Search Results

California Forever dropped from the sky two weeks ago, like a lost chapter from Italo Calvino's Invisible Cities. It promised a utopia of low-carbon emissions, a jobs-housing balance, rowhouses (!), light rail, human-scale density, and, most marvelously, diversity social equity. Exquisitely, it created fans and detractors in seemingly equal numbers. Most observers, though, probably fell in the middle, able to imagine best- and worst-case scenarios with equal vividness. Naturally, many people’s fantasies are others' nightmares. And, after a flourish of a week or so, California Forever has receded into the fog. If it revisits us, it will likely do so in the form of lobbying, ballot measures, environmental impact reports, and lawsuits until the end of our days. So far, California Forever--the name of which sounds more like that of a cemetery than a metropolis--offers more of a lesson in public relations than in planning. In the span of a week, coverage of California Forever went from a scoop in the San Francisco Chronicle to multi-article coverage in The New York Times , The Hill, The Guardian --and everything in between. I can't imagine a story related to urban planning that would get more, and swifter, coverage than this one did. Howard Jarvis would have to rise from the dead and insist on the repeal of Proposition 13. Clovis would have to invade Fresno. A whale would have to eat San Diego. Beverly Hills would have to build affordable housing. That's how big it was. The developer, Flannery Associates LLC, had been operating in stealth mode for five years until the Chronicle uncovered what was going on. Flannery's most exquisite move was to immediately post a website -- so fully-formed that it must have been designed and written ahead of time, like an aging celebrity's obituary, long before the news leaked. Flannery (apparently named for a road bordering its original parcel) is thus both an enormity and a mystery at the same time. Planning news rarely "breaks." But, to Flannery Associates' credit -- whether the leak of their buying spree was accidental or calculated -- they gave us, perhaps unwittingly, a story that had it all: a "new city," a huge amount of (private) capital, a place (Solano County) that most people have never heard of, mild deception, and the audacity of the tech industry. The plan's most Calvino-eseque elements so far are the renderings on California Forever's website, if you can call them "renderings." In some ways, they hold tremendous appeal: pretty, well detailed buildings overlooking coves and arbors, dappled in the light of a wine country afternoon. And, yet, they are obviously the product of artificial intelligence--just a little too perfect, and a little too cliched. A recent post on SF Gate confirms as much. By now, Flannery has surely gotten calls from every New Urbanist architect in the country. A city on a hill. The reasons why it got so much attention are more pedestrian and more dispiriting. The attention we gave to a Utopian vision, seemingly inspired by equal parts Tuscany and Philadelphia, says more about the current state of our cities -- and the surrounding discourse -- than it does about Flannery. The vision for California Forever depends on not just empty land but also on blank pages. California Forever's zoning code has yet to be written. (Maybe it won't even have one.) It also doesn't have incumbent residents with entrenched interests. It doesn't have design guidelines. It doesn't have anxious politicians or overworked planning staffers. That's why they can dare to dream of something new, fresh, and attractive. Back in the real world, pretty much nothing is happening. Some of the biggest development stories center on what's not getting built. That high-rise in San Francisco. A new ballpark for the A's. The Concord Naval Weapons Station redevelopment. Anything smaller than Versailles and denser than Alaska on the San Francisco Peninsula. Home mortgage rates just hit 8%. Not exactly fodder for The New York Times. On many levels, the project is off-putting, perhaps terrifying. And yet, there's  useful lesson in California Forever's audacity. California Forever has a shared purpose: its investors have all spent a lot of money and they all want to make a lot of money. I give them credit for being, possibly, more than just capitalists. They seem to understand principles of good urbanism, and they seem to understand that California needs more housing. "Hey Dall-E, give me a perfect New Urbanist streetscape." That's more than we can say for some cities in this state. Too much of the planning innovation and new development in California are taking place under duress (see: Builder's Remedy ), with extreme reluctance (see: housing element updates), or in the face of recreational litigation (hello, Huntington Beach ). None of this amounts to a vision. None of this amounts to an enthusiastic, optimistic consensus about what the state and its cities might strive for. As ever, the California Dream feels passive -- something that we participate in purely because we're here, somewhere near the beach, under the sun -- rather than something we actively, collectively pursue. Sure, many new plans include progressive planning principles. But, they are usually buried deep in codes and general plan updates. They are often included to evade scrutiny of anti-development stakeholders. They lack exuberance. And the incrementalism is excruciating. We get a six-story podium building here; a dozen townhouses there. ADU's aplenty. If we're lucky, we end up with better cities by the time our grandkids graduate from college. This leisurely pace is what prompted developer Christopher Meany to unload on planners when I spoke to him about his Treasure Island project: "Planners have to stop focusing on planning and start focusing on getting things built." What this approach lacks is a vision -- a sense of enthusiasm or shared purpose. It's almost impossible to envision better cities in California because the new elements -- say, a well designed mixed-use building, or street furniture that might make a place walkable -- has to mingle with whatever outdated, Prop. 13-enabled ugliness is still hanging around. So, I can forgive anyone who gets excited about California Forever. It's tantalizing to think that, just this once, we could learn from our mistakes and build something truly enlightened--exorcise the ghosts of Burnham, Corbusier, and Moses once and for all. But what the world wants and what the world builds are often two different things. I am not suggesting that planners should pursue headlines. Doing so would be disingenuous and annoying. But we have to learn something from the flap over California Forever. However difficult planning in the real world may be, planners cannot cede an optimistic, excited vision of California's future to a venture capital fund. Even if he predated the California Environmental Quality Act, Italo Calvino probably knew how hard it is to build utopia. It's why he conjured up cities a few hundred words at a time, never claiming that they would exist anywhere other than in the collective imagination. Now that DALL-E can do Calvino's job for him, it's hard yet to tell whether California Forever believes his fantasies are within reach—or whether California Forever is blind to his cautionary tale. Perhaps it was, and is, both. Images courtesy of California Forever .

