HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC AG PKT 2008-12-08 #NAGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 8, 2008
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
THRU: David Carmany, City Manager
FROM: Lee Whittenberg, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT -PREPARATION OF HOUSING
ELEMENT UPDATE - CONEXUS
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
The proposed action will execute a professional services agreement in the amount
of $45,930 to retain Conexus to update the Housing Element in accordance with
the provisions of State Law.
BACKGROUND:
Overview of Housing Element Uadate Requirements and Process:
By provision of State law, all cities within the Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) region are required to update their Housing Element. The
update process is required to comply with very detailed requirements as set forth
within the Government Code, § 65580 - 65590.1.
Given the very detailed and specific requirements of State law regarding the
contents of the Housing Element, it is necessary for the City to retain a qualified
housing consultant to prepare the required update to the Housing Element.
The goal in updating the Housing Element is to develop a comprehensive housing
program which addresses the identified needs of Seal Beach's present and future
residents, including the affordability, availability, and adequacy of the City's housing
stock. Primary criteria to be used in developing the City's housing program will
include:
^ satisfaction with provisions of State law;
^ acceptability with the City Council; and
^ feasibility given staff and budgetary constraints.
Agenda Item N
Page 2
The Housing Element Update will require the completion of the following major
components:
^ Update the most recent census and statistical data available in analysis of
existing conditions, housing needs, constraints to development, and fair
share housing needs analysis.
^ Utilize updated housing needs information to guide the evaluation of the
appropriateness of the City's existing policies and programs.
^ Ensure internal consistency with the goals, policies and programs of al{ of
the other elements of the General Plan, and the subdivision and zoning
code.
Meet all statutory requirements of Housing Element law.
The City issued an RFP for the necessary consulting services on September 30,
2008. The City received five responses to the RFP. The responding firms were:
^ Civic Solutions, San Juan Capistrano
^ Conexus, North Tustin
^ Hogle Ireland, Inc., Irvine
^ The Planning Center, Costa Mesa, and
^ Willdan Engineering, San Bernardino
The Director of Development Services and the Senior Planner interviewed all
responding firms on November 24 and it is Staff's recommendation to retain
Conexus to prepare the Housing Element Update.
A copy of the Agreement for Professional Services is provided as Attachment 1. A
copy of the Proposal of Conexus is provided as Attachment 2.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Funds are currently budgeted for this activity. The Department of Administrative
Services has prepared the necessary budget amendment for this activity as a
separate City Council Staff Report.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the City Manager to execute a professional services agreement with
Conexus to update the Housing Element at a cost not to exceed $45,930.
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
~ ~~r
ee Whittenber David Carman
9 y
Director of Development Servic City Manager
Page 3
Attachments: (3)
Attachment 1: Resolution No. 5818, A Resolution of the City Council of
the City of Seal Beach, California Authorizing the City
Manager To Execute a Professional Services Agreement
With Conexus
Attachment 2: Professional Services Agreement between City of Seal
Beach and Conexus (Housing Element Update)
Attachment 3: "Proposal -Housing Element Update, City of Seal Beach",
submitted by Conexus dated October 30, 2008 (Cost
Estimate)
Page 4
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NUMBER 5818, A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH, CALIFORNIA
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH CONEXUS
RESOLUTION NUMBER 5818
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH, CALIFORNIA AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
CONEXUS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves a Professional Services
Agreement between the City of Seal Beach and Conexus.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute
the Professional Services Agreement.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of Seal Beach, at a
meeting hereof held on the 8th day of December , 2008 by the following
vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Linda Devine, City Clerk of Seal Beach, California, do hereby certify that the
foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution Number 5818 on file in
the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of
the City of Seal Beach, at a regular meeting thereof held on the 8th day
of December , 2008.
City Clerk
Page 5
ATTACHMENT 2
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN CITY OF SEAL BEACH AND
CONEXUS (HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE)
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
between
City of Seal Beach
211 - 8th Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
CONEXUS
13142 Rosalind Drive
Santa Ana, CA 92705
(714) 628-0464
Contact: John Douglas, AICP
Professional Service Agreement ("the Agreement") is made as of December 8, 2008 (the
"Effective Date"), by and between CONEXUS ("Consultant"), a planning consulting firm, and
the City of Seal Beach ("City"), a California charter city, (collectively, "the Parties").
RECITALS
A. City desires certain professional services.
B. Consultant represents that it is qualified and able to provide City with such services.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the Parties' performance of the promises,
covenants, and conditions stated herein, the Parties hereto agree as follows.
AGREEMENT
1.0 Scope of Services
1.1. Consultant must provide those services ("Services") set forth in Exhibit A
("Proposal to Prepare the 2008 Housing Element Update"), which is hereby incorporated by this
reference. To the extent that there is any conflict between The Proposal and this Agreement, this
Agreement must control.
1.2. Consultant must perform all Services under this Agreement in accordance with
the standard of care generally exercised by like professionals under similar circumstances and in
a manner reasonably satisfactory to Authority.
1.3. In performing this Agreement, Consultant must comply with all applicable
provisions of federal, state, and local law.
1.4. Consultant will not be compensated for any work performed not specified in the
Scope of Services unless the City authorizes such work in advance and in writing. The City
Manager may authorize payment for such work up to a cumulative maximum of $10,000.
Payment for additional work in excess of $10,000 requires prior City Council authorization.
2.0 Term
This term of this Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue
terminated as provided by this Agreement.
3.0 Consultant's Compensation
City will pay Consultant in accordance with the fee schedule set forth on page 20 of the
`Proposal to Prepare the 2008 Housing Element Update' dated October 30, 2008, for Services
but in no event will the City pay more than $ 45,930. Any additional work authorized by the
City pursuant to Section 1.4 will be compensated in accordance with the rate schedule set forth
on page 20 of the `Proposal to Prepare the 2008 Housing Element Update' dated October 30,
2008.
4.0 Method of Payment
4.1. Consultant must submit to City monthly invoices for all services rendered
pursuant to his Agreement. Such invoices must be submitted within 15 days of the end of the
1 of 7
S7296-0001\1103444v1.doc
month during which the services were rendered and must describe in detail the services rendered
during the period, the days worked, number of hours worked, the hourly rates charged, and the
services performed for each day in the period. City will pay Consultant within 30 days of
receiving Consultant's invoice. City will not withhold any applicable federal or state payroll and
other required taxes, or other authorized deductions from payments made to Consultant.
4.2. Upon 24 hours notice from City, Consultant must allow City or City's agents or
representatives to inspect at Consultant's offices during reasonable business hours all records,
invoices, time cards, cost control sheets and other records maintained by Consultant in
connection with this Agreement. City's rights under this Section 4.2 shall survive for two years
following the termination of this Agreement.
5.0 Termination
5.1. This Agreement may be terminated by City, without cause, or by Consultant
based on reasonable cause, upon giving the other party written notice thereof not less than thirty
30 days prior to the date of termination.
5.2. This Agreement may be terminated by City upon 10 days' notice to Consultant if
Consultant fails to provide satisfactory evidence of renewal or replacement of comprehensive
general liability insurance as required by this Agreement at least 20 days before the expiration
date of the previous policy.
6.0 Party Representatives
6.1. The City Manager is the City's representative for purposes of this Agreement.
6.2. Mr. John H. Douglas is the Consultant's primary representative for purposes of
this Agreement.
7.0 Notices
7.1. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be deemed made
when personally delivered or when mailed 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class
postage prepaid and addressed to the party at the following addresses:
To City: City of Seal Beach
211 8th Street
Seal Beach, California 90740
Attn: City Manager
To Consultant: CONEXUS
13142 Rosalind Drive
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Attn: John H. Douglas
7.2. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred,
regardless of the method of service.
2 of 7
S7296-0001\1103444v1.doc
8.0 Independent contractor
8.1. Consultant is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. All
services provided pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed by Consultant or under its
supervision. Consultant will determine the means, methods, and details of performing the
services. Any additional personnel performing services under this Agreement on behalf of
Consultant shall also not be employees of City and shall at all times be under Consultant's
exclusive direction and control. Consultant shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due
such personnel in connection with their performance of services under this Agreement and as
required by law. Consultant shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such
additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding,
unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
8.2. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City and its elected officials,
officers and employees, servants, designated volunteers, and agents serving as independent
contractors in the role of city officials, from any and all liability, damages, claims, costs and
expenses of any nature to the extent arising from Consultant's person el practices. City
shall have the right to offset against the amount of any fees due to Consultant under this
Agreement any amount due to City from Consultant as a result of Consultant's failure to
promptly pay to City any reimbursement or indemnification arising under this Section 5.
