HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.0_Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update_PA2017-141CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
April 8, 2021
Agenda Item No. 3
SUBJECT: Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update
(PA2017-141)
SITE LOCATION: Citywide
APPLICANT: City of Newport Beach
PLANNER: Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Senior Planner
949-644-3253 or bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov
PROJECT SUMMARY
The Housing Element is a mandatory element of the City’s General Plan that requires
periodic review and updating. It is a comprehensive statement of housing goals and
policies that are closely correlated with other elements of the General Plan. The next
update to the Housing Element must be adopted by mid-October of 2021, and once
adopted, it will apply for the upcoming 8-year planning cycle (October 2021-October
2029). The draft update provides for the City’s 4,845-unit allocation of the 6th Cycle of the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), a State mandate, as well as relevant
supporting policies consistent with State Housing Element laws.
This item is a study session presentation and discussion of the Initial Draft of the General
Plan Housing Element Update, which was released to the community on March 10, 2021
for review and comment.
RECOMMENDATION
Review, discuss and provide input and direction to staff.
DISCUSSION
Background and Introduction
On January 22, 2019, the City Council acted to initiate a General Plan review and update
process. A City Council-appointed resident Steering Committee was formed to prepare a
request for proposals for consultant assistance. The City retained Kearns & West to
prepare and execute an open and transparent public outreach effort to be guided by the
Steering Committee. The “Listen and Learn” outreach process was launched in late 2019;
however, during the effort, the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation
process was being conducted by the Southern California Association of Governments
1
INTENTIONALLY BLANK PAGE2
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 2
(SCAG). Early methodology estimates showed between approximately 2,000 and 5,000
new housing units required for the City of Newport Beach’s 6th Cycle RHNA. The Listen
and Learn effort was then shifted to focus specifically on RHNA and updating the Housing
Element.
On January 14, 2020, City staff reviewed the progress of the update with the City Council
at the direction of the Steering Committee, given that much of the context surrounding the
potential comprehensive update of the General Plan had changed due to the housing
crisis. City Council directed staff to focus efforts on primarily updating the Housing
Element for compliance with State law, along with preparing a simultaneous update to the
Circulation Element to ensure adequate mobility for the community.
Alongside the January 2020 direction to focus on updating the Housing Element, the
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee (HEUAC) was formed and the prior
Steering Committee was dissolved. The HEUAC is purposed with ensuring there is
adequate public outreach regarding the update, reviewing the responses received to the
request for proposals for consultant assistance, providing guidance to City staff and its
consultant(s) during the process on the outreach efforts, as well as guidance on updating
goals and policies considering feedback received from the community.
In April 2020, the City Council authorized a professional services agreement with Kimley-
Horn and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Horn) for the preparation of the more focused updates.
With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the HEUAC did not meet until July 2020.
City staff has worked alongside the HEUAC and consultant team to engage the
community through virtual public workshops and online activities throughout the process
and is committed to working with HCD to submit a compliant, adopted Housing Element
by the October 2021 deadline. For a complete summary of the engagement efforts to
date, please review Appendix C (Summary of Outreach) of the initial draft Housing
Element update here:
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/PLN/Housing_Element_Update/March_10_2021_Draf
t/AppendixCCommunityEngagement.pdf
Organization of the Draft Housing Element
Section 1: Introduction
The Introduction provides a summary of the statutory authority of the Housing
Element, discussion of the RHNA, relationship to other Elements of the General
Plan, and data sources used in the analyses. It also provides a summary of the
content of the Housing Element.
3
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 3
Section 2: Community Profile
The Community Profile provides a description of the demographic and housing
characteristics of Newport Beach using recent sources. All statutory requirements
for analyzing the characteristics of residents and housing units are summarized in
this Chapter. Emphasis is provided showing housing trends, areas where
overpayment is occurring, areas where overconcentration of units is occurring, and
the status of existing housing stock. The analysis contained in this Section uses
the most currently available data from a variety of Federal, State and local sources.
Section 3: Housing Resources, Constraints and Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
This Section analyzes governmental and non-governmental constraints in the
production of housing in the City. It also describes market conditions and land use
controls governing the development of residential lands. Constraints related to
infrastructure and environmental issues are also described. A summary of housing
resources, including a summary of sites available, financial resources and
opportunities for energy conservation is also included.
Pursuant to Assembly Bill AB 686 (Chapter 958, Statues 2018), a needs
assessment for affirmatively furthering fair housing is provided. The new statute
requires analysis of disparities and dissimilarities in the provision of housing the is
accessible to all persons regardless, of racial or ethnic or economic status. The
section evaluates local and regional policies and evaluates resources to address
fair housing issues.
Section 4: Housing Plan
The Housing Plan represents the City’s official policies related to housing. Due to
the unique requirements in Housing Element law, these policies may be more
detailed and prescriptive than other policies in the General Plan. It also describes
overall housing goals, supported by polices and program actions. Each action
includes description of the action, a timeline for its implementation responsible
party for implementation and assumed funding source.
The Housing Plan has the following eight goals:
Housing Goal #1: Provision of adequate sites to accommodate projected housing unit
growth needs identified by the 2021-2029 RHNA.
Housing Goal #2: Quality residential development and the preservation, conservation,
and appropriate redevelopment of housing stock.
Housing Goal #3: A variety of housing types, designs, and opportunities for all social
and economic segments.
4
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 4
Housing Goal #4: Housing opportunities for as many renter- and owner-occupied
households as possible in response to the market demand and RHNA obligations for
housing in the City.
Housing Goal #5: Preservation of the City’s housing stock for extremely low-, very low-,
low-, and moderate-income households.
Housing Goal #6: Housing opportunities for special needs populations.
Housing Goal #7: Equal housing opportunities in the City for all people.
Housing Goal #8: Effective and responsive housing programs and policies.
Policies and policy actions follow and are summarized in the next subsection (see
“Policy Actions Summary”).
Appendix A – Review of Past Performance
The Review of Past Performance evaluates 5th Cycle Housing Element programs
by describing accomplishments and summarizing its status for the 6th Cycle. Many
of the existing 5th Cycle programs are continued in the 6th Cycle to provide
continuity and consistency with the General Plan and to preserve active and
currently funded programs or policies.
Appendix B – Adequate Sites Analysis
This Appendix provides a detailed summary of focus areas and a complete list of sites to accommodate the City’s 2021-2029 RHNA allocation of 4,845 units. The
analysis includes mapping and identification of sites that will constitute the
inventory of sites available for residential uses during the upcoming 2021-2029
planning period.
Appendix C – Community Engagement Summary
This Appendix provides a summary of all community engagement activities,
including meetings, workshops, HEUAC Meetings and other print and digital
engagement with the community and stakeholders.
Policy Actions Summary
While there are many carryover policies from the current 5th Cycle Housing Element, there
are also newly required updates and changes in policy for compliance with State law and
new legal requirements. Most of the updates relate to demonstrating adequate sites to
accommodate the 6th Cycle RHNA allocation and to meet the State’s housing goals
expressed through Housing Element and related laws. Several of the key policy actions
are summarized below and all of the actions can be found in the draft update that can be
accessed here:
5
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 5
https://www.newportbeachca.gov/PLN/Housing_Element_Update/March_10_2021_Draf
t/Section4_HousingPlan.pdf.
Policy Actions 1A – 1G (Pages 4-4 to 4-6)
The initial draft provides several key focus areas for housing production and
indicates those areas will be subject to rezoning for by-right housing development
using housing opportunity overlays or similar rezoning strategies. Those focus
areas include Airport Area Environs, West Newport Mesa, Dover/Westcliff,
Newport Center, Banning Ranch, Coyote Canyon, and remaining 5th Cycle
Housing Element Sites.
The unit targets included in each of these draft policy actions are subject to change
based upon community input but may not result in a material change to policy
actions. A revised scenario has been prepared for consideration that is described
in the next subsection (see “Revised Housing Production Scenario”).
Policy Actions 1H – 1J (Page 4-7)
In addition, the initial draft provides policies to encourage the production of
accessory dwelling units (ADUs) or junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs). These
policies aim to support an aggressive approach for construction of at least 336
ADUs or JADUs and include incentives for development, a monitoring program,
and an amnesty program for existing unpermitted units to become legal.
Policy Action 1K (Page 4-8)
An inclusionary housing program is also proposed to require the production of
affordable housing for new residential development projects. This policy is seen as
imperative to meeting the higher affordability required in the 6th Cycle RHNA
allocation.
Policy Actions 3A – 3B (Page 4-10)
These new policies are required for compliance with State law. They discuss the
creation of objective design standards for projects with affordable housing, as well
as streamlining residential projects under Senate Bill SB 35 and limit the City’s
local review authority under certain conditions.
