5 ms·
This ruling is frustrating (to say the least) in the short term, but overall I think this ruling going to tremendously backfire in NIMBY's faces. This judge jus
by thebradbain 4y ago
This ruling is frustrating (to say the least) in the short term, but overall I think this ruling going to tremendously backfire in NIMBY's faces. This judge just unintentionally put the state's spotlight on CEQA -- previously, the dearth of housing laws passed this year were careful to navigate within its framework without attempting to change it.
Newsom has demonstrated he takes housing starts seriously (Really! The fact that virtually every commercial lot is now zoned for ministerial housing approval statewide, abolishing parking minimums statewide, passing SB9 to allow 2-4plexes on single family parcels statewide, and passing SB10 to exempt apartments of less than 10 units from CEQA, and directing the housing authority to decertify rich cities' zoning codes that flout RHNA housing obligations like Santa Monica is huge) and I don't expect him to let up.
> State housing laws, she ruled, do not apply to a project until after a city “certifies” the project’s environmental review.
> Although CEQA puts a one-year limit on environmental review, the court held that this deadline is just advisory
If these rulings stand, you can absolutely bet that CA state housing laws in 2023 will now turn their focus toward CEQA. At a minimum, expect that "advisory" deadline to be formalized, shortened, and certification expedited or even exempted if the project falls within certain categories. Bike and bus lanes were just exempted from CEQA this session, and I absolutely imagine housing that is X% affordable will be soon, too.
In fact, really all California has to do is expand SB 330 or their 2019 Builders Remedy Law (which itself gave an existing state law from 1990 teeth) which states that developers are guaranteed ministerial approval regardless of zoning in any municipality determined to have a non-certified housing element to include expedient and ministerial CEQA approval. What would once be considered unthinkable politically a decade ago is now just a legislative hop and a skip away.
- tsycho 4y agoI really really hope you are right.
- xyzzyz 4y ago> In fact, really all California has to do is (…) I guarantee they when Charlie actually does that, Lucy will nevertheless pull away the ball again.
- thebradbain 4y agoBut that time if they try they'll fail. Almost all avenues to municipal NIMBYism have been closed: Strict SFH zoning? It can often be ignored now and build duplexes and four-plexes by right (no CEQA necessary!) Amply sized commercial lots but no residential multifamily zoning? Those can be residential now. No CEQA necessary in some cases. I believe it's <400 units. Parking requirements? Gone. In fact a city cannot even consider parking in deciding to issue a permit or not. Procedural tactics? New laws have been passed capping the amount of required public comment meetings to 3, along with various other things like maximum review windows and mandatory ministerial approvals. Bad zoning? Cities for which CA decertifies their zoning codes (housing elements) can be considered to _have no zoning_ until they present a housing element the state is satisfied with. Such cities include Santa Monica (recently fixed, but not before 4000+ units qualified), Beverly Hills, Pasadena, Redondo Beach, Davis, soon to be Palo Alto and San Francisco. The only thing that's left, really, is CEQA reform. California is _so close_ to realizing a building boom. You have the Coastal Commission, too, but that only affects properties directly within the vicinity of the beach, and as a state agency is not something a city itself can really influence.
- xyzzyz 4y agoWell, I hope you’re right about this, but if experience is any guide, I bet that new obstacles will be invented, and in a decade you will still believe that the building boom is just around the corner.
- lazide 4y agoThe big issue now will be financing, with increased fed rates, leading to drastic drops in prices. It’s extremely high risk for a builder to build in a market with dropping prices. It will lead to a boom in 4-5 years most likely after big turnover in existing boomer home owners and resets in price expectations lead to cheaper house valuations, which lead to lower land values, which lead to lots being somewhat affordable again. Then tear downs and builds at higher density become more economic, and the rules unblock it.
- chaostheory 4y ago> directing the housing authority to decertify rich cities' zoning codes that flout RHNA housing obligations like Santa Monica is huge The true test is whether or not this works in Palo Alto. That's the NIMBY capital of California.
- throwayyy479087 4y agoI don’t understand why. It’s ugly and boring there
- mushbino 4y agoHahaha very true, but bougie attracts bougie.