9.0 Subcontractors
No portion of this Agreement shall be subcontracted without the prior written approval of
the City. Consultant is fully responsible to City for the performance of any and all
subcontractors.
10.0 Assignment
Consultant shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement whether by
assignment or novation, without the prior written consent of City. Any purported assignment
without such consent shall be void and without effect.
11.0 Insurance
11.1. Consultant must not commence work under this Agreement until it has provided
evidence satisfactory to the City that Consultant has secured all insurance required under this
Section. Consultant shall furnish City with original certificates of insurance and endorsements
effecting coverage required by this Agreement on forms satisfactory to the City. The certificates
and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that
insurer to bind coverage on its behalf, and shall be on forms provided by the City if requested.
All certificates and endorsements shall be received and approved by the City before work
commences. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required
insurance policies, at any time.
11.2. Consultant shall, at its expense, procure and maintain for the duration of the
Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may
arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Insurance is to be placed
3 of 7
S7296-0001\1103444v1.doc
with insurers with a current A.M. Best's rating no less than A:VIII, licensed to do business in
California, and satisfactory to the City. Coverage shall be at least as broad as the latest version
of the following: (1) General Liability: Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability
coverage (occurrence form CG 0001); and (2) Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office
Business Auto Coverage form number CA 0001, code 1 (any auto). Consultant shall maintain
limits no less than: (1) General Liability: $1,000,000 per occurrence for bodily injury, personal
injury and property damage and if Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a
general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this
Agreemendlocation or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit;
and (2) Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
11.3. The insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or Consultant shall
provide endorsements on forms supplied or approved by the City to state: (1) coverage shall not
be suspended, voided, reduced or canceled except after 30 days prior written notice by certified
mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City; (2) any failure to comply with
reporting or other provisions of the policies, including breaches of warranties, shall not affect
coverage provided to the City, its directors, officials, officers, (3) coverage shall be primary
insurance as respects the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers,
or if excess, shall stand in an unbroken chain of coverage excess of the Consultant's scheduled
underlying coverage and that any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its
directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's
insurance and shall not be called upon to contribute with it; (4) for general liability insurance,
that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers shall be covered
as additional insureds with respect to the services or operations performed by or on behalf of the
Consultant, including materials, parts or equipment furnished in connection with such work; and
(5) for automobile liability, that the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and
volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation,
maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the
Consultant or for which the Consultant is responsible.
11.4. All insurance required by this Section shall contain standard separation of
insureds provisions and shall not contain any special limitations on the scope of protection
afforded to the City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
11.5. Any deductibles or self-insured retentions shall be declared to and approved by
the City. Consultant guarantees that, at the option of the City, either: (1) the insurer shall reduce
or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the City, its directors,
officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers; or (2) the Consultant shall procure a bond
guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigation costs, claims and administrative and
defense expenses.
12.0 Indemnification, Hold Harmless, and Duty to Defend
Consultant shall indemnify, and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees,
volunteers and agents serving as independent contractors in the role of city officials (collectively
"Indemnities") free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs,
expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including
S 729 6-0001 \ 1103444v 1. doc
4 of 7
wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to the negligent or wrongful acts or
omissions of Consultant, its employees, or its agents in connection with the performance of this
Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages and attorneys
fees and other related costs and expenses. With respect to any and all such aforesaid suits,
actions, or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against
Indemnitees, Consultant shall defend Indemnitees, at Consultant's own cost, expense, and risk,
and shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award, or decree that may be rendered against
Indemnitees. Consultant shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees,
agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs incurred by each of them in
connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Consultant's obligation to
indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by the City, its directors,
officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. All duties of Consultant under this Section
shall survive termination of this Agreement.
13.0 Equal Opportunity
Consultant affirmatively represents that it is an equal opportunity employer. Consultant
must not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment because
of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, or age. Such
non-discrimination includes, but is not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment,
upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff, or termination.
14.0 Labor Certification
By its signature hereunder, Consultant certifies that it is aware of the provisions of
Section 3700 of the California Labor Code that require every employer to be insured against
liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the
provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the
performance of the Services.
15.0 Entire Agreement
This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject
matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings, or agreements. This
Agreement may only be modified by a writing signed by both parties.
16.0 Severability
The invalidity in whole or in part of any provisions of this Agreement shall not void or
affect the validity of the other provisions of this Agreement.
17.0 Governing Law
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
State of California.
Sof7
S7296-0001\ 1103444v l .doc
18.0 No Third Party Rights
No third party shall be deemed to have any rights hereunder against either party as a
result of this Agreement.
19.0 Waiver
No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether
of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily
given or performed by a party shall give the other party any contractual rights by custom,
estoppel, or otherwise.
20.0 Prohibited Interests
Consultant maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or
person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, to solicit or secure this
Agreement. Further, Consultant warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any
company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for Consultant, any fee,
commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting
from the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City has
the right to rescind this Agreement without liability. For the term of this Agreement, no
member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have
any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising
therefrom.
21.0 Attorneys' Fees
If either party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or
otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing party in such
litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing party all of its attorney's fees and
other costs incurred in connection with such action.
22.0 Exhibits
All exhibits referenced in this Agreement are hereby incorporated into the Agreement as
if set forth in full herein. In the event of any material discrepancy between the terms of any
exhibit so incorporated and the terms of this Agreement, the terms of this Agreement shall
control.
23.0 Corporate Authority
The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of the Parties warrant that they are duly
authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of said Parties and that by their execution, the
Parties are formally bound to the provision of this Agreement.
6 of 7
S7296-0001\1103444v1.doc
Dec 01 08 09:29p Conexus
7146280330 p.2
Il~T QiTITNESS WI~REOF, the Parties hereto, through their respective authorized
representatives have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written.
CITY OF SEAL BEACH CONSULTANT
By. By:
David Carrnaay, City Manager
Name: J H. D s, AICP
Attest:
Its: Principal
By:
Linda Devine, City Clerk
Bv:
Name:
Approved as to Form:
By:
Its:
Quinn Barrow, Ciiy Attorney
7 of 7
S7?96-0001;1 ]03a44vl,doc
Page 6
ATTACHMENT 3
"PROPOSAL -
UPDATE, CITY
SUBMITTED BY
HOUSING
OF SEAL
CONEXUS,
ELEMENT
BEACH",
DATED
OCTOBER 30, 2008
CITY OF SEAL BEACH
Proposal to Prepare the
200 Housing Element Update
Submitted to: City of Seal Beach
211 8t" Street
Seal Beach, CA 90740
Submitted by: CoNexus
Contact: John Douglas, AICP
13142 Rosalind Drive
North Tustin, CA 92705
Phone: 714.628.0464
October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
CoNExus October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Table of Contents
A. Project Understanding and Approach ......................................... 1
B. Consultant Team Description and Qualifications .......................... 2
C. Scope of Work .......................................................................... 6
D. Schedule ................................................................................. 19
E. Fee Schedule and Cost Estimate ................................................20
Appendices
1. Resumes ................................................................................. 21
2. Summary of Recent Housing Element Legislation ........................ 25
3. Common Housing Element Questions and Answers ..................... 27
CONEXUS -i- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
This page intentionally left blank
CONEXUS -ii- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
A. Project Seal Beach is an established beach community that is
Understanding and essentially built-out. In recent years the development
Approach of the Hellman Ranch property occurred on the last
significant remaining vacant parcel of buildable land in
the city.
Based on our conversation with City staff, we
understand that a comprehensive update of the
Zoning Code and preparation of a new Local Coastal
Program are currently underway. We will integrate
these planning efforts with the Housing Element update
to the extent feasible. Typically, Housing Element
updates identify aspects of the Zoning Code that
require modification in response to recent changes in
state law. Depending on the timing of the Zoning
Code revisions, it may be possible to incorporate
needed revisions into the Zoning Code prior to or
concurrent with adoption of the Housing Element,
thereby streamlining the implementation program.
