At the start of this year's legislative session, housing advocates in the California Senate put forth a collection of housing bills and went so far as to brand them the Senate Housing Package -- with a website and everything. The package included six bills to start and grew to eleven. Nearly nine months later, it should come as little surprise that every bill but one now awaits Gov. Gavin Newsom's signature. Sponsors weren't likely to publicize them without reasonable assure that they'd make it to the final round.

In an important new ruling, the Second District Court of Appeal has concluded that the City of San Mateo’s design guidelines are not “objective” under the Housing Accountability Act and has ordered San Mateo to reconsider its denial of a four-story 10-unit apartment buildings. The appellate court also upheld the constitutionality of the Housing Accountability Act, saying it does not impermissibly intrude upon local government powers. The case is one of the first to deal with the strengthened Housing Accountability Act at the appellate level. While it overturned a San Mateo County Superior Court judge’s ruling, it mirrored a recent ruling in a case from Huntington Beach , where an Orange County Superior Court judge similarly found that the city’s design standards aren’t objective and the Housing Accountability Act is not unconstitutional. The case involves a proposed apartment building on the corner of El Camino Real and West Inez Avenue in San Mateo. In 2017, a local developer proposed the project and the city staff recommended to the planning commission that the project be approved. Planning commissioners expressed concern that the project was inappropriate in scale compared to the adjacent single-family neighborhood. The staff then returned with a revised recommendation to deny the project based on a finding under the Housing Accountability Act that the project did not meet a standard in the city’s design guidelines calling for taller projects to be stepped back from adjacent single-family homes. The developer appealed the decision to the San Mateo City Council, which affirmed the planning commission decision in early 2018. (This account is derived from the appellate court decision and could not be independently verified by CP&DR because all staff reports regarding the project, unlike other past staff reports, appear to have been removed from the city’s web site.) California Renters Legal Advocacy And Education Fund then sued – the same organization that sued in Huntington Beach. The case revolved largely around the question of whether the stepback requirement in the design guidelines is an “objective” design standard as required the Housing Accountability Act in order to deny a project that otherwise meets a city’s planning requirements. Superior Court Judge George Miram ruled that the stepback requirement is an objective standard but he was overruled by the appellate court. The specific standard the city relied on in denying the project, contained in San Mateo’s multifamily design standards, states: “If height varies by more than 1 story between buildings, a transition or step in height is necessary . Any portion of a building constructed taller than surrounding structures should have the taller section built to a width that acknowledges the traditional building width pattern of the City—generally 30 to 50 feet in width.”

North Coast Officials Wary of "Secret" Railroad Proposal The recently-formed North Coast Railroad Company, LLC filed a pleading with the Surface Transportation Board hoping to secretively build infrastructure that could support coal shipment overseas from Montana, Utah, and Wyoming through the Port of Humboldt Bay. The 14-page filing, which lacks names of any company executives or representatives, notes that NCRCo. plans to spend $1.2 billion to purchase and redevelop the broken-down rail line and will use it to move unspecified "high-volume shipments." State and local officials, however, are dedicated to blocking their plan over environmental concerns regarding the coal industry, and the North Coast Railroad Authority hopes to build the 320-mile Great Redwood Trail between Marin and Humboldt Counties. Disputes Could Derail Vallco Mall Development in Santa Clara While demolition is underway at the Vallco Town Center in Cupertino, tension between city and state housing officials could throw off future progress. A special approval designed to approve the development is set to expire on September 21, which the state disagrees with. However, local officials are concerned about meeting the state's housing requirements, and this project would bring 2,402 housing units in addition to 400,000 square feet of retail and 1.8 million square feet of office space to the city. The expiration on its own is unlikely to derail the project's momentum because the developer can request a one-year extension, but residents who oppose the development might use it as ammunition for their fight against the project that has already made it through a ballot referendum, some lawsuits, and many city council debates. (See related CP&DR coverage .) San Diego County Adopts Expansive Housing Plan The San Diego County Board of Supervisors approved a plan designed to make housing more accessible to low- and middle- income residents. The plan, centered in "equity, sustainability, and affordability for all," urges the General Services department director to make a real estate market assessment of Sorrento Valley East and West and the chief administrative officer to form a plan that will make it easier for stakeholders to participate in the proposal. Supervisors also approved a new policy that will expand affordable housing construction through a voucher program. The Health and Human Services Agency will be in charge of analyzing voucher attrition rates and transfers, projected fair market rents, voucher availability, and a waitlist system as well as giving voucher priority to projects near high-transit areas and that use sustainable construction materials and design principles. Report Analyzes Pandemic's Effect on Small Residential Property Owners