The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC AG PKT 2012-04-09 #K F SEA'ey. e'7,1 DATE: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT �.qL/PORN---P-f DATE: April 9, 2012 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council THRU: Jill R. Ingram, City Manager FROM: Greg A. Hastings, Interim Director of Development Services SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DRAFT 2008-2014 HOUSING ELEMENT SUMMARY OF REQUEST: After conducting a public hearing, that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6245 adopting the 2008-2014 Housing Element and directing staff to submit the Housing Element to the State Department of Housing and Community Development. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS: Each local government in California is required to adopt a comprehensive, long- term General Plan for the physical development of the city or county. The Housing Element is one of the seven mandated elements of the General Plan. Housing Element law, first enacted in 1969, mandates that local governments plan to meet the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community. The law recognizes that, in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. The State of California requires every jurisdiction to periodically update its Housing Element to provide the housing needs of the community. Housing Element law requires a quantification of each jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need as established in the Regional Housing Need Allocation ("RHNA") prepared by the Council of Governments (COG). The RHNA is a minimum projection of additional housing units needed to accommodate projected household growth at all income levels by the end of the housing element's statutory planning period. The current statutory planning period is 2008-2014. On August 9, 2011, the Ad Hoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee ("Committee") recommended a draft Housing Element to the City Council and Planning Commission. On October 10, 2011, the City Council and the Planning Commission considered the draft Housing Element at a joint Agenda Item K public meeting. Thereafter, the draft Housing Element was forwarded to the state Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). By letter dated December 16, 2011, HCD provided its comments to the City (Attachment 1). The Draft Housing Element was revised to respond to the HCD letter. On February 14, 2012, the Ad Hoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee considered the revised potential site analysis matrix (Attachment 2) showing 25 sites in the City that might accommodate RHNA requirements. Upon considering the 25 sites, the Committee voted to submit the following seven sites for Planning Commission consideration: POTENTIAL SITE: Number of Votes (out of 12) #14 — 1701 Adolfo Lopez (Accurate Storage) 7 #19 — Sunset Aquatic Park 7 #24 — Former ARCO service station 7 #15 — Boeing parking lots along Westminster 6 #5 — Marina Park expansion site 5 #11 — Shops at Rossmoor 4 #12 — State Lands Property (1st & PCH) 4 The Draft Housing Element was further revised in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee and presented to the Planning Commission. After conducting a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-5, recommending that the City Council adopt the 2008-2014 Housing Element, with the following revision. The Planning Commission recommended removing site #24 (ARCO) from the list and adding a new site - the DWP Specific Plan site - to the list (Site#18). The Planning Commission recommended that the Council consider the following sites: POTENTIAL SITE: #5 — Marina Park expansion site #11 — Shops at Rossmoor #12 — State Lands Property (1st & PCH) #14 — 1701 Adolfo Lopez (Accurate Storage) #15 — Boeing parking lots along Westminster #18 — DWP Specific Plan site (1st and Marina) #19 — Sunset Aquatic Park Purpose of the Housing Element State law recognizes the vital role local governments play in the supply and affordability of housing. The law was enacted because affordable housing is of statewide interest. Page 2 The law recognizes that in order for the private market to adequately address housing needs, local governments must adopt land use plans and regulatory systems that provide opportunities for, and do not unduly constrain, housing development. As a result, housing policy in California rests largely upon the effective implementation of local General Plans and, in particular, local Housing Elements. Housing Element law also requires the HCD to review local housing elements and to report its written findings to local governments with respect to the Housing Element's conformance with state law. As mandated by state law, the planning period for this Housing Element extends from 2008 to 2014. This Element identifies strategies and programs that focus on the following major goals: • Facilitate the development of a variety of housing types for all income levels to meet the existing and future needs of residents; • Assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of low- and moderate-income households; • Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing; • Maintain and enhance the existing quality of residential neighborhoods in Seal Beach; • Promote equal housing opportunities for all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, marital status, or familial status. The Housing Element consists of the following major components: • An analysis of the City's demographic and housing characteristics and trends; • An evaluation of land, financial, and administrative resources available to address the City's housing goals; • A review of potential constraints, both governmental and non-governmental, to meeting the City's housing needs; • A Housing Action Plan for the 2008-2014 planning period, including housing goals, policies, and programs; and • A review of the City's accomplishments and progress in implementing the 2000 Housing Element. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) As noted above, Housing Element law requires a quantification of each jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need as established in the RHNA prepared by the Council of Governments (COG). Each locality's RHNA is distributed among four income categories as follows: very low, low, moderate, and above moderate. While cities are given a goal or target through the RHNA process, cities are not penalized if the housing units prescribed by the process are not built. Cities, however, are required to demonstrate there are adequate sites available for Page 3 housing. The Seal Beach RHNA for 2008-2014 is 57 units as follows: 11 very low income, 10 low income, 12 moderate income, and 24 above moderate income. HCD has not yet acknowledged RHNA credit for two new mobile home units, although staff believes this credit will be allowed. Thus, the City must demonstrate there are adequate sites available to accommodate 19 lower- income units. Under state law, a minimum density of 20 units/acre is presumed to be necessary in order to facilitate the development of lower-income housing. Because the City did not adopt a Housing Element during the last housing cycle, HCD typically requires the City to address the RHNA "carryover" from that cycle. However, the draft Housing Element demonstrates that there is no carryover required from the previous period because sites identified in the previous Housing Element had sufficient capacity to accommodate the prior RHNA. As a result, the City's total lower-income shortfall to be accommodated through rezoning is 19 units. There are not currently adequate sites with appropriate zoning to accommodate the lower-income RHNA allocation for this planning period. In order to identify potential sites for multi-family housing, a thorough analysis of potential sites was conducted. The Commission forwarded seven sites for consideration. This list includes both vacant and underutilized parcels. With the appropriate zoning amendments, the sites listed in Table B-3 of the Draft Housing Element have sufficient capacity to accommodate high-density residential development commensurate with the City's remaining lower-income need of 19 units during this planning period. Program 1 a in the Housing Action Plan (Chapter V) includes a commitment to rezone parcels with sufficient capacity at a density of at least 20 units/acre to accommodate this remaining need. Special Needs Housing In 2007 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 2 amending State Housing Element Law. The legislation requires local jurisdictions to strengthen provisions for addressing the housing needs of the homeless, including the identification of a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a Conditional Use Permit. The draft Housing Element identifies the Boeing Specific Plan as an appropriate site for homeless shelters. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City completed an initial study to analyze whether the proposed Housing Element would result in any significant impacts. The Initial Study concluded that the Housing Element would not result in any significant impacts on the environment. Thereafter, the Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a • Negative Declaration were completed and circulated for public review for the period of March 7, 2012 - April 6, 2012. A copy of the Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration is Attachment 6 to this report. Page 4 LEGAL ANALYSIS: The City Attorney has reviewed and approved as to form. FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no Financial Impact. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt Resolution No. 6245 adopting the 2008-2014 Housing Element and directing staff to submit the Housing Element to the state department of Housing and Community Development. SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:czu,R, lb , .....21:::,, ,..,11YIZ Greg A. Hastings l ill_Ft. Ingram, City d ager Interim Director of Development Services Attachments: 1. December 16, 2011 letter from HCD 2. Potential Site Analysis Matrix 3. Planning Commission Resolution 12-05, adopted March 14, 2012 4. Planning Commission Minutes-March 14, 2012 (draft) 5. Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration 6. Draft City Council Resolution No. 6245 (Exhibit A to City Council Resolution- Draft 2008/2014 Housing Element) (Exhibit B to City Council Resolution -Itemized List of Changes to Housing Element in Response to December 16, 2011 HCD Letter) Page 5 I ATTACHMENT 1 December 16, 2011 Letter from HCD STATF OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY FfMIJNf)0 BROWN JR sovemel DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �oet�+vNr,;e DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 1800 Third Street,Suite 430 P.O.Box 952053 Sacramento,CA 94252-2053 %F - (916)323-31771 FAX(916)327-2643 _.... — -> O^teoR+` www.hcd.ca.gov -- -�— _�- City of Seal Beach . December 16, 2011 DEC :19 201r. • Department of Mr, Mark Persico Dpvointl;o,1tz:!.:''rIC( Director of Development Services City of Seal Beach 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Dear Mr. Persico.: RE: Review of the City of Seal Beach's Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting Seal Beach's draft housing element received for review on October 17, 2011 with revisions received on December 1, 2011. The Department is required to review draft housing elements and report the findings to the locality pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(b). A telephone conversation on November.16,.2001 with you and Mr. John Douglas, the City's Consultant, facilitated the review, In addition, the Department considered comments pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(c). • • The draft element addresses many statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State housing element law (Article 10.6 of the Government Code). In particular, the element must include complete analyses of identified sites and governmental constraints. The enclosed Appendix describes these and other revisions needed to comply with State housing element law. The Department is committed to assist Seal Beach in addressing all statutory requirements of housing element law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Melinda Coy, of our staff, at (916) 445-5307. Sincerely, • • Glen A. Campora , . . , . . . Assistant Deputy Director - Enclosure . . . . • APPENDIX CITY OF SEAL BEACH The following changes would bring Seal Beach's housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code. Housing element technical assistance information is available on the Department's website at www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd. Refer to the Division of Housing Policy Development and the section pertaining to State Housing Planning. Among other resources, the Housing Element section contains the Department's latest technical assistance tool Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks) available at www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing element2/index.php, the Government Code addressing State housing element law and other resources. A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints 1. Include an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having the potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites (Section 65583(a)(3)). The inventory of land suitable for residential development shall be used to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period (Section 65583.2). Seal Beach has a regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 57 housing units, of which 22 are for lower-income households. The City also has identified an unaccommodated need from the previous planning period pursuant to Chapter 614, Statutes of 2005 (AB 1233). To demonstrate the adequacy of the identified site and strategies, the element must include complete analyses: Progress in Meeting the RHNA: The element indicates (page A-10) that two replacement mobilehome units affordable to low-income households have replaced prior units in the current planning period and credits these units towards meeting the RHNA. Pursuant to conversations with staff, these units are in an existing mobilehome park in spaces which have been previously occupied. The element must demonstrate whether the units meet the eligibility requirements under adequate site alternative option, Government Code Section.65583.1(c). Further information can be found in the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing element2/SIA adegsites.php. • Addressing Unaccommodated Need from the Previous Planning Period (AB 1233): As indicated in the element (page B-1), Seal Beach failed to make adequate sites available to accommodate the regional housing need in the prior planning period and therefore must zone or rezone sites to accommodate any unaccommodated need pursuant to AB 1233. To determine the amount of unaccommodated need from the previous planning period, the element subtracts from the previous RHNA the capacity of sites which were zoned for multifamily use and found suitable for development within the previous planning period and rehabilitation of the Seal Beach Shore Mobile Homes (page B-2). However, to credit rehabilitation of the Seal Beach Shore Mobile Homes, the element must demonstrate that the units meet the eligibility requirements under adequate site alternative option, Government Code Section 65583.1(c). • • -2- For example, the element could evaluate whether the units qualify under the substantial rehabilitation section of Government Code Section 65583.1(c)(2)(A). Specifically, to credit rehabilitated units, the statute requires the units were found to • be unfit for human habitation pursuant to Section 17995.3 of the Health and Safety (H&S) Code and for rehabilitation to have resulted in a net increase in the number of housing units affordable to very low- and lower-income households. Please be aware, to be eligible to credit units under Government Code Section 65583.1(c), the element must demonstrate the City has met some portion of its share of the regional need for affordable housing, for low- and very low-income households during the current or immediately prior planning period. Further information can be found in the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing element2/GS reviewandrevise.php and http://www.hcd.ca.00v/hpd/housinq element2/SIA adeosites.pho. Please also note, AB 1233 requires the City to zone sufficient sites to accommodate the unaccommodated need from the previous planning period within the first year of the 2008-2014 planning period. As this timeframe has lapsed, the Department cannot find the element in compliance until the required zoning or rezoning is complete and the element reflects that zoning. Suitability of Non-Vacant Sites,: The draft element does not identify any sites with existing zoning allowing residential development to accommodate the City's RHNA. As a result, the element includes Program 2 to rezone sites. While Table B-3 identifies two sites for potential rezoning, only the Rossmoor Center site has the capacity to accommodate the required minimum 16 units pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(h). To demonstrate the suitability of the Rossmoor Center site, the element must describe the existing uses sufficiently to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment and evaluate the extent to which existing uses may impede additional residential development. The evaluation should consider development trends, market conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards to encourage additional residential development on this site. This analysis is critical in demonstrating the suitability of the Rossmoor site given this is the only site identified in the housing element to accommodate the RHNA for lower-income households. For further information, refer to the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.aov/hpd/housinq element2/SIA zoninq.php#nonvancant. Sites with Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types Emergency Shelters: Program 7 proposes to amend the zoning code to permit emergency shelters in the Boeing Specific Plan Zone (page V-5). However, pursuant to Chapter 633, Statutes of 2007 (SB 2), the element must also demonstrate the appropriateness of the identified zone and identify adequate capacity to accommodate at least one year-round emergency shelter. To demonstrate capacity . -3- within this zone, the element could include a brief description of the amount and availability (e.g., vacant, re-use potential, etc.) of the identified sites to accommodate an emergency shelter. To assist in addressing this statutory requirement, see the Department's SB 2 technical assistance memo at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hbd/sb2 memo050708.pdf. 2. Analyze potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures. The analysis shall also demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting its share of the regional housing need in accordance with Section 65584 and from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities, supportive housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters identified pursuant to paragraph (7) (Section 65583(a)(5)). Land-Use Controls: While the element lists zoning and development standards in Table 23, it must also include an analysis of the impacts of standards including the cumulative impact on the cost and supply of housing and ability to achieve maximum densities. For example, the element should specifically analyze the two-parking space requirement for studio and one-bedroom multifamily units. • Local Processing and Permit Procedures: The element states senior independent living /senior apartments are considered residential care facilities for the elderly (page IV-14). While general multifamily uses are a permitted use in the residential medium and high density zones, senior apartments are permitted only in the professional office, service commercial, and general commercial zones and require a conditional use permit(CUP). Non assisted living senior apartments should be treated as any other multifamily use. As it appears the only differentiating factor is the age restriction, the element should demonstrate how these provisions comply with State and federal Fair Housing Laws (e.g., Government Code Section 65008). Constraints on Persons with Disabilities: The element states licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons are only permitted by-right in the RHD zone (page IV-14). According to the H&S Code 1267.8, 1566.3 and 1568.01 local governments must treat residential care facilities for six or fewer residents as single- family uses. The City may not disallow such developments in residential zones where single-family uses are allowed nor require a CUP or variance not required of other family dwellings in the same zone. The City may need to include a program to amend its zoning ordinance to address this.requirement. Additional information and sample analyses are available in the Building Blocks Constraints-Housing for Persons with Disabilities section at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing element2/CON disabilities.pho. • -4- 3. Analyze the opportunities for energy conservation with respect to residential development(Section 65583(a)(8)). The element indicates the City enforces Title 24, describes conservation programs of local utilities, and indicates the City adopted a resolution to waive fees for solar • installations. However, the analysis should identify opportunities for the City to promote energy conservation in residential development. For example, the element could include incentives to promote higher density housing along transit corridors, encourage green building techniques and materials in new and resale homes, promote energy audits and participation in utility programs, and facilitate energy conserving retrofits upon resale of homes. Planning to maximize energy efficiency and the incorporation of energy conservation and green building features can contribute to reduced housing costs for homeowners and renters, in addition to promoting.sustainable community design and reduced dependence on vehicles. Such planning and development standards can also significantly contribute to reducing greenhouse gases. Additional information on potential programs or policies to address energy conservation objectives and a sample analysis is available in the Building Blocks at http:l/www.hcd.ca.4ov/hpd/housing element2/SIA conservation.php and the Department's Green Building and Sustainability Resources bibliography at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/green build.pdf. • • B. Housing Programs 1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, 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 the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when available. The.program shall include an identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions (Section 65583(c)). Programs should be revised for compliance with Government Code Section 65583 in order to ensure the beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period. To address the program requirements of Government Code Section 65583)(c)(1-6), and to facilitate implementation, programs should include: (1) a description of the City's specific role in implementation; (2) definitive implementation timelines; (3) objectives, quantified where appropriate; and (4) identification of responsible agencies and officials. The element includes the same programs unchanged from the previous planning period, yet the element acknowledges the programs were not successful. The element should describe how programs could be revised based upon the analysis of what has been learned from the results of the previous element pursuant to Government Code Section 65588(a)(1)). Programs to be revised include, but are not limited to the following: -5- Program lb (Land Use Compatibility): Describe how the Program will be implemented. Program le (Innovative Land Use and Construction Techniques): Provide specific actions the City will implement to encourage the use of innovative land-use techniques and constructions methods to minimize housing costs. For example, the City could provide flexibility in development standards or siting requirements to minimize costs associated with variance procedures. Program 2b (Affordable Housing Resources): Describe when and how the City will network with non-profit developers and explore new funding opportunities. The City could commit to annual contact with nonprofit housing sponsors to coordinate and implement a strategy for developing housing including assisting with site identification and commit to assist, support or pursue funding applications. Program 2c (Land Write Downs and Assistance with Off Site Improvements): Describe the specific actions the City will take to implement this Program. Program 3b (Mortgage Credit Certificates): The Program could provide timelines for the development and distribution of Program information and quantify the households expected to be assisted. Program 4a (Home improvement Program): Provide specific timeframes for the development and distribution of Program information. 