The lack of vacant residential land is reflected in the
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), prepared
by the Southern California Association of Governments
(SCAG). The RHNA identifies new housing needs for
each jurisdiction in the region, and Seal Beach has
been assigned a growth need of 57 new housing units
for the period 2006 - 2014, including 21 units in the
lower-income categories. How jurisdictions
accommodate their "fair share" housing needs is one
of the most important components of the Housing
Element update, and is often the key to obtaining
certification from the state Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD). How the City will
accommodate its RHNA allocation will be one of the
most important aspects of the update process.
We understand that the current Housing Element has
not been certified by state HCD. This issue will need to
be considered in both the evaluation of the previous
element, and in the preparation of policies and
programs for the new Housing Element. Our proposed
scope of work assumes that the update will be
comprehensive in scope, but with special focus on
those revisions needed in response to recent changes
in state Housing Element law, and on any changes in
local conditions and policies since the 2001 Element
was adopted.
The updated Housing Element will examine the City's
zoning and inventory of sites for new housing, and
determine whether this inventory can accommodate
the RHNA need, particularly in the very-low- and low-
CONEXUS -1- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
income categories. In its memo on AB 2348 state HCD
established a "default density" for Seal Beach of at
least 20 dwelling units per acre to facilitate the
production of lower-cost housing. This issue will be
analyzed as part of the update, along with other
strategies such as mixed use and second units.
Under new state law2, if the Housing Element does not
demonstrate adequate sites to accommodate the
RHNA for lower-income households, a jurisdiction must
adopt a program to provide sufficient sites and allow
multi-family development on such sites "by right",
which is interpreted by HCD to mean no public
hearings and no discretionary review triggering CEQA
analysis. A brief summary of other recent changes to
Housing Element law is provided in Appendix 2.
In addition to the new (2006-2014) RHNA allocations,
other recent amendments to Housing Element law3
may require a "carryover" of a portion of the previous
RHNA when the previous element was not certified.
This issue will be evaluated as part of the update.
B. Consultant Team CONEXUS is an urban and environmental planning
Description and consulting firm formed in 2004. Founding principal John
Qualifications H. Douglas, AICP brings nearly 35 years of diverse
planning experience to the firm, which has afforded
him a broad understanding of land use planning and
analysis, environmental planning and CEQA
documentation, housing policy and implementation,
demographic and market analysis, development
feasibility analysis, entitlement processing, public
participation and conflict resolution. We maintain
offices in Orange County and San Diego.
There are two principles that define CONEXUS and our
approach to all our planning projects. First, we are a
small firm with only seasoned professionals. There are
no junior planners-in-training here. Each of the
consultants who will work on this project has 25 to 35
years of experience in both public and private sectors.
Because we each have worked as senior staff on "both
sides of the counter", we understand the needs of our
clients and don't spin our wheels. We have excellent
communication skills and we do quality work the first
time, without the need for extensive revisions. As a
Memo dated June 9, 2005 from Cathy Creswell, Deputy Director, California Department of
Housing and Community Development regarding AB 2348 of 2004
s AB 2348 of 2004 (Govt. Code Sec. 65583.2[h])
s AB 1233 of 2005 (Govt. Code Sec. 65584.09
CoNExus -2- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
result, we are better able to control budgets and meet
our clients' expectations.
Second, we approach each Housing Element update
as a team effort -while we have special expertise in
preparing Housing Elements, the City's staff, officials
and community stakeholders have a detailed
understanding of local conditions, information sources,
and priorities that are essential to a successful project.
In the kickoff meeting we will exchange information
about the City's important issues and how the Housing
Element update can best meet the City's objectives
while also satisfying the requirements of state law.
Obtaining state certification of the Housing Element
can be a daunting task, and CONEXU$ is especially well-
qualified to help cities in this regard for two reasons.
Mr. Douglas has worked with management and senior
staff at state HCD as both a local government planner
and consultant over the past 25 years to resolve
Housing Element issues and help cities and counties
obtain certification. His long experience and good
relationships with HCD enable him to identify solutions
to issues raised by HCD during the review process.
During the 2008 Housing Element cycle he assisted over
25 jurisdictions in Southern and Central California with
their updates.
Secondly, Mr. Douglas is a certified mediator with a
background in helping to find solutions to difficult land
use and public policy issues. He holds a Certificate in
Conflict Management and Alternative Dispute
Resolution from the University of California, Irvine and is
a lecturer in the Graduate Program in Urban and
Regional Planning at UCI where he teaches seminars in
housing elements and collaborative planning.
Local control of land use matters is of paramount
importance to local elected officials, and the state's
role in certifying housing elements can be very difficult
for decision-makers to accept. Mr. Douglas'
knowledge' of housing issues and background in
consensus building strategies can help overcome these
obstacles and achieve successful solutions.
CorvExus -3- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Personnel The following consultant team members will carry out
this assignment. Resumes are provided in Appendix 1.
John Douglas, AICP Mr. Douglas will serve Principal in Charge and Project
Principal in Charge/ Manager for the Housing Element update, will prepare
Project Manager or review all Housing Element and CEQA documents,
and will be responsible for cost, schedule and quality
control. John will be the day-to-day contact with City
staff and attend public workshops, public hearings,
and meetings. John's extensive experience with
Housing Elements and conflict resolution methods
makes him well-qualified to lead the consultant team
for the Housing Element update.
During the current Housing Element cycle, Mr. Douglas
is supervising the preparation of over 20 Housing
Element updates in seven counties. Most of these
elements are currently in the final revision stage in
response to HCD comments.
Greg Konar, AICP Mr. Konar has over 23 years professional planning
Senior Associate experience in both the public and private sectors. His
diverse range of experience encompasses many highly
complex projects including master plans, specific
plans, zoning ordinances, general plan amendments,
and entitlement processing.
Greg's experience with major local government and
private sector planning projects has enabled him to
develop a balanced, highly effective, solution-oriented
approach toward land use planning, policy
development and implementation.
Prior to joining Conexus, Greg was Senior Project
Manager with Project Design Consultants in San Diego.
At PDC Mr. Konar was project manager for the
SeaWorld San Diego Master Plan update, the Rancho
San Juan Specific Plan - a 4,000 unit new urbanist-
sustainable community in Monterey County -and the
Rancho Lilac Specific Plan in San Diego County among
many other planning projects. His public sector
projects at PDC included amendments to the City of
San Clemente General Plan, land use and zoning
feasibility studies for the City of National City, and an
adjunct staff assignment with the County of San Diego
as a Senior Land Use and Environmental Planner.
Mr. Konar will assist in data collection, analysis, and
preparation of portions of the Housing Element update.
~~Ntxus -4- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
References Our team members have an extraordinary depth of
experience preparing Housing Elements in a wide
variety of communities including coastal jurisdictions
(Malibu, Hermosa Beach, Ventura, San Clemente,
Laguna Niguel, County of Orange) and other
communities with high housing costs (Rolling Hills
Estates, Mission Viejo, Lake Forest, Rancho Santa
Margarita, Culver City, Camarillo).
We encourage City staff to contact these current
Housing Element clients for references.
City of Mission Viejo
Chuck Wilson, Community Development Director
949-470-3024
cwilson@cityofmissionviejo.org
City of San Clemente
Leslie Davis, Senior Planner
949-361-6188
davisl@san-clemente.org
City of Lake Forest
Cheryl Kuta, AICP, Planning Manager
949-461-3479
ckuta@ci.lake-forest.ca.us
City of Rolling Hills Estates
Niki Cutler, Principal Planner
310-377-1577x115
NikiC@ci.rolling-hills-estates.ca.us
City of Big Bear Lake
Jim Miller, Director of Planning and Building
909-866-5831
jmiller@CITYBIGBEARLAKE.com
City of Santa Paula
Janna Minsk, AICP, Planning Director
805-933-4244
jminsk@ci.santa-pau(a.ca.us
City of Yucaipa
John McMains, Planning Director
909-797-2489
jmcmains@yucaipa.org
CONEXUS -5- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
C. Scope of Work The following section outlines the specific tasks we
anticipate for this project. Other optional tasks are
also listed following the core tasks.