Policy Action 4A (Page 4-14)
This new policy is required under Assembly Bill AB 686, which requires the City
take steps to affirmatively further fair housing. Affirmatively furthering fair housing
intends to resist discrimination by overcoming patterns of segregation and foster
6
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 6
inclusive communities that are free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity
based on protected classes.
Policy Action 7A – 7D (Pages 4-24 to 4-25)
In response to recent changes in State law, the City must address supportive
housing and low-barrier navigation centers for people who are experiencing
homelessness. These policies include by-right zoning for centers meeting certain
criteria, maintaining an inventory of adequate sites for supportive housing facilities,
and providing regulatory incentives for housing for persons with developmental
disabilities.
Revised Housing Production Scenario
The initial draft of the Housing Element update was published online for the community’s
review on March 10, 2021. Since that time, the initial draft was discussed both at the
March 17, 2021, Housing Element Update Advisory Committee (HEUAC) meeting and at
a virtual public workshop held on March 22, 2021. During the discussions, comments
were made regarding the total number of units included and concentration of affordable
housing units within the Airport Area.
Based on these comments, staff and Kimley-Horn reviewed the assumptions used for
each focus area within Appendix B of the draft update and prepared a revised scenario.
This revised scenario is intended to reduce the overall numbers and to better distribute
the affordable units within the various focus areas identified. Attachment No. PC 2 is a
memorandum to the HEUAC with exhibits that show the previous scenario, which was
reflected in the published initial draft of the Housing Element update, as well as a revised
“current” scenario that redistributes units within the various focus areas. Of note, the total
affordability decreased by 40 percent in the Airport Area and by 15 percent in the West
Newport Mesa Area. Increases in affordability ranging from 5 to 25 percent occurred in
every other focus area. This revised table is provided for discussion purposes and staff
seeks further input on the assumptions prior to incorporating it, or a version of it, within
the final draft.
No Net Loss
There has been some discussion about the amount of surplus units indicated at the
bottom of Table B1 (Summary of RHNA Status and Sites Inventory) on page B-2 of the draft update and the revised “current” scenario table in Attachment No. PC 2. The State
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) guidelines recommend that
the City provide a 20- to 30-percent surplus of units (or a “buffer”) to avoid a net loss of
opportunity sites during the 2021-2029 planning period. The reason for the buffer is to
ensure that the City has adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA over time and
accounts for sites that may not be developed consistent with the planning assumptions
7
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 7
for those individual sites. If the City does not provide a buffer, the City would need to find
a replacement site and rezone it to accommodate the housing opportunities lost within
180 days. Should that site be a sizable difference, a vote of the electorate could be
required. Failure to accommodate that replacement site within 180 days could render the
Housing Element out of compliance thus exposing the City to enforcement activities and
potential litigation. Staff and the consultant recommend a buffer of 20 percent; however,
should a smaller buffer be directed, the City would need to closely monitor the sites over
time to ensure the remaining RHNA allocation is properly accommodated.
Next Steps and Summary
During the study session, staff and the consultants request Commission review and
comment on the initial draft the Housing Element. All public comments should also be
considered. All comments during the process will inform and guide further refinement of
the draft document. Staff has requested that all comments on the draft be submitted by
April 30, 2021. Comments can be submitted by emailing
GPUpdate@newportbeachca.gov.
The draft will next be reviewed by the City Council on April 27, 2021, as a study session
item. Following the study session, staff will request City Council authorization to submit a
revised draft, after considering public comments to date, to HCD for a mandatory 60-day
review period.
During the review period, they will coordinate with City staff to clarify the document and/or
discuss perceived shortcomings in the document that may necessitate further revisions.
HCD will also review comments from the public and stakeholders during their review. At
the end of the 60-day review period, HCD will provide a Letter of Substantial Compliance
or a review letter with findings that detail needed changes to comply with applicable law.
It is expected that revisions will be required.
In August 2021, the HEUAC will review HCD’s findings and will review a revised draft of
the update. In September 2021, the Planning Commission will review the revised draft.
Subsequently, the City Council will review and adopt a final document for submission to
HCD by October 15, 2021, in compliance with the statutory deadline. While there is some
built-in flexibility with the October 15, 2021, deadline, the City would face a severe penalty
if the Housing Element is not adopted by February 15, 2022. The penalty would be two,
four-year Housing Element update cycles. Staff has been directed to plan for compliance
with the preparation of the update for submission by the October 15th deadline.
Environmental Review
This is a discussion item. No action will be taken and, as a result, it is not subject to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City will prepare an environmental
impact report for both the Housing and Circulation Element updates that will be certified
prior to the adoption of either update.
8
Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Planning Commission, April 8, 2021
Page 8
Public Notice
The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of
the meeting) and it was posted at City Hall and on the City website.
Prepared by: Submitted by:
_____________________
Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP
Senior Planner
ATTACHMENTS
PC 1 Initial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (hyperlinked due to size
with a hard copy provided to Commissioners)
PC 2 Memorandum to HEUAC dated March 25, 2021, with a Revised Scenario for
Housing Production
01/12/18
9
INTENTIONALLY BLANK PAGE10
Attachment No. PC 1
Initial Draft of the Housing Element Update
(Please follow this link:
www.newportbeachca.gov/DraftHEUpdate)
11
INTENTIONALLY BLANK PAGE12
Attachment No. PC 2
Memorandum to HEUAC dated March 25,
2021, with a Revised Scenario for Housing
Production
13
INTENTIONALLY BLANK PAGE14
Community Development Department
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, California 92660
949 644-3200
newportbeachca.gov/communitydevelopment
Memorandum
To: Chair Tucker and Housing Element Update Advisory Committee Members
From: Benjamin M. Zdeba, AICP, Senior Planner
Date: March 25, 2021
Re: Revised Housing Element Update Table with Redistribution of Units
________________________________________________________________
The initial draft of the Housing Element update was published online for the
community’s review on Wednesday, March 10, 2021. Since that time, the initial
draft was publicly discussed both at the March 17, 2021, Housing Element Update
Advisory Committee (HEUAC) meeting and at the March 22, 2021, virtual public
workshop. During the discussion, comments were made regarding the
concentration of affordable housing units within the Airport Area.
The enclosed exhibit shows the previous scenario, which was reflected in the
published initial draft of the Housing Element update. The exhibit also includes a
revised “current” scenario that redistributes units within the various focus areas.
The changes between the two scenarios are summarized below reference:
• Redevelopment potential:
o Decreased by 5% in the Airport Area
o Increased by 10% in the West Newport Mesa Area
o Increased by 30% in the Dover-Westcliff Area
• Total affordability:
o Decreased by 40% in the Airport Area
o Decreased by 15% in the West Newport Mesa Area
o Increased by 20% in the Dover-Westcliff Area
o Increased by 25% in the Newport Center Area
o Increased by 15% in the Coyote Canyon Area
o Increased by 5% in Banning Ranch
• Total net units (low and very low):
o Decreased by 1,031 in the Airport Area
o Increased by 76 in the West Newport Mesa Area
15
Tmplt:-02/05/15
o Increased by 45 in the Dover-Westcliff Area
o Increased by 363 in the Newport Center Area
o Increased by 220 in the Coyote Canyon Area
o Increased by 69 in Banning Ranch
• Total Net Units (Moderate):
o Decreased by 182 in the Airport Area
o Increased by 44 in the West Newport Mesa Area
o Increased by 6 in the Dover-Westcliff Area
o Increased by 91 in the Newport Center Area
o Decreased by 88 in the Coyote Canyon Area
o Experienced no change in Banning Ranch
• Total Net Units (Above Moderate):
o Increased by 809 in the Airport Area
o Increased by 98 in the West Newport Mesa Area
o Increased by 73 in the Dover-Westcliff Area
o Decreased by 454 in the Newport Center Area
o Decreased by 132 in the Coyote Canyon Area
o Decreased by 69 in Banning Ranch
• Total Net Units:
o Decreased by 404 in the Airport Area
o Increased by 218 in the West Newport Mesa Area
o Increased by 124 in the Dover-Westcliff Area
o Experienced no changes in the Newport Center Area, Coyote
Canyon Area, and Banning Ranch
• Total percentages over need (i.e., surplus or deficit):
o Decreased by 11% in the “Low/Very Low” category
o Decreased by 12% “Moderate” category
o Increased by 23% in the “Above Moderate” category
o Overall “Grand Total” decreased by 1%
Staff also discovered a mathematical error in total units in the “Surplus Deficit” row
of Table B-1 in the published initial draft. The correct number is 5,145 units rather
than 4,292 units shown. The error has been corrected in the attached scenarios.
You may also notice small differences in the number of units in the previous
scenario in the attachment and the published initial draft Update. These small
differences are attributable changes in the total acreage of one or more focus
areas.
