At first blush, the rest of California may not have much to learn from a high-priced, semi-isolated Spanish Revival paradise by the sea. But, roughly halfway through this week’s conference  of the American Planning Association California Chapter, held in Pasadena, Santa Barbara yielded what might be the conference's two most compelling pieces of data:  Among all the people who live in Santa Barbara’s downtown core and immediate surrounding neighborhoods, 10 percent commute outside the city for work.  Among all the people who work in downtown Santa Barbara, 39 percent commute into the city from somewhere else.  Hm.  These numbers come from Rob Dayton, principal transportation planner in the Santa Barbara Department of Public Works. They illustrate a truism that planners in big cities know well but that is counterintuitive to many suburban planers and — more importantly — to many of the opponents of growth in center cities. Dayton's numbers attest to the jobs-housing imbalance, in all its Mediterranean glory. (CP&DR doesn’t cover Santa Barbara very often — in part because, being built-out, it doesn’t have a lot of development.)  This data lead to an obvious conclusion: the more residents a downtown accommodates, the less driving there is in the aggregate. That’s doubly true if you believe in a world in which people do not equate self-worth with a steering wheel.  Santa Barbara is acting on this data sensibly: by encouraging development — commercial and residential — in its downtown core. Though Santa Barbara's street grid that is saturated, as Dayton said, a development’s traffic impact depends largely on its location. He expects that developments in the core will generate half the traffic of developments in outlying areas of the city.  This is exactly the kind of logic that eludes many of the opponents of development. In Santa Monica, for instance, voters will soon consider a ballot measure, Measure LV, that would all but freeze residential development. Proponents argue in part that development automatically incurs traffic and they fight like mad against it, ignoring the fact that the people with the most incentive to occupy new units are exactly those who are commuting into Santa Monica. Meanwhile, the westbound Interstate 10 looks like an evacuation route every morning.  Disregard for the jobs-housing imbalance is much the same in Los Angeles, where traffic gridlock is cited as the reason to oppose pretty much everything, especially in sites in West L.A. that would likely house — you guessed it — workers who commute to Santa Monica.  Dayton’s Santa Barbara data is of course no revelation for anyone who has paid any attention to center cities in the past decade. But his way of getting around the NIMBY freakout is. He’s using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) measurements rather than level of service (LOS). That change, which will be blessed statewide with the imminent implementation of SB 743, enables the city to essentially evaluate traffic impacts — and, crucially, CEQA analysis — from potential development in its entire downtown area in one fell-swoop. (The conference's host city, Pasadena, happens to have been the first city in California to implement VMT metrics; see CP&DR coverage .) Dayton said the impacts of any particular downtown development can be performed "on the back of a napkin." That’s because VMT enables the city to account for the non-impact of all those downtown workers who, with closer-in housing, will no longer be gumming up intersections after they spill off Highway 101.  Dayton stressed that Santa Barbara’s plan is new and not yet implemented. But if a place as near-perfect as Santa Barbara can accept that, sometimes, a little development can be a good thing, maybe there’s hope yet for the rest of coastal California.