Task 1 Following authorization to proceed, the first step will
Project Initiation be to meet with City staff to review the work
program, make any necessary adjustments, and
refine the schedule to meet the City's objectives. A
review of the previous Housing Element and new
requirements will help to identify key issues to be
addressed. The public outreach program will also be
refined at this stage. Data requirements and the
respective expectations and responsibilities of City
staff and the consultant team will be clarified. It is
assumed that staff will provide us with an MS Word
document file of the current Housing Element and
related documents upon commencement of the
project.
Products
~ 1 kick-off meeting with City staff
+ Refined work program and schedule
Task 2 Task 2 encompasses the research, data compilation,
Research and Analysis and analysis necessary to update the required
sections of the Housing Element, which include the
Progress Evaluation; Needs Assessment; Resources
and Opportunities; Constraints; and Goals, Policies,
and Quantified Objectives. A consistency evaluation
will also be conducted to identify any areas where
new Housing Element policies may require
amendments to other elements of the General Plan.
The findings from this analysis will be incorporated into
the Draft Housing Element, and will play a key role in
framing policy issues and developing the 2008-2014
Action Plan. Specific topics to be addressed are
described below.
2.1 Evaluation of the This task involves the review and evaluation of the
Previous Housing previous Housing Element, including appropriateness
Element of goals and policies, the effectiveness of programs,
and the City's progress in meeting quantified
objectives. The focus of this effort is to identify
refinements to previous policies and programs that
respond to new state housing laws, changed
circumstances, or new opportunities in order to make
the Housing Element more effective in achieving the
City's objectives.
Since much of the information needed for this
CONEXUS -6- October 30, 2008
of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
evaluation is contained in City files, the budget
assumes that City staff will assist CONEXUS by gathering
and compiling the following information for the
previous planning period. We will provide templates
to assist staff in this effort.
o New units produced by type and
income category
o Units rehabilitated or conserved
o Current status of housing program
actions
Products
~ Screencheck analysis of the appropriateness
of goals and policies, effectiveness of
programs, and progress in meeting objectives
2.2 Needs Assessment A fundamental component of the Housing Element is
an identification of the community's needs. The
source of much of this information is the 2000
Decennial Census. Other demographic reference
sources such as state Department of Finance (DOF)
population and housing trends, state Employment
Development Department job statistics and
forecasts, and real estate market data will also be
utilized in the analysis. The Regional Housing Needs
Assessment prepared by SCAG will provide growth
needs for the new planning period.
The needs assessment will include all of the items
required by California Government Code Section
65583(a) and Department of Housing and
Community Development guidelines, including the
following specific items:
+ Analysis of population and employment
trends and existing and projected housing
needs for all income levels.
~ Analysis of household characteristics including
level of payment compared to ability to pay,
and housing characteristics, including
overcrowding, affordability levels and housing
stock conditions.
Analysis of special housing needs, including
large families, elderly, female-headed
households, persons with disabilities,
farmworkers and the homeless. This analysis
will also address how the City complies with
the requirements of recent legislation
regarding emergency shelters, transitional
CONEXUS -7- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
and supportive housing (SB 2 of 2007).
+ Analysis of "at-risk" assisted housing
developments (if any).
The budget assumes that City staff will assist CONEXUS
by providing the following information:
+ Units At Risk - an inventory of assisted housing
projects in the City and their eligibility to
convert to market rate. If it is determined that
there are units at risk, the required analysis will
be conducted as an optional task.
+ Housing conditions data -Housing Element
law requires an estimate of the number of
housing units in need of rehabilitation or
replacement. Based on our observations and
the high property values in Seal Beach, we
believe it is unlikely that there are many units
with serious structural problems. Accordingly,
it is possible that this analysis could be based
on the observations and professional
judgment of Code Enforcement, Planning
and Building Department staff rather than a
comprehensive field survey. This issue will be
discussed with City staff during the project
initiation task. If it is determined that a new
field survey is necessary, an amendment to
the budget may be required.
2.3 Resources and The analysis of resources and opportunities will focus
Opportunities on the following topics.
+ Land inventory/site analysis and an
evaluation of the relationship of zoning and
public facilities to serve these sites.
+ Financial and administrative resources,
including federal, state and local housing
assistance programs
+ Analysis of opportunities for energy
conservation.
The analysis will include the City's Redevelopment
Agency programs and objectives related to the
Low/Moderate set-aside fund.
The analysis of available housing sites is a critical
component of the Housing Element. Cities must
demonstrate that adequate sites with appropriate
zoning are available to accommodate the RHNA
allocation, plus any RHNA "carryover" from the
previous period. The inventory of sites may include
vacant or "underutilized" parcels with potential for
CoNExus -8- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
additional housing development or redevelopment.
The City's RHNA allocation for the new planning
period is 57 units, 21 of which are assigned to the
lower-income categories. Under new state law (AB
1233 of 2005), any unmet portion of the RHNA
allocation from the previous period must be carried
forward and added to the RHNA for the new
planning period. Since it is our understanding that
the City's previous Housing Element was not certified
by HCD, it is possible that some RHNA carryover may
be required.
Also in response to new state law (AB 2348 of 2004), a
"default density" of 20 units/acre is assumed to be
sufficient to facilitate lower-income housing
development. Any sites with zoning that allows at
least this density will be counted as lower-income
sites. Based on our conversation with City staff, we
understand that there are relatively few vacant sites
suitable for additional housing development. As part
of the initiation phase we will explore this issue in
detail and work with staff to develop an appropriate
methodology for updating the land inventory.
The budget also assumes that City staff will assist
CONEXUS by providing a digital base map suitable for
use in showing the locations of vacant/underutilized
parcels with the potential for housing development.
If sufficient vacant or underutilized sites at suitable
densities are not available to meet the current RHNA
allocation plus any "carryover", program options for
making additional sites available will need to be
considered.
2.4 Constraints Constraints include the following issues to be studied:
Governmental constraints, including land use
plans and regulations, zoning, development
standards, improvement requirements,
impact fees and processing procedures will
be analyzed. The budget assumes that City
staff will assist in this process by identifying any
changes to plans, regulations, and other
potential governmental constraints that have
occurred since the previous Housing Element
was prepared. Our experience in preparing
Housing Elements during the past year has
shown that obtaining a finding of
"compliance" from state HCD has become
much more challenging than in previous
CONEXUS -9- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
cycles, and the governmental constraints
analysis is one of the prime examples of this
change. While the City's previous Housing
Element is well written, it appears from our
review that a substantially more detailed
analysis will be necessary in the new element,
particularly in the areas of zoning and
development standards related to lower-
income and special needs housing,
processing procedures, fees and public
improvement requirements.
Non-governmental constraints, including land
cost, construction cost, financing cost and
availability, environmental conditions (e.g.,
wetlands and floodplains, geotechnical
problems, sensitive biological habitat) and
infrastructure (particularly water and
wastewater treatment capacity), will be
evaluated. It is assumed that the City's Public
Works/Engineering staff will provide the
information needed to assess infrastructure
capacity constraints.
2.5 Goals, Policies, The foregoing analysis of needs, resources,
Programs and opportunities and constraints, together with the
Objectives evaluation of the current Housing Element, will
provide guidance in identifying areas where previous
policies and programs may need to be refined to
better accomplish the City's objectives, as well as
address changes in state law. CONEXUS will work with
staff and decision-makers to identify policy options
and refine the goals, policies and programs as
necessary.
The results of the research and analysis described
above will be used to prepare an Administrative Draft
Housing Element for review by City staff (see Task 4
below).
Products
+ Research and analysis for the preparation of
the draft Housing Element
Task 3 Task 4 entails the writing and production of the new
Housing Element Housing Element document for review by City staff,
decision-makers, the public, and State HCD. This will
Preparation be followed by revisions to the draft element in
response to comments from state HCD, and final
adoption by the City Council.