The attached revised scenario is presented for discussion purposes in response
to the comment on the number and distribution of the affordable units. Direction
and comment from the Committee is requested. Input from the Planning
Commission and City Council will also inform the final scenario that will be reflected
in the draft Update planned to be submitted to the State Department of Housing
and Community Development (HCD) in mid-May.
16
17
18
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 2:26 PM
To: Lee Lowrey
Cc: Weigand, Erik; Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Kleiman, Lauren
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Commissioner Lowrey,
We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My home
in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and what
day and time works for you.
Sincerely,
Debra Allen
President
Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 2:30 PM
To: Klaustermeier, Sarah
Cc: Weigand, Erik; Kleiman, Lauren; Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Klaustermeier ,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 2:32 PM
To: Peter Koetting
Cc: Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Weigand, Erik; Kleiman, Lauren
Subject: Fwd: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Koetting,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 2:37 PM
To: Rosene, Mark
Cc: Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Weigand, Erik; Kleiman, Lauren
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Rosene,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 2:40 PM
To: Ellmore, Curtis
Cc: Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Weigand, Erik; Kleiman, Lauren
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Ellmore,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 3:12 PM
To: Koetting, Peter
Cc: Weigand, Erik; Kleiman, Lauren; Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Koetting,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From: Debra Allen <debraeallen@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 3:15 PM
To: Lowrey, Lee
Cc: Jurjis, Seimone; Campbell, Jim; Kleiman, Lauren; Weigand, Erik
Subject: Draft Housing Element Planning Commission APRIL 8,2021
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
> Dear Commissioner Lowrey,
> We have been told the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee is due to send you the Draft
Housing Element with their recommendations for your meeting next week.
> I am President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association. My neighborhood is concerned with
preserving the Newport Center Sight Plane. It is a protected view plane granted in 1971 to Harbor View
Hills by the Irvine Company. Among other things, it limits heights of buildings in portions of Corporate
Plaza and Corporate Plaza West.
> It was codified into the Newport Center Sight Plane ordinance in 1971 and has remained a limit on
heights ever since.
> If you can spare 20 minutes next Monday or Tuesday, I would like to show it to you in person. My
home in Harbor View Hills, just across MacArthur from the City hall. Please let me know if this works and
what day and time works for you.
> Sincerely,
> Debra Allen
> President
> Harbor View Hills Community Assn.
>
> Sent from my iPad
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Laura Daboub
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:ddixon@neportbeachca.gov; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin; Blom, Noah; Brenner, Joy; O"Neill, William
Subject:RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Monday, April 5, 2021 4:48:34 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission:
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who along with residents of 100
homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60 years enjoyed the height limit protection of the City’s
Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). The ordinance limits the height of all buildings and landscaping to a
maximum height of 32 feet and never to invade the Sight Plane.
It is important to remember the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, The Irvine Company began
selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and City. The Company also owned most
of the vacant land in Newport Center. Agreeing they could not sell the same view twice, The Irvine
Company agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor View Hills across the land
that is now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the Library and City Hall sites. For
over 60 years, hundreds of residents of Harbor View Hills have purchased their homes and paid a very
substantial premium for this protected view.
We understand that the City has a difficult task to accommodate the demands of the state in the RHNA
numbers. However, we ask that your planning and recommendations to the City Council respect the long
established height limits reflected in the Sight Plane Ordinance.
Sincerely,
Jorge and Laura Daboub
Harbor View Hills
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Bud Volberding
To:Dept - City Council; Housing Element Update Advisory Committee
Subject:FW: Harbor View Hills Sight Plane- NB Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596)
Date:Monday, April 5, 2021 4:37:37 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Housing Update Advisory Committee, Mayor Avery and Members of the
City Council,
By now you should all be familiar with the issues surrounding our Harbor View
Hills sight plane over portions of Fashion Island.
As the previous President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association and
34 year resident of our 146 home development which dates back to over 60
years I ask that the committee and the Council not change the sight plane
ordinance.
The Ordinance was intended to protect the views from each home in Harbor
View Hills of the Ocean, Bay and City and has done so in concert with our own
Association bylaws which are rigorously enforced as to any view blockage
occurring within the Association. Unlike many associations, each home in
Harbor View Hills has a view as intended and this has made Harbor View Hills a
popular and very well maintained community with appropriate valuations over
the many years.
I can’t imagine this City Council willing to be the ones to make such a change.
Thank you all for your consideration.
Sincerely,
LeRoy (Bud) Volberding
1120 Goldenrod Ave.
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3a - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Dear Mayor Avery and Members of the City Council
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who
along with residents of 100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60
years enjoyed the height limit protection of the City’s Sight Plane Ordinance
(#1596). The ordinance limits the height of all buildings and landscaping to a
maximum height of 32 feet and never to invade the Sight Plane.
It is important to remember the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, TheIrvine Company began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the
Bay, Ocean and City. The Company also owned most of the vacant land in
Newport Center. Agreeing they could not sell the same view twice, The Irvine
Company agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the views from HarborView Hills across the land that is now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West,
CdM Plaza and the Library and City Hall sites. For over 60 years, hundreds of
residents of Harbor View Hills have purchased their homes and paid a very
substantial premium for this protected view.
We understand that the City has a difficult task to accommodate the demands
of the state in the RHNA numbers. However, we ask that your planning and
recommendations to the City Council respect the long established height limitsreflected in the Sight Plane Ordinance.
From:Jan Varner
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:Dept - City Council; Avery, Brad
Subject:Re: RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Monday, April 5, 2021 6:14:53 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Jan Varner
varnerjanmarie@gmail.com
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Kenneth Tye
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:RE;RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Monday, April 5, 2021 7:18:42 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission:
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who along
with residents of 100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60 years
enjoyed the height limit protection of the City’s Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). The
ordinance limits the height of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height of 32
feet and never to invade the Sight Plane.It is important to remember the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, The Irvine
Company began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and
City. The Company also owned most of the vacant land in Newport Center. Agreeing
they could not sell the same view twice, The Irvine Company agreed to the SightPlane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor View Hills across the land that is
now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the Library and City
Hall sites. For over 60 years, hundreds of residents of Harbor View Hills have
purchased their homes and paid a very substantial premium for this protected view.
We understand that the City has a difficult task to accommodate the demands of the
state in the RHNA numbers. However, we ask that your planning and
recommendations to the City Council respect the long established height limitsreflected in the Sight Plane Ordinance.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours
Kenneth Tye
1114 Sea Lane Corona Del Mar
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Karen & Bruce
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:HV Hills sight line
Date:Tuesday, April 6, 2021 9:36:35 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission:
>
> The Harbor View Hills Community Association, along with our friends in
> Harbor View Broadmoor, consist of over 500 Newport Beach residents who
> have for over 60 years enjoyed the height limit protection of the
> City’s Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). This group of residents are
> relying on the City to honors its commitment to us. The ordinance
> limits the height of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height
> of 32 feet and promises to never invade the Sight Plane.
>
> The historical basis for this ordinance was the understanding and
> agreement in 1960, when it began selling homes in Harbor View Hills
> with views of the Bay, Ocean and City, that it would not be ethical to
> sell the same view twice. Since TIC owned most of the vacant land in
> Newport Center, it agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the
> views from Harbor View Hills across the land that is now Corporate
> Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the Library and City Hall
> sites, so that the view it sold to our homeowners would not be
> obstructed in the future. For over 60 years, hundreds of residents of
> Harbor View Hills have purchased their homes and paid a very
> substantial premium for this protected view. The loss of this view
> would certainly have an extremely adverse impact on the value of our
> homes
>
> While we understand that the City has a difficult task to accommodate
> the demands of the state in the RHNA numbers, it is simply not right
> to ignore our long-standing rights. We ask that your planning and
> recommendations to the City Council respect the the residents of
> Newport Beach and honor the long established height limits reflected
> in the Sight Plane Ordinance.
>
> Bruce and Karen Clark
> Residents of Harbor View Hills
>
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Shirley Celtik
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Tuesday, April 6, 2021 12:21:49 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission:
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who along
with residents of 100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60 years
enjoyed the height limit protection of the City’s Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). The
ordinance limits the height of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height of 32
feet and never to invade the Sight Plane.It is important to remember the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, The Irvine
Company began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and
City. The Company also owned most of the vacant land in Newport Center. Agreeing
they could not sell the same view twice, The Irvine Company agreed to the SightPlane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor View Hills across the land that is
now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the Library and City
Hall sites. For over 60 years, hundreds of residents of Harbor View Hills have
purchased their homes and paid a very substantial premium for this protected view.
We understand that the City has a difficult task to accommodate the demands of the
state in the RHNA numbers. However, we ask that your planning and
recommendations to the City Council respect the long established height limitsreflected in the Sight Plane Ordinance.