The Strategic Growth Council granted $289 million to 25 projects last week in the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program – but not without considerable criticism about how the SGC scored the applications for senior housing projects. SGC funded only two out of 17 full senior housing applications, many of whose scores were apparently affected by the Air Resources Board’s decision to reclassify those applications under the “Retirement Communities” land use subtype rather than the “Apartment” subtype”. According to several unsuccessful applicants, this change caused an increase in estimated vehicle trips and hence a lower estimate in greenhouse gas emissions reduction. “Senior housing is typically a housing source for low-, very-low, and extremely-low income seniors,” Stuart Hartman, vice president for operations at the Retirement Housing Foundation, a nonprofit developer, told the SGC at its meeting in Sacramento on October 11. “It is a radically different type of housing than a retirement community. “It’s like calling a horse a dog and a dog a horse,” Meghan Rose, director of policy for Leading Age California, told the SGC. “They’re just not the same thing.” Several speakers asked SGC to rescore the projects for this round, the SGC declined to so and approved the staff recommendations instead. Most speakers also asked SGC to consider a supplemental round in order to give the senior projects another chance, but SGC Chair Ken Alex downplayed expectations on that idea as well. “It's not obvious to me that it should go back simply to ‘Apartments’,” Alex said. “For that reason I think it's not appropriate to change the proposed allocations this year or to do a new round based on next year’s money until we figure this out in a better way." The two senior projects funded by the SGC were the Kings Canyon project in Fresno, a mixture of affordable and senior housing that received $15 million, and the Sun Valley senior veterans housing project in Los Angeles, which received $11 million. Both were funded through the Integrated Connectivity Program. Among the senior projects that did not receive funding were the Beacon Pointe project in Long Beach by Century Affordable Development, the Valley Vista senior apartments in Jamestown, a senior affordable housing project in South San Francisco, Eden Housing’s senior project in Alameda, and a senior housing project in Crescent City by Danco Communities. Several applicants and advocates also criticized SGC and ARB for a lack of transparency. Although SGC held several workshops on proposed changes to the guidelines, this shift was buried deep in ARB’s “Quantification Methodology” document and not highlighted by SGC staff at the workshops. Deputy Executive Director Allison Joe said the staff would discuss the senior housing issue in detail in developing guidelines for next year’s program. The question of affordable housing has been a difficult one for the SGC ever since the AHSC program was created two years ago. The program is funded by state cap-and-trade pollution permit funds and is designed primarily to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, housing advocates have lobbied hard to give priority to affordable housing projects in the scoring, with considerable success. In his remarks about the senior housing issue, Alex referred to the tension between sustainability and affordable housing. “I do want to remind everybody that at the end of the day this remains a cap-and-trade greenhouse gas emission reduction funded program,” he said. “So as important as affordable housing is in this State, and as important as it is that we deal with it, the function of this Council on this topic is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” SGC permitted more than 70 proposals to move forward to the final scoring, seeking more than $700 million in state funds. The final SGC decision was to fund 25 projects with $289 million. The Bay Area and Southern California received seven projects each, with the average project receiving between $10 million and $12 million. Originally the SGC had been expected to give away $400 million, but cap-and-trade auction sales have been weaker than expected. SGC meeting materials can be found here . Videotape of SGC meeting can be found here . Prevous CP&DR coverage of these recommendations can be found here . The free online CSS cleaner tool allows you to organize style for websites.

Breaking new legal ground, an appellate court has concluded that a Mello-Roos District may fund facilities and services that are funded by general tax revenue in areas outside the district but within the same jurisdiction. The court also ruled that a Mello-Roos tax funding general governmental services is not a general tax under Proposition 13 and Proposition 218 but, rather, a special tax.