A dozen land use bills related to housing have landed in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, and he has until mid-October to sign or veto them. That’s become the norm in the last few years in Sacramento. But there’s a pretty good argument that the Legislature is beginning to run out of things to do on housing – unless the lawmakers are willing to take on the California Environmental Quality Act.

Two land use bills got all the attention this year, both carried by Sen. Scott Wiener: SB 423, which extends SB 35, and SB 4, which requires ministerial approval for projects on college and church land. But the Legislature passed two dozen important land use bills this year, most of which are now sitting on the desk of Gov. Gavin Newsom. And Newsom isn’t likely to veto many of them – especially the housing bills.

Coastal Commission Imposes $1 Million Fine on Coastal Resort The Coastal Commission unanimously approved a significant settlement with San Diego's Paradise Point resort, addressing Coastal Act violations that hindered public access to city-owned waterfront property for years. The settlement, estimated at $4.1 million, involves a $1 million fine, the installation of over 70 new coastal access signs throughout the 52-acre resort, additional public restrooms near the beach, and a $500,000 outreach program providing free overnight stays to lower-income students and families. It also ensures an uninterrupted pathway across the bayfront. Concerns were expressed about potential future violations despite the settlement's cost, with some commissioners questioning the adequacy of the $1 million fine. The resort, owned by Pebblebrook Hotel Trust, is now free to proceed with plans to reposition as a Margaritaville Resort. Navy Agrees to Return Property to Port of San Diego The Port of San Diego and the U.S. Navy have reached a historic agreement after 38 years, wherein which the Navy will vacate a 3.4-acre waterfront property in exchange for $5.75 million in goods and services. The deal will return prime real estate to the port for redevelopment, potentially including hotels and public amenities. The Navy's 100-year lease on the property will end before the year's end, pending approval by Port of San Diego Commissioners. The site currently hosts outdated Navy buildings but is surrounded by public attractions and hotels. Once the Navy exits, plans for additional park space, hotels, and retail shops are in place, with a local San Diego developer given the first opportunity for redevelopment. Climate Change Exacerbates Wildfire Danger by 25% According to a new study published from Breakthrough Institute, a Berkeley-based think tank, climate change bolsters the risk of severe wildfire growth by 25%, and it will continue to influence severe wildfires in the state for decades to come. The research studies exactly how temperatures impact individual fires statewide, and predicts the influence of climate change on the behavior of fires in the future, analyzing almost 18,000 fires in California between 2003 and 2023. Over that time, climate change has increased the risk of deadly daily wildfires by an average of 25%. Researchers further estimate climate change will increase the risk of extreme wildfire growth by an average of 59% by the end of the century if greenhouse gas emissions reach net zero by 2070. If emissions continue to increase until 2050, climate change poses an average risk of 90%. Los Angeles Establishes Priority Transit Projects for 2028 Olympics The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is preparing for the 2028 Olympic Games by seeking Federal funding for 15 projects to manage the anticipated increase in tourists. These projects aim to address transportation and mobility challenges. Metro may potentially double its bus fleet by borrowing buses and staff from transit agencies, primarily within California. They plan to establish a Games Routes Network to efficiently connect event venues with transportation hubs using existing and planned ExpressLanes and bus-only corridors. The initiative includes the creation of mobility hubs, micro-mobility options, and first/last-mile connections for visitors. Additionally, they will address street-running operations and traffic signal improvements while considering plans for grade separation. Lastly, Inglewood's automated people mover system and Metrolink's SCORE program were deemed essential components of the preparations. CPD&R Coverage: Planning in the Central Valley In that time, the eight-county San Joaquin Valley region's population has grown to an estimated 4.3 million. It has gained a campus of the University of California, and it is, slowly, gaining High-Speed Rail. And, though agriculture dominates the region, it is far from rural, including major cities like Fresno, medium-sized cities like Modesto and Merced, and small towns like Taft. They and other communities are feeling housing pressures, especially in light of dramatic price spikes in coastal metropolitan areas, while serving populations that are dramatically lower-income and more predominantly blue-collar than in their coastal counterparts, including some of the highest countywide poverty rates in California. To mark the occasion of this week's conference of the California Chapter of the American Planning Association, CP&DR's Josh Stephens spoke with four planners in the Central Valley to find out about the Valley's priorities and challenges. Quick Hits & Updates BART is set to launch a plan aimed at improving service and boosting ridership. The plan includes reducing wait times to a maximum of 20 minutes, increasing evening service by 50% seven days