2. Identify adequate sites which will be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards and with public services'and facilities needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, and emergency shelters and transitional housing. Where the inventory of sites, pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), does not identify adequate sites to accommodate the need for groups of all household income levels pursuant to Section 65584, the program shall provide for sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential use by right, including density and development standards that could . accommodate and facilitate the feasibility of housing for very low- and low-income • households (Section 65583(c)(1)). As noted in Finding A-9, the element identifies a shortfall of sites to accommodate its current RHNA for lower-income households, along with an unaccommodated need from the previous planning period. However, the element does not include a complete site analysis to establish the adequacy of sites and zoning. Based on the result from a complete sites inventory and analysis, the element may need to add or revise programs accordingly. At a minimum, the element should be revised as follows: -6- Program 1a (Provision of Adequate Sites for New Construction through the General Plan and Zoning'Ordinance): The proposed timeframe for rezoning is June 2013. Please be aware, rezones must be completed early enough in the planning period for development to occur. Second Units: According to Table B3, the City is estimating the development of three new second units prior to the end of the planning period. However, no second units have been built in the current or previous planning period (page B-8). If utilizing second units to accommodate the City's share of housing needs for lower-income households, the element must include an analysis supporting the realistic capacity of second units in the planning period. The analysis must be based on the number of units approved in the previous planning period, whether or not units are permitted by- right, the need for the units in the community, the resources or incentives available for their development and any other relevant factors pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.1(a). For example, the City could expand Program 1 c or add new programs to include resources or incentives encouraging the development of second units. 3. The housing element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate- income households (Section 65583(c)(2)). While the element includes some programs to assist in the development of low- and moderate-income households, pursuant to Chapter 891, Statutes of 2006 (AB 2634), existing programs should either be expanded or new programs added to specifically assist in the development of a variety of housing types to meet the housing needs of extremely low-income (ELI) households. To address this requirement, the element could revise programs to prioritize some funding for the development of housing affordable to ELI households, and/or offer financial incentives or regulatory concessions to encourage the development of housing types, such as multifamily, single-room occupancy units, and supportive housing, which address some of the needs of this income group. 4. The housing element shall contain programs which address, and where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing (Section 65583(c)(3)). As noted in Finding A-2, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints. -7- C. Public Participation Local governments shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element, and the element shall describe this effort(Section 65583(c)(7)). The element includes a general summary of the public participation process (page 1-2) and includes a list of organizations notified. However, the element should describe the success of outreach efforts and how the element incorporated public input. The City should continue efforts to achieve public participation including from low- and moderate-income households. For more information and a sample analyses, see the Building Blocks at http://www.hcd.ca.00v/hpd/housinq element2/GS publicparticipation.php. D. Consistenc with General Plan The City should also note recent statutory changes to Government Code Section 65302 (Chapter 369, Statutes 207 [AB 162]) which requires amendment of the safety and . conservation elements of the General Plan to include analysis and policies regarding flood hazard and management information upon the next revision of the housing element on, or after, January 1, 2009. For additional information, please refer to Department's website at • http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/hrc/plan/he/ab 162 stat07.pdf. • ATTACHMENT 2 Potential Site Analysis Matrix two 42 O o O CO 0 0 ti 0 O O 0) co O Lo CD N Co >, N O 0 0 N O O O CO CO O OMCr) O o N N 0")M N N M N Cr) Cr) CL CL a -0 v v -0 -0 v a 10 -0 a a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) .o 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o 0 o Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q v Co M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 O o 0 .� Cr) v Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z N 'Z Z Z Z CD a) C m a) >, >. >, >, >, >, >, >, >. a) >, >, >, N C c V) 0 0 a) L+ c C C c C c c c c c c c - - = 0 a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) a) L) o a 2 U C 7 7 3 7 0 O 3 O 7 u) D 15 I. 0 0 D N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •> 0 0 0 Z Z u) O a) -1' O O CD O N 00 to M 0 0 N O O O O O C) Lo to 0 ` O N O d M 0 r O Oro- O •N N ID r N 0) C C 0 0 0 N o C C C C W 0 0 0 0 .0 to Co Co Lo LO To a O U U U U U O 'V •C O Y •0 U C) �II�� a) c CC 0 o ° o 0 D o m 3 m m O a o E CL c Z 5� a U c� U U 0 0 a o c a a a 0 0 o aa)) O Q. C ■0 M 0 T. 2 a '0 O co o m 0 cn 0 0 0 0 cn m coo u) 0 m O '^ � 0 Q W app °) o m c a) o N min v J U o c c a = 0) Q = Q_ a) Q- 0 0 = I N N 0 cn cC rt a) O J J ce cL 0 0 co a J cn 2 cn cn O cC re a ce ,2 0 a a) I J c J < co Q Z a) _ L 1 Q W > r r+ .0 Zr ' C C a) a) O m W Z E a) E U a 0 m E; C N 0 QW aci W 00 a) m a) p cm - E � � Na) E m c a) t- J a) a) m 0 ^ _ O �L Q ....• 0 W 0 W a) N a z °) a) w o U c w c U) m U Q a) W ° Na � � 0) co a) O m i c� W ED- a a) O L m co a) 0 a= 'y o -c o Cl) N 1 E co o L- � m T-- N O O 5 r 0 a) as N o tn Q ° o 0 a) LO 3 0 Leo 0 ,° i c am - 05 e` r t U O N = r U) 2 0 a) 00 CD a� m a s a) Q- m 0 c rn U N N •C co m O �- _c d .O O N U) a) o a c a) v a) _c .S c o m Lo 0 s m co co o Q .A a) 0 a) . c CO caii (/' ..,...= a) v -Q m c) c � �? c,_o vN O U cn " Q o O 0 U co � m C c o ' m N U ` o — ` 3 > a) 0 a) 0 N -, m O .. O co C �cn -j CU 0 -C) E o c Q_ —° co v a U �, � zz .L—° a) -0 O LlxJ N m � c"cn o mu) a a) J co o LT: - o v) 0 o U 11 c U) �- Q m 05 0 u) N m il 7, v° Q- it 0 < 0 O a < as +x0+ 7 N 0 +La) 0 m co m L_ N J co Q 0, _� a) CO 0 co o " a) " to cN c ` c, r .) Q. a) c" r .E to E a v) I E E > Ea a) a) 'N 0 0 0 0 N Lo co co J •(i ° o co> N > C ', 'C O ,•_a. `O , I 0 J U) 2 U) N U) a U) N U CO U r m Z I 0 U) O < LL 0 a U To E 0 , N M d• In CO ti 00 0) O r N CO cf Lo CO N- CO 0) O r N M to N N N N N N CL ATTACHMENT 3 Planning Commission Resolution 12-5 adopted March 14, 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-5 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE GENERAL PLAN 2008-2014 HOUSING ELEMENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The State of California requires every jurisdiction to periodically update its Housing Element to assure the housing needs of the community are provided for. The proposed Housing Element would be for the planning period of 2008-2014. The 2008-2014 Housing Element is attached to the accompanying staff report as Attachment B and is hereby incorporated by reference. Section 2. With the assistance of independent consultant John Douglas, AICP, City staff oversaw the preparation of the City's Housing Element, with the ongoing input of the community, the Ad Hoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission and the City Council. Adoption of the 2008-2014 Housing Element will result in a Housing Element that better reflects the desires of the community while also maintaining consistency with current State legislation. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on March 14, 2012. Section 4. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City completed an initial study to analyze whether the proposed Housing Element would result in any significant impacts. The Initial Study concluded that the Housing Element would not result in any significant impacts on the environment. Thereafter, the Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration were completed and circulated for public review, which commenced on March 7, 2012 and will end at 5:00 pm on April 6, 2012. Section 5. On February. 14, 2012, the Ad Hoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee considered the revised Draft Housing Element and a matrix showing 26 sites in the City that might accommodate RHNA requirements. The 26 sites are attached hereto as Attachment C. Upon considering the 26 sites, the Committee voted to submit 7 sites for Planning Commission consideration. 1 Section 6. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council consider the sites listed on Exhibit A for inclusion into the Housing Element. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt General Plan Amendment 12-01, adopting the City's Housing Element dated January 15, 2010 (Attached Exhibit A), in order to further encourage the provision of housing in a manner which adequately serves the needs of all present and future community residents in compliance with State law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Seal Beach at a meeting thereof held on the 14th day of March, 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None __ PLIAAJ A901- ndra Massa-Lavitt, Ch irwoman Planning Commission c g tanning Commission Secretary 2 ATTACHMENT 4 Planning Commission Draft Minutes for March 14, 2012 City of Seal Beach - Planning Commission March 14, 2012 Chair Massa-Lavitt called the special meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, March 14, 2012. The meeting was held in the City Council Chambers and began with the Salute to the Flag led by Commissioner Goldberg. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Massa-Lavitt; Commissioners: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg Staff Present: Jerry Olivera, Senior Planner Steven Flower, Assistant Cityy Anita Chapanond, Deputy Cityerk • •PUBLIC HEARING 1. Seal Beach Housing Element—Adopt Resolution No. �2`•• recommending to the City Council that it adopt a Housing EI,erts�n nth one ,,rem ore of the 7 sites forwarded for consideration by the e�►d,i oc rt ral Plar/;Leal Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee. The Senior Planner delivered the stafffeport prov ; f ackground information regarding the Housing Element to dfiR John Douglas, consultant, •o.i.‘d a Pow �nt,`presentation ("Housing Element Update") and indicated that a ,\ staff`7e�ort was delivered to the Planning Commission earner ay Some ig,lights from the presentation include: • 2 kgy ues: 1 e al Ne •ousing — permanent emergency shelters and traf s t onal/supporti• ;ousing; rowth needs to accommodate Regional `using Needs Allocation(RHNA). • r share growth needr RHNA: City needs to demonstrate it has adequate app city to accommodates his growth — 19 units. •„•„•,‘ • RHNA,qllocations areblanning targets, not construction quotas — no penalty imp�3s, developrt-does not occur. • Lower'ii•e portion-of RHNA: state law mandates that appropriate zoning for this type o � is a density of 20 units/acre or more. • City must de` ,nstrate it has identified appropriate sites to accommodate RHNA or amend existing zoning regulations to do so — AdHoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory reviewed 26 potential sites —forwarded 7 sites for consideration by Planning Commission and Council. • Housing Element will not change zoning for any of the potential sites — it identifies which sites will be considered for that zoning change at a future date • Amount of land to be re-zoned depends upon the density chosen for that land when zoning is changed. • Presented aerial images of the 7 sites proposed. • Comments from State review letter: Seal Beach Shores Mobilehome Park not eligible for RHNA credits as they are existing units — will receive credit for two units that were replaced during the planning period. Page 2 — Planning Commission 03/14/12 Chair Massa-Lavitt opened the discussion for the commission: o Commissioner Goldberg: questioned whether multi-family housing was required in addition to the 20 units/acre requirement - Mr. Douglas clarified that multi- family housing, in this context, referred to the physical type of housing such as condominium ownership or rentals — state law specifically refers to density and that zoning allows either ownership or rental housing. Mr. Douglas continued with the second portion of his presentation — stated there should be no RHNA carryover from the previous period — clarified that at least 10 units (50%) must be on exclusively residential zoning when referring to nixed use zoning (overlay zone) — development standards commensurate with density 4,t e yi ded for the site — state density bonus law: cities must provide incentiu sho Idd ` veloper volunteer affordable housing above threshold. o Commissioner Everson: questioned if HCD us Ncriteria or\ -nkin system when considering sites — Mr. Douglas clarified here is no spect,L4cnteria, but rather the use of judgment is involved when' anaii ee site. ' ' 'v • Commissioner Massa-Lavitt: asked for clarification 4 regarding parking requirements for 0-1 units — Mr. Douglas lari•ied that den it. bonus law affords the City to offer reduced parking quire nts-\as ince iues for affordable �tm housing projects. ``\\ Chair Massa-Lavitt opened the public h a ping. �Sp�eakerBi?uce Monroe, member of AdHoc GP/LCP Citizens Advisor grnmittee, ed Planning Commission to consider elevation concerns when revie ,in• sites; Shirl y�rous$rd, Senior Consulting Pastor of SWARM & Associates, stated t est in providW i tional housing and to consider property ownershipArotential it ��i4�R,,on Casey, board member of RCSD and Shops at Rossmoor AdH6� U" Iltte , spoke n\opposition to the Shops at Rossmoor site and asked Plan n i ` ommo• recons�a Schelly Sustarsic, College Park East, spoke in oppos•t •R o the Shops 9ssmoote, iterated concerns regarding parking and traffic colstion, believe co ��ercial potential would be diminished; Joyce Parque, Old Tow \ -;estioned why grant nip es used towards low income recipients does not count towar '• NA (City tried, but•` to denied); Michael Maynard, RCSD board member, spoke in �. sition to Shops ossmoor site; Commissioner Goldberg, read a letter on behalf of IVI�r `acoboni, win opposition of the ARCO site as it is currently in the early stages o1'.re,• -diatio..„..s. Commission comm inquiries: • Commissioner` inquired about maintenance of affordability and whether a future seller would receive market rate for the property, or if the subsequent owner would also have to qualify for affordable housing — Mr. Douglas indicated that it is dependent upon agreements made such as deed restrictions or language for sponsoring agency to recapture value. • Commissioner Galbreath: questioned why the State Lands and Sunset Aquatic Park properties are being considered when they do not belong to City — Mr. Douglas clarified that there is no distinction between public and private properties for inclusion on this list of sites, the City does not take ownership of any of these potential sites, but rather exercises regulatory power for planning and zoning. Page 3 - Planning Commission 03/14/12 O Commissioner Everson: questioned whether HCD is more likely to accept a property if privately owned versus publicly owned — Mr. Douglas clarified that privately owned sites are more typical, but there is no preclusion; received clarification on whether Accurate Storage site was in the Boeing Specific Plan — the Senior Planner clarified that it is not in the Boeing Specific Plan and is zoned as Light Industrial. The Commission began discussion on each of the 7 sites forwarded by the AdHoc GP/LCP Citizens Advisory Committee: Commissioner Goldberg recused himself and left the Council Chambers at 9:02 p.m. due to a potential conflict of interest under the Political RefaikAcktesides within 500 feet of Marina Park Expansion site). #5- Marina Park Expansion site �"�` Discussion: Commissioner Galbreath - concerns regar•� ;,g potenti •�rontamination; Commissioner Everson - mixed signal may be co st 'Kd with cuiteptik grant application being submitted; Commissioner Cumming —fats ending mot options in an effort to get certification. Consensus of opinion to have site remain one '; \ IN FAVOR: Cummings, Galbreath, Massa-Leavitt OBJECT: Everson L 4 4r\ . Commissioner Goldberg returned te"� e Council``�amberst 9:08 p.m. #11 — Shops at Rossmoor \ \` :"�'1 ' \ Discussion: Commissioner Massa=Lvitt — site wo•ld be potentially zoned for half the density of the, cj`aceapropert D-46); Commissioner Goldberg — to address concerns frdifit auc aqc y .ndica{e l e,City has contracted out for a traffic impact study (w rill ll include pote a,�housinn ,�evelopment). Conse s of opinion to have si"\[emain on the list, 5-0. IN FAVV ' Cummings, Everso .Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt OBJECTa, br1 #12 — State La;ds•PropertO'5 & PCH) Discussion: Co i i l Cummings — concerned with flooding of the area and inclusion into the Loitrritos Wetlands; Commissioner Galbreath — had concerns with Wetlands as well; 'Commissioner Goldberg — questioned what the elevation is (regardless, would have to comply with flood certification if developed). Consensus of opinion to have site remain on the list, 5-0. IN FAVOR: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt OBJECT: None #14— 1701 Adolfo Lopez (Accurate Storage) Discussion: Commissioner Cummings — spoke in favor of this site being proposed; Commissioner Massa-Lavitt — would be a great mixed density use; Commissioner Goldberg — concerned with loss of revenue from a commercial property; Commissioner Page 4 – Planning Commission 03/14/12 Everson – concerned that building already exists there and HCD may not be in favor of that. Consensus of opinion to have site remain on the list. 4-1. IN FAVOR: Cummings, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt OBJECT: Everson #15 Boeing parking lots along Westminster Ave. Discussion: Commissioner Everson – questioned if this site was designated for emergency shelters (Mr. Douglas clarified that it has been proposed, but HCD has not yet accepted the designation). Consensus of opinion to have site remain on the list, 5-0• .1...,,." %..,,t, IN FAVOR: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg assa- OBJECT: None CVs `� #19–Sunset Aquatic Park – ;\ - a� Discussion: Commissioner Cummings concerns wfih pry ei ing wildlife, nd not in favor of construction near the refuge; Commissioner Goldberg ink uired about ancillary property next to parking/storage lot (Mr. og clarifie cat boundaries are ''```preliminary). .. Consensus of opinion to have site remain�ti`the Iis �- O. — � IN FAVOR: Cummings, Everson, Gal.,reaf:,•,� oldt�e g, Ma sa vitt OBJECT: None #24– Former ARCO service station �\ ° "'�` ° Discussion: Commissioner Curn r� :4 g –too smal a'o 'a site and not in favor of keeping on the list; Cor o Massa � .itt – number of years before cleaned up; Commission e of snake ab . '��\ngoing remediation plan, more strict clearance standards�suld property �e��emediate l�to residential standards; the Assistant City Attorng��i`0 icated corresponds was received from the owners of the property (BP) – they0'cj xpress concern, butt of objection, to the inclusion of the site in the Housing Eleme`P�i•. a .... %...... . , Consensus©f�•:pi ion to ha s e remain on the list, 0-5. IN FAVOR: N �� c , OBJECT: Cummis }r on, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt Av The Commission began deliberation on each of the remaining sites discussed by the AdHoc GP/LCP Citizens Advisory Committee: #18– DWP Site Discussion: Commissioner Goldberg – reiterated that property would qualify, need to strike language of multi-family, would not need to mandate it as affordable, just need the density (Mr. Douglas confirmed that neither state law nor HCD requires affordability; it requires density - at the discretion of the Council to impose affordability requirements, if volunteered by developer, to then provide incentives). Commissioner Everson inquired if this would complicate the current EIR process for that property and if open space for the Specific Plan would be affected (no complications, no effects foreseen); Mr. Douglas clarified that the state established a "default density" as a proxy for affordability. Page 5 - Planning Commission 03/14/12 Consensus of opinion to have site added to the list, 5-0. IN FAVOR: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt OBJECT: None #20—Old Ranch Golf Course Discussion: Commissioner Massa-Lavitt — would require redesign of golf course; Commissioner Galbreath inquired why it was not included on the list. Consensus of opinion to have site added to the list, 2-3. IN FAVOR: Everson, Galbreath OBJECT: Cummings, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt .` Public Hearing - Additional Speaker(s): Shirley Brou 'lyd, Se, i�b ,p4 nsulting Pastor of SWARM & Associates, spoke about concerns ret a ing s�;te"s fha will actually be developed. There being no other speakers, Chaira Lavitt'lclo ed thz public hearing. `N,. �� -..y:.' Motion by Goldberg, second by Everson, to adopt Resolution2-5 recommending to the City Council that it adopt a Housing Eleme '� tbding exhil`t �A4with the following sites forwarded for consideration: (1) Ma ". a x . ( )t ,��.