Findings from UC Berkeley's Terner Center for Housing Innovation underscore the unequal economic impact of the pandemic on tenants and small rental property owners. The study considered responses from 1,690 rental property owners and managers, who reported that more than 1 in 5 tenants fell behind on rent payments, and low-income and Black residents were the most impacted. At the same time, landlords of small rental properties, 1 in 3 of which brought in less money due to COVID-19, plan to evict residents once moratoria are lifted, and owners of 13% of the reported units have sold or taken steps to sell their properties. Researchers noted that the findings stress the importance of expanding emergency rental assistance programs and increasing public outreach to make these programs more accessible. CP&DR Sponsorship: Interview with Housing California for 2021 California APA Conference CP&DR is please to be a media sponsor of the 2021 California APA Conference , taking place today and tomorrow on the internet. Housing California Executive Director Lisa Hershey, a longtime advocate for housing and public health in a variety of public sector roles, will be participating in the panel “Tackling the Homeless Crisis in California,” one of the three “ Big Conversations ” at this week’s conference. CP&DR’s Josh Stephens spoke with Hershey, along with Housing California Associate Director David Zisser, about the organization’s vision and its message for planners at this year’s conference. Quick Hits & Updates Facebook will give $38 million to four affordable housing projects as part of its $150 million Community Housing Fund included in the $1 billion the company has pledged to confront the housing crisis over ten years. The $38 million will go toward the 94-unit Villas at Buena Vista proposal in San Jose, Lighthouse at Grace in San Jose, the 160-home project at 1171 Sonora Court in Sunnyvale, and the 132-unit Elevate Apartments project in Alameda County. (See related CP&DR commentary.) The US Department of Commerce's Economic Development Administration awarded a $960,000 grant to Vallejo to complete an infrastructure study of Mare Island's sewer, water, storm drainage, roadways, and electrical system with a third-party engineering firm. The $960,000 will pair with Vallejo Flood and Wastewater District and Southern Land/Nimitz Group's $540,000 donation to total $1.5 million for an assessment that could allow for more federal grant funding to make improvements on the island. The US 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the city of Los Angeles cannot take and destroy bulky items such as mattresses, sofas, and carts left on public property by the city's unhoused population. In a 2-1 decision, the panel asserted that the ordinance proposed by the city violated the 4th amendment, which protects people from unreasonable government seizure of their property, including on public grounds. Cal Poly Pomona and two real estate development firms, Edgewood Realty Partners and Greystar, are negotiating an agreement to redevelop a state-owned facility once used to care for those with mental illnesses into a mixed-use community. Redevelopment of the 300-acre Lanterman site near the SR-57 would include existing historic structures and new construction. Oakland City Council will choose between two Black developer groups to purchase the city's share of the Coliseum site and develop the A's waterfront site at Howard Terminal that includes housing, offices, hotels, and spaces for sports, music, arts, and culture. The city will enter negotiations for six months before recommending either the African American Sports and Entertainment Group or another group led by Dave Stewart and Lonnie Murray to city council. Veterans, residents, and politicians continue to fight over the fate of an Irvine military cemetery . While veterans are advocating for the Irvine cemetery to honor those who served, developers, residents, and city officials are looking to other locations due to various reasons concerning traffic congestion, property values, and neighborhood character. Nearly half of LA County tenants could not pay all of their rent throughout the pandemic, according to a study by researchers from UCLA and USC. The report indicates that renters owe a median $2,800, and debt has continued to increase since the start of the pandemic. While over 15% of tenants who were behind on rent payments were faced with eviction in 2020, that figure rose to 25% in 2021. A prominent marijuana businessman, Helios "Bobby" Dayspring, will plead guilty to bribing a San Luis Obispo County supervisor and filing a false tax return. Dayspring will also pay $3.4 million in restitution, which equals the amount by which he underrepresented his income, and will work with prosecutors who are investigating larger cases of political corruption. Voter-approved funding through Measure M could turn LA Metro’s $8 billion proposal to build the 63-mile High Desert Multi-Purpose Corridor from Palmdale/Lancaster to Victorville/Apple Valley/Adelanto into a widening of LA County's SR-138 and SR-18 in San Bernardino County. Previously, Metro planned to use the money to fund an 8-10 lane freeway, a bike path, solar panels, high-speed rail. LA Metro released the draft environmental impact report for the proposed 19-mile West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor that would connect Los Angeles County to downtown Los Angeles. The agency is still considering a public-private partnership to execute the project and is accepting public comments on the project until September 13. Save Surf City, a conservative group based out of Huntington Beach, is attempting to recall every council member but one with the justification that the six council members do not represent the interests of Huntington Beach residents and acted dangerously in their decision to hand over local zoning control to the state. Now that all members are aware of the the recall intent, they will have to draft a maximum 200-word response, and the recall petition will be published locally for signature collection. (See related CP&DR coverage .)