CONEXUS -10- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
3.1 Administrative Draff An Administrative Draft Housing Element will be
Housing Element prepared incorporating the research and analysis
from Task 2 as well as updated goals, policies,
quantified objectives, and implementation programs
describing the City's housing strategy for the 2008-
2014 planning period. Policies and programs will be
based on the review of the City's progress in
implementing the current element and where
appropriate, refinements will be recommended. It is
important to note that the budget assumes that a
complete Administrative Draft document will be
submitted for staff review, and that all comments on
the Administrative draft will be consolidated and
delivered as a single package.
This proposal assumes that the new Housing Element
will be prepared in substantially the same format as
the previous element.
Products
• Administrative Draft Housing Element
document (1 hard copy + Word and PDF
electronic files)
(Note: If desired, CONEXUS can provide additional
copies of documents on atime-and-materials basis)
3.2 Public Review Draff A Public Review Draft Element will then be prepared
Housing Element incorporating City comments. If additional rounds of
review are requested on the Draff Element at this
stage, or if late comments must be incorporated
affer the Public Review Draft has been completed,
they will be provided as extra work on a time-and-
materials basis.
Products
• Public Review Draft Housing Element (1 hard
copy + Word and PDF electronic files)
3.3 HCD Review Draff Although not explicitly discussed in the RFP, our
Housing Element experience has been that it is desirable to have
decision-makers review the draft element prior to
submittal to HCD. An efficient use of time and
budget could be a joint study session held by the
Planning Commission and City Council (see Task 5 for
further discussion of the public participation strategy).
Following the study session an HCD Review Draft
Element will be prepared incorporating the
comments of policy-makers. This draft will be
delivered to staff and one round of review is
budgeted. This Draft element will then be submitted
to HCD for its 60-day review.
CONEXUS -11- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Products
+ HCD Review Draft Housing Element document
(1 hard copy+ Word and PDF electronic files)
3.4 Proposed Final The ultimate goal of the Housing Element update
Housing Element process is to adopt and implement an element that
meets City objectives and also is certified by the
California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD). HCD certification of the
Housing Element is important for several reasons - to
maintain eligibility for grant funds, to ensure alegally-
adequate General Plan, and to maintain local
control of the land use planning process.
Affer receipt of HCD comments on the Draft Housing
Element, CONExUS will work with staff to revise the
element, as necessary, to address the state's
concerns. We will prepare a summary matrix
following the points raised in HCD's review letter
along with a tracked version of the revised draft
element so that all parties can easily see how the
City has responded to HCD comments.
Our experience preparing Housing Elements in many
other jurisdictions over the past 25 years has provided
us with a good working relationship with HCD's senior
staff and a thorough understanding of what is
required in order to receive Housing Element
certification. In particular, our experience during the
past year indicates that obtaining HCD approval has
become far more challenging than in previous
cycles. While this is in part due to new laws (see
Appendix 2), we have also found that HCD is
interpreting old laws in a manner that requires much
more detailed analysis.
Our approach to obtaining certification is based on
establishing and maintaining a cooperative working
relationship with HCD's assigned reviewer and
management. We expect to have conversations
with HCD staff during the course of the project as
questions and issues arise. In our experience, HCD
staff has always been willing to work cooperatively
with our client jurisdictions, including attendance at
public meetings to explain state requirements and
expectations to decision-makers and the community.
This process of clarifying and resolving issues during
the Housing Element preparation phase increases the
likelihood of achieving certification and reduces
delays.
CONEXUS -12- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
The practice of HCD in recent years has been to issue
a letter of "conditional certification" when an
element essentially complies with state law but
follow-up actions are necessary to implement
adopted policies or programs. While "full"
certification is desirable (i.e., without requiring
subsequent review and approval of implementation
actions by HCD), in many cases required program
actions cannot be completed within the timeframe
of element adoption. Our commitment is to assist the
City in achieving full certification to the extent
feasible. However, if implementation actions are
necessary in order to achieve full certification, we will
assist the City in carrying out these subsequent
actions and coordinating with HCD within budget
limits.
The budget assumes a total of 20 hours for this task. If
HCD comments require more time and effort than
this budget allows, additional work will be done on a
time-and-materials basis.
(Note: Appendix 3 contains insights gleaned from our
conversations with HCD staff regarding recent
changes to state Housing Element law.)
Products
+ Review and analysis of HCD comments
+ Meetings/conference calls to review HCD
comments with City and HCD staff
+ Matrix summarizing HCD comments and
proposed changes to the Draft Housing
Element (1 reproducible copy)
+ Preparation of a revised Draff Housing
Element for consideration by decision-makers
(1 hard copy + Word and PDF electronic files)
3.5 Finpl Housing Following completion of proposed revisions to
Element address HCD comments, public hearings will be held
by the Planning Commission and City Council to
review the draff final element. CONEXUS will make any
additional revisions to the document to address
Planning Commission comments prior to
consideration by the City Council.
Further revisions, if necessary, will be made to
respond to City Council direction. The adopted
element will then be submitted to HCD for
certification.
CONEXUS -13- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Products
• Planning Commission: Proposed Final Housing
Element document (1 hard copy+ Word and
PDF electronic files)
+ City Council: Revised Draft Final Housing
Element document (1 hard copy + Word and
PDF electronic files)
(Note: While our goal is to help the City produce a
Housing Element that receives certification by HCD, it
is possible that unresolved policy differences
between City decision-makers and HCD could hinder
certification efforts. CONEXUS cannot guarantee, nor
is payment for our services contingent upon, HCD
certification. If additional revisions and/or public
hearings are required, assistance can be provided on
atime-and-materials basis.)
Task 4 During the preparation of the updated Housing
General Plan Element, we will prepare a General Plan Consistency
Evaluation to identify any areas where the new
Consistency Evaluation element may require revisions to other elements to
maintain consistency. The focus of this effort will be
the residential land use categories and policies
contained in the Land Use Element, although all
elements will be reviewed. The findings of this
analysis will be presented to City staff. If desired,
CONEXUS can prepare amendments to other elements
or related documents (e.g., Zoning Code) as optional
tasks.
Products
+ General Plan Consistency Evaluation (1 hard
copy + Word and PDF electronic files)
Task 5 State Housing Element law4 requires a pro-active
Public Participation effort to involve interested persons and organizations
in the preparation of Housing Elements. The public
involvement process could include stakeholder
meetings, public workshops, focus groups, interviews,
surveys, and media. Public participation and
collaborative planning are particular strengths of our
consulting practice, and Mr. Douglas has extensive
experience facilitating workshops and meetings, and
we are frequently complimented on the clarity of our
presentations. We encourage City staff to contact
our previous clients regarding our public
presentations as part of the proposal evaluation.
The RFP indicates that at least three community
a Cal. Govt. Code Sec. 65583(0(6)
CONEXUS -14 October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
outreach meetings should be included in the project
scope. While public involvement is essential,
expanded opportunities also have schedule and
budget consequences. We recognize that most
small jurisdictions have limited funds, and also that
the state-mandated deadline for this round of
Housing Elements has passed.
In consideration of these factors, this proposal
presents an alternative approach to the public
involvement program that we have used successfully
on a number of other Housing Element updates. This
approach would include two Planning
Commission/City Council study sessions and one
community outreach meeting, in addition to
adoption public hearings by the Planning
Commission and City Council. We assume that the
outreach program will be fine-tuned as part of the
initiation phase of the project in conformance with
schedule and budget constraints. Prior to the first
meeting we will assist the City in preparing a public
notice distribution list.
5.1 Joint Planning We have found that joint study sessions are an
Commission/City efficient use of both time and budget. If City officials
Council Workshop #1 are comfortable with this format, one joint study
session will be held early in the process to review
Housing Element requirements, issues and policy
options. CONEXUS will provide a slide presentation
along with appropriate handout materials for this
meeting.
Products
+ Attendance, slide presentation and handout
materials
5.2 Community One community outreach meeting is proposed, to be
Outreach Meeting held shortly after the first joint study session. The
purpose of this meeting would be to inform
attendees of the issues to be addressed in the
Housing Element and solicit opinions and suggestions
regarding local housing needs and program priorities.
Products
• Attendance, slide presentation and handout
materials for one community outreach
meeting
5.3 Joint Planning The purpose of the second joint study session would
Commission/City be to present the Public Review Draft Housing
Council Workshop #2 Element to decision-makers, review issues and policy
options, and obtain authorization to submit the draft
to state HCD. CONEXUS will provide a presentation
CoNExus -15- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
and respond to questions.