� .<� , pansion.,�s�ite, (2) Shops at Rossmoor, (3) State Lands Property— 1CH, (4) Adolfo Lopez Road "Accurate Storage", (5) Boeing parking lots along ;� �pstmi ter,T(., r 11"1.�P Site, and (7) Sunset Aquatic Park; and to strike the "multi-f,milts angua�e frorr�m*:ggram la. AYES: Cummings, Everso albreath, \ ldber .\__ assa-Lavitt NOES:None .ems ' ` `,;; Motion Carried . The Assistant C' ''br. a indica at approval of Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-5 wi I'b` ffoo he Cis a�•tancpfor final action (April 9, 2012 City Council meeting). , '� 2. • a Text Amendment .:• -1 regarding Residential Care Facilities — Adopt RCN/bon No. 12-6 reco' ending to the City Council the approval of Zone Text Am na'rient 12-1 regard'aresidential Care Facilities. The Assistant Attor, elivered the staff report — this amendment essentially cleans-up exists to conform to state law and existing practices under Title 11 of the Municipal Co - w d fulfill Program 5d of the Housing Element. Chair Massa-Lavitt opened the public hearing. Speakers: Shirley Broussard, Senior Consulting Pastor of SWARM & Associates, spoke about concerns regarding homeless persons and received clarification about the amendment. There being no other speakers, Chair Massa-Lavitt closed the public hearing. Commission comments and inquiries: • Commissioner Goldberg received clarification regarding the location of the LC/RMD zone — Seal Beach Blvd. south of PCH, on the westerly side, area between Electric Avenue and PCH (only area in the City with this zoning). Page 6 — Planning Commission 03/14/12 Motion by Everson, second by Galbreath, to adopt Resolution No. 12-6 recommending to the City Council the approval of Zone Text Amendment 12-1 regarding Residential Care Facilities. AYES: Cummings, Everson, Galbreath, Goldberg, Massa-Lavitt NOES: None Motion Carried The Assistant City Attorney indicated that approval of Planning Commission Resolution No. 12-6 will be forwarded to the City Council for final action (April 9, 2012 City Council meeting). ADJOURNMENT Chair Massa-Lavitt adjourned the meeting at 10:16 p.m. ms •\ \\\ N*. 1uty City die Approved: Aka, `te . \\A Attes .' Deputy C, ''Clerk 4"N•'$- NOTICE: The following document has not been approved for accuracy and may be corrected, modified or amended before final approval. Because it is being made available prior to final action,it should not be considered a true record of the meeting. It is not the official Minutes of the Planning Commission and cannot be relied on or used as an official record of the proceedings.Although the City of Seal Beach makes every effort to see that proper notes are taken at a meeting, and although.draft Minutes are generally approved as submitted, changes and corrections are sometimes made before a final version is approved. The City therefore makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the contents of this document. Once Official Minutes have been approved,a copy can be obtained from the City Clerk. ATTACHMENT 5 INITIAL STUDY AND NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT/ NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY NEGATIVE DECLARATION This serves as the City of Seal Beach's Notice of Intention to adopt a Negative Declaration for the 2008-2014 Housing Element,prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA),State CEQA Guidelines and local implementation procedures. PROJECT: 2008-2014 Seal Beach Housing Element update PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide LEAD AGENCY: City of Seal Beach,211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach,California 90740. PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Seal Beach,211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach,California 90740 DESCRIPTION: State law mandates that each city shall include a Housing Element in its General Plan,and that the Housing Element be updated periodically. The Housing Element is required to analyze existing and projected housing needs,and include goals,policies,quantified objectives,and scheduled programs for the preservation,improvement, and development of housing. The proposed Housing Element covers the 2008-2014 planning period.(Please see Initial Study for additional information) NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the City of Seal Beach proposes to adopt a Negative Dedaration for the above-cited project. The Negative Declaration is based on the finding that adoption of the Housing Element will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. Copies of the Negative Declaration(ND)and supporting materials are available for review during the Public Comment Period(March 7,2012 through April 6,2012)at the following additional locations: 1.City of Seal Beach Development Services Dept.,211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach,California 90740. 2.Mary Wilson Library,707 Electric Avenue,Seal Beach,CA 90740 3.Rossmoor/Los Alamitos Library, 12700 Montecito Drive,Seal Beach,CA 90740 4.Leisure World Library(Leisure World residents only),2300 Beverly Manor Road, Seal Beach,CA 90740 Written comments on the ND must be submitted by 5:00 p.m.on Friday,April 6,2012 to:Jerry Olivera,Senior Planner, City of Seal Beach,211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach,California 90740. Comments may also be faxed to 562-430-8763 or sent by e-mail to JOliverae.sealbeachca.gov PUBLIC MEETINGS: Seal Beach Planning Commission hearing Wednesday, March 14,2012 at 7:30 PM 211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach(City Council Chambers) Seal Beach City Council hearing Monday April 9,2012 at 6:30 PM 211 Eighth Street,Seal Beach(City Council Chambers) Date: March 7,2012 tiJ L dert(auc (13 ) POSTED t X07 2012 TOM DALY,CLERI(REWHDER BY 45 DEPUTY City of Seal Beach Development Services Department 211 Eighth St., Seal Beach, CA 90740 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM AND ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Project 2008-2014 Seal Beach General Plan Housing Element Update Title: Lead Agency Name& City of Seal Beach Address: Development Services Department 211 Eighth St.,Seal Beach, CA 90740 Contact Person& Phone No.: City Manager Jill R. Ingram • 562.431.2527 Project Location/Address: City of Seal Beach, California(Citywide) Nearest Cross Street: NA(Citywide) APN: NA(Citywide) Project Sponsor's Name & City of Seal Beach Address: Development Services Department 211 Eighth St., Seal Beach, CA 90740 General Plan Designation: NA(Citywide) Zoning: NA(Citywide) Overlay Zone/Special District: NA(Citywide) Project Description and Requested Action: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary) California Government Code Section 65302(c) mandates that each city shall include a Housing Element in its General Plan. The Housing Element is required to identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs, and include statements of the City's goals, policies,quantified objectives,and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. The City, in adopting its Housing Element, must consider economic, environmental, and fiscal factors, as well as community goals as set forth in the General Plan, in compliance with California Government Code Section 65580 et seq. This Initial Study evaluates the potential environmental impacts that would be expected to result from adoption of the Housing Element and, to the extent they can be foreseen at this time, any related zoning amendments and conforming General Plan amendments. Where specific zoning and General Plan element changes are proposed, subsequent CEQA analysis will be conducted and project design features and/or mitigation measures will be identified to reduce any potential impacts. The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), presented in Table 11-23 of the draft Housing Element, identifies Seal Beach's lair share' of the regional housing need for the planning period July 2006 through June 2014 as 57 units. This total includes 11 very-low income units, 10 low-income units, 12 moderate-income units, and 24 above-moderate units. In addition to this RHNA allocation for the current planning period, the City has a carryover of 32 lower-income units from the prior planning period (see Appendix B). State law requires the City to demonstrate that it has adequate sites that are appropriately zoned to accommodate the need for the various types of housing units identified in the RHNA plus the carryover. Because there are no appropriately zoned sites that could accommodate the amount of lower-income housing identified in the RHNA, the City is required to rezone properties with capacity for at least 53 City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 1 units to allow multi-family housing by-right(i.e.,without a discretionary permit)with a minimum density of 20 units/acre. Program la in the Housing Plan (Chapter V) includes a commitment to amend the zoning regulations on parcel(s)totaling at least 1.7 acres to allow multi-family residential development at a base density of 33 units/acre. Rezoned parcels must accommodate at least 16 housing units per site. To maintain consistency between the Housing Element, other General Plan Elements and the Zoning Ordinance, a corresponding amendment to the General Plan will also likely be required at a later date. No specific sites for rezoning or development projects are currently proposed in connection with the Housing Element. The Housing Element proposes the following programs in addition to Program 1a: 1d. Emergency Shelters and Transitional/Supportive Housing. An amendment to the Zoning Code in conformance with SB 2 to establish development standards for emergency shelters and transitionall supportive housing within one year of Housing Element adoption. 3d. Single Room Occupancies ("SROsi. The City intends to process a Zoning Code amendment in 2012 to establish regulations for SRO facilities. 3f. Off-Street Parking. The City intends to process a Zoning Code amendment in 2012 to reduce off-street parking requirements for the construction of small apartment units reserved for low or moderate households 5d. Residential Care Facilities. To conform with state law, the City intends to process a Municipal Code amendment to clarify that small state-licensed residential care facilities for six or fewer persons are treated as a single-family residential use. 5e. Senior Apartments and Independent Living Facilities. The City intends to process a Zoning Code amendment in 2012 to modify the zoning regulations for senior apartments and independent living facilities. These programs are intended to improve the quality of the City's housing stock, conserve existing neighborhoods, increase housing affordability, and remove potential constraints to housing for persons with special needs. The zoning amendments described in Programs 1d (Transitional and Supportive Housing), 5d (Residential Care Facilities), and 5e (Senior Apartments and Independent Living Facilities) are already required by state law, would not alter the physical nature of development, would not have a significant effect on the environment,and therefore are not analyzed further in this document. Zoning amendments described in Program 1d (Emergency Shelters) would allow these facilities in the Boeing Specific Plan zone. The development standards for these facilities have not yet been established; however, it is anticipated that standards regulating maximum occupancy, staffing, lighting, parking, building size and location, landscaping and provision of infrastructure will be established. No significant environmental impacts are foreseen at this time and this program is not analyzed further in this document. Prior to adoption of any new zoning regulations for emergency shelters, subsequent CEQA review will be conducted to identify potential impacts and mitigation measures,where necessary. Zoning amendments described in Program 3d (SROs) would add a definition and development standards for this type of use. It is anticipated that SRO developments would be subject to the same building intensity standards as currently exist in the applicable zones. Prior to adoption of any new zoning regulations for SROs, subsequent CEQA review will be conducted to identify potential impacts and mitigation measures,where necessary. Program 3f(Off-Street Parking) would allow a reduction in required on-site parking spaces for projects that provide affordable housing. This change is intended to implement state density bonus law and would apply to affordable and senior housing projects, which require less parking than conventional residential projects. No significant impacts would occur as a result of this change, and therefore this program is not analyzed further in this document. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 2 Existing Conditions of the Project Site: Seal Beach encompasses 11.4 square miles in northwestern Orange County south of Long Beach (in Los Angeles County) and north of Huntington Beach (see Figure II-1). Incorporated in 1915 primarily as a farming community, the City has grown while still maintaining its small town atmosphere. The population of the City remained relatively stable from 1915 to 1944 with little more than 1,000 residents. However in 1944 the U S Navy acquired half of the City to construct the Naval Weapons Station bringing new residents to Seal Beach. The population increased to more than 7,000 persons in 1954 with the development of the Marina Hill subdivision. The largest population increase occurred with the development of the Leisure World retirement community beginning in 1962, which currently houses more than 9,000 senior residents.The 2010 population of the city was estimated at 24,168. Demographic characteristics of the Seal Beach have also remained relatively stable over the past three decades. With the presence of Leisure World and many condominium developments catering to retired persons the City has a large number of elderly households. The City's prime beachfront location appeals to the affluent, both working and retired. Property values in Seal Beach increased as the City has become increasingly built out. Newcomers to the City who can afford high housing costs tend to be those of upper incomes or retired persons with substantial assets. However the City also has long-time residents who purchased their homes many years ago when real estate was still affordable. Many of these long-time residents may have difficulty in maintaining their homes. The housing stock in Seal Beach consists of a mix of single-family and multi-family units with one mobile home park. Though a majority of the housing units are more than 40 years of age, housing is generally in good condition with the exception of some older beach areas and some units in the mobile home park. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: (Briefly describe the project's surrounding) NA(Citywide) Other public agencies whose approval is required: (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement) No other agency is required to approve the Housing Element update, but it will be reviewed by the Califomia Department of Housing and Community Development for the purpose of determining whether it complies with the requirements of the Housing Element Law. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 3 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact'as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: ❑ Aesthetics ❑ Land Use/Planning ❑ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Biological Resources • ❑ Population/Housing ❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Public Services ❑ Geology/Soils ❑ Recreation ❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ❑ Transportation/Traffic ❑ Hazards& Hazardous Materials El Utilities/Service Systems ❑ Hydrology/Water Quality ❑ Mandatory Findings of Significance ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'potentially significant impact' or'potentially significant unless mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects(a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Jerry Olivera Senior Planner Name Title March 7, 2012 • - re Date • City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 4 • Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ El b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ❑ ❑ ❑ limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ❑ ❑ ❑ quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which ❑ ❑ ❑ would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated • share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs,the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None necessary at this time. II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES AND FOREST RESOURCES: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of ❑ ❑ El El Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, p ❑ ❑ forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land ❑ ❑ ❑ to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, ❑ ❑ ❑ due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 5 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Responses: There are no farmland or forest resources in the city and no impacts would occur. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 0 0 0 El air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ❑ 0 0 El to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any 0 0 0 El criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 0 El concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ 0 0 El of people? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES--Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through 0 0 0 El habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or 0 0 0 El other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 6 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected ❑ ❑ ❑ El wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ❑ ❑ ❑ resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ ❑ ❑ El biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑ ❑ ❑ El Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated • share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ❑ ❑ ❑ a historical resource as defined in 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of ❑ ❑ ❑ El an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ ❑ resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ❑ ❑ ❑ El outside of formal cemeteries? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 7 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS--Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the ❑ 0 ❑ El most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ El c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that ❑ ❑ ❑ would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of ❑ ❑ ❑ El the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of ❑ ❑ 0 septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS--Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑ indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? • b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation ❑ ❑ ❑ adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 8 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ ❑ ❑ Igl through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ 0 0 El through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ❑ El hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ❑ ❑ ❑ El hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ El where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ ❑ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ El injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Res ponses• (a-c) Neither adoption of the Housing Element nor subsequent residential developments would affect transport of hazardous materials. However, hazardous materials are routinely used and transported on major highways traversing the city. Therefore, future residents, workers, and visitors of this area could be exposed to hazards from spills associated with transport of hazardous materials, although to no greater degree than that associated with housing projects in many urban areas: a hazardous waste incident is a rare event and cannot be predicted, and is City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 9 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated therefore not significant. Households may use and dispose of small quantities of hazardous wastes typical of household use in small multi-family housing developments throughout the state;this is not deemed to be a significant public health hazard at the scale of potential development associated with the project. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary at this time. (d) There are no sites in Seal Beach listed on the Cortese list of hazardous material sites. No impacts would occur. (e-f) The Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base(JFTB)is a military installation and airfield located immediately north of the City corporate limits, and is located approximately 3.7 miles from the northernmost portion of the project site. Based on Figure S-1, Los Alamitos Impact Zones, Joint Forces Training Base, of the General Plan,the project site is not located within an impact zone. No impacts would occur pertaining to the creation of a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.No further analysis of this issue is required. (g) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. (h) There are no wildland fire hazard areas in the city. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measure(st: None are required at this time. IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY--Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site ❑ ❑ ® ❑ or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site p ❑ ® ❑ or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 10 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ® ❑ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which ❑ ❑ ® 0 would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, 0 0 ® ❑ injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche,tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Responses• (a) New development could impact water quality through runoff and wastewater discharge. However, all future developments will be required to comply with federal, state and local water quality requirements such as the Clean Water Act and the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. As part of the City's development review process, future development projects will be required to prepare water quality plans and/or incorporate "Best Management Practices° (BMPs) into their construction operations to reduce erosion, siltation and water pollution both during and after construction. Compliance with these regulations would be expected to reduce water quality impacts to a level that is less than significant. No mitigation measures are necessary at this time. (b) If new residential development were to occur on vacant land, an increase in the amount of impervious surfaces could affect the rate of groundwater recharge. However, due to the limited amount of land affected (1.7 acres),future development would not substantially reduce groundwater recharge or deplete groundwater supplies. No new significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary at this time. (c-f) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs,the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Residential