Sincerely,
Shirley Celtik1026 White Sails Way
Corona del Mar, CA 92625
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Margaret Cunningham
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Please do not allow high rise towers that block the view plane
Date:Tuesday, April 6, 2021 1:23:11 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Newport Beach Planning Commission:
My home is in Harbor View Hills, and I urge you not to change the 60-year old City's Sight Plane Ordinance
(1596). The current height limits should not be changed.
Thank you,
Margaret Thielemeir
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3b - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Elizabeth Hallett
To:Housing Element Update Advisory Committee; Dept - City Council; Dixon, Diane; Duffield, Duffy; Muldoon, Kevin;Blom, Noah; Brenner, Joy; O"Neill, William; Avery, Brad
Subject:RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Tuesday, April 6, 2021 8:41:53 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Tucker, Members of the HE Update Advisory Committee,
Mayor Avery and Newport Beach City Council Members,
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes. Our
homeowners, along with residents of 100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have,
for more than 60 years, enjoyed the height limit protection of the City’s Sight Plane
Ordinance (#1596). The ordinance limits the height of all buildings and landscapingto a maximum height of 32 feet and it forbids invasion of the Sight Plane.
Please note the historical basis for this ordinance: In 1960, The Irvine Company
began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and City. The Irvine Company also owned most of the vacant land in Newport Center. The
Irvine Company recognized that the company could not sell the same view twice, so
it agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor View Hills
across the land that is now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza andthe Library and City Hall sites. For more than 60 years, hundreds of residents of
Harbor View Hills have purchased their homes and paid a very substantial premium
for this protected view.
We understand that the HE Update Advisory Committee and the City Council have
a difficult task to accommodate the demands of the state in the RHNA numbers.
However, we ask that you respect the long-established height limits reflected in the
Sight Plane Ordinance.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best regards,
Beth Hallett
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Sally Chesebro
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Wednesday, April 7, 2021 9:52:16 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission:
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who along with residents of
100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60 years enjoyed the height limit protection of
the City’s Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). Our home is one of the 146 homes. The ordinance limits
the height of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height of 32 feet and never to invade the
Sight Plane.
We feel it is important to know the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, The Irvine Company
began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and City. The Company also
owned most of the vacant land in Newport Center. Agreeing they could not sell the same view
twice, The Irvine Company agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor
View Hills across the land that is now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the
Library and City Hall sites. For over 60 years, hundreds of residents of Harbor View Hills have
purchased their homes and paid a very substantial premium for this protected view.
As longtime homeowners of Harbor View Hills it would mean a lot to us if we could continue to enjoy
this protected view that we have loved so much. We understand that the City has a difficult task to
accommodate the demands of the state in the RHNA numbers. However, we ask that your planning
and recommendations to the City Council respect the long established height limits reflected in the
Sight Plane ordinance.
Oren J. and Sally L. Chesebro
1032 White Sails Way
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Sally Chesebro
To:Planning Commissioners
Cc:Dixon, Diane; ddduffield; Muldoon, Kevin; Blom, Noah; Brenner, Joy; woneill
Subject:RHNA Development in Corporate Plaza, Newport Center
Date:Wednesday, April 7, 2021 10:07:31 AM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weiglan
and Members of the Commission:
Our Harbor View Hills Community Association is made up of 146 homes, who along with residents of
100 homes in Harbor View Broadmoor, have for over 60 years enjoyed the height limit protection of
the City’s Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596). Our home is one of the 146 homes. The ordinance limits
the height of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height of 32 feet and never to invade the
Sight Plane.
We feel it is important to know the historical basis for this ordinance. In 1960, The Irvine Company
began selling homes in Harbor View Hills with views of the Bay, Ocean and City. The Company also
owned most of the vacant land in Newport Center. Agreeing they could not sell the same view
twice, The Irvine Company agreed to the Sight Plane Ordinance to protect the views from Harbor
View Hills across the land that is now Corporate Plaza, Corporate Plaza West, CdM Plaza and the
Library and City Hall sites. For over 60 years, hundreds of residents of Harbor View Hills have
purchased their homes and paid a very substantial premium for this protected view.
As longtime homeowners of Harbor View Hills it would mean a lot to us if we could continue to enjoy
this protected view that we have loved so much. We understand that the City has a difficult task to
accommodate the demands of the state in the RHNA numbers. However, we ask that your planning
and recommendations to the City Council respect the long established height limits reflected in the
Sight Plane ordinance.
Oren J. and Sally L. Chesebro
1032 White Sails Way
Virus-free. www.avast.com
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
April 7, 2021
City of Newport Beach
Planning Commission
100 Civic Center Drive,
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Dear Commission Members:
The Public Law Center (“PLC”) is a 501(c)(3) legal services organization that provides
free civil legal services to low-income individuals and families across Orange County. Our
services are provided across a range of substantive areas of law, including consumer, family,
immigration, housing, and health law. Additionally, PLC provides legal assistance to community
organizations. Further, the mission of our Housing and Homelessness Prevention Unit includes
preserving and expanding affordable housing. Thus, we write on behalf of individuals in need of
affordable housing in Orange County to comment on the City of Newport Beach’s (“the City”)
Draft 6th Cycle Housing Element (the “Draft”).
Through the housing element process, local governments must assess their existing and
projected housing needs and constraints and create a detailed plan to meet those needs and
address any constraints. Some of the requirements include addressing the need for emergency
shelter, identifying adequate sites to meet the jurisdiction’s housing need, and implementing
programs and policies to achieve these goals. While we are still in the process of reviewing all of
the Draft, we wish to provide some preliminary comments for the Planning Commission and
City Staff to consider as they continue to revise the Draft. Additionally, we understand from the
Staff Report for the Planning Commission Agenda that the City has already made some changes
to the previously released Draft in an attempt to reduce concentrations of affordable housing in
the vicinity of the airport and distribute affordable housing throughout other areas of focus in the
City. However, we have not been able to locate a copy of any revised Draft as a revised Draft or
more details on these specific changes were not attached to the Staff Report, only data describing
the proposed revisions. Having not had a chance to review these revisions to the Draft, all of our
comments are based on the previously issued Draft without the proposed revisions referenced in
the Staff Report. We have, however, kept in mind that the City is attempting to address previous
comments about the distribution of affordable housing in the site selection.
Housing Need
Emergency Shelters
Under Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A), a housing element shall contain an
identification of a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use
without a conditional use or other discretionary permit. The identified zone or zones shall
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter.1 Each local
government must identify a zone or zones that can accommodate at least one year-round
emergency shelter.2
The City identifies that the Office Airport zoning district (“OA”) and the Private
Institutions Coastal zoning district (“PI”) permit emergency shelters. By allowing emergency
shelters to be placed on any of the 98 parcels in these districts, the City claims there are adequate
sites available “for the potential development of emergency shelters in the City.”3 However,
these claims do not specifically explain whether these zoning districts allow emergency shelters
without a conditional use or other discretionary permit, whether these zones will be able to
accommodate the City’s need for emergency shelter, or whether the zone could accommodate a
year-round emergency shelter. To better demonstrate that the City has met this requirement, it
should include more detail about OA and PI zoning and how these zones allow for the required
emergency shelters and what parcels within those zones are realistically available for
development of or conversion to a shelter.
Additionally, the local government must demonstrate that existing or proposed permit
processing, development, and management standards are objective and encourage and facilitate
the development of, or conversion to, emergency shelters.4 Here, the City does not provide the
requisite information about its existing permit processing, development, or management
standards for emergency shelters. The City should include this information to better demonstrate
its ability to encourage and facilitate emergency shelters.
Although State law allows local governments to include a program to amend its zoning
ordinance to meet these requirements, the City’s program is vague, making it difficult to assess
whether the City can comply with housing element law in the future.5 Specifically, “Policy
Action 6F: Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Supportive Housing” is intended to amend the
City’s Municipal Code to “permit supportive housing as a use permitted by right in all zones
where multiple family and mixed-use development is permitted,” “address permit requirements,
objective standards, analysis of annual and season needs, and parking and other applicable
standards and provisions,” and “ensure Emergency Shelters, Transitional and Supportive
Housing are permitted in appropriate zones, consistent with State law.”6
This proposed policy action simply states that the City will comply with State law within
12 months of the Housing Element adoption. It does not provide details about what the standards
will contain or how the standards will encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion
to, emergency shelters.
1 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A).
2 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A).
3 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 3-25 (March 2021).
4 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A).
5 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(4)(A).