Without exception, California’s metro areas are becoming more dense. And the bigger they are, the faster they are densifying. At least that’s the conclusion of one of the nation’s most astute urban growth economists, Jed Kolko, chief economist at Indeed.com. In a recent article for The New York Times Upshot section, Kolko declared the 2010s as “the downtown decade,” because overall urban densities went up between 2010 and 2020, according to the Census. Kolko made his data available at both the metropolitan and the Census tract level and his statistics found that virtually all California metros densified in the last decade. To understand Kolko’s analysis, you have to understand how Kolko analyzed tract-level data to find the net density or net sprawl. (Warning: This gets pretty nerdy.) He used what the Census Bureau calls “weighted population density” – or, in his description, the weighted average of Census tract population density (tract population divided by tract land area) for all tracts in the metropolitan area, where the weight is the tract’s share of metropolitan population. In essence, this weighting eliminates the problem created by tracts with no population – or, as Kolko calls it, “the San Bernardino County problem.” San Bernardino County includes more than 20,000s square miles – more than Massachusetts and New Jersey combined. But much of that land is national forest with nobody living in the Census tracts. In most developed areas of San Bernardino County, people live at typical suburban densities. By giving zero-population tracts a weight of zero in his analysis, Kolko’s analysis can zero in only on areas that are developed. Not surprisingly, New York was off the charts in density. But the San Francisco metro area – not including Santa Clara County, which is technically a separate metro area – was third, behind New York and just barely behind Honolulu, with about 6,000 residents per square mile. And metro Los Angeles (just L.A. and Orange Counties in this analysis) was fifth nationally, with about 4,200 residents per square mile, just behind Chicago.

Alameda County Supervisors Imperil Proposed A's Stadium After the Alameda County Board of Supervisors decided it will not vote this month on helping Oakland fund the proposed A's development at Howard Terminal , the fate of the entire project in jeopardy due to insufficient financial support. In May, Oakland called on Alameda County to vote to opt into a tax district that would help cover infrastructure costs, but Administrator Susan Muranishi said that the Board of Supervisors will not vote due to the project's glaring uncertainty. While the A's hope to have a final vote from Oakland City Council by October, and the city believes its terms will be ready for a vote by the end of the year, Muranishi expressed concern over the project's economic and environmental specifications. She also expressed that the project appears uncertain without the county's financial assistance and will need more information to go forward with a vote. Report Measures Tradeoff between Parking and Housing at Transit Stations Limiting parking spaces near public transit is critical to generating low-emission, affordable housing, according to TransForm’s recent report , Measuring the Promise of Transit-Oriented Development. TransForm’s study considers the impact of housing construction near seven BART stations around Oakland, and the research team concluded that space dedicated toward parking could instead accommodate 4,837 new homes, almost half of which would be below market rate, that would produce two-thirds fewer emissions than the regional average. Housing construction would also encourage sustainable public transit use, bringing 6,900 new BART riders daily. The report relies on the principle that housing is more essential than parking spaces, and building housing near public transit will make cities more affordable, green, and accessible. Study: Sites Identified in Housing Elements Rarely Get Built Out Based on data gathered from Bay Area cities, typical California city will likely approve housing projects on less than 10% of sites listed and approved in their housing elements, according to a study published by the UCLA Lewis Center for Regional Policy Studies published a study titled "What Gets Built on Sites That Cities 'Make Available' for Housing?". Meanwhile, many cities are hoping to meet their housing targets by building on sites that have been unapproved; during the study, almost 70% of the housing built was on sites not classified in plans to meet housing quotas. The study recommends that, in order to more accurately and effectively confront the housing crisis, cities consider and perhaps underestimate the true potential of building on approved sites and truthfully include sites that may not be technically approved in their housing plans. CP&DR Coverage: Court Takes Stern Attitude Toward Parking The frustration of Second District Acting Presiding Judge Beth Grimes was palpable throughout her panel’s recent decision in a California Environmental Quality Act lawsuit over parking at a popular trailhead in the San Gabriel Mountains. Again and again in this ruling, Grimes makes the same point: “Parking deficits