development could result in modification of existing drainage patterns through grading and construction of homes and internal circulation. However, prior to development, applicants will be required to prepare storm water plans, demonstrate adequate storm water drainage facilities, and retain stormwater onsite in compliance with the City's Grading and Building Codes. Compliance with existing regulations would reduce potential impacts to a level that is less than significant and no mitigation measures are necessary at this time. (g-i) Existing regulations preclude residential development within 100-year flood hazard areas, therefore any future residential projects would be required to avoid such areas. Therefore no significant impacts would be expected. However, when subsequent zone changes or developments are proposed, site-specific CEQA analysis will be required and appropriate design features and/or mitigation measures may be established. (j) Seal Beach is a beachfront city, and future residential development sites could be affected by tsunamis. The City's Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) describes how the City would respond in the event of a tsunami. Emergencies that are preceded by a recognized buildup period allow for advance warning to those impacted areas and population groups. Timely warning and information broadcasts are important to citizens' ability to help themselves, and for their evacuation. Emergencies generally occur without advance warning, and therefore require prompt mobilization and commitment of the emergency organization after the onset of the emergency. During or following local emergencies, the City is the first agency involved. If the emergency is so large that the City's resources are inadequate or exhausted, assistance would be requested of, and provided by, nearby jurisdictions through mutual aid agreements. Neighborhood groups can assist the City by conducting first aid and search and City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 11 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated rescue operations in times of large disasters. When mutual aid systems are not sufficient for the disaster task, the County requests assistance from the State. The Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES) coordinates regional emergency response and disaster assistance. The State may also request aid from the Federal government in the form of a Presidential Disaster Declaration. FEMA then provides disaster assistance, temporary housing assistance, and recovery funds after a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Implementation of the City's EOP would result in less than significant impacts associated with inundation by a tsunami. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. X. LAND USE AND PLANNING-Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ El b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑ ❑ ❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ natural community conservation plan? Responses: (a-b) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. (c) There are no habitat conservation plan or NCCP areas within the city. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. Xl. MINERAL RESOURCES--Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ 0 resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important ❑ ❑ ❑ El mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Responses• There are no mineral resources or recovery areas designated within the city. No impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 12 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated XII. NOISE—Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ❑ ❑ ❑ excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ groundborne vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ ❑ ❑ IZI the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ ❑ ❑ El noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ El where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ El the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Responses: (a-d) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development.While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs,the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time,the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. (e-f) The Los Alamitos Joint Forces Training Base(JFTB)is located near the northeastern portion of the city. According to Figure N-5, Existing CNEL Noise Contours, of the General Plan Noise Element, some portions of the city are located within the 65 CNEL noise contour of the JFTB.Adoption of the Housing Element would not authorize any new development; however, prior to approval of any zone change anticipated in the Housing Element, the designated site(s)will be evaluated for potential impacts from aircraft noise and if necessary, mitigation measures will be required. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ ❑ El directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing • elsewhere? City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 13 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Responses• The proposed zoning amendments anticipated in the Housing Element would induce population growth by allowing 53 additional housing units within the city. This change is necessitated by the State law and is consistent with the regional growth forecast in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment. The sites to be designated for housing have not been determined at this time, but development of any of the potential sites identified in the Housing Element would not displace existing homes or substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Residential development consistent with the Housing Element would in fact ensure that all housing needs are adequately accommodated. No significant impacts would occur and no mitigation measures are necessary in connection with the Housing Element amendment. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ IZI Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ El Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ El Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ Responses: The proposed Housing Element amendment would not authorize any new development, therefore no impacts to public services would occur. Future zoning amendments would allow development of 53 additional housing units on sites that have not yet been determined. While no significant impacts on demand for fire, police, parks or other public services would be expected due to this incremental increase in population,this issue will be examined further prior to approval of any zone change to allow additional residential development. Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ® ❑ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Response: Adoption of the Housing Element amendment would not authorize any new development, therefore no increase in use of parks or recreational facilities would occur. However, an increase of 53 housing units would be accommodated by future zoning amendments,which may result in an increase in public use of the beach, parks and other recreational facilities. This incremental increase is not considered to be substantial, and would not result in significant physical deterioration of such facilities. Quimby Act park fees paid by new residential developments are City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 14 • Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated used to acquire and/or improve park facilities,which would help reduce any impact of additional residents. Mitigation Measure(s): None required. XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC--Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy ❑ ❑ ❑ establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulating system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management ❑ ❑ ❑ program, including but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures,or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an ❑ ❑ ❑ increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑ ❑ ❑ (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding ❑ ❑ ❑ public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Responses: (a-b) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and•appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. (c) No change in air traffic patterns would occur as part of the proposed Housing Element, or subsequent amendments to allow development of 53 additional housing units. (d-f) The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 15 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Mitigation Measure(s): None required at this time. XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS--Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 0 applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 El wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ 0 0 drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project 0 0 0 El from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 0 0 0 El accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and U U regulations related to solid waste? Responses: The Housing Element is a policy document that would not change land use designations or authorize any development. While the City is required by state law to amend land use regulations to accommodate its allocated share of regional housing needs and special needs housing such as emergency shelters and SROs, the site(s)to be rezoned and applicable development standards have not yet been identified. Subsequent to the adoption of the Housing Element, zoning amendments and CEQA review will be processed and appropriate conditions and mitigation measures will be established at that time. At this time, the City cannot predict the location of these sites, and thus any analysis would be based on premature speculation. Mitigation Measure(s): Norte required at this time. XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE— a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality 0 0 0 of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 16 Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than No EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Significant Impact Unless Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, 0 0 0 but cumulatively considerable? ('Cumulatively considerable' means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will 0 0 0 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Responses' Under state law, each jurisdiction is required to adopt a Housing Element that, among other things, identifies how the jurisdiction's fair share of regional housing growth needs will be accommodated. The fair share of new housing need assigned to Seal Beach through the Regional Housing Needs Assessment requires that the City amend its zoning regulations to allow 53 additional multi-family units for the current planning period. While the Housing Element includes a program commitment to amend land use regulations to accommodate 53 units, the parcels to be rezoned have not yet been identified. As a result, no new development would be authorized by the Housing Element and the site-specific environmental impacts associated with this additional housing development cannot be determined at this time. When specific zone changes and conforming General Plan Amendments are proposed, subsequent CEQA analysis will be conducted and project design features and/or mitigation measures will be identified to reduce any potential impacts. No significant environmental impacts would result from adoption of the Housing Element. REFERENCES: City of Seal Beach, Draft 2008-2014 Housing Element, March 2012 City