Wulf9
Member
- Messages
- 923
- Points
- 22
My daughter is concerned about a CA city that is allowing development at 4x General Plan densities near her house (160 units per acre vs 40 max in the General Plan) using the state density bonus law as the way to exceed density.
Here's the basic scenario.
The project has 20% low income housing, so it qualifies for density bonus.
The density bonus is allowed "until the project becomes economically feasible" per the state inclusinary housing law.
The city waives all other zoning standards to get to that "feasibility" calculation. (density, height, coverage, parking).
The projects are given categorical exemptions as "infill."
Do any California planners see a legal fallacy in this approach. The city has been approving these developments right an left, and the staff is taking the developer's side against the neighbors (sort of like the FCC). I can't find the "hook" that says the approach is, in fact, illegal.
Any suggestions. I am looking for factual statements in law which would argue with certainty that the excessive density is illegal.
Thanks
Here's the basic scenario.
The project has 20% low income housing, so it qualifies for density bonus.
The density bonus is allowed "until the project becomes economically feasible" per the state inclusinary housing law.
The city waives all other zoning standards to get to that "feasibility" calculation. (density, height, coverage, parking).
The projects are given categorical exemptions as "infill."
Do any California planners see a legal fallacy in this approach. The city has been approving these developments right an left, and the staff is taking the developer's side against the neighbors (sort of like the FCC). I can't find the "hook" that says the approach is, in fact, illegal.
Any suggestions. I am looking for factual statements in law which would argue with certainty that the excessive density is illegal.
Thanks