a week, shortening the length of trains to improve safety and resource allocation, and utilizing only the "fleet of the future" trains for the base schedule to enhance efficiency and reduce costs, all in an effort to avoid a looming fiscal crisis. Philanthropist and Jeff Bezos's ex-wife MacKenzie Scott donated $20 million to the San Francisco Community Land Trust, a nonprofit focused on affordable housing, enabling the organization to accelerate property acquisition and expand its reach to address the city's affordable housing crisis. This significant gift will allow the trust to triple its staff, acquire more buildings, and transform them into permanently affordable homes, benefiting communities of color and helping renters become homeowners. A Silicon Valley tech leader is selling his 14,100-acre Rana Creek Ranch in Carmel Valley to the Wildlands Conservancy for $35 million, with plans to create a public nature preserve. The conservancy intends to open the scenic property to the public for recreational activities, while the Esselen Tribe plans to purchase a portion of the land for cultural and environmental purposes, including controlled burns and recreating a historic village. After nearly five hours of discussion, the Brentwood Planning Commission sent a proposal for nearly 300 homes in the Bay Area city back to the staff due to concerns about potential traffic issues. The key issue centered on a second exit from the proposed development which would have directed traffic into and out of congested neighborhoods, prompting the commission to request solutions to reduce traffic and noise for nearby residents. The proposal will be reviewed by the commission again at a later date. The Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously to temporarily halt the demolition of Marilyn Monroe's former home in the Brentwood neighborhood after a council member introduced a motion to consider it as a city historic-cultural monument. This decision triggers a pause on all building permits, allowing for an assessment of the property's historic and cultural significance, with the process expected to conclude within 75 days.

This weekend, the conference of the California Chapter of the American Planning Association returns to the Central Valley for the first time since 1975.

After over a quarter century of planning and seven years of infrastructure development, San Francisco’s Treasure Island neighborhood is finally taking shape. One of the project’s signature elements—a 22-story apartment tower—topped out in July, and new structures, parks, and public amenities are under construction on the 405-acre landfill site, and on adjacent 300-acre Yerba Buena Island. The forward moves are taking place at the same time that the project’s main developers are suing each other and the Bay Area’s urban housing market has softened. The project's primary developer and funder, Wilson Meany and Stockbridge Capital are jointly involved in lawsuits and countersuits against a second developer, Kenwood Investments. The disputes center on the project’s anticipated profits, which are likely far lower due to current economic conditions than they were in 2016, when the project broke ground. And yet, demand for the project’s 8,000 housing units – a significant number in the housing-starved Bay Area – is likely as high as ever.

A's Spurn Would-Be Developer for Oakland Coliseum Site The (likely) departing Oakland A's turned down an offer from a local Black-owned development group to purchase their share of the Oakland Coliseum site. The A's president declined the offer in a letter to the head of the African American Sports and Entertainment Group (AASEG), stating their current lack of interest in selling their Coliseum stake. AASEG is in talks with the city to potentially buy or lease Oakland's part of the site for a $5 billion megaproject featuring housing, restaurants and a new convention center. While the A's initially had plans for the site, they later shifted their focus to Las Vegas. The A's current plans for the Coliseum remain unclear, and a cooperation agreement with AASEG has not yet been signed. Meanwhile, A's endeavor to move to the Las Vegas Strip faces the potential of being subjected to a statewide vote in Nevada. A Nevada political action committee named "Schools Over Stadiums" filed a referendum petition, aiming to force a statewide vote on the use of public funding for the A's stadium bonds, which would require approximately 102,000 valid signatures to qualify for the 2024 ballot. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Two California Tribes Receive Federal Affordable Housing Funds The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development announced a total of $128 million in affordable housing investments in 22 tribal communities , nationwide. The grants include $4.4 million to the Cahto Tribe of Laytonville Rancheria and $2.9 million to the Susanville Indian Housing Authority, both in California. The funds are designated to the construction of 14 new housing units for low-income Cahto indigenous families and nine affordable housing units in Susanville. Since 2019, 94 percent of funds from the federal Indian Housing Block Grant Competitive grants have gone towards the construction of new housing units to address the housing crisis for indigenous tribes across the nation. Los Angeles Approves Spending of Funds Collected from Controversial Transfer Tax The Los Angeles City Council approved a $150 million expenditure plan for funds generated by Measure ULA directed towards six programs for the first time since voted into law last November, including short-term emergency rental