are always inconvenient for drivers, but they do not always cause a significant adverse physical impact on the environment.” In so doing she warns future CEQA plaintiffs not to focus on parking per se, but on the environmental impacts of parking – if there are any. The case reinforced the view put forth almost 20 years ago in an appellate ruling from San Francisco dealing with the Yerba Buena Center redevelopment plan: A lack of parking isn’t an environmental impact. Quick Hits & Updates Emile Haddad, CEO of developer Five Point, developer of numerous large-scale developments throughout California, including many former military bases, will step down from his position at the end of the month and take a senior adviser role while remaining on the board as chairman emeritus. Stuart Miller and Lynn Jochim will take over on the management team, while Haddad hopes to focus on growing public interest projects and confronting the housing crisis. The Sierra Nevada red fox, which faces threats caused by wildfires and droughts and competition with coyotes, will be protected under the Endangered Species Act after its numbers have significantly diminished to 18 to 39 foxes in Sierra Nevada. The species' population in the southern Cascade Range of Oregon and California will not be protected. Mountain View City council unanimously approved a plan to transform a parking lot near the city hall building into 120 affordable apartments as well as a ground-floor retail and community space intended to promote pedestrian attraction. Alta Housing plans to set 20 units aside for residents facing homelessness, another 20 for those making up to 30% of the area's median income, and 40 for those making between 30% and 50%. In an effort to make affordable housing more accessible, Los Angeles City Council voted to require that all covenanted affordable units in the city be publicly listed on the website lahousing.lacity.org in addition to the leasing website specific to the project and is also calling for an open application process for new units. Their vote aligns with the city's Transit Oriented Communities guidelines and the statewide density bonus designed to confront the state's housing crisis. National City is hoping that $50 million of the $100 million that the San Diego Unified Port District could give to the district through the COVID-19 American Rescue Plan Act will be dedicated toward environmental justice programs that confront health inequities caused by the agency's industrial operations. The district, which is predominantly home to Latinx and working-class communities, has suffered from extreme COVID-19 cases due to bad air quality and other environmental harms. The California National Guard is considering the environmental impacts of a 99-acre solar power grid at Joint Forces Training Base - Los Alamitos designed to minimize carbon emissions and install a reliable energy source. The US Army Corps of Engineers would lease the land to a private developer to build the power grid as early as next year. California's Third Appellate District Court ruled that the Placer County Board of Supervisors violated the Brown Act when planning a significant redevelopment of Olympic Valley. Environmental activists were quick to celebrate their victory after the court found that the Board of Supervisors deceived the public when proposing the ski resort redevelopment that would add 1,500 hotel and condominium rooms and a 90,000 square-foot indoor recreation center. San Francisco and Los Angeles were named third and ninth, respectively, among the top 10 most expensive cities to build across the globe in a 2021 international construction market survey from Turner & Townsend. Worldwide, many respondents noted the pressure put on labor and supply chains due to the pandemic, though some have called attention to North America's high incomes for construction workers, which averages $104.90 hourly in San Francisco. In an effort to expand affordable housing units, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Governing Board approved several new rules that will allow more homeowners of parcels of all sizes to build ADUs and incentivizes ADU construction near transits and town centers and at affordable rates. The units cannot be rented for more than 30 days in order to ensure that housing is dedicated to local workers. The American Public Transportation Association has named the Sacramento Regional Transit District the best transit system of 2021 with annual ridership between 4 and 20 million. SacRT officials credited the program's lower fares, increased ridership, fare-free ridership for students, and the smaRT ride program for its success. For the first time ever, Encinitas' state-required housing plan was submitted and approved on time, but concerns from city Planning Commission members and the state HCD department remain. Some city officials find that the current plan will benefit developers and fall through on providing sufficient affordable housing to residents, and the state has asserted that the city must prove that it will accommodate more high-density housing projects. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Geoffrey Palmer, a prominent Los Angeles landlord, has sued the city over its eviction moratorium implemented during the pandemic, maintaining that his companies experienced "astronomical" losses and that the city owes him that money. GHP Management Corp. and several other Palmer companies noted that 12 buildings have missed out on $20 million in rental payments and believes that they will qualify for over $100 million by the time the moratorium comes to an end. (See related CP&DR commentary .) The Oakland A's will be able to avoid lengthy lawsuits after a state appeals court ruled that their plan to build a new ballpark at Howard Terminal will have to go through a full environmental impact review, but any legal challenges must be resolved by within 270 days due to AB734. While getting the A's and the city to agree in the first place has been an extensive process, many believe that the judge's decision is dangerous because the A's have long been attempting to avoid rules. The city of Livermore received the National Civic League's All-America City Award for centering equity and resilience in its efforts to improve the community, including in mental health and affordable housing initiatives. The organization celebrated Livermore for its Council Subcommittee on Equity and Inclusion, composed of groups of volunteer community members, which prioritizes inclusivity when encouraging community participation.

Maybe it's just me, but this time feels different... more personal, I suppose. If you follow California planning Twitter or have remotely followed the state's housing debates, you know by now that many of the state's housing advocates are overjoyed at the imminent adoption of Senate Bills 9 and 10, which passed both houses of the legislature in the past week and now await the signature of an apparently willing Gov. Newsom. (Several other housing-related bills are still pending.) SB 9 is the bill that “ends single-family zoning in California” by requiring ministerial approval to property owners’ ability to split their lot in half and build up to four units in the resulting two parcels. SB 10 is the companion bill that allows local governments to re-zone properties near transit for up to 10 units without environmental analysis. Of course, the passage of bills to promote housing is nothing new. Each of the past few legislative sessions has included a mix of modest victories and frustrating defeats on the part of housing proponents, including the likes of Sen. Scott Wiener, Sen. Toni Atkins, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks, and Sen. Ana Caballero. Tempered by the legislature's moderate, suburban Democrats (who want to inflate home values) and its radical leftist Democrats (who want to destroy capitalist hegemony), nearly all housing bills have been watered down, if not stopped entirely. But, the immovable object of political gridlock has inched backwards against the unstoppable force of the state's housing crisis. (This being California, Republicans have had little influence over the matter. And, anyhow, it's hard to own the libs when the "libs" don't even know what they want.) And so, if I'd had to bet on the year's three biggest housing bills, two wins and a loss would have sounded around right. I'd have won the bet, but the payout wouldn't exactly pay my rent. So, why all the euphoria? Most broadly, the two wins are the biggest yet for the YIMBY movement. It has matured from a cheeky idea a few years ago into a true advocacy movement and a lobbying force. Its constituents--both vocal activists and a silent majority of renters, young adults, and other people who feel the direct pressure of the housing market--have only grown in number. The bigger the crowd, the louder the cheers. And, the YIMBYs have been around long enough to have felt the sting of defeat, most notably on 2019's SB 827 and 2020's SB 50 , and now to enjoy some vindication. Even if SB 10 is a super-light version of SB 50 (more on that in a moment), it's still gotta feel good. The real emotional punch, if something as staid as housing legislation could be said to have such a thing, comes in the form of SB 9. For all the housing bills that have addressed zoning, affordable housing finance, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation Process, density bonuses and all the other soporific arcana of planning, SB 9 operates at an enticingly human scale. It addresses that fundamental unit of human habitation: the house. People who cannot afford to buy or rent houses can now imagine oportunities to live in house-like dwellings. They can envision the conversion of a second floor into a separate unit, or the ground-up development of cute duplexes, the likes of which are already abundant in California's older neighborhoods but were largely outlawed with the onset of (often racially motivated) single-family zoning. People who already own houses can imagine ways to welcome new people on to their properties, or ways to profit from their properties. Of course, there was plenty of fear-mongering. That's another hallmark of this legislative cycle. Just as the YIMBY movement has matured and become more vocal, so has the anti-development movement. Groups like Livable California and the Embarcadero Institute threw everything but the kitchen sink