of Seal Beach,General Plan, 2003 City Seal Beach, Municipal Code. City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 17 LIST OF PREPARERS: Environmental Consultant: J.H. Douglas&Associates John Douglas,AICP Principal City of Seal Beach Housing Element Initial Study Page 16 A\TTACHMENT 6 Draft City Council Resolution No. 6245 (Exhibit A to City Council Resolution - Draft Housing Element) (Exhibit B to City Council Resolution - Itemized List of Changes to Housing Element in Response to HCD Letter) RESOLUTION NUMBER 6245 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE GENERAL PLAN 2008-2014 HOUSING ELEMENT THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL DOES RESOLVE AND FIND AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The State of California requires every jurisdiction to periodically update its Housing Element to address the housing needs of the community. Housing Element law requires a quantification of each jurisdiction's share of the regional housing need as established in the Regional Housing Need Allocation ("RHNA") prepared by the Council of Governments (COG). The RHNA is a minimum projection of additional housing units needed to accommodate projected household growth at all income levels by the end of the housing element's statutory planning period. The current statutory planning period is 2008-2014. Section 2. City staff oversaw the preparation of the City's Housing Element, with the assistance of an independent consultant and ongoing input of the community, the Ad Hoc General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Citizens Advisory Committee ("Citizens Advisory Committee"), the Planning Commission, and the City Council. Adoption of the 2008-2014 Housing Element will result in a Housing Element that reflects the desires of the community while also maintaining consistency with current State legislation. Section 3. Pursuant to Section 65585(b) of the California Government Code, on October 17, 2011 the City submitted the draft Housing Element to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. On December 16, 2011 HCD issued a letter, provided as Attachment 2 to the April 9, 2012 City Council staff report, describing changes that are necessary in order for the element to fully comply with state law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65585(e) the City Council has reviewed and considered the comments of HCD and hereby finds that the Housing Element, as revised, fully addresses HCD's comments and substantially complies with the requirements of state law. Therefore, adoption of the revised draft Housing Element complies with the requirements of Government Code Section 65585(0(1). Exhibit B, attached hereto, includes an itemized description of the changes made to the Housing Element along with an explanation of how those changes substantially comply with the requirements of state law. Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on March 14, 2012. After receiving public testimony, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the 2008-2014 Housing Element. On April 9, 2012, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing and received public testimony. Section 5. Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), the City completed an initial study("Initial Study")to analyze whether the proposed Housing Element would result in any significant impacts. The Initial Study concluded that the Housing Element would not result in any significant impacts on the environment. Thereafter, the Initial Study and Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration were completed and circulated for public review for the period of March 7, 2012 through April 6, 2012. Section 6. On February 14, 2012, the Citizens Advisory Committee considered the revised Draft Housing Element and a matrix showing 25 sites in the City that might accommodate RHNA requirements. The 25 sites are attached to the staff report as Attachment 3. Upon considering the 25 sites, the Committee voted to submit seven sites for Planning Commission consideration. The seven sites Resolution Number 6245 recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee are listed on page 2 of the staff report. After its public hearing on March 14, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council consider seven sites. Six of the seven sites recommended by the Planning Commission were also recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee. However, the Planning Commission added one site to its recommendation, and voted to exclude one of the sites recommended by the Committee. The seven sites recommended by the Planning Commission are likewise listed on page 2 of the staff report. Section 7. The City is located within an urbanized area, and is almost entirely built out with established roadways, circulation patterns, utility services, and development patterns. The Housing Element does not propose or contemplate specific development projects, but the goals and policies in the Housing Element may result in future projects and actions that could have environmental effects. As projects come forward in the future, however, each will be reviewed for consistency with the General Plan and the City's development regulations and for impacts to the environment per CEQA. For the reasons summarized in this Resolution and discussed in further detail in the Initial Study and Negative Declaration,the City Council hereby finds on the basis of the whole record before it, including the Initial Study and any comments received, that there is no substantial evidence that the Housing Element will have a significant effect on the environment and that the Negative Declaration prepared in connection with the Housing Element represents the independent judgment and analysis of the City and the City Council. Therefore, the City Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration. The documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this decision is based are located in the City's Development Services Department. The record of proceedings, which includes all background information, reports, and studies that were used in the development and refinement of the Housing Element and the CEQA documentation, is maintained by the City as part of the official records of the Development Services Department. The custodian of records is the City Clerk. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing, and in order to further encourage the provision of housing in a manner which adequately serves the needs of all present and future community residents in compliance with State law, the City Council hereby adopts General Plan Amendment 12-01, adopting the City's Housing Element attached hereto as Exhibit A, as that document has been revised on April 9, 2012 by the City Council. The Council directs the City Manager to transmit the adopted Housing Element to HCD in conformance with Government Code Section 65585(g), and authorizes the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, to make non-substantive changes to the Housing Element in response to comments that may be received from HCD. Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. (Intentionally Left Blank) Resolution Number 6245 PASSED,APPROVED and ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of April , 2012 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members NOES: Council Members ABSENT: Council Members ABSTAIN: Council Members Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 6245 on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 9th day of April , 2012. City Clerk EXHIBIT " A " Draft 2008/2014 Housing Element Posted on the City's website for public review www.sealbeachca.gov EXHIBIT "B" HCD Housing Element Comments and Responses (December 16, 2011 HCD Letter) N ^^,, O O -O^` y" E m N AN` L E C Ti A°` o 0 E c 5 O /off♦ ��) w ® _- a) o -0 o D C E C a) O N ,(., O O .2 N co O N O "- -c a ,_ 0) O Z ci °op Q E "- m .C2Cu9 Ea' a) • 3 .4-C ® a) c o N O a) ° OU a) li .- a OH � O O) - C .0 O ® p ° E o o) 2 E •� o O O a2 a) a) 0) O Q a s N C a N L 0 C C N a) O N OU .- C E O a O - 0 co CL o a)a) 0 N `� U > Q O p a) y Q v; 0 •3 m '> = U O � m 0 � ;._ ° 0) o � r CD W Cl. a) c a C a) a)® c a) N C .N O) C •" VI N O O) H a) H O U Q /) � O N O O o � � ° 0C4—CEO � ° o0)� _ � � � r Q -0 •X a) O 4) 3 0 - - a N -•- 'a" C O O a) a) 0a) s, OC ° Oo " U ° ® ® ° a) � c ce o C C a) o o a) N ±- '- n," a C O N O ® O n N C _ 0 O U ^ -� p C w P p 0 O a C O �_ C O U "- > O C -0 L O U v1 t C • '> p .O O > O h ° m C O O "- U - (� a) a) N O C N a a) >- a) - CO '3 s C O a) a c1 0 >p •5 c 2 Q a Q 3 0 U) U > \ L O a) 13 0 4- C E m Q C N H Z C N ° V� _ C aS O N } '� C C O C co N m O C p p 3 O W ° a t N C O - V V- N R, U N - ° O C L N 3 O a 3-3.vt 0 a) 0 CT O O .0 >' C 4- C 0 vi vt 0 .e . L E - •4n N -O .O a .- (13 _c N O U o co O -0 O L 4- L a) = C C O a 0 0 ,N ao ,N N 3 E N N C a) ° O a) O V O t n E L Q 3 . 0 y 0 Q c 0) o a s '8 a) " c`i C " � j Q 0 0 O C a C ° a � a) > o f ° m 0 E a) o o ru- m f- C O 12 0 4- 4— O ''n O Q •'n 3 ►- .c < a) .E 2 U O .o .0 C C C d CO V VI O E C m o O d a -C _" = W o 05 N O) 0.5 S � o c d Q i > 0 V m > .N •� } c? N a] — y Q 0 4 c_ c z aa)i a ° Y ce C N Z 0 0 y d \ 10 0 0 ° d. E ° C C o O a) V O ° " m -o 0 L ° O Z d O O h C o ° E ._ o >. U U � o� EN > c ca) W = a) U Q p) d 5' v > 0) 0 - (1) p 13 _ p E cn E N 2 a 2 d U 0 C 0) O O N C N o o ON 3 3 O a O N D = H h Q N 0 O /3 c C 3 C C '` 01H —0 _C) O L ,,, C O4— = o o ,,, C Cl) 4) Q Via) - h vo ,, o � 30U � Q .� o Cl) Q 0 Q :F. N •U .� O U vi 0 0 E 0 m O .N H O o � o -` c E a) c o 0 O - 3 � •� O O y_ O 0 O ` O U 0 H 2c0 � >° ,= � EEO 5N � a '°-' 'O c E- 0 0 E , o U O •c o 0) 0 0 Q U _.. E. -0 2 0 F. D 0 _ O U O D o n O O 2-:-_-.-.- ,,; U U E .� O U P U• -0 0 c p U O N 0) 3 = c c > U H 4) U = M in *= 0 0 c = a) 0 •� QL a m O cco P o -o aco < D o 0 EL 0 - y C m o m a ix) 0 0 _ � -0 L1/41 c C O N O O O U o C U O c O C " b D C O ••gin C 0)•C a" +-- ,., U - a) 0 w O O O O O a S' 0 0 0 — U c � -0 >. _ - O 0 0)U c D -0 c4= Q 0 ., ._ N .N O 'y fn O 0) E O ie C 0 a) C ,n C " .0 N O _o 0) •— C N . E 4) U h O 3 v 2 O O 4-- '4 _ 13 0 ", N O 0-3(1) LJ -O fn O N ° 0 or ° i -c a) N c 0 ° 3 � U _CU .Co 0 o a) _CU aQ o 0 ,, S 0 O 75 .0 0 _c . x >. _0 CD o 3 _ 13 C O C 0 ._ v, U ,O E M vi co)a C E O O O 2 a 0 � '� ° °o o c a° U E �; O c a) 3 0 O o c � c .o � H aao N •E ° o •c E _c o EN a) o o c E . (7)° O .c - �., O � "' � C7 L. �0 N O o O N 0 3 p- 0 " co Q r ." 0 O O a 0 o � N C U O O C H C 0 .§. O C H C O C O C O C E O 0 0 •v ", -0 y 0) 0 _ O o 0 v, E 0 ,., . E O C O O } E O E cn 0 ,, - +- ° a C C a) ,- o .c 0 0 0 0 4- 0 a) N '/_, O Q _ 0 _ a) .` O C 5, o .._ a) L 0) 3 .0 .0 ,n 0)- 3 S/ '5 W U E 0) 0 -E D N 4) N E V N 5 0 2 O3 OU iU 0 2`D < c .Qwvl L- -0 Qm TS Q -S - c a 3 N d U t 0 CO C EmE Lo M T ,tr) NI- - M ,O ojs 0) 3 o, i •a 0) N > c4) M o o v 1 m C a) y o6 E y y-- N _a) O C •E C W Q •.., N (D 0) C O c o -O .- O C D N 0 F O C E ° 0 = a i 0 E - 0) � 0. '- 0 y .0 O y .c b y 0 42 0 o_ 0 O o ° O a) _c O a, Cl)43 O E _ ° _a ._ 3 0) 0 0 a) U ate) 0 0 -0 o a`, �6 a, `" O O i C O 0 O U O U N W = Q _ r, c" U Q em ao § 2 q O JD a) / -- _00 , = 0 Eo « « 2 E / oO 22 § kE 22q o3 E E 2 2 / 7 / ƒ 0 > E .- 5 E S [ \ 0 2 @3 e O § 2 f 2 :2 . ./ § \ 2 - I a) 0 D O ® E O ® § k@ C ƒ ® E O F •o 2 0 2 ƒ � 2 E a) 0 _ o o ¢ — O E 0 -,--- ca) 2 2 2 k # » 2 o ® / 2k £ 0 346 2 -9 t » 2 £ \ D " 0 \ \ � / � q ® D 2 / 2 e . @ § 2 _ �O E D X� § % / 2 C ® 0 0 c c / o • > 0 O / O / 2 / k - / / 2a) § 2a) E ^ E £ m c 022 - 02 2 :_ k ® � q r — r Sir ( - � 2 E xO - 0 § � � � o C = kfk 0) "E \ \\ E E® E _ E O _£ E ƒ - / / / < o O o a, u 4: E (7, # 0)2 , > / C In a 5 0 , D oo 2 $ a) G 2 I- E a o ( 0) ƒ . � k U g q C . ■ � % 2 g c £ 0 E ' @ U 2 £ I U � 00 C >. / E x k B 0 E 2 0 co 0 b >. " $ o k c _/ 22 m U d / /