assistance, eviction defense, tenant outreach and education, direct cash assistance for low-income seniors and people with disabilities, tenant protections and affordable housing production. Notably, $23 million will be allocated to eviction defense, $23 million for income support for rent-burdened seniors, and $18.4 million for rent debt assistance. The first program to roll out will be an emergency rental assistance program, scheduled to begin on September 19. Measure ULA, often referred to as a "mansion tax" but applicable to all types of properties in the city, was initiated on April 1, imposing a 4% charge on real estate transactions exceeding $5 million and a 5.5% charge on sales above $10 million. To date, the tax has raised approximately $55 million, with the stipulation that the funds can only be spent as they accrue, thus requiring $150 million in tax revenue before the full allocation can be utilized. Despite $55 million in funding for L.A.'s housing crisis, the funds from the tax fall significantly short of early estimates -- which anticipated around $900 million annually -- due to a cooling luxury real estate market and homeowners' efforts to evade the tax. (See related CP&DR coverage .) PPIC Survey Shows Conflicting Sentiments on Housing, Environment Recent surveys by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) reveal conflicting opinions among California residents on the state housing crisis, despite ongoing efforts to address it. Many Californians want the state to ease environmental and land use restrictions to boost housing supply, even as a significant portion believes the restrictions should remain the same, even if it increases housing costs. The sentiment is strong across the state, except for the San Francisco Bay Area, where opinions are divided. Renters are more supportive of easing restrictions than homeowners. A majority of Californians also favor changing regulations under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to make housing more affordable. Democrats, independents and residents from various regions support the California Legislature requiring local governments to build affordable housing, while Republicans prefer local governments to decide housing policy. Despite the demand for affordable housing, 71% of Californians prefer single-family homes over condos or townhomes, even if it means relying on cars for commuting. CP&DR Coverage: Fulton on "Creative" Interpretations of CEQA The California Environmental Quality Act plays a unique role in California planning and development. Depending on your point of view, it's either the one thing standing in the way of destruction of your neighborhood or the one thing standing in the way of providing needed housing. As we recently reported, both sides of the CEQA debate often use CEQA litigation - either the supposed prevalence of it or the supposed rareness of it - to defend their point of view. But, whichever side of the issue you are on, CEQA continues to operate as the “big dog” of California planning, overshadowing almost everything else in sight. But lately, we've seen California's appellate courts having to deal with more creativity than usual. Quick Hits & Updates Two landowners in East Elliott , a once-planned housing development area in eastern San Diego, contend that the city's classification of the region as open space has resulted in substantial financial losses and worsened the housing crisis. Their lawsuit argues that historical agreements from the 1960s with the federal government, aimed at transforming East Elliott into a residential neighborhood, should invalidate the city's 1997 decision to designate it as open space, potentially posing significant financial consequences for the city if the lawsuit prevails. On Wednesday, the California Water Resources Control Board rejected Cemex's plea to reconsider the agency's decision to re-notify an old water permit application by the Mexican mining company. The water permit, crucial for Cemex's long-standing efforts to establish a large mine, has been a major obstacle, with community concerns and opposition from the city, residents, environmentalists, and state legislators delaying the project since its initial permit issuance in 1991. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Army have jointly issued a new regulation significantly reducing the extent of federally protected water in response to a Supreme Court decision in May that curtailed protections for US wetlands. This new rule, which redefines the scope of "waters of the United States," excludes wetlands and smaller tributaries from protection, potentially affecting up to 63% of US wetlands by acreage and around 1.2 million to 4.9 million miles of streams. Los Angeles Metro unveiled its updated Active Transportation Strategic Plan , aiming to connect passengers walking, biking or rolling to and from transit facilities. The plan includes projects to improve pedestrian crossings, enhance bikeways and create safer walkways in underserved communities, but it faces funding challenges, with regional bikeways alone estimated to cost $36 billion, four times the agency's annual budget. A committee has formed in Marin County in order to designate the area as a Dark Sky Reserve under the International Dark-Sky Association, combatting light pollution . The committee identifies non-compliant lighting in the area to preserve wildlife and human wellbeing. The Fremont City Council unanimously approved the purchase of a 23,000-square-foot office building to rebuilding as a potential new city hall, consolidating operations and using thee current city hall into a mixed-use housing development.