at SB 9. They implied that homeowners would be cheated out of their homes. They argued that "developers" were going to invade neighborhoods. They argued that infrastructure would be burdened and trees would be cut down. They warned of the danger of wildfires and mega-mansions. And, of course, they cried that SB 9 mandates no (deed-restricted) affordable housing. (Many of these people, of course, live in multimillion homes.) They predicted the "destruction" of neighborhoods and, most horrifically, increased demand for street parking. And they continently conflated SB 9 with SB 10 to pretend that multi-story, 10-unit buildings were going to crop up on every block, from Rancho Santa Fe to Mill Valley. On my local social media feed, one of the most vocal opponents of SB 9 lives in Bel Air (average home price: $4 million). If anyone should not be happy, it's California's planners. I'm not suggesting that they don't support these reforms--far from it, in fact. But they now have a lot of work on their hands. As CP&DR has reported , and discussed in a recent webinar, un-doing the regulatory and physical legacy of the one-plex is going to be a mightily complex affair. But it should be a gratifying one. Among the many objections to SB 9, and pretty much every housing bill, is that it curtails local control and is "one-size-fits all." Given the refusal of many cities to permit new housing, much less multi-unit housing, these objections are like criticizing someone for being a bad driver when they haven't even turned on the ignition. If anything, SB 9 is going to be a bonanza of local control, as every single city in the state gets to decide how to implement it. They can consider design guidelines, parking regulations, financing mechanisms, fire safety, massing, setbacks, flat or sparkling, cream or sugar, and, yes, affordability incentives. If locals want something to control, well, by golly, they've got it! Now, on to SB 10. The reason SB 10 is hardly worth discussing is that SB 10 does absolutely nothing. Clearly written in the spirit of compromise, it allows cities to extend by-right approvals for up to 10 units per parcel in transit-rich areas. Any actual action depends on city councils, but it doesn't mandate anything. Milquetoast as SB 10 is, everyone who even pretends to support housing should have been able to tolerate it. Instead, I saw Livable California mailers that predicted apocalyptic levels of construction. So much for compromise. For cities that do want to both add housing and exercise local control, SB 10 gives them even more power. In some ways, I think advocates are celebrating SB 10 not because it's going to ease the housing crisis, except in a few cities that embrace it, but rather because it makes opponents look utterly ridiculous. Our journey ends with the failure of AB 1401 , which would have prohibited parking minimums statewide and left it to developers and landowners to provide parking as they saw fit. Though it would have applied to all types of properties, many supporters called it a housing bill in the guise of a transportation bill. While wonkier than the other two, it was a fan favorite for its potential to promote housing, decrease construction costs, and discourage automobile use in one fell-swoop. It's entirely possible that it would have passed as well. Except, a laughably minimal financial impact of $97,000 annually diverted it into the jaws of the Senate Appropriations Committee where Committee Chair Anthony Portantino--whose suburban hometown of La Canada Flintridge is the last place that would have been appreciably affected by AB 1401--summarily swept it off his docket and into legislative oblivion, just as he did SB 50 last year. Far be it for a multibillion-dollar housing crisis to take precedence over fiscal rectitude. It's been an eventful year. And yet, I'm not sure any of it matters. While legislators, advocates, and opponents have been wringing their hands, the RHNA process has proceeded apace. As I wrote following the defeat of SB 50, RHNA is really where the action is. Targets have been set, and councils of governments have assigned cities their allocations. And it seems to be working. Appeals are getting shot down  (with more surely to come), and cities are accepting the reality of zoning for, collectively, millions of new units. They're going to have to use SB 9 and SB 10 for all they're worth. They're going to have to lower parking minimums of their own volition. And they're going to have to come up with plenty of tricks of their own. So, while YIMBYs dance in the streets and NIMBYs decry those meddling kids, California's cities are going to have to exercise their local control whether they like it or not.

Ever since the 1980s, it’s been clear that a state law can pre-empt a local initiative. But in a “friendly lawsuit” from Encinitas, a San Diego County Superior Court judge has ruled that the state housing element law does not pre-empt a local government’s power to adopt its own housing element. As a result, the judge upheld the Encinitas’s initiative requiring voter approval of density increases – an initiative that has resulted in the city’s voters shooting down the housing element twice in the last five years.