As part of its participation in the 100 Resilient Cities program , the City of Oakland released  Resilient Oakland: It Takes a Town to Thrive, a resilience playbook and call to action designed to tackle Oakland’s most pressing systemic and interdependent economic, social and physical challenges. The Resilient Oakland playbook includes strategies and actions to tackle systematic, interdependent challenges. This means changing the local and regional institutions to become more resilient and responsive to challenges. The main themes of Resilient Oakland are to build a more trustworthy and responsive government, stay rooted and thrive in the city, and build a more vibrant and connected Oakland. "The Resilient Oakland Playbook sets forth nearly 40 actions designed to be collaborative, data-driven and equitable in our outcomes," said Kiran Jain, Oakland's chief resilience officer, in a statement. "By taking a continuous 'build, measure, learn' approach to resiliency, we honor the work that has been done and build on it today, while setting forth bold actions that shape the future of a more resilient Oakland." (See prior CP&DR coverage .) Low Inflows Imperil S.F. Bay Ecosystem Researchers at the Bay Institute have found  that because little water is flowing from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River into the San Francisco Bay estuary, the ecosystem may be collapsing. One major reason for the sharp decrease in water is human extraction. The State Water Resources Control Board last month required Californians to leave 40 percent of what would naturally flow during the spring to save fish species. One UC Davis scientist told the SF Chronicle “of the roughly 120 native freshwater fish species in California, over 80 percent of those are faced with extinction by the end of the century if current trends continue.” The study’s conclusions were that fish extinctions were looming, starvation of fish-dependent species, diminished freshwater to the Gulf of the Farallones, increased salinity, and lack of sediment. Downzoned San Diego Community Plans Sent Back to Drawing Board The San Diego City Planning Commission rejected  the Uptown community plan update, which would have decreased housing density in parts of Hillcrest, Bankers Hill and Mission Hills. The vote may signal an appetite for greater density in those parts of San Diego. The rejected Uptown community plan update included several instances of “downzoning,” resulting in a loss of around 1,900 housing units but also protects historic buildings. The commissioners voted unanimously to recommend approval of the community plan update, but without the density decreases. A city-commissioned analysis found the Uptown Community Plan update would fall short of the citywide transportation goals included in the Climate Action Plan. The City Council has final say on the update. Beacon Awards Recognize Leaders in Greenhouse Gas Reduction Honoring voluntary efforts by local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, save energy and adopt policies that promote sustainability, the Beacon Program  is sponsored by the Institute for Local Government and the Statewide Energy Efficiency Collaborative (SEEC). The City of Colma won the 2016 Gold Beacon Award for 29 percent Agency Energy Savings, 43 percent Agency Greenhouse Gas Reductions, and Platinum in Sustainability Best Practices. American Canyon, Emeryville, Benicia, Hermosa Beach, Davis, Manhattan Beach, and Santa Monica received silver Beacon awards. One-hundred California cities participate in the program and 45 cities received awards  for their sustainability efforts. Parcel Adjacent to Great Park Rouses Controversy in Irvine Orange County is developing  a proposal to develop 100 acres it owns south of the Great Park in Irvine. The development would include 2,103 housing units, 242 room hotel, 220,000 feet of commercial space, and 1.9 million square feet of office space and could reap the county nearly $4 billion in tax revenues over 75 years. Irvine officials are threatening to sue over the project because they claim it is a money grab and could prevent future nearby developments. County officials deny these allegations and will begin a public discussion about the project by releasing draft plans next month. The opposition centers on the limited capacity of local roads. Study Assesses Wild Fire Damage Across Western U.S. A study by the University of Idaho and Columbia University found  that 10.4 million acres in the West burned between 1984 and 2015 as a direct result of human-caused global warming. While research has tied wildfires to hotter, dryer conditions resulting from GHG emissions, this report is one of the first to quantify the impact of climate change. California is one of the states hit the hardest with the 132,000-acre Soberanes Fire in Big Sur this summer, last years Valley Fire in Lake County and Yosemite’s Rim Fire in 2013. According to the U.S. Forest Service, nationwide a record 10.1 million acres burned last year. The research looked at eight measures of “aridity” such as weather and moisture metrics. Their models showed temperature increases of 2.5 degrees in the past 50 years. Additionally they computed that 55 percent of forest aridity was due to climate change and the remaining 45 percent was natural climate variation. Oceanside Embarks on General Plan Update The City of Oceanside is updating  its General Plan to focus on expanding local jobs and reducing its carbon footprint. The first step is a new Economic Development Plan Element and Energy/Climate Action Plan Element. As is required by CEQA, all cities must reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2035. Oceanside is updating its general plan and including GHG emission reduction thresholds and how they intend to meet these goals. Some policies the city will focus on are containing sprawl, providing alternative transportation options and expanding tree canopy. Quick Hits & Updates