Concord Names New Developer for Former Navy Site Possibly ending a two-decade saga of false starts and controversies, the City of Concord selected Brookfield Properties as the master developer for the transformation of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station into a massive mixed-use community. Covering 2,300 acres and comprising a significant portion of the site's total 5,046 acres, this project is the largest ongoing development in the Bay Area. Brookfield Properties has committed to designating at least 25% of the housing as affordable, hiring 40% of the construction workforce locally and prioritizing early connections to the nearby BART station. Before the U.S. Navy transfers ownership to the city, environmental concerns must be addressed, including soil assessment and cleanup efforts. The final phases of construction are expected to span the next 30 to 40 years, with ongoing negotiations to clarify timelines and costs. Despite past divisions among Concord residents, Brookfield's proposal has gained approval as the most promising option for revitalizing the former Naval outpost, shuttered in 1999, potentially creating a new city within Concord that could significantly impact the region's housing landscape. (See related CP&DR coverage .) State to Disburse $757 Million in Grants to Fund 2,500 Affordable Housing Units The California Strategic Growth Council announced $757 million in funding from the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program aimed at advancing affordable housing construction in walkable neighborhoods with job opportunities. The funds will go to 21 projects statewide, with awards ranging from $19 million to $49 million. The investment is expected to result in development of over 2,500 affordable residences, 150 zero-emissions buses, 50 miles of new bikeways and improvements to sidewalks across various communities in the state. Once completed, these projects are projected to reduce 800,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions, equivalent to removing 178,000 gas-powered cars from California's roads for a year. Governor Newsom emphasized the significance of these investments in addressing climate change and housing scarcity, underscoring their role in creating a cleaner energy future. San Jose Housing Element Fails to Win State Approval Regulators at the Department of Housing and Community Development have declined to certify San Jose's draft housing element, which would add more than 60,000 new homes over the next decade. Without this approval, the city risks losing access to crucial affordable housing and transportation funds and relinquishing control over the approval process for new housing projects. When San Jose's City Council submitted the plan for approval in June, it faced skepticism from pro-housing advocates, tenant activists, and construction labor supporters. In HCD's letter to the city, they urge greater community engagement and public input during the housing element revision process while calling for more evidence the identified sites for housing are viable. The letter also demanded more details on programs to streamline permitting processes and combat housing discrimination and displacement. San Jose must specify where and how it intends to facilitate the development of at least 62,200 additional homes, over half of which must be affordable, by 2031. This represents a 20% boost in the city's housing stock and a 77% increase from its previous eight-year housing goal. San Bernardino Agrees to Update Housing Element to Avoid Penalties California Attorney General Rob Bonta, Governor Gavin Newsom and three state agencies have announced a settlement with the City of San Bernardino for violating California's Housing Element Law. San Bernardino failed to adopt a compliant housing plan within the statutory deadline, prompting state intervention. The settlement requires the City of San Bernardino to adopt a compliant housing element by no later than February 7, 2024, expedited to meet the deadline. Additionally, the city must modernize its zoning code, amend its emergency shelter ordinance to streamline homeless shelter construction, and adjust its local density bonus ordinance to permit increased density for housing projects with affordable dwelling units. Failure to comply with the settlement terms will result in escalating penalties, including limitations on zoning changes and variances and restrictions on permitting any development except for residential projects containing affordable housing. (See related CP&DR coverage .) CP&DR Coverage: Success and Struggles in California's Downtowns The depths of the covid pandemic inspired dire proclamations about the “death of cities." Three years later, plenty of cities have contradicted those predictions—while a few still struggle. California cities represent both extremes , with downtowns in Los Angeles and, most notably, San Francisco still struggling while downtowns in San Diego, Fresno, and even Bakersfield are operating as if the pandemic never happened. At both ends of the spectrum, urban planners who focus on downtowns are thinking of new, and more aggressive, ways to maintain or regain their vibrancy. San Francisco’s Financial District may have to reinvent itself entirely. Once home to a high concentration of tech companies and professional services, such as law and accounting firms, the district has an estimated 18 million vacant square feet, and relatively little housing, leading to predictions that the city is facing a “doom loop.” Meanwhile, San Diego credits its success largely to its high concentration of residences--and is doubling-down on policies that led to a residential boom over the past decade. Over 8,700 units, many of them in high-rise buildings, have been developed since 2013. Quick Hits & Updates According to an analysis by the San Jose Mercury News, apartment construction in the Bay Area, particularly in Silicon Valley, has come to a standstill in the first half of 2023, with no new projects breaking ground. The slowdown is attributed to higher interest rates, reduced financing returns, lingering material and labor costs from the pandemic, declining demand for market-rate apartments, and persistent obstacles like local regulations and opposition. The Healdsburg City Council is evaluating three potential sites for the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit ( SMART ) train extension following the availability of $30 million worth of funding to continue the construction north. The current depot location on Harmon Street has long been planned as the SMART depot, with two downtown station locations under consideration, one north and one south of North Street. SMART recently secured $30 million to cover the remaining cost of the $70 million extension to Windsor, while the rest of the extension still requires $82.4 million. (See related CP&DR coverage .) The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of the Army have issued a final rule , aligned with a recent Supreme Court ruling, changing the definition of "waters of the United States," potentially reducing federal protections for up to 63 percent of the nation's wetlands and affecting 1.2 million to 4.9 million miles of ephemeral streams. This revision comes in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Sackett v. EPA, which limited the EPA's regulatory power over certain waterways, with the EPA Administrator expressing disappointment but the obligation to follow the court's ruling. The highly-publicized " Doom Loop Walking Tour " in Downtown San Francisco, originally organized by an anonymous City Hall commissioner, was canceled at the last minute due to concerns about preserving the organizer's anonymity. However, the cancellation inadvertently revealed the identity of the organizer, the vice president of the city's Commission on Community Investment and Infrastructure, who subsequently resigned from his position amidst controversy and criticism from city officials and the community. The plans for a new housing project in San Jose, located on the former site of the Century 24 movie house, includes a 264-unit residential building with 35 studios, 113 one-bedroom, and 116 two-bedroom apartments, with approximately 52 to 53 units designated as affordable for low-income households. The developer plans to use a "builder's remedy" strategy to expedite the project's approval as San Jose's long-range housing plan is still awaiting state certification.