6 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 4-23 (March 2021).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
Assessing Emergency Shelter Need
The need for emergency shelter shall be assessed based on (1) the most recent point-in-
time count conducted before the start of the planning period, (2) the need for emergency shelter
based on number of beds available on a year-round and seasonal basis, (3) the number of shelter
beds that go unused on an average monthly basis within a one-year period, and (4) the
percentage of those in emergency shelters that move to permanent housing solutions.7
Here, the City has used a point-in-time count to identify 64 unsheltered people
experiencing homelessness within the jurisdiction.8 However, the City fails to analyze the need
for emergency shelter, the number of shelter beds that are unused, or how many people in
emergency shelters move to permanent housing solutions. Such an analysis would help the City
better determine which of the 98 available parcels are needed to accommodate its need.
Site Inventory
A housing element must include an inventory of land suitable and available for
residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated
potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for all
income levels.9 A jurisdiction may identify sites by a variety of methods, such as redesignating
property to a more intense land use category, increasing the density allowed within one or more
categories, and identifying sites for accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”).10 The site inventory
must provide for a variety of types of housing, including multifamily rental housing, factory-
built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-
room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing.11
Lower Income Sites
If a jurisdiction designates sites that have been previously identified, sites smaller than
half an acre, or sites larger than ten acres to accommodate its lower income housing needs, the
sites must satisfy extra criteria.12
Previously Identified Sites
If a jurisdiction identifies nonvacant sites to satisfy its lower income housing need, it
must note whether the site has been identified in a prior housing element or has been included in
two or more consecutive planning periods that was not approved to develop a portion of the
locality’s housing need. The City has marked the following lower income sites as identified in its
5th Cycle Housing Element: Site 132, 133, and 134.13 However, from our review of the Draft
and the 5th Cycle Housing Element, the City failed to acknowledge that the following sites were
also previously identified:
7 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(7).
8 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 2-28 (March 2021).
9 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(a)(3).
10 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.1(a).
11 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c).
12 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c).
13 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-25 (March 2021).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
● Site 66: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2b;
● Site 69: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2c;
● Site 71: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 1h;
● Site 72: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 1f;
● Site 75: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2i;
● Site 76: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2f;
● Site 79: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 1e;
● Site 81: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2h;
● Site 84: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2j;
● Site 88: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2e;
● Site 89: formerly Area 9 John Wayne Airport Area Site 2a;
● Site 137: formerly Area 2 Dover Drive/Westcliff Drive Site 2;
● Site 138: formerly Area 2 Dover Drive/Westcliff Drive Site 3;
● Site 139: formerly Area 2 Dover Drive/Westcliff Drive Site 1; and
● Site 214: formerly Area 8 Newport Center Site 8.14
Further, a nonvacant site identified in a prior housing element cannot be deemed adequate
to accommodate a portion of the housing need for lower income households unless the site is
zoned at an appropriate density and the site is subject to a program in the housing element
requiring rezoning within three years of the beginning of the planning period to allow residential
use by right for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to
lower income units.15 Although these sites are subject to “Policy Action 1G: 5th Cycle Housing
Element Sites”, which requires rezoning within three years of the beginning of the planning
period to allow residential use by right for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of
the units are affordable to lower income units, the units are not appropriately zoned.16
The appropriate residential density is based on whether the jurisdiction is an
unincorporated area within a metropolitan county, an incorporated city within a nonmetropolitan
county, a nonmetropolitan county with a micropolitan area, a suburban jurisdiction, or a
jurisdiction within a metropolitan county.17 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Orange
County is a metropolitan county within the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim Metropolitan
Statistical Area.18 As a jurisdiction within a metropolitan county, the appropriate residential
density is at least 30 units per acre.19 As seen below, none of the City’s previously identified
nonvacant sites for lower income households are currently zoned at the appropriate density:
● Site 66: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
14 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-20-B-31 (March 2021).
15 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c).
16 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 4-6 (March 2021).
17 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B).
18 U.S. Census Bureau,
https://www2.census.gov/geo/maps/metroarea/us_wall/Mar2020/CBSA_WallMap_Mar2020.pdf (last visited Mar.
16, 2021); Employment Development Department of State of California,
https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/definitions/metropolitan-statistical-areas.html (last visited Mar. 16, 2021).
19 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
● Site 69: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 71: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 72: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 75: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 76: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 79: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 81: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 84: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 88: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 89: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 50;
● Site 132: existing density - 21, rezoned density - 30;
● Site 133: existing density - 18, rezoned density - 30;
● Site 134: existing density - 15, rezoned density - 30;
● Site 137: existing density - 26, rezoned density - 30;
● Site 138: existing density - 26, rezoned density - 30;
● Site 139: existing density - 26, rezoned density - 30; and
● Site 214: existing density - 0, rezoned density - 45.20
Without meeting the appropriate density, these sites cannot be deemed adequate to accommodate
a portion of the housing need for lower income households. We assume that the “rezoned
density” is the proposed density at which the sites will be rezoned through the “Policy Action
1G,” this program should be clearer and include more specifics about how and what sites will be
rezoned to meet state requirements.
Site Size
If a site is smaller than half an acre or larger than ten acres, it cannot be deemed adequate
to accommodate lower income housing unless the locality can demonstrate that sites of an
equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent
number of lower income housing units as projected for the site.21 Alternatively, the locality may
provide other evidence to the California Department for Housing and Community Development
(“HCD”) that the site is adequate to accommodate lower income housing.22 The following
identified sites are either smaller than half an acre or larger than ten acres:
● Site 56: gross acreage - .26, net acreage - .26;
● Site 103: gross acreage - .29, net acreage - .29;
● Site 105: gross acreage - .29, net acreage - .29;
● Site 110: gross acreage - 130.87, net acreage - 0;
● Site 111: gross acreage - 74.64, net acreage - 0;
● Site 112: gross acreage - 65.05, net acreage - 0;
● Site 113: gross acreage - 51, net acreage - 0;
● Site 114: gross acreage - 44.78, net acreage - 0;
● Site 115: gross acreage - 41.2, net acreage - 0;
20 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-20-B-31 (March 2021).
21 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c)(2).
22 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(c)(2).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
● Site 116: gross acreage - 19.35, net acreage - 0;
● Site 117: gross acreage - 15.76, net acreage - 0;
● Site 118: gross acreage - 14.32, net acreage - 0;
● Site 119: gross acreage - 12.51, net acreage - 0;
● Site 120: gross acreage - 11.48, net acreage - 0;
● Site 121: gross acreage - 10.81, net acreage - 0;
● Site 122: gross acreage - 6.52, net acreage - 46;
● Site 126: gross acreage - .37, net acreage - .37;
● Site 128: gross acreage - .21, net acreage - .21;
● Site 131: gross acreage - 243.23, net acreage - 22;
● Site 132: gross acreage - .14, net acreage - .14;
● Site 133: gross acreage - .11, net acreage - .11;
● Site 134: gross acreage - .06, net acreage - .06;
● Site 216: gross acreage - .23, net acreage - .23; and
● Site 133: gross acreage - .23, net acreage - .23.23
While the Draft is not clear on what is the difference between gross acreage and net acreage of
identified sites or on which acreage is being used to calculate capacity, regardless the Draft does
not meet the requirements for identifying sites less than 0.5 acres or greater than 10 acres. The
City has not demonstrated that similarly sized sites were successfully developed during the 5th
Cycle for an equivalent number of lower income housing units and has not stated that it is able to
provide HCD with other evidence that the sites are adequate to accommodate lower income
housing. Without this information, these sites cannot be considered adequate for lower income
housing.
Nonvacant Sites
If a jurisdiction designates a site that is nonvacant, it must describe the existing use of the
property.24 Most of the sites included in the City’s site inventory are nonvacant. Further, if a
jurisdiction designates a site that is nonvacant and owned by the jurisdiction, the jurisdiction
must describe the existing use of the property, whether there are any plans to dispose of the
property during the planning period, and how the jurisdiction will comply with the Surplus
Lands Act.25 The City owns the following sites and included them in its site inventory:
● Site 102;
● Site 119;
● Site 124;
● Site 125;
● Site 127;
● Site 222;
● Site 223; and
● Site 224.26
23 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-20-B-25 (March 2021).
24 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(b)(3).
25 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(b)(3).
26 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-23-B-32 (March 2021).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
However, the City has not described the existing use for any of the nonvacant sites, has not
described any plans to dispose of the City owned properties, and has not described any plans to
comply with the Surplus Lands Act. Without this information, these sites should not be deemed
adequate to accommodate the City’s housing need.