CP&DR Vol. 36 No. 8 August 2021

Judge Caps UC Berkeley Enrollment over Environmental Impact of Adding Students In an unusual California Environmental Quality Act suit, Alameda County Superior Court Judge Brad Seligman ruled that the University of California at Berkeley must keep next year's enrollment at the same limit as last year's and cannot move forward with a $126 million project to build more classrooms and housing for professors. Despite surging applications across the UC system, UC Berkeley's 2022-23 enrollment will have a 42,237 capacity because the judge found that the university's analysis of the environmental impact of an increasing student body was inadequate and incorrect. Neighborhood residents who sued the school in 2019 because they thought that the development would increase noise and crowds in the neighborhood are celebrating the decision. Meanwhile, the university has stressed that it needs to develop more housing for faculty and plans to fulfill the judge's requirements for its Upper Hearst development in the next six to eight months. Concord Identifies Potential Development Group for Naval Base The Concord City Council voted , 3-2, to give Seeno Companies, Discovery Builders Inc., Lewis Group of Companies, and California Capital Investment Group an opportunity to become the developer of the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Officials took particular interest in the Discovery/Seeno group after the council heard pitches from all three developers and public commentary. Seeno Companies, however, has a turbulent history of real estate development in the Easy Bay that includes numerous lawsuits against local cities, agencies, and environmental groups as well as a federal mortgage fraud investigation. The ambitious plan for the station includes 13,000 housing units and millions of square feet of office and commercial buildings, but the Navy will have to remove toxic pollutants before handing the land to the city for development. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Feds Recognize California HCD for Block Grant Program The US Department of Housing and Urban Development celebrated the California HCD for effectively using federal funding from the Community Development Block Grant to assist low- and moderate-income residents. The CDBG Program provides funding primarily intended to develop safe and sufficient housing and living environments and extend economic opportunities, but its flexibility allows states to use the money to renovate public facilities, utilities, streets, and more while centering renewable energy. California's HCD was recognized as the top in the United States and pins part of its success on the organized separation of its Division of Financial Assistance into two sections that distribute and monitor both state and federal funding. San Francisco Pares Down Market Street Plan San Francisco continues to cut out some of its original goals for transforming Market Street largely due to obstacles produced by the pandemic and a more general failure on the part of city officials to logistically execute their plan. "Better Market Street," approved in October 19, originally aimed to upgrade street and sidewalk infrastructure, improve transit, and implement safety measures for cyclists and pedestrians. Thus far, officials have dropped plans to construct an elevated bikeway and improve transit and utility structures for an 800-foot stretch of the street. Additionally, private cars continue to disregard the car-free mandate intended to prioritize cyclists. Moving forward, city officials still disagree over whether their improvements should be street-level or more comprehensive underground upgrades. San Diego County Updates Housing, Safety Elements of General Plan To address its countywide housing shortage, the San Diego Board of Supervisors approved several amendments to the housing and safety elements of its general plan and incorporated an environmental justice component. The amendments also include plans to address wildfires and other climate disasters. In its updated general plan, San Diego plans to adhere to quotas set by the Department of Housing and Community Development largely by promoting housing construction in transit-oriented areas, which would also minimize traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, and sprawl. In its environmental justice component, the county hopes to reduce pollution, provide access to healthy food and safe and sanitary homes, and propel public participation. CP&DR Coverage: Housing Appeals in Bay Area The Association of Bay Area Governments  received 28 appeals from 24 cities and three counties (including two appeals from Sonoma County). According to data compiled by the Campaign for Fair Housing Elements, a coalition of YIMBY groups, the jurisdictions' RHNA numbers collectively amount to 65,935 units, and the appeals collectively ask for a reduction of 24,735 units. The appeals ask ABAG to reduce their numbers anywhere from 20% to, in the case of Sausalito, 83%. The majority of cities that are appealing are relatively small and heavily suburban. Almost all of the appeals claim that ABAG somehow miscalculated the appropriate number of units based on its methodology and jurisdictions' respective existing conditions.  