CP&DR Vol. 38 No. 8 August 2023

Financiers, Tech Leaders Purchase Land for "New City" in Northeast Bay Area Over the past five years, a company called Flannery Associates has been acquiring over $800 million of open and agricultural land near Fairfield in Solano County, with apparent ambitions to build a new city in the Bay Area hinterlands. The holdings total roughly 40,000 across 230 parcels. The company, which is registered as an agricultural company and has no apparent experience in real estate development, was founded by former Goldman Sachs trader Jan Sramek and has been funded by some of the wealthiest individuals in the tech industry, including Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn), Patrick and John Collison (Stripe), investor Michael Moritz, and the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. Mortiz reportedly circulated investment memos describing the development of a new, walkable city with an innovative governance structure. The company has purchased land for as little as $5,000 per acre, but prices have risen to $20,000 per acre as available land has become more scarce. The purchases have raised national security concerns due to their proximity to Travis Air Force Base. A local mayor believes the company -- which has not previously stated their intentions behind the purchases -- could be planning to create a new city, as suggested by a poll reportedly sent to Solano County residents. This poll stated the potential city could include new homes, a solar energy farm, orchards, parks and open spaces. Federal entities like the U.S. Air Force's Foreign Investment Risk Review Office and the Committee on Foreign Investment are looking into the acquisitions. Orange County COG to Ask Supreme Court for Relief from Housing Goals The Orange County Council of Governments unanimously voted to ask the California Supreme Court to overturn the state's directive requiring cities and counties in Southern California to construct 1.34 million new homes by the end of the decade. This move comes after lower courts dismissed their former lawsuit alongside several Los Angeles County cities challenging the housing mandate's excessiveness. The Second District Court of Appeal upheld the original ruling, stating that legislative changes in 2004 shield the Regional Housing Needs Assessment process from legal intervention. Orange County leaders claim state housing and community development officials did not adhere to the law in determining the region's housing needs. The Attorney General's Office, representing HCD, emphasizes their commitment to aiding struggling California families in affording housing. The 1.34 million-unit mandate is applicable to all city and county jurisdictions within the Southern California Association of Governments region, encompassing LA, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Imperial counties. The appeal filing deadline for the council of governments is September 5, with the California Supreme Court having the discretion to review the matter. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Supreme Court Throws Out Monterey County Ban on Oil Wells The state Supreme Court ruled, on a 7-0 decision, Monterey County's voter-approved ban on new oil and gas wells as invalid due to state laws promoting oil and gas production. Measure Z aimed to prohibit drilling new wells and wastewater injection in unincorporated areas of the county, but the court found it conflicting with existing state laws. While oil companies welcomed the decision, supporters of Measure Z expressed disappointment and emphasized the need for state law prioritizing public health and climate concerns over industry interests. The ruling avoided addressing the issue of restricting well locations. “By providing that certain oil production methods may never be used by anyone, anywhere, in the county, Measure Z nullifies — and therefore contradicts — (the state law's) mandate that the state ‘shall' supervise oil operation in a way that permits well operators to ‘utilize all methods and practices' the (state) supervisor has approved,” the ruling reads. San Diego Revamps Mission Bay Recreation and Restoration Plan The City of San Diego amended plans to turn parts of Mission Bay into marshland , including a 10 percent increased of land -- from 60 acres to 66 of the 505-acre redevelopment -- for golfing, tennis, sports and recreation. The new plan includes other additional offsite replacement recreation sites and a promise to minimize disruption to activities if fields are relocated. Many recreational institutions in the area disputed with environmental groups pushing for more wetlands and camping companies advocating for campgrounds. The plans initially began with the closure of a mobile home at Mission Bay, and have faced large community pushback. City officials stated they cannot promise any individual activity will be included in the plans. The city council will vote on a revised concept plan in the fall. CP&DR Coverage: CEQA & Solar As California enters a new world of renewable energy, local governments are struggling to make sure their plans and zoning ordinances are keeping up with changes in technology. A good example is the battle in North Livermore over the Aramis Solar project, a 347-acre solar farm in unincorporated Alameda County that would include 267,000 solar panels as well as on-site battery storage. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors approved the project back in 2020. But neighbors and local environmentalists, including the local chapter of the Audubon Society, have consistently opposed the project, calling it an industrial “power plant” and arguing that it would convert an agricultural area into an industrial area. Recently, an unpublished First District Court of Appeal ruling gave the county a complete victory on the Aramis project. Quick Hits & Updates A new report by SPUR studies San Jose's Al Fresco Initiative allowing local businesses to operate on sidewalks, street parking spaces and private parking lots, concluding that making the initiative permanent by making the program affordable, easy to implement and easy to scale up would enable the city to continue a program benefitting businesses and community members. The University of California Regents face a $4.5 million lawsuit from neighborhood groups linked to Berkeley's People's Park, alleging that they intentionally destroyed plants and property, hindering access and enjoyment of the park. The lawsuit, filed by three nonprofits, claims the destruction was a result of the university's order to clear the land for a housing development project, arguing the demolition damaged the park's features, including a wheelchair ramp to the "People's Stage," with the nonprofits seeking compensation for the lost vegetation and repairs, while emphasizing the importance of protecting the environment. (See related CP&DR coverage .) The Los Angeles City Council has approved the purchase of the Mayfair Hotel for $60 million to be used as part of the city's efforts to combat homelessness, despite concerns about safety, costs, and operational plans. The purchase, intended to provide interim housing and services, received mixed reactions, including concern over community engagement and the site's access to Skid Row residents, but was approved with a 12-2 vote. Oakland's lead negotiator for the A's Howard Terminal ballpark project left her position to join a real estate developer after the A's stopped payments in May while shifting their focus to exploring a new ballpark in Las Vegas. If the A's return to negotiations an assistant city administrator, will take over the role. The City and County of San Francisco has engaged San Francisco-based design firm Gensler on a "feasibility study" for a downtown soccer stadium that would replace the city's faltering Westfield mall. The city does not control the site, but Mayor London Breed hopes to "get a developer and others excited about making investments into the stadium as a way to diversify what happens in the downtown area." Several flagship stores have vacated the mall amid poor sales and lack of activity downtown. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Fairfield's Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) approved the annexation of three county "islands" within city limits, while also approving a 5% cost-of-living increase for its employees and adding a project specialist position. The annexations involve several properties, an apartment complex and a local church as part of the ongoing effort to incorporate unincorporated properties within the Solano city. The Los Angeles City Council voted 8-6 to halt a contentious hotel project in Benedict Canyon due to concerns about environmental impact and public safety, citing potential ethics violations, environmental threats and community opposition. The development group behind the Mall of America abandoned plans to buy a 47-acre site in Canoga Park in Los Angeles after almost five years in escrow. The parcel requires extensive environmental cleanup due to groundwater and soil contamination. (See related CP&DR coverage .) Department of General Services and the Department of Housing and Community Development have selected McCormack Baron Salazar to lead the team to transform three state office buildings in Sacramento into affordable housing. This move is in line with Governor Newsom's efforts to address California's housing crisis by repurposing state properties for affordable housing, potentially creating 400 new homes in the heart of downtown Sacramento with various affordability levels. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development agreed to exempt Los Angeles-based housing providers from rules requiring applicants to provide identification and documentation of their homeless status and income before moving into their apartments. Now, applicants can move into apartments and acquire the necessary documents, particularly prescient for people moving from interim to permanent housing.