Moreover, for nonvacant sites, the jurisdiction shall specify the additional development
potential for each site within the planning period and explain the methodology used to determine
the development potential.27 The methodology shall consider multiple factors, including: (1) the
extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential
development; (2) the jurisdiction’s past experience with converting existing uses to higher
density residential development; (3) the current market demand for the existing use; (4) an
analysis of any existing leases or other contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or
prevent redevelopment of the site for additional residential development; (5) development trends;
(6) market conditions; and (7) regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional
residential development on these sites.28
The City general states that it took into account development standards, net acreage and
assumed density, and previous development trends when calculating the unit capacity for each
site.29 However, the City does not include any of the other requisite factors in its methodology.
Without further consideration, it is difficult to assess whether the unit capacity reflects realistic
development potential. To better predict how much of its RHNA can be accommodated on its
identified sites, the City should incorporate more information into its analysis.
Accessory Dwelling Units
The number of ADUs identified is based on the number of ADUs developed in the prior
housing element planning period, whether or not the units are permitted by right; the need for
these units in the community; the resources or incentives available for their department; and any
other relevant factors determined by HCD.30
To predict its ADU production, the City calculated the average of production over the last
planning cycle and assumed the rate doubled each year during the 6th Cycle. As a result, the City
predicts that 334 ADUs will be constructed from 2021 to 2029. However, the City only took into
account prior production and did not consider any of the other factors. Without considering this
information, the City’s 334 ADU prediction is unreliable and should be recalculated.
Nonvacant Sites for 50% or More of Housing Need
If the jurisdiction is relying on nonvacant sites to accommodate 50 percent or more of its
housing need for lower income households, the methodology used to determine additional
27 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(g)(1).
28 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(g)(1).
29 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, B-17, B-36 (March 2021).
30 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.1(a).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
development potential shall demonstrate that the existing use identified does not constitute an
impediment to additional residential development during the planning period.31
The City has accommodated almost all of its lower income housing need on nonvacant
sites. However, the City has not addressed any of the existing uses on these sites and has not
explained its methodology to determine whether existing uses are impediments to development.
The City must include this information to continue utilizing a high percentage of nonvacant sites
to accommodate its lower housing need.
Programs
The housing element must include programs that allow the jurisdiction to achieve its
stated housing goals and objectives.32 Programs must set forth a schedule of actions for the
planning period, each with a timeline for implementation.33 The programs may recognize that
certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within
the planning period.34 The programs may also recognize that the local government is undertaking
or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the
housing element through: (1) the administration of land use and development controls; (2) the
provision of regulatory concessions and incentives; (3) the utilization of appropriate federal and
state financing and subsidy programs, when available; and (4) the utilization of moneys in a low-
and moderate-income housing fund of an agency if the locality has established a redevelopment
project area pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law.35 To make adequate provision for the
housing needs of all economic segments of the community, the program shall address housing
issues such as inadequate site inventories, meeting lower income housing needs, removing
constraints, maintaining affordable housing, promoting affirmatively furthering fair housing,
preserving assisted housing developments, encouraging accessory dwelling units, and facilitating
public participation.36
While the City identified numerous policies to meet its housing need, many of these
programs are only vaguely described. The City’s programs tend to state that the City will meet
the statutory requirements, but does not specifically explain how the City will do so. For
example, “Policy Action 1H: Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction” describes how the City
will “aggressively support and accommodate the construction of at least 336 ADUs by a variety
of methods.”37 While the City explains they will engage in a public awareness campaign, provide
a user-friendly website, and provide pre-approved plans, one of these methods is described as
“evaluating and assessing the appropriateness of additional incentives to encourage ADU
development.”38 Here, the City does not explain what other incentives it is considering or how it
31 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583.2(g)(2).
32 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Building Blocks, Program Overview and
Quantified Objectives, https://hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/program-requirements/program-
overview.shtml (last visited Apr. 4, 2021).
33 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(c).
34 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(c).
35 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(c).
36 Cal. Gov. Code Section 65583(c).
37 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 4-7 (March 2021).
38 City of Newport Beach, Draft 2021-2029 Housing Element, 4-7 (March 2021).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
will determine the appropriateness of additional incentives. Without such specificity, the City
avoids committing to pro-housing policies by merely making a plan to make a plan. By doing so,
it is not clear whether the City is prepared to adequately provide for the housing needs of all
economic segments of the community.
To create effective programs, HCD recommends jurisdictions include the following:
● Definite time frames for implementation;
● Identification of agencies and officials responsible for implementation;
● Description of the local government’s specific role in program implementation;
● Description of the specific action steps to implement the program;
● Proposed measurable outcomes;
● Demonstration of a firm commitment to implement the program; and
● Identification of specific funding sources, where appropriate.39
By following HCD Guidance and committing to more detailed plans, the City will be able to
enter the planning period with a list of specific policies and actions in mind to provide more
mindful housing opportunities with more realistic chances for development.
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
As mentioned above, we are still in review of the Draft and intend to provide comments that are
more detailed at a later date. As the changes to the distribution of affordable housing referenced
in the Staff Report directly impact the City’s obligation to affirmatively further fair housing, we
look forward to discuss this aspect of the Draft when we have had an opportunity to review those
proposed revisions. However, we do want to take the moment to mention that by limiting the
Draft’s analysis of fair housing issues to City-specific data and not analyzing these issues on a
regional level, the City fails to truly recognize and address fair housing issues. While the City did
not identify any areas within its borders with concentrations of racial or ethnic minorities, it
failed to recognize that the City as a whole has failed to integrate other populations, which is
evident from a regional perspective. The City must revise its fair housing analysis to more
carefully analyze the issue on a regional level and the role that it has historically played in
promoting segregation throughout Orange County.
39 California Department of Housing and Community Development, Building Blocks, Program Overview and
Quantified Objectives, https://hcd.ca.gov/community-development/building-blocks/program-requirements/program-
overview.shtml (last visited Apr. 4, 2021) (emphasis added).
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
601 Civic Center Drive West ∙ Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 ∙ (714) 541-1010 ∙ Fax (714) 541-5157
Conclusion
We are optimistic about the City’s intentions to revise the Draft and the receptiveness to
feedback thus far. We look forward to continuing to work with the City to ensure that the final
6th Cycle Housing Element complies with state law, meets the needs of all community members,
and creates realistic opportunities for the development of affordable housing.
Sincerely,
THE PUBLIC LAW CENTER, BY:
/s/
Richard Walker, Housing and Homelessness Prevention Unit, Senior Staff Attorney
Alexis Mondares, Housing and Homelessness Prevention Unit, Legal Fellow
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3c - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Initial Draft of the Housing Element Update
Planning Commission Study Session
April 8, 2021
Community Engagement:
Committees
General Plan Update Steering Committee
() –12 Meetings
Housing Element Update Advisory Committee
() –13 Meetings
•February 20, 2019
•March 6, 2019
•March 20, 2019
•April 3, 2019
•May 1, 2019
•May 15, 2019
•May 29, 2019
•September 12, 2019
•September 25, 2019
•October 16, 2019
•November 6, 2019
•December 4, 2019
•July 1, 2020
•July 15, 2020
•September 2, 2020
•October 7, 2020
•October 21, 2020
•November 4, 2020
•December 2, 2020
•January 20, 2021
•February 3, 2021
•February 17, 2021
•March 3, 2021
•March 17, 2021
•March 31, 2021
Community Engagement:
Workshops
Listen & Learn –7 Workshops Housing Element Update –5 Workshops
•November 12, 2019
•November 14, 2019
•November 20, 2019
•November 21, 2019
•December 3, 2019
•December 11, 2019
•December 12, 2019
68 Participants
21 Participants
16 Participants
54 Participants
17 Participants
8 Participants
26 Participants
•October 20, 2020
•November 16, 2020
•November 17, 2020
•February 24, 2021
•March 22, 2021
74 Participants
53 Participants
47 Participants
61 Participants
37 Participants
Community Engagement:
Advertising
•Flyers
•Utility Bill Inserts
•eNotifications
•Social Media
•Committee Members
•Council Announcements
•City Website
•Newport, Together
•Printed Newspaper
•Online Newspaper
Community Engagement:
Upcoming Schedule
•April 27, 2021, City Council review of draft HE and authorization
of submission to HCD
•May 14, 2021, Submit Progress Draft to HCD
•August 4, 2021,HEUAC review HCD comments and potential
HE changes
•August 18, 2021, HEUAC review revised HE draft
•September 9, 2021, Planning Commission review revised HE
•September 23, 2021, Planning Commission review revised HE
•October 12, 2021, City Council (certify EIR and adopt HE)
•October 15, 2021, submit adopted Housing Element
5
•DRAFT Document is an initial draft document for review by the
Planning Commission and City Council
•Review and Comments received by Housing Element Update
Advisory Committee (HEUAC) and Public
•Additional review/amendments to DRAFT anticipated:
•Policy and program considerations
•Sites analysis and identification
•Statutory compliance/verification
•Consideration of public/stakeholder comments
•DRAFT available for public comment through April 30, 2021
Considerations for DRAFT
Housing Element
6
Housing Element Content
and Organization:
•Section 1: Introduction
•Section 2: Community Profile
•Section 3: Housing Constraints and
Resources
•Section 4: Housing Plan
•Appendix A: Review of Past
Performance
•Appendix B: Adequate Sites Analysis
•Appendix C: Summary of
Community Engagement
Housing Element Content
•Detailed analysis of adequate
sites to accommodate RHNA
•Evaluation of capacity by APN
•Mapping of Sites
•Statistical Summary
•Discussion of feasibility and
likelihood of redevelopment
Adequate Sites Analysis
•Estimate of housing growth need for 2021-2029
•Housing growth need by income category
•City must show capacity to accommodate future growth
Regional Housing Needs
Assessment (RHNA)
Income Category % of Area Median
Income (AMI)
RHNA Allocation
(Housing Units)
Very Low Income 0 -50% AMI 1,456 units
Low Income 51 –80% AMI 930 units
Moderate Income 81 –120% AMI 1,050 units
Above Moderate Income >120% AMI 1,409 units
Total:4,845 units
Notes: (1) Based on percentage of Orange County Median Family Income (MFI), updated annually. The 2020 MFI
for a four-person household is $103,000.