The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission  announced  it will produce a plan to help the city prepare for sea level rise. Drafting of the plan will take three years and focus on coming up with “vulnerability assessments” for each section of the shoreline and explain how it could be adapt to changes that lie ahead as well as recommending that local governments explore new institutional arrangements to address the impacts of climate change”. Tesla Motors Inc. intends to build  4.6 million square feet of new space for its factory in Fremont, which would increase production to 500,000 cars per year and add more than 3,000 workers. This proposed expansion is adjacent to the company’s current 4.5 million square feet plant. The company is seeking approval from the City of Fremont for a master plan to accommodate 11 new structures, primarily industrial space. The proposal must now go to the city’s Planning Commission. (See prior CP&DR coverage .) The Fair Political Practices Commission dismissed  a complaint that accused Chinese developer Wanda Group of illegally funding an effort to halt a rival Beverly Hills condo proposal, which is the subject of a November ballot measure. Wanda Group and Alagem have plans to build condominium towers on adjacent properties. The California High-Speed Rail Authority has announced  the beginning of its search for engineering and architectural consultants to draw up plans for the Fresno station. The winning team will receive a six-year contract for up to $11 million. The City of Fresno is developing a master plan for the proposed area of the station in the heart of downtown. The Greater Sacramento Economic Council has presented a proposal  to rename the Bay Area, Sacramento, Central Valley corridor the “Bay Area-Sacramento Mega Region.” The council claims that the megaregion can collaborate to keep jobs in California and improve regional transportation. The California Public Utilities Commission has approved  water taxi service connecting San Francisco and Berkeley. Two companies, Tideline and Prop, will run smaller 40-person ferries. Prop plans to serve Berkeley, Emeryville, San Francisco, and Redwood City starting in January. Tideline expects cross-bay trips to take about 20 minutes and cost $10 each way. The League of California Cities installed  several new officers at its recent conference. Lodi Council Member JoAnne Mounce, former vice president, was installed as the League president. Palos Verdes Estates Council Member James Goodhart was elected the first vice president and South San Francisco Council Member Rich Garbarino as second vice president. The City of Carlsbad released  its draft Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment in June. City officials are meeting with residents and experts to discuss ways the city can adapt.

In most urban areas, the promise of 25,000 new jobs would cause celebrations. But the laws of economics take strange turns in Silicon Valley. This summer, the Santa Clara City Council approved CityPlace, a $6.5 billion mega-development on the site of a city-owned golf course (which was previously a landfill). It is designed in part to be the downtown that the valley, populated by office parks and bedroom communities, does not have. The project, developed by Related Cos., will encompass a total of 9.7 million square feet, more than half of which will be office space, and 1.1 million square feet of retail. Amid this enormity will be 1,360 residential units. But that’s far too few, according to Santa Clara’s biggest neighbor. While Santa Clara city leaders are hailing the project, their counterparts in San Jose are wondering something else: Where is everyone going to live? And how are they going to get there? Shortly after CityPlace’s approval, and an accompanying general plan amendment, San Jose filed a lawsuit against Santa Clara in Santa Clara County Superior Court; Related Cos. is named as a real party of interest. It is believed to be the first time San Jose has sued a neighboring city over development issues. The suit alleges that the project violates the California Environmental Quality Act on the grounds that the city did not properly consider the traffic, water, and economic impacts of the massive project. In particular, San Jose alleges that Santa Clara has failed to plan for the housing needs of the project’s estimated 25,000 workers. They will, San Jose’s argument goes, be forced to seek housing in San Jose and thereby push housing prices even higher. CityPlace exacerbates what San Jose officials describe as an already challenging situation. According to city officials, 32 percent of Santa Clara workers live in San Jose, with only 8 percent of Santa Clarans working in San Jose. “As a city, San Jose is providing housing not just for workers employed in Santa Clara, but for workers in other cities across the Peninsula and South Bay,” said San Jose spokesperson Elisabeth Handler. It’s a region-wide problem – and it’s an old fight in Silicon Valley, where San Jose – a city of almost 1 million people – has long complained of bearing the housing burden for smaller, richer Silicon Valley cities where the jobs are located. “In the Bay Area there is an extraordinary imbalance between job creation and housing production which puts pressure on housing prices,” said Sarah Karlinsky, a policy analyst for the regional urbanist advocacy group SPUR. She noted that the region added