My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
NS-3075 - Uncodified Ordinance Amendment No. 2024-07: Local AB 2011 Implementing Ordinance Revision
Clerk
>
Ordinances
>
2021 - 2030 (NS-3001 - NS-XXXX)
>
2025 (NS-3074 -NS-XXXX)
>
NS-3075 - Uncodified Ordinance Amendment No. 2024-07: Local AB 2011 Implementing Ordinance Revision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 7:13:54 AM
Creation date
1/27/2025 4:08:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Ordinance
Agency
Planning & Building
Doc #
NS-3075
Item #
32
Date
1/21/2025
Destruction Year
P
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
288
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
WHEREAS, on July 18, 2023, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana conducted <br />a second reading of Ordinance No. NS-3047, exempting certain parcels within the City <br />from the streamlined, ministerial approval process provided by Government Code sections <br />65912.114 and 65912.124; and <br />WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 2243 (AB 2243) was signed by the Governor on <br />September 19, 2024, and will become effective on January 1, 2025, amending AB 2011 <br />by modifying a number of eligibility criteria and development standards in state law to <br />permit streamlined, ministerial approval processes for certain housing developments, one <br />of which is removing the 500-foot freeway buffer; and <br />WHEREAS, the removal of the 500-foot4reeway buffer from AB 2011 eligibility <br />criteria and development standards by AB 2243 will result in a number of sites that were <br />previously not eligible for AB 2011 streamline, ministerial approval and, thus, not <br />contemplated, analyzed or included in NS-3045 or NS-3047 (Ordinances) to now qualify <br />for AB 2011 streamlining unless the exempt parcels lists included in the Ordinances are <br />amended; and <br />WHEREAS, AB 2011, as amended by AB 2243, will permit affordable housing in <br />high -risk zones in close proximity to freeways and will result in potential conflicts with the <br />General Plan Land Use Element and environmental justice policies aimed at avoiding the <br />locating of sensitive receptors in close proximity to uses that pose a hazard to health; and <br />WHEREAS, the City's General Plan Land Use Element allows for residential <br />development in certain parts of the City identified in its land use map with the appropriate <br />infrastructure improvements required to sustain high -quality housing and residential <br />communities, while maintaining and preserving existing neighborhoods, commercial <br />districts and established land use patterns; and <br />WHEREAS, AB 2011 permits a local government to exempt a parcel from these <br />types of streamlined approval before a developer submits a development application on <br />the parcel if: (1) the local government identifies one or more alternative sites for residential <br />development that meet certain environmental criteria; (2) the local government has <br />permitted the alternative parcels not otherwise eligible for development pursuant to AB <br />2011 to be developed pursuant to AB 2011 streamlining, and that the alternative parcels <br />are suitable for residential development as defined in State housing element law; (3) the <br />local government has permitted the alternative parcels that are subject to AB 2011 <br />streamlining to be developed at densities above the residential density required in <br />subdivision (b) of Section 65912.113 (100 percent affordable) or subdivision (b) of <br />65912.123 (Mixed -Income) of the Government Code; (4) the alternative development <br />would result in no net loss of the total potential residential density in the jurisdiction; (5) the <br />alternative development would result in no net loss of the potential residential density of <br />housing affordable to lower income households in the jurisdiction; and (6) the alternative <br />development would affirmatively further fair housing; and <br />Ordinance No. NS-3075 <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.