Products
• Attendance, presentation and handout
materials
5.4 Planning Commission Following the receipt of HCD comments the
and City Council Proposed Final Housing Element will be prepared
Public Hearings (Task 3.4) incorporating revisions to address HCD
concerns. It is assumed that one public hearing each
will be held by the Planning Commission and City
Council for adoption of the element. Following
Council approval, the Final Housing Element will be
submitted to State HCD for certification as required
by state law.
CorvExus' Project Manager will give a presentation at
each public hearing to focus attention on the key
issues, and will respond to questions. The budget
assumes that CONEXUS will assist Carr staff in preparing
staff reports, resolutions, and related materials for
these hearings.
If further substantive changes to the element are
required in response to HCD comments after Council
adoption, additional public hearings may be
necessary. If desired, CONEXUS can prepare
additional revisions to the Housing Element, assist with
staff reports and public noticing, and attend
additional hearings on atime-and-materials basis.
Products
+ Preparation of draff staff reports and
participation at one Planning Commission
public hearing and one City Council public
hearing
Task 6 CONEXUS will prepare an Initial Study for the Draft
CEQA Review Housing Element in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act. A Preliminary IS/ND will be
submitted to City staff for review, and a Public
Review Draft IS/ND will be prepared incorporating
staff comments. The IS/ND will conform to the City's
procedures and format for CEQA documents. One
round of review and revisions is budgeted.
It is assumed that the Initial Study will support the
preparation of a Negative Declaration. If the Initial
Study finds that significant impacts could occur, an
EIR would be required and a revision to this scope
and budget will be negotiated. The budget assumes
that the analysis will be limited to program-level issues
CONEXUS -16- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
and not site-specific actions such as Land Use
Element designations or zone changes. If site-specific
project-level analysis is required, a supplemental
budget will be negotiated.
It is assumed that City staff will distribute the Public
Review IS/ND to the State Clearinghouse and
Responsible Agencies. After the close of the
comment period we will prepare draft responses to
comments for City review. Final responses to
comments, revisions to the IS/ND (if necessary), and a
mitigation monitoring program (if necessary) will then
be prepared incorporating staff comments for
consideration by decision-makers.
We assume that no separate scoping meeting will be
necessary for the CEQA document, and that
consideration of the IS/ND will be handled as part of
the Housing Element review and adoption hearings.
The budget assumes that the City will handle filing of
the IS/ND and Notice of Determination with the
County Clerk, and that the City will be responsible for
any filing fees.
(Note: Recent changes in state law may limit the
City's ability to conduct CEQA review of "by right"
multi-family housing approvals on sites that are
rezoned to accommodate the lower-income needs
identified in the RHNA. As a result, "project-level"
CEQA review may be required for Housing Element
implementation actions. This proposal assumes
CEQA review of Housing Element policy issues only - if
subsequent CEQA documentation is required for
implementation actions orsite-specific entitlements, it
can be provided as an additional product with a
supplemental budgef.J
Products
+ Administrative Draft Initial Study/Negative
Declaration
+ Public Review Draft Initial Study/Negative
Declaration
+ Notice of Availability/Notice of Intent to
Adopt the IS/ND
+ Preliminary Responses to Comments
+ Final Responses to Comments
• Final Adopted IS/ND and Mitigation
CONEXUS -17- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Monitoring Program, if necessary
(Note: The proposed budget assumes that CoNexus
will provide one reproducible hard copy and
electronic files of each work product and the City will
duplicate and distribute the documents as
appropriate.)
Task 7 CONEXUS' Project Manager will maintain regular
Meetings and contact with staff as often as necessary to ensure a
smooth working relationship and successful
Project Management completion of the project. Up to five on-site
meetings with City staff during the course of the
project are included in the budget. It is assumed that
additional coordination will occur via telephone and
e-mail. Monthly status meetings are also assumed via
conference call.
Products
• Regular coordination with City staff via
telephone or a-mail
+ Up to 5 on-site working meetings
+ Monthly status meetings via conference call
Opflonal Tasks If desired, additional tasks and services can be
provided on atime-and-materials basis. Such tasks
could include additional public participation efforts,
revisions to the Development Code or other planning
documents, design guidelines, conceptual site plans
for key parcels, etc.
CONEXUS -18- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
D. Proposed Schedule The following schedule identifies proposed milestones
for the major components of the Housing Element
update. Obtaining the approval of state HCD
requires a significant amount of time, which is
affected by the specific issues raised during the
review process. Recent experience has shown that
more than one round of review by HCD is generally
necessary to obtain certification. There are different
ways to structure this process, and our typical
approach has been to work informally with HCD staff
to address their concerns prior to official submittal of
a revised draft or adopted element. At the project
outset we will review the schedule with City staff and
jointly refine the schedule.
We believe the keys to schedule (and budget)
control are 1) a clear understanding of issues, 2) close
coordination between the consultant and City staff,
and 3) an experienced consulting team. CONEXUS'
senior staff have managed numerous similar projects
and are committed to providing excellent service.
November 2008
Nov 2008 -Jan 2009
February 2009
Dec. 2008 -Feb 2009
February 2009
March 2009
March -April 2009
May 2009
May -June 2009
June 2009
August 2009
September 2009
November 2009
December 2009
December 2009
Project initiation & kickoff meeting
Data collection and analysis
City Council/Planning Commission study session # 1
Prepare Preliminary Draft Housing Element
Administrative Draft Element to staff for review
Community outreach meeting
Staff review and revisions
Prepare Public Review Draft Element
Joint PC/Council workshop
Prepare HCD Review Draff Housing Element
Submit Draft Element to HCD (60-day review)
HCD comments due
Prepare responses to HCD comments and
Draft Final Housing Element
HCD review of Draft Final element
Planning Commission hearing
City Council hearing and adoption
Prepare & submit Final Housing Element to HCD for
certification
CONEXUS -19- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
E. Fee Schedule and Our fee schedule is provided below, and the project
Cost Estimate cost estimate is enclosed in a separate envelope. This
fee schedule is valid through December 2009. A cost
of living increase of up to 5% may apply to work
completed after that date. Additional tasks or out-of-
scope work will be provided on atime-and-materials
basis.
Reimbursable expenses are billed at actual cost with
no surcharge. No mileage or travel expenses will be
charged. Travel time to/from meetings is included in
the budget for each meeting.
The Cost Estimate will not be exceeded without the
City's prior authorization. We recommend that a 5%
contingency fund be included in the contract, and
that the contract specify that budget funds may be
transferred between tasks, as determined appropriate
by the City's Project Manager. If extra work is required,
a supplemental budget will be determined in
consultation with the City prior to initiation of the work.
2008-09 Fee Schedule
Principal/Project Manager $135/hr
Senior Associate $110/hr
Graphics/Word Processing $65/hr
Reimbursable expenses Actual cost
Travel/mileage No charge
CONEXUS -20- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
APPENDIX 1
RESUMES
John H. Douglas, AICP
Principal
Qualifications Mr. Douglas has over 32 years experience in the planning field, including
15 years of management-level positions in city and county planning
agencies. John manages the firm's practice in general plans, housing
elements, CEQA/NEPA documents, demographic analysis, public
outreach programs and conflict resolution. Prior to forming CONEXUS, he
was Director of Planning for Civic Solutions, Inc. (2001-2004) and senior
consultant with The Planning Center where he supervised Housing
Element projects from 1998-2001. From 1991-1998 John served as
Principal Planner for the City of Newport Beach where his duties included
advance planning, economic development, annexations, CDBG
administration, managing the entitlement and CEQA review process,
and coordination with the California Coastal Commission on permitting
issues. From 1981-1991 he was employed at the Orange County
Environmental Management Agency where he supervised staff in the
areas of advance planning, demographic forecasting, housing, CEQA
compliance and entitlement processing. From 1977-1981 he was a
housing market analyst fora private consulting firm. His planning
experience began in 1974 with the City of Fresno.