over 450,000 jobs from 2010 to 2014, but scarcely more than 10 percent as many housing units. Santa Clara officials point out that the city’s general plan calls for 10,000 new housing units. Santa Clara’s population is 120,000 while San Jose’s is 998,000. “Create profound environmental impacts which, unnecessarily, have a regional effect…. shifts the environmental burden and expense to support that economic development onto neighboring cities and counties by limiting housing within the development,” wrote San Jose’s attorneys in the complaint. “Respondent's EIR has understated and/or whitewashed the impacts the project creates, leaving its own citizens and neighboring communities to bear the burdens, risks, and costs of these impacts.” The complaint further accuses Santa Clara of disregarding the principles of its own general plan, which call for reducing in vehicle miles traveled, reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, and preservation of neighborhoods. Santa Clara has hired prominent CEQA attorney Tina Thomas to defend it. City officials have fired back at San Jose alleging that it has pursued developments close to its border with Santa Clara without consulting the city and that it has aggressively recruited businesses and new jobs. Santa Clara Mayor Lisa Gilmor did not respond to requests for comment. In essence, both cities’ housing shortages, and the resulting jobs-housing imbalance, has made economic development an unusually controversial issue. San Jose hopes to reach a settlement without bringing the suit to court. “As a city, we believe in working with the other cities in our region to jointly address the economic and quality of life issues that impact all of us, without involving the courts,” said Handler. Contacts & Resources Santa Clara CityPlace Project Page San Jose Complaint (pdf) Elisabeth Handler , Public Information Manager, Office of Economic Development, City of San Jose, elisabeth.handler@sanjoseca.gov Sarah Karlinsky , Senior Policy Advisor, San Francisco Planning & Urban Research, skarlinsky@spur.org

Showing more than a little impatience, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled that the old housing redevelopment housing set-aside requirement didn’t create a “debt” just because the set-aside funds were delineated in a long-term redevelopment plan as required by law.

The American Planning Association announced its 2016 Great Places in America, including one honoree in California: downtown Santa Ana . These communities all include planning that has lead to stronger, healthier and more just communities. The organization announced five Great Neighborhoods, five Great Streets and five Great Public Spaces. Downtown Santa Ana received recognition as a Great Neighborhood. The award refers to the neighborhood bounded by Civic Center Drive Flower Street, First Street, and on the east by the Southern Pacific Railroad. The award cites downtown’s “organic” evolution over 147 years and its mix of uses and architectural styles and its embrace of Orange County’s creative community. It praises planning efforts such as a complete streets plan and notes that Santa Ana has the largest form-based code in the country. Sacramento Arena Opens with Hopes of Spurring Downtown Vibrancy The Golden 1 Center, the new $557 million Sacramento Kings arena, officially opened  this month after years of planning, negotiating, and efforts to keep the Kings in Sacramento. Located in the heart of downtown Sacramento at Fifth and L Street, the building was designed for a relatively small space, but needed to push Sacramento’s downtown into a new era architecturally and economically. The arena’s design draws from the Sierra Nevada mountains and Yosemite’s Half Dome for inspiration. The city gave $255 million in construction subsidies in the belief that the stadium would draw people to the city center to help rejuvenate Sacramento. The Downtown Plaza shopping mall, which had been in decline for years, formerly occupied the site. It, in turn, had come about through a 1960s urban renewal program that demolished an entire neighborhood. Anaheim Approves Redevelopment Initiatives The Anaheim City Council approved  a series of actions for commercial and residential developments along Beach Boulevard intended to rejuvenate the west side of the city. The council unanimously approved a $16.1 million sale of 25-acres to LA-based Zelman Development Company for a proposed “Main Street-style” outdoor shopping center. Additionally a 3.6-acre property was purchased for $13 million by the city’s Housing Authority to push out motels and encourage mixed-use development and affordable housing. These motels are hotspots for illicit activity and provide makeshift month-to-month housing for poor and homeless families. City officials are completing a draft of a Beach Boulevard Specific Plan, which has plans to revitalize the corridor and provide incentives such as fee waivers, flexible development standards and commercial rehabilitation loans. L.A. County Light Rail Extension Takes Eastward Step The Foothill Gold Line Construction Authority board of directors approved  engineering plans for the 12.3-mile Gold Line extension from Glendora to Montclair. The 700-page document, which took two years to draft and cost $15 million, describes the alignment of the two new light-rail tracks, location and design of six future stations and parking