybe the Planning Commission should review the all waivers.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that maybe there should be a limit as to how many waivers of the standards a developer can ask for.
Chairman Bratt opened the public hearing.
No communications made
Chairman Bratt closed the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5
May 15, 2025
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that he felt the document overall is well thought out and feels that developments according to these standards will look very nice. While he feels that Staff should enforce the standards in the document, waivers should come to Planning Commission for review and approval.
Community Development Director Torrico stated that he understands the Commission would like to be the review authority for all waivers no matter how many are being proposed, and asks if there should be a limit to the number of waivers developers can ask for.
Chairman Bratt stated that was correct and he doesn’t feel that there should be a limit on the number of waivers that can be requested.
RESOLUTION PC-1698
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN
DIMAS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF MUNICIPAL CODE TEXT AMENDMENT 25-03
APPROVING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE CITY OF SAN DIMAS MUINCIPAL CODE TITLE 18 TO CREATE OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.
MOTION: Moved by Vice-Chairman Davis seconded by Commissioner Barnes to approve Resolution PC-1698 recommending City Council adopt MCTA 25-03 with the following modifications:
Add language that the Planning Commission will be the review authority for all waiver requests.
Motion carried 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
OB 1. San Dimas Citywide Bicycle Master Plan 2025 Draft Staff Report and introduction by Assistant Engineer Jacoy introducing GTS - Gentecsol consultants Rawad Hani and Ryan Meller.
Mr. Hani and Mr. Meller gave presentation of the 2025 Bicycle Master Plan Draft.
Vice-Chairman Davis asked if this plan is a State required process.
Mr. Hani stated it wasn’t state required but if the City wants to go for grant funding than it’s important to have this plan in place. It also provides justification for finance requests to explain why certain projects are needed.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
May 15, 2025
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that there is a wandering sidewalk in the area where the plan proposed a Class I Bikeway on Via Verde and asked how a bikeway would work with this type of sidewalk.
Mr. Meller stated that more than likely the wandering sidewalk would be widened into a straight sidewalk to accommodate the Class I bikeway.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that in the 2011 plan there was a thought to add a path from the Via Verde area to the High School and Middle School on Covina so the kids can get from Via Verde to their school safely. He asked if this was considered in the current draft.
Director of Public Works Garwick stated that this path was removed because this area is County and State property.
Vice-Chairman Davis stated that the freeway might need to be upgraded at some point and maybe the City can negotiate obtaining some property from CalTrans to put in a bike path. This is something he feels shouldn’t be taken off the plan.
Commissioner Barnes stated that he is curious about the total network. The intersection where Bonita Avenue and Arrow Highway meet going west is where a lot of the major shopping areas are located and bicyclists would miss a lot of points of interest along Arrow Highway. By running the bikeway down Cienega you miss a lot of the shopping areas that bikers are probably trying to get to.
He’s surprised that a path on West Arrow Highway is not on the plan at all even though he can see that it would be tricky to use and maybe be difficult to implement. He also stated that the area on San Dimas Canyon Road north of Foothill Boulevard isn’t in the plan at all. It looks like the bikeways end at Foothill Boulevard.
Mr. Meller stated that the public right of way is kind of narrow up in that area and hard to fit in a bikeway.
Commissioner Barnes stated that if we had all the money in the world and as part of a long-term plan maybe something should be added to include that part of the community in the plan. The presentation was great and really explained the class system better than the documents provided.
Commissioner Shirley asked if in regards to page 159 under section 5.3 Bicycle Donation and Refurbishment, will there be a waiver that the people accepting the bikes or repairs have to sign to protect the City. He wants to make sure the City is protected should something happen to someone that receives a refurbished bike or free bike repairs.
Mr. Meller stated that in San Luis Obispo there is a private organization that provides parts at cost and people could go in and do their own repairs which provide low cost ways for fixing bikes. He believes that as part of this program, the City should partner with an organization to provide a similar service.
Commissioner Shirley stated if a private company were to do this that would be ok. He doesn’t want the City to be liable for any defects or accidents.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 7
May 15, 2025
Commissioner Green asked what is actually considered a bicycle now that there are so many eBikes and alternative modes of transportation out there.
Mr. Hani stated that bicycles are typically considered something that doesn’t go above 15 miles per hour. Typically, eBikes can go as fast as a car and should be using the street. But the whole eBike industry is a bit of a tricky subject when it comes to where can they go, where can they can bike, who can use them, and can you ride them on a sidewalk where typically they aren’t meant to be shared with pedestrians.
Mr. Meller stated that the State has established three different classifications for eBikes.
Commissioner Green asked where people go to learn these rules and regulations.
Mr. Meller stated that education and outreach is very important for these things. It would be up to the City to pass an ordinance to say which eBikes could be used in these bike lanes and what works best for the community.
Commissioner Shirley asked if that would be hard for the City to enforce and regulate. He stated the City could post what it should be but that doesn’t mean the people follow the rules. He then asked what would be the maximum speed of an eBike if they are going to share the bike paths.
Mr. Hani stated that the decision would need to be made by the City.
MOTION: Moved by Commissioner Barnes, seconded by Green to recommend the City Council approve the Bicycle Master Plan 2025 Draft with the following additions to the plan:
• Add for future consideration, a bikeway route from San Dimas Avenue in Via Verde to Cypress Street, as referenced in the 2011 Bicycle Master Plan. • Add for future consideration, a bikeway route on Arrow Highway from Valley Center Avenue to Bonita Avenue.
• Add for future consideration, bikeway route in the northern area of the City along San Dimas Canyon Road north of Foothill Boulevard.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Community Development Department
Planning Manager Espinoza gives an update:
• The City Council approved the elimination of DPRB with the second reading going to the May 27, 2025 City Council Meeting.
• The Tree Ordinance MCTA will be presented to City Council on May 27, 2025. • There will be two items on the June Planning Commission Agenda.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 8
May 15, 2025
b. Members of the Audience
No communications were made.
c. Planning Commission
Vice-Chairman Davis asked about the development across the high school and when it might be presented to Planning Commission. He asked if it would be possible to have the City attorney attend the meeting. This is the first time we have a project with the density bonus and it might be a good idea to have a little refresher from the Attorney on the topic.
Planning Manager Espinoza stated that the RC Homes Development will be brought to Planning Commission at the June meeting and he would talk to Community Development Director Torrico about setting up an overview of the Density Bonus Law.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Commissioner Barnes moved, seconded by Commissioner Davis Motion carried 5-0.
The meeting adjourned at 7:39 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 12, 2025.
________________________________
David A. Bratt, Chairman
San Dimas Planning Commission
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kimberly Neustice
Senior Management Analyst
Approved: June 26, 2025