Highlights of John's extensive background in local government has given him a broad
Experience understanding of the practical aspects of planning. He has managed
numerous General Plan projects, Housing Elements, zoning code
amendments, EIRs, and entitlement processes for both private and public
projects. His special area of expertise is public outreach, meeting
facilitation and consensus building strategies, and he holds a certificate
in Conflict Management from the University of California, Irvine. He is a
state-certified mediator and has considerable experience in working with
groups and committees to find common ground on complex and
controversial issues. He teaches a course on Housing Elements in the
graduate program in Urban and Regional Planning at the University of
California, Irvine and is a frequent speaker at professional conferences
on techniques for effective public participation and conflict
management.
Education + B.A., University of California, Los Angeles, Geography, 1974
• Graduate Studies, San Diego State University, City Planning, 1976-78
+ Certificate in Alternative Dispute Resolution, UCI, 2000
Professional + Lecturer, Graduate Program in Urban 8~ Regional Planning, UCI
Affiliations + American Institute of Certified Planners
+ Charter Member, American Planning Association
+ Southern California Mediation Association
CONEXUS -21- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
This page intentionally left blank
CONEXUS -22- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
Gregory C. Konar, AICP
Senior Associate
Qualifications Greg Konar is a Senior Associate with CONExUS. Mr. Konar has over 23
years professional planning experience in both the public and private
sectors. His diverse range of experience includes many highly complex
projects including master plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances,
general plan amendments, and entitlement processing. Prior to joining
CONEXUS, Mr. Konar was Senior Project Manager with Project Design
Consultants and a Senior Land Use and Environmental Planner for the
County of San Diego's Department of Planning and Planning and Land
Use.
Highlights of • SeaWorld Master Plan Update, City of San Diego, CA
Experience In concert with PGAV of St. Louis, SeaWorld's theme park designer,
Mr. Konar prepared a 20-year master plan for the San Diego theme
park. Primarily a policy document to establish the development
parameters for future redevelopment and expansion of the 189-acre
park, Mr. Konar provided innovative solutions to complex regulatory
challenges within a highly charged political environment. As a key
member of SeaWorld's entitlement team, Mr. Konar was instrumental
in securing favorable recommendations from eight community
planning groups, the San Diego Planning Commission, the San Diego
City Council, and the California Coastal Commission.
Rancho San Juan Specific Plan, County of Monterey, CA
Mr. Konar was the project manager responsible the development of
the Rancho San Juan Specific Plan in Monterey County. The 2,500-
acre, 4,000-unit Specific Plan proposed the largest development in
the history of Monterey County. Pursuant to a court order to
prepare the plan on behalf of the developer, the client, Monterey
County, wanted a plan to create a sustainable, new-urbanist
community, with a jobs-housing balance and at least 20%
affordable housing. Located in a General Plan designated "Area of
Development Concentration" just north of the City of Salinas, the
plan provided a blueprint for the development of small town of
about 13,000 residents. Highlights of the plan included amixed-use
town center, live-work units, LEEDs-type building requirements for all
neighborhoods and a "green infrastructure" approach to the water,
wastewater, reclaimed water, and stormwater systems.
Star Ranch, County of San Diego, CA
Mr. Konar was the project manager for Star Ranch, a proposed new
community in San Diego County's backcountry. Prepared for a
private client, the Star Ranch Specific Plan envisioned the creation
of an authentic rural village built around a working cattle ranch. The
design was required to fit seamlessly into the rural setting and avoid
any trace of suburban character. At the same time, the plan
embraced many sustainable and smart growth elements such as
concentrating development around a pedestrian/equestrian
oriented village center. Retaining the cattle ranch allowed more
than 80% of the property to be retained in open space and the
CONEXUS -23- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
ongoing cattle grazing provided an efficient, low-impact fuel
management solution.
Resource Protection Ordinance, City of San Diego, CA
At the direction of the San Diego City Council, Mr. Konar wrote the
first comprehensive ordinance to protect the City's wetlands,
floodways, floodplains, and steep slope areas. The ordinance was
later expanded to include historic and cultural resources. Designed
to augment CEQA, the ordinance filled a gap by restricting the
development and mitigation of identified resource areas. The
Resource Protection Ordinance pioneered the use of site-specific
surveys to identify resources, prior to which time, the City had to rely
on its own mapping. The ordinance was accepted by the San
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAL) as a model ordinance
for the region and soon after was adopted by the County of San
Diego.
Education University of California at Los Angeles
BA, Political Science and Sociology, 1973.
San Diego State University
Master of City Planning, 1979
Professional + American Institute of Certified Planners
Affiliations + Charter Member American Planning Association
+ Board of Directors, Webmaster-San Diego APA Chapter
+ Co-Chair, Professional Development Workshop, "Paving Temporary
Paradise -The High Cost of Free Parking" San Diego County APA
Chapter (2006)
+ Speaker: "Building Blocks of Sustainable Communities: Case Study of
Rancho San Juan Specific Plan Project" -Land Development West
Conference and Expo, Scottsdale, Arizona (2005)
CONEXUS -24- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
APPENDIX 2
SUMMARY OF RECENT HOUSING ELEMENT LEGISLATION
AB 2158 (2004)
Makes changes in the methodology for allocating the RHNA and in the rules for
transferring RHNA between cities and counties. This bill includes the "2158 Factors" that
may be used to support requests for reduction in a jurisdiction's RHNA. A COG may
request the use of population and household forecast assumptions used in the regional
transportation plan.
htto•//www leainfo ca aov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab 2151-2200/ab 2158 bill 20040922 chaotered odf
AB 2348 (2004)
Requires aparcel-specific land inventory. Establishes a specific "default density" that is
assumed to be adequate to facilitate lower-income housing. Also requires that when the
land inventory does not demonstrate an adequate supply of land for housing at all
income levels, sufficient land must be rezoned to accommodate i00~ of the shortfall
and multi-family housing must be permitted "by right."
ht~•//www leainfo ca aov/oub/03-04/bill/asm/ab 2301-2350/ab 2348 bill 20040923 chaotered odf
AB 1233 (2005)
Requires that any portion of a jurisdiction's share of regional housing need that is not
accommodated in the land inventory during one planning period must be carried
forward to the next round of fair-share housing allocations.
htto•//www leginfo ca gov/oub/bill/asm/ab 1201-1250/ab 1233 bdl 20051006 chaotered odf
SB 575 (2005)
Strengthens anti-NIMBY law relating to affordable housing projects and prevents cities
and counties from rejecting or conditionally approving a project unless the jurisdiction
has met its fair-share housing needs for the planning period.
htto•//www leainfo ca gov/pub/bdl/sen/sb 0551-0600/sb 575 bill 20051006 chaotered odf
AB 2511 (2006)
Makes additional changes to anti-NIMBY law and other affordable housing statutes
htto•//www leainfo ca aov/oub/bill/asm/ab 2501-2550/ab 251 1 bill 20060930 chaotered odf
AB 2634 (2006)
Requires the analysis of population and projected housing needs for all income levels to
include extremely low income households (30% or less of countywide median)
htto //www leginfo ca aov/oub/bill/asm/ab 2601-2650/ab 2634 bdl 20060930 chaotered odf
SB 2 (2007)
Strengthens planning requirements for emergency shelters and transitional housing. With
certain exceptions, requires all jurisdictions to designate at least one zoning district where
shelters are permitted by-right.
htto://www.leamfo ca aov/oub/07-08/bdl/sen/sb 0001-0050/sb 2 bill 20071013 chaotered odf
CONEXUS -25- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
This page intentionally left blank
CONEXUS -26- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
APPENDIX 3
HOUSING ELEMENT QUESTIONS 8~ ANSWERS
1. If a jurisdiction rezones land for multi-family use to meet the RHNA requirement
prior to the Housina Element due date, must it allow "by right" development?
A: "By right" development is not required if the jurisdiction provides sufficient land
(such as through rezoning) prior to adoption of the new Housing Element. The key
factor is whether the rezoning is required as a follow-up action program in
response to an insufficient land inventory compared to the RHNA.
2. How are SROs treated for purposes of the RHNA, land inventory and units
produced? College dorms? Farmworker housing?