facilities, 24 grade-separation bridges and 24 street crossings. A trip from Montclair to downtown Pasadena will take about 40 minutes, to Los Angeles approximately 75 minutes. The train will directly serve six cities: Glendora, San Dimas, La Verne, Pomona, Claremont and Montclair. These cities, along with LA Metro, now have 60 days to submit comments on the preliminary plans. Funding for the $1.2 billion project depends on voters approving Measure M, a half-cent sales tax increase on the Los Angeles County ballot. The line would be the first Los Angeles-Area light rail line to cross county borders, with the final station being in San Bernardino County. With Vote Looming, Interest Groups Weigh in on San Diego Stadium A new study  from the University of San Diego and the San Diego County Building and Construction Trades Council found that the Chargers’ proposed stadium and convention center annex would bring an economic boost and other benefits to San Diego and its residents. The team-funded study finds that the project would create 15,000 construction jobs and 6,400 permanent jobs. The three areas the project will have economic impacts are the construction, the Chargers’ operation, and additional conventions and meetings in the “convadium”. Meanwhile, San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer has endorsed  the Chargers stadium ballot measure after reaching an agreement with the team on various financial safeguards and other concessions. Even if the measure fails in November, the relationship between the city and the Chargers will allow for a new stadium solution to be found. Finally, San Diego Chargers owner Dean Spanos announced  that he will not consider a new Mission Valley stadium if voters reject the team’s ballot measure for a combined downtown stadium and convention center annex. Spanos said it would not make financial sense to build a standalone stadium that would host eight to ten events per year and need construction subsidies from the city’s general fund. Quick Hits & Updates The National Trust for Historic Preservation released a report of the 11 most endangered historic places  in the U.S., San Francisco Embarcadero made the list. The two major threats to this historic area are earthquakes and sea level rise. The Port of San Francisco is anticipating a rise in sea level of up to 66 inches by 2100 and major disruption to the $11 billion a year tourism industry in the city. The Anaheim City Council voted to postpone  a vote on the proposed $450 million development at Platinum Triangle, across from the Angel Stadium. The project has support from city leaders and nearby businesses, but the development would harm the team’s ability to build its own developments around the stadium.  The San Francisco Planning Commission voted unanimously to displace  the city’s only commercial farm and allow Golden Bridges School to build on the site. The private school owns the 30,700-square foot parcel but supporters of the farm say Little City Gardens provides herbs to acupuncturists, vegetables for Michelin-starred restaurants, and a peaceful sanctuary for many volunteers. The Long Beach City Council announced  the results of a feasibility study to analyze the potential impacts of adding an international terminal and federal customs facility to accommodate international flights at Long Beach Airport. The conclusion was the move would not violate the noise ordinance established, would generate 350 jobs, and cost between $13.1-$16.4 billion to build. President Obama signed  a new law that gives the Veterans Administration authority to negotiate and sign leases on the nearly 400-acre property in Westwood. The VA’s master plan for the campus calls for 1,200 units of permanent supportive housing for homeless vets. The Escondido Creek Conservancy has been purchasing  land to eventually create a greenbelt and improve creek conditions to support steelhead trout. In the past 25 years, the organization has preserved 1,800 acres. The final two parcels, totaling nearly 1000 acres, will cost nearly $11 million. After reaching purchase agreements with willing sellers, the organization raises funds through community groups, private donors and government grants. The Brisbane City Council decided to postpone  a vote on adding housing to a proposal to develop a 684-acre site know as Baylands. Brisbane residents would like to develop the land as a “community alternative” plan with commercial and industrial space, but not housing. The City of Santa Cruz has announced plans to establish  a bike sharing program. The city is planning on bringing in a third-party operator to manage the rental program. Santa Cruz’ General Plan and Climate Action Plan goals include “multimodal mobility” as well as increasing commute trips by bicycle from 9.7 to 12 percent by 2020.

The Strategic Growth Council staff is recommending awards of almost $300 million to 25 different projects around the state that promote greenhouse gas emissions reduction and affordable housing, and assist disadvantaged communities. The Council will meet next week to approve the list.

While Washington, D.C., is physically one of the nation’s more pleasant cities, very little by way of progressive urbanism has ever come out of it. Until now.

Expanding Printing Operation OK As CEQA Baseline

funds as part of a redevelopment dispute even though a previous ruling concluded that the state cannot.