As most readers of CP&DR are aware, the California Environmental Quality Act plays a unique role in California planning and development. Depending on your point of view, it’s either the one thing standing in the way of destruction of your neighborhood or the one thing standing in the way of providing needed housing. As we recently reported , both sides of the CEQA debate often use CEQA litigation – either the supposed prevalence of it or the supposed rareness of it – to defend their point of view. But, whichever side of the issue you are on, CEQA continues to operate as the “big dog” of California planning, overshadowing almost everything else in sight (with, currently, the possible exception of the builder’s remedy). There is no question that CEQA invites creative challenges to development projects. The whole law is designed to encourage the creation of citizen groups that will sue and try to find something wrong with the environmental analysis – or the procedure used to conduct the environmental analysis. But lately, we’ve seen California’s appellate courts having to deal with more creativity than usual. Most of this creativity results in nothing more than a lengthy and expensive win for the local government approving the development, but it does highlight the state of play for CEQA right now. Three recent cases – two of which resulted in wins for the local government, one of which resulted in a loss – are unusually good examples of this creativity. The first, in case you didn’t notice it when we reported on it, was what is probably best described as “the Montecito biking trail case”. Here’s what happened: There’s a popular trail in pricey Montecito called Hot Springs Canyon, which has only about eight or 10 off-road parking spaces. During COVID, trail usage went through the roof and people started parking on adjacent streets and roads. Then, nearby residents – and this is an extremely expensive neighborhoods, with houses currently on the market for between $4 million and $25 million – put boulders, plants, and other obstructions out in the public street to prevent people from parking there – a violation of the Santa Barbara County’s encroachment law. But the hikers simply parked around the boulders and obstacles, blocking traffic. When the county tried to enforce the encroachment ordinance, the neighbors sued, saying that removal of the obstacles was really a prelude to an expansion of the parking area and therefore was part of a “project” under CEQA. The Court of Appeal disagreed, saying that the county was simply trying to reclaim parking that already existed. “Any claimed ‘failure’ to follow the California Environmental Quality Act is not a defense to the commission of a crime,” the court wrote. ( CP&DR ’s writeup of this case can be found here .) The reaction to our writeup of this case was virtually unprecedented. When Bay Area YIMBY Max Dubler called the case “bonkers,” on X (formerly Twitter), we got more web traffic than we’d had on any other story all year. Which I guess means all this CEQA creativity is good for us, even if the creative lawyers lose in appellate court. But that wasn’t the only creative case we’ve run across recently. Here’s another recent creative case: In San Diego, the city decided to try to underground utilities – something that most neighborhoods welcome. But because the underground utilities would have required above-ground transformer boxes, a resident of the affluent close-in neighborhood of Kensington sued. (The resident has sued the city several times over tree removal, which might have been part of the undergrounding project, and has also written a book about the neighborhood .) This case has now been to the Court of Appeal twice. The first time, the appellate court ruled in favor of the neighbor – saying that the city’s mitigated negative declaration was insufficient because the city had not analyzed consistency between the project and sent the case back down for the judge to resolve. Instead of redoing the environmental analysis, the city simply abandoned the project. You’d think that would be the end of it. But the neighbor continued the litigation, arguing that the city needed to do the additional environmental analysis anyway because the project might be re-started at some point in the future. At that point, the appellate court called a halt to the whole thing, saying that if the city re-starts the project in the future, additional CEQA analysis can be done at that time. ( CP&DR ’s writeup of that case can be found here .) But both those creative challenges failed. The challenge to the Marilyn succeeded. If you’ve been to downtown Palm Springs, you’ve probably seen the 26-foot-tall, 34,000-pound statue of Marilyn Monroe – recreating her famous scene from The Seven-Year Itch – which is located in the middle of Museum Way in front of the Palm Springs Art Museum. When the statue was placed on Museum Way in 2020, quite a few locals objected, calling it a sexist statue. The director of the Art Museum said : “You come out of the museum and the first thing you're going to see is a 26-foot-tall Marilyn Monroe with her entire backside and underwear exposed…We serve over 100,000 school-age children that come to our museum every single year. What message does that send to our young people, our visitors and community to present a statue that objectifies women, is sexually charged and disrespectful?” (Following a variety of controversies, that particular museum director left Palm Springs after two years.) However distasteful misogyny is, it’s not an environmental impact. So the Committee to Relocate Marilyn had to find something else to sue over, and they did. The city had declared the statue’s location on Museum Way as exempt from CEQA and also declared the statue’s positioning (and closure of the street) as “temporary” under the state Motor Vehicle Code. (When you stand in front of it, the statue sure looks permanent.) In this case, the appellate court said the CEQA problem was the exemption was tied to a temporary closure and subsequently the city permanently closed the street. The court revived the CEQA part of the case on those grounds. ( CP&DR ’s writeup of the Marilyn case can be found here .) What’s the common theme? In all of these cases, the plaintiffs were opposed to something for reasons other than the reasons they sued on. The Montecito residents didn’t want to comply with the law, so they sued based on CEQA grounds. The San Diego resident feared her trees would be removed, so she sued based on the city’s Climate Action Plan. The Palm Springs Marilyn opponents thought the statue sent the wrong message, but they sued over CEQA technicalities. You can complain all you want about these kinds of cases, but, as I say in my CEQA summing up in Guide to California Planning , CEQA is doing what it is designed to do: Engage communities (affluent ones, anyway) in a robust debate over the environmental effects of proposed projects – even if those supposed environmental effects are sometimes a stretch. If you don’t want CEQA to do that, you’ve got to change the law in a big way. And, for a variety of reasons, nobody in Sacramento is willing to take that on.

The depths of the covid pandemic inspired dire proclamations about the “death of cities,” and downtown areas were Exhibit A.