A: HCD uses the U.S. Census Bureau definition of "housing unit" for purposes of the
RHNA and Housing Elements. The Census Bureau defines "Housing unit" as "A
house, an apartment, a mobile home or frailer, a group of rooms, or a single room
occupied as separate living quarters, or if vacant, intended for occupancy as
separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the
occupants live separately from any other individuals in the building and which
have direct access from outside the building or through a common hall."
Accordingly, SROs may qualify as housing units if they are occupied as separate
living quarters (e.g., private bathrooms and kitchen facilities). Dorm units with
shared bathrooms and cafeterias are not considered housing units.
3. If some or all of a jurisdiction's vacant land is encumbered by a legally binding
development agreement that extends through the entire planning period, can
that justify a land inventory that does not meet the RHNA? Is there a different set
of rules for new cities that "inherited" development agreements from the County.
A: Development agreements do not justify any waiver or reduction in
jurisdictions' responsibilities to ensure a sufficient land inventory. If potential
housing sites are encumbered by development agreements that impede the
production of lower-income housing, jurisdictions must find other ways to make
sufficient sites available for all income levels (e.g., second units, rezoning of
commercial sites, redevelopment, etc.).
4. How much land inventory "credit" may be taken for potential 2~d units?
A: If a jurisdiction claims that a portion of its land inventory will be met by second
units, HCD will first look to the Housing Element's analysis of the previous planning
period to see how many second units were produced. If the jurisdiction claims
that second unit production will be greater in the new planning period, the
Housing Element must provide an analysis demonstrating why the increase is
anticipated. Such an analysis would include such things as by-right permit
processing, incentives, and market demand.
5. In the Q 8, A (#40) and also the 6/9/05 memo on AB 2348, it states that in
suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions zoning must allow at least 20 units per
CONEXUS -27- October 30, 2008
City of Seal Beach 2008 Housing Element Proposal
acre, but Appendix 1 of the 6/9/05 memo lists most jurisdictions in Southern
California as having a minimum 30 du/ac. Can you please clarify whether the
required density is 20 or 30 du/ac for cities with a "default density" of 30 du/ac?
A: Jurisdictions should use the same methodology in the site analysis/ land
inventory as they do in an action program to provide additional sites, if
necessary. fn metropolitan jurisdictions, the "default density" for lower-income
housing is at least 30 du/ac. If zoning allows at least 30 du/ac, then HCD will not
question the validity of this assumption for purposes of calculating the land
inventory. However, jurisdictions may use a density lower than 30 du/ac in the
sites inventory if the Housing Element includes an analysis demonstrating that
lower-income units are feasible at that density. The analysis would include
examples of recent affordable projects that were successfully completed at the
lower density. If an action program to provide additional sites is required due to
an insufficient land inventory, then the density standards in the program should
use the same methodology as the land inventory. 20 du/ac is the statutory
minimum density that will be accepted in a rezoning program for lower-income
units, however, and the program must allow development "by right". While
density is an important component of the land inventory, other steps are also
required in the analysis, including availability of infrastructure, site constraints
(e.g., environmental conditions), and any other factors that could present an
obstacle to development during the planning period.
6. Can density bonus law be included in the evaluation of land inventory and the
"default" density provisions of AB 2348? (e.g., if the default density for lower
income housing is 30 du/ac, would base zoning at 22-25 du/ac be sufficient
under the assumption that a density bonus to 30+ du/ac would be approved for
affordable projects?)
A: No, an assumed density bonus cannot be used to achieve the default density.
The base zoning density must be used for the land inventory analysis.
7. If a jurisdiction has insufficient vacant residential land to accommodate its RHNA,
what limitations would HCD place on affordable housing or mixed-use overlay
zones to meet the shortfall? The Q & A (#40) states that at least 50% of the lower
income need must be accommodated on sites zoned exclusively for residential
use. Are there any other limitations HCD would impose on overlay or mixed-use
zones?
A: If a program is required to provide additional sites due to a shortfall in the land
inventory, HCD would consider several factors in evaluating the appropriateness
of the program. Such factors could include incentives or other measures the
program includes to facilitate affordable development on the sites; monitoring
provisions included to inform the jurisdiction as to whether the program is working
as intended; corrective measures built into the program to allow adjustments if
the expected results are not achieved, etc.
Note: This paper reflects the opinions of CoNexus, and is not an official publication of the California
Department of Housing and Community Development. While it is based on the personal
conversations of the author with HCD staff in February 2007, any errors or omissions are solely the
responsibility of the author and not HCD. It should not be considered to be legal advice. Specific
concerns regarding the legal adequacy of your Housing Element should be referred to your City
Attorney or County Counsel.
CONEXUS -28- October 30, 2008
C IvExus
Cost Estimate
City of Seal Beach Housing Element Update
October 30, 2008
_`~' ~"`~a,~i; _
~`~~¢, ir'.arF:"
~_~~•~'~~~--Task"- ~~ _«~,-=.aF"-Y~.'?i==~?-'-'ri:.;',S~:~s:..`r._''y ;~:: v~~
,~'Y 1. ~.d:a"-~~~~i~- ~F_.]~.n__`'Y~.^stiy.S~f~~',~
_
,yDescri 'on:~q.'-;{~:~~3?"~` -~.; ='==g:=b =~':w~ :.~rY i"-+~, .~4__
~'~~G,`4t~SY1
~~PIC~=
,: ~~¢z :`~
,•mjv ~..
f,`SP-Iz~
.~~'~„-
~~J,+--_
.GIWPt '•T `ate
i1-1 ~~YI-~~
FHouis:. `-t~,_ _
:[
:•s:.Cost=
1.0 Pro'ect Initiation 12 5 17 $2170
Research and Anal is ~'~.-~ ~~.. ``: ``~. •~~-~ =R-•
2.1 -Evaluation of Current Housin Element 8 12 20 $2,400
2.2 -Needs Assessment 8 16 24 $2,840
2.3 -Resouroes & 0 rtunities 10 16 26 $3,110
2.4 -Constraints 10 30 40 $4,650
2.5 -Goals Polices, P rams, Ob'ectives 10 10 $1350
3.0
Housin Element Pre oration :r, .:vim
"- - _
`~: ° - - _4•_
3 =-_- a mil'' 3
"~-- ° --- -'•' ~ '
3.1 -Administrative Draft Housin Element 16 16 8 40 $4,440
3.2 -Public Review Draft Housin Element 8 8 2 18 $2 090
3.3 -HCD Review Draft Housin Element 8 8 2 18 $2,090
3.4 -Pro Fnal Housin Element 8 12 20 $2,400
3.5 -Final Housin Element 6 4 2 12 $1,380
4.0 General Plan Consisten Evaluation 4 8 12 $1,420
5.0 PublicPartici ation '~~~~"- ~,~'-
-, .
`~"°`~ ~"-`~'"_ "~' =~` -~" ~~~~~~ --_-
5.1 ,loint PC/C' Council worksho #1 12 12 $1620
5.2 -Commun' meetin 8 8 $1,080
5.3 ,loint PC/C' Council worksho #2 12 12 $1,620
5.4 -PC 8 CC hearin s 1 each 24 24 $3 240
6.0 CEQA Review 8 32 . 2 42 $4,730
7.0 Pro'ect Mana ement I Meetin s 20 20 $2,700
Total Labor 192 167 16 375 $45,330
Hourf Rate $135 $110 $65 ;_-:`~•~~'~~~ '' ~ ' ~=ar~`
Reimbursable Ex enses See table below $600
GRAND TOTAL BUDGET $45 930
:q4 t.a~'~~s4C',. •L~~r g'" `• a~,;,3,.5~~~£,~ ~:a~`i; ~,=~it:F~`' , '~~°.re'~~r;,°#h
Stafrn G••l'-+t-~~.4 ~G- `~'•'y'_ t_.r -_;;- - ~e °rn,s :~•.-'.
PIC =Principal in Charge/Prolect Manager
SP =Senior Planner
GNVP = Gra hics/word rocessin
Esti`mated;Reimbursatile;Ezpenses,° ~•Y:~` - -
Travel No charge
Printing /graphics /supplies $500
Postage /deliveries $100
Total $600
NOTE: Reimbursable expenses are estimated based on the anticipated level of effort and the City will only be
billed for actual costs incurred. All overhead costs are included in the proposed budget.