•Combine baseline to calculate net remaining RHNA need
during the 2021 –2029 planning period
Net Remaining RHNA Need
Net Remaining 2021-2029 RHNA Need (in Units)
Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
RHNA Allocation 1,456 930 1,050 1,409 4,845
ADU Projections 84 144 100 6 334
Projects in the
Pipeline 43 78 0 2,183 2,815
5th Cycle 0 0 342 40 382
Remaining Need 1,299 738 608 --2,645
Note –projections are for discussion purposes only and are subject
to minor changes based on finalized analysis
10
•Community-identified “Focus Areas” for development
•HEUAC process to evaluate candidate sites
•Extensive analysis/discussion to determined “feasible”
and “potentially feasible” future housing sites
•HEUAC identified inventory of sites with highest
potential for change in the future
•Only portion of land identified in the inventory will be
needed to accommodate RHNA need
Site Selection Process
11
•Development Potential describes capacity to
accommodate growth
•Required by law to demonstrate ability to
accommodate growth
•Does not calculate “build out” of housing units
•Used as a basis to frame future policy and regulatory
amendments to accommodate growth:
•Rezoning/Amended Zoning
•Overlays
•Inclusionary policies
•Other land use strategies
What is Development Potential?
12
•Step 1: Identify all sites in a Focus area with potential
for future development
•Step 2: Establish estimate of % of all sites in each
Focus Area that would likely redevelop in the planning
period 2021-2029
•Step 3: Identify % distribution of affordability within
each Focus Area
•Step 4: Determine target density for each Focus Area
•Step 5: Calculate total development potential within
each Focus Area
Calculating Development Potential
13
•Community-identified “Focus Areas” for development
•HEUAC process to evaluate candidate sites
•Extensive analysis/discussion to determined “feasible”
and “potentially feasible” future housing sites
•City received feedback during outreach
workshops and HEUAC meetings suggesting
reevaluation of sites methodology
Inventory of Sites –1 st Draft
14
•Feedback from HEUAC, Public and Stakeholders:
•Establish more equitable distribution of units
citywide
•Reconsider distribution of affordability in each
focus area
•Revise assumptions for development potential
•HEUAC generally supportive of revised assumptions
Inventory of Sites –Revised Draft
15
•The community, HEUAC and City staff have identified the following Focus Areas:
Accommodating Remaining Need
Airport Area
Coyote
Canyon
Newport
Center
Banning Ranch
West
Newport
Mesa Dover-
Westcliff
•Focus area for development
•Planned higher-density residential units may
accommodate lower-income units
•Key strategy of 4th and 5th Cycle Housing Element
Update
•Proposed Average Density for Area: 50 du/ac
Airport Area
Airport Area –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
% Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Airport 162 ac 25%45%15%50 du/ac 910 303 809 2,022
•Identified as area for reinvestment and redevelopment opportunity
•Older industrial and smaller-scale development can transition to
support future residential development
•Partnership opportunities between public and private organizations
•Adjacent Hoag hospital and related medical uses creates
opportunity to house local workers of various income levels
•Assumes 30% residential redevelopment of city-owned parcels
•Proposed Average Density for Area: 45 du/ac
West Newport Mesa Area
West Newport Mesa –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
% Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
West
Newport
Mesa
48 ac 30%65%20%45 du/ac 423 130 98 651
•Identified as an area with opportunity to support
increased density that is compatible with
surrounding uses
•Proposed Average Density for Area: 30 du/ac
Dover/Westcliff Area
Dover/Westcliff –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
% Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Dover-
Westcliff 14 ac 40%30%5%30 du/ac 49 8 108 165
•Recently had construction of several new
residential developments
•City expects continuation of development
opportunities which create housing adjacent to
employment opportunities and support retail
•Proposed Density: 45 du/ac
Newport Center Area
Newport Center –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
% Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Newport
Center 162 ac 25%30%10%45 du/ac 547 182 1,094 1,823
Sight Plane View Ordinance
Sight Plane View Ordinance
•Closed landfill with limited opportunities
•Portion of area not subject to restrictions and is an
ideal opportunity for residential development
•Proposed Density: 40 du/ac
Coyote Canyon Area
Coyote Canyon –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
%
Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability
Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Coyote
Canyon 22 ac 100%35%0%40 du/ac 308 0 572 880
•Utilized in prior planning periods to accommodate
housing need
•Development previously approved by City but denied by
Coastal Commission
•Considered unlikely for redevelopment in Scenario 1
•Proposed Density: 30 du/ac
•Based on previous proposal
Banning Ranch Area
Banning Ranch –Potential for Development
Area Acreage
% Projected
to
Redevelop
Affordability Proposed
Density
Net Units by Income Category
Low/
Very Low Moderate Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Banning
Ranch 46 ac 100%20%15%30 du/ac 275 207 893 1,375
Category Low/Very
Low Moderate Above Mod Total
RHNA ALLOCATION 2,386 1,050 1,409 4,845
ADU's (Aggressive Approach)228 100 6 334
Pipeline Projects, 5th Cycle Sites 121 342 2,223 2,686
Rezone Strategies 2,512 830 3,575 6,917
Total Development Potential 2,861 1,272 5,804 9,937
Surplus/Deficit 475 222 4,395 5,092
Percentage Over Need 20%21%312%
Summary of Sites Inventory
29
•No Net Loss Provisions (SB 166) –City must always
provide enough sites for any unaccommodated need in the
planning period
•Percentage over RHNA sites need to accommodate sites
that may not develop at the estimated unit yields and/or
affordability levels
•HCD considers “buffer” a diligent means to reduce need
for additional rezoning during the planning period
•If No Net Loss issue occurs, City only has 180 days to
complete rezones for unaccommodated need
Sites Inventory “Buffer”
30
•Consider Planning Commission comments and public
comments through April 30, 2021
•City Council Study Session
•Additional edits/amendments to DRAFT anticipated:
•Policy and program considerations
•Sites analysis and identification
•Statutory compliance/verification
•Additional Public/Stakeholder comments
•Prepare Draft for HCD Submittal
Next Steps
31
Questions/Clarifications from Staff:
•Is the approach to accommodate future growth
appropriate?
•Are the policy approaches to accommodate future growth
appropriate?
Planning Commission
Comments/Discussion
32
Questions?
Thank you!
Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director
Jim Campbell, Deputy Community Development Director
Ben Zdeba, Senior Planner
Dave Barquist, Kimley-Horn & Associates
CDD@newportbeachca.gov
1
Danielle Silhanek
From:Danielle Silhanek
Sent:Tuesday, March 30, 2021 5:02 PM
To:'bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov'
Cc:Paul Tanguay; John Loper (jloper@palmtreecommunities.com); 'GPUpdate@newportbeachca.gov'
Subject:Housing Element - March 2021 Draft Comments
Attachments:3-30-21.(LDO)FOR PUBLIC RECORD-Housing Element Inclusion Letter-Via Lido Plaza, NB.pdf
Mr. Zdeba,
Please see the attached letter for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Danielle Silhanek
Fritz Duda Company
3425 Via Lido, Suite 250
Newport Beach, CA 92663
P: 949.723.7102
F: 949.723.1141
dsilhanek@fritzduda.com
www.fritzduda.com
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
3425 Via Lido ● Suite 250 ● Newport Beach, CA 92663 ● 949.723.7100 ● Fax 949.723.1141
Dallas, Texas | Newport Beach, California | Reno, Nevada
www.FritzDuda.com
March 30, 2021
James Campbell
Benjamin Zdeba
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Re: Housing Element – March 2021 Draft Comments
After reviewing the March 2021 Draft Housing Element, we request that the Housing Element include a mixed-use zone
for Via Lido Plaza to allow up to 30 units per acre plus commercial uses for the property bounded by Newport Blvd, Via
Lido, Via Oporto and the shared property line with the Lido House Hotel. Via Lido Plaza includes the following addresses:
3415 - 3475 Via Lido, Newport Beach.