The Coastal Act trumps both the Density Bonus Act and the Mello Act, which requires affordable housing in coastal areas. That’s the conclusion of the Second District Court of Appeal, which upheld the City of Los Angeles’s decision to deny a 15-unit housing project in Venice that would have replaced a three-unit building. The ruling reaffirms the power of the Coastal Act, whose primary purpose is to protect coastal resources. In this case, Los Angeles officials decided that the visual incompatibility of the new project, proposed by Kalnel Gardens LLC, with existing buildings violated the Coastal Act even though some buildings nearby were of similar scale. The court had an easy time with the Density Bonus Act, since that law expressly states that it does not supercede the Coastal Act. The court had a more difficult time with the Mello Act, which specifically applies within the coastal zone. In addition, the Coastal Act states that its provisions should not be used to allow local governments to obstruct the construction of affordable housing under other laws. However, the appellate court found, the Coastal Act also requires that the design of new developments protect scenic views and be “visually compatible with the character of the surrounding areas.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 30251.) That was the basis of the City’s decision to reject the Kalnel project, and on appeal Kalnel does not contend there was insufficient evidence to support that finding.” Kalnel proposed a project that included five single-family homes and five duplexes and received a density bonus because two units were reserved for very-low-income families. Under the density bonus law, Kalnel also got a height variance. City staff gave the project various approvals, including a coastal development permit, but neighbors appealed the project to the Planning Commission, claiming that height, density, setbacks, and other visual characteristics were out of step with the neighborhood. At a hearing before the West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission, neighbors claimed one- and two-story structures outnumbered larger structures such as the one proposed by a 9:1 ratio. However, Kalnel’s lawyer ultimately said the project was “all a case about affordable housing and density bonus.” Kalnel lost all the appeals, including the appeal to the Los Angeles City Council, and then filed a lawsuit. Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge James C. Chalfant ruled that the city had violated the Housing Affordability Act and that the project conformed to density bonus rules. However, the court ruled that the three housing laws are subordinate to the coastal act and substantial evidence existed that coastal resources would be threatened by the project. Perhaps the most important issue was whether the Coastal Act trumps the density bonus law – a law that developers often use to increase the density of their project above local zoning limits in exchange for providing affordable housing. But this proved to be an easy issue for the court to resolve. Writing for the three-judge panel, Justice Laurence Rubin simply noted that the The Density Bonus Act (§ 65915) states: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the .” (§ 65915, subd. (m).)” The Mello Act proved more complicated, since the law is specifically designed to ensure that affordable housing is provided in the coastal zone. Whenever a new project is built in the coastal zone, the law requires the developer to provide either new or replacement affordable housing. The Coastal Act also specifies coastal considerations do not permit local governments to avoid other affordable housing requirements. “Standing alone, these two provisions might be construed as giving the Mello Act primacy over the Coastal Act,” wrote Justice Rubin. “However, the Coastal Act also requires that the design of new developments protect scenic views and be ‘visually compatible with the character of the surrounding areas.’ (Pub. Resources Code, § 30251.)” In further discussion about the conflict between coastal resources and affordable housing, Justice Rubin wrote: ‘Which interpretation is most protective of coastal resources? One that requires Mello Act housing even if it blocks coastal access, intrudes into environmentally sensitive areas, or is visually incompatible with existing uses, or one that requires application of the Mello Act’s affordable housing requirements within the coastal zone so long as those housing projects abide by the Coastal Act’s overall protective provisions? He concluded: “Remembering the Legislature’s statements that protecting coastal resources is a paramount concern because those resources are of vital and enduring interest, it seems clear that the latter interpretation must prevail.” The appellate court declined to consider the question of the Housing Affordability Act because of a technical error in the appeal made by Kalnel. The Case: Kalnel Gardens LLC v. City of Los Angeles , No. B264434 (September 29, 2016). The Lawyers: For Kalnel Gardens: Allen Abschez, Loeb & Loeb, aabshez@loeb . com For City of Los Angeles: Michael Bostrom, Deputy City Attorney, mailto:Michael.Bostrom@lacity.org