Quick Hits & Updates A statewide survey from the Public Policy Institute of California found that the majority of residents are worried about climate change and environmental hazards, with 63% expressing concern about the increasing severity of wildfires and drought. Concerns were shared across party lines, with a significant portion of the population expressing interest in clean energy sources. The EPA will take greater action to reduce air pollution in Kern County , an area burdened with extreme smog due to substantial oil production. The Center for Biological Diversity sued the federal government for failing to help the county meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards and is demanding greater investment in clean energy. A study from the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy determined that low income communities and communities of color experience hotter days than wealthier and predominantly white communities in Southern California. The study discusses how various factors, including urban forestry and development patterns, allow low-income communities to reach temperatures that are 7 degrees hotter than wealthy ones. The Bakersfield City Council voted unanimously to allocate $5 million of the city's Public Safety and Vital Services Measure N fund to a new Affordable Housing Trust Fund as part of its larger effort to address rising construction costs and rental and housing prices. The funding could generate eight annual affordable housing projects compared to the four projects that received funding over the past few years. Part of the $5 million would be put toward renovating existing buildings, transforming hotels into affordable housing units, and funding accessory dwelling units. While the trust fund is symbolic of a greater momentum toward preventing homelessness and displacement in Bakersfield, community advocates have expressed concerns that the plan for the trust fund is too vague. The Southern California Rental Housing Association, a landlord group based in San Diego County, was unsuccessful in its lawsuit against the county's eviction ban, maintaining that the ban violates the U.S. Constitution. San Diego's law currently does not allow homeowners to return to properties inhabited by a tenant, which Judge M. James Lorenz preserved because the law is short-term. The Office of Planning and Research released a draft technical advisory that recommends ways in which the CEQA can more effectively review and approve sustainable transportation projects. Bus rapid transit, light rail service, and bus-only lane projects as well as those that center riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians are among those that qualify for CEQA exemption. The state is investigating Alameda County to determine if officials followed the Surplus Lands Act when they sold part of the Coliseum to the Oakland A's. The state's HCD asserted that the county never defined the site as "surplus land" or "exempt surplus land," and the county will have to prove otherwise in less than 60 days or face legal consequences. The 80-mile high speed rail leg from Bakersfield to Palmdale is taking a big step forward after the California High-Speed Rail Authority Board of Directors approved the plan's Final Environmental Impact Report, allowing for preconstruction work as the project receives more funding. Thus far, almost 300 miles of the proposed 500-mile journey from San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim have been approved. Lincoln Property Company Vice President Clay Duvall announced in a letter addressed to Oceanside officials that the company will no longer pursue construction of an Amazon package distribution center at their 28-acre Oceanside industrial park site. While Duvall gave no explanation for their change of plans, Senior Planner Rob Dmohowski cited Oceanside City Council's reversal of the Planning Commission's approval. San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal dismissed all but two claims in a lawsuit that suggests San Diego city and county officials discriminated against unhoused people with disabilities when combatting the spread of COVID-19. The two arguments that can move forward include an accusation that officials broke a state code that prohibits discrimination and a demand for a judicial declaration that officials acted improperly.

“Since when was environmental protection focused on promoting and expanding parking in protected wilderness monuments?”

If Andrew Thomas was a betting man, he would likely bet against himself. The head of planning for the City of Alameda, Thomas recently filed an appeal with the Association of Bay Area Governments to ask for a reduction the city's Regional Housing Needs Allocation. According to Thomas, though, there's nothing wrong with the city's allocation--it was calculated accurately and assigned fairly.

Last week, CP&DR rank a link to a brief news item reporting that an Orange County judge ruled in favor of Huntington Beach on a controversial Housing Accountability Act case. To our surprise, this turned out to be one of the most-visited items on our web site in recent weeks – and it’s the latest in a long-running saga about fights over housing in Huntington Beach. So this week, we thought we’d take a deeper dive into the Huntington Beach case, which seems likely to become a pivotal appellate court case on the Housing Accountability Act. What the story shows is a developer – and a nonprofit legal advocacy group – trying to hold the city’s feet to the fire on the specifics of the Housing Accountability Act, while a local judge instead provided considerable deference to the city’s action and the city’s reliance on a traffic expert. The key to the city’s success may have been a fire expert who concluded that the project does not meet the city fire department’s standard for fire truck access.