The current zoning on the property is Commercial General (CG) with a 0.5 FAR for commercial uses. The property contains
several retail and office buildings including West Marine and Via Lido Drugs. The property also includes the Lido Theater
which would remain in a mixed-use redevelopment.
The property is surrounded with mixed use or residential zoning including:
North – Lido Marina Village with MU-W2 zone which allows 26 du/acre and commercial uses
South – South of 32nd Street is the MU-CV 15th Street zoning which allows 26 du/acre and commercial uses
East - Along Via Oporto is MU-V zone which allows 26 du/ac and commercial uses and PC-59 which allows attached
3-story residential project of for-sale units.
In addition, the March 2021 Draft Housing Element is proposing to increase the zoning from 15 du/acre to 30 du/acre for
property on the south side of 32nd street (Site #134, Parcel 047-041-25 on page B-10 of Appendix B - March 2021 Draft
Housing Element). The Draft Housing Element also includes several parcels in Lido Marina Village (Parcels 2 & 14 on
Page B-10 of Appendix B) as potential development sites so Via Lido Plaza is surrounded on the north and south by sites
identified for housing in the current March draft.
Besides being surrounded by mixed use or residential zoned property, the property is an ideal candidate for being
redeveloped into a mixed-use development with a significant residential component. The property currently consists of
functionally obsolete multi-level retail spaces and has very large surface parking fields. We have developed plans to
redevelop the project as a mixed-use project with retail/office uses fronting Via Lido and Newport Blvd, residential uses
fronting Via Oporto and residential on the upper floors. The centerpiece of the redevelopment would be the rejuvenated
Lido Theater.
Accordingly, we request that Via Lido Plaza be included in the Draft Housing Element with a mixed-use zoning that would
provide for 30 du/acre plus a mixture of retail and office uses.
Sincerely,
Paul Tanguay
Vice President
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:golfcarrs@aol.com
To:Planning Commissioners
Subject:Harbor View Hills Sight Plan
Date:Wednesday, April 7, 2021 5:45:49 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Chair Weigland and Members of the Commission: I have lived in the community of Harbor View
Hills for 43 years. We have had a City Sight Plane Ordinance (#1596) in effect since 1960 which limits
the heights of all buildings and landscaping to a maximum height of 32 feet and NEVER to invade the
Sight Plane of our community. I expect you to continue to abide by this ordinance which is in place and
do not change any zoning. No new zoning to Newport Center or Corporate Plaza!!!
Thanks you,
Joan Carr
1038 Sea Lane
Corona del Mar, CA
949-640-8585
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
From:Lee, Amanda
To:Zdeba, Benjamin
Cc:Rodriguez, Clarivel
Subject:FW: INITIAL DRAFT OF THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141)
Date:Thursday, April 8, 2021 3:48:28 PM
Attachments:Newport Beach PA2017-141.pdf
From: Ben Libbey <ben@yesinmybackyard.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2021 3:30 PM
To: Planning Commissioners <PlanningCommissioners@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Campbell, Jim <JCampbell@newportbeachca.gov>; City Clerk's Office
<CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>; Sonja Trauss <sonja@yimbylaw.org>
Subject: INITIAL DRAFT OF THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141)
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Newport Beach Planning Commission
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
April 8, 2021
Re: INITIAL DRAFT OF THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT
UPDATE (PA2017-141)
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commission:
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)(3) charitable non-profit organization dedicated to make
housing more accessible and affordable by promoting and enforcing
compliance with state housing law in California.
YIMBY Law enforces state laws by advising localities of their obligations under
state law, and filing lawsuits against those localities when they fail to comply.
Examples of some of our recent cases include litigation against the city of Simi
Valley for denying a residential care facility for seniors in violation of the HAA,
and litigation against the state Department of Housing and CommunityDevelopment for assigning a Regional Housing Need Assessment for the San
Francisco Bay Area that is too low, in violation of state law.
As part of the RHNA process, every local government in California is required to
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
make plans to accommodate their fair share of the regional need for affordable
housing in the “housing element” of their general plans. YIMBY Law organizes
and provides technical assistance to pro-housing activists all over California
who are interested in advocating for housing elements that realistically plan for
housing, and that distribute affordable and dense housing equitably acrosscities. YIMBY Law has partnered closely with People for Housing OC on
housing element advocacy in Orange County.
We are writing today regarding the new requirement that Housing Elements
Affirmatively Further Fair Housing. Government Code Section 8899.50 requiresthat all housing elements passed after Jan 1 2021 must affirmatively further fair
housing. What does it mean to "affirmatively further fair housing?" There are 4
aspects in the code:
1. Address significant disparities in housing needs and in access toopportunity,
2. Replac[e] segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced
living patterns,
3. Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty intoareas of opportunity, and
4. Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
Newport Beach's Housing Element as written does not address all of these
aspects. In particular, in the current draft, there is no mention of how NewportBeach plans to "replace segregated living patterns with truly integrated and
balanced living patterns." According to Figure 3-8 on page 70 of the draft
Housing Element, most of Newport Beach's census block groups are 75%-100%
white, and 4 block groups are 95-100% white.
Newport Beach's housing element has to explain how it is going to "replace" this
existing "segregated living pattern with a truly integrated and balanced living
pattern" as the law requires. There is no discussion at all of how Newport Beach
is going to address these racially concentrated areas. The law requires housingelements explain how these areas became segregated and articulate policies
that will desegregate them.
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase theaccessibility and affordability of housing in California. I am signing this letter both
in my capacity as an employee of YIMBY Law and as a resident of California
who is affected by the shortage of housing in our state.
Best regards,
Sonja Trauss
Executive Director
YIMBY Law
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Newport Beach Planning Commission
100 Civic Center DriveNewport Beach, CA 92660
April 8, 2021
Re: INITIAL DRAFT OF THE GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE (PA2017-141)
Dear Newport Beach Planning Commission:
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)(3) charitable non-profit organization dedicated to make housing
more accessible and affordable by promoting and enforcing compliance with state
housing law in California.
YIMBY Law enforces state laws by advising localities of their obligations under state law,
and filing lawsuits against those localities when they fail to comply. Examples of some of
our recent cases include litigation against the city of Simi Valley for denying a residential
care facility for seniors in violation of the HAA, and litigation against the state Department
of Housing and Community Development for assigning a Regional Housing Need
Assessment for the San Francisco Bay Area that is too low, in violation of state law.
As part of the RHNA process, every local government in California is required to make
plans to accommodate their fair share of the regional need for affordable housing in the
“housing element” of their general plans. YIMBY Law organizes and provides technical
assistance to pro-housing activists all over California who are interested in advocating for
housing elements that realistically plan for housing, and that distribute affordable and
dense housing equitably across cities. YIMBY Law has partnered closely with People for
Housing OC on housing element advocacy in Orange County.
We are writing today regarding the new requirement that Housing Elements Affirmatively
Further Fair Housing. Government Code Section 8899.50 requires that all housing elements
passed after Jan 1 2021 must affirmatively further fair housing. What does it mean to
"affirmatively further fair housing?" There are 4 aspects in the code:
1. Address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity,
2. Replac[e] segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living
patterns,
3. Transform racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of
opportunity, and
4. Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
1
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)
Newport Beach's Housing Element as written does not address all of these aspects. In
particular, in the current draft, there is no mention of how Newport Beach plans to "replace
segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns." According to
Figure 3-8 on page 70 of the draft Housing Element, most of Newport Beach's census block
groups are 75%-100% white, and 4 block groups are 95-100% white.
Newport Beach's housing element has to explain how it is going to "replace" this existing
"segregated living pattern with a truly integrated and balanced living pattern" as the law
requires. There is no discussion at all of how Newport Beach is going to address these
racially concentrated areas. The law requires housing element explain how these areas
became segregated and articulate policies that will desegregate them.
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility
and affordability of housing in California. I am signing this letter both in my capacity as an
employee of YIMBY Law and as a resident of California who is affected by the shortage of
housing in our state.
Best regards,
Sonja Trauss
Executive Director
YIMBY Law
sonja@yimbylaw.org
Sue the Suburbs.
yimbylaw.org 2
Planning Commission - April 8, 2021 Item No. 3e - Additional Materials Received Intitial Draft of the General Plan Housing Element Update (PA2017-141)