Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Density Bonus topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission recommends rewrite of Westminster’s density‑bonus rules to align with state law
Summary
The commission voted 5-0 to recommend repeal and re‑adoption of Chapter 17.57 to align city code with California’s density bonus law, change review authority to follow the project’s review level, and add requirements to ensure affordable units match market-rate units.
The Westminster Planning Commission voted unanimously on Oct. 1 to recommend that the City Council repeal and re‑adopt Chapter 17.57 of the Westminster Municipal Code — the city’s density‑bonus chapter — to bring local rules into alignment with California state law.
Alice, an associate planner, told the commission that the city’s existing density‑bonus code (adopted in 2010) no longer complies with state law. The proposed rewrite would adopt state density‑bonus law by reference, shift approval of density bonuses to the same review authority as the underlying housing project (so a density bonus for a ministerial project would be approved at staff level rather than by a higher body), and remove the code’s findings requirement because state law already governs approval. “The proposed code will be changed to state that the density bonus will be considered and approved by the review authority for the housing project,” Alice said.
Staff also proposed new development requirements intended to ensure affordable units have comparable amenities and are constructed concurrently with market‑rate units unless an alternate phasing schedule is agreed upon by the developer and approving body. Examples given included the requirement that affordable units have the same on‑site amenities and, for for‑sale projects, require the affordable units to also be for sale.
A commissioner expressed concern that shifting some approvals to ministerial review could limit opportunities for public hearings and public comment, particularly in light of recent state changes referenced by the speaker. Planning staff replied that the city maintains an online list of development projects and updates it monthly; staff said projects that require higher review authority (tract maps, variances, etc.) would still come before the planning commission or council.
Staff recommended forwarding a resolution and ordinance to the City Council. A motion to recommend approval carried on unanimous roll call; Commissioners Wolbert, Winn, Anderson, Tran and Chair Hamadi voted yes.
Staff told the commission the text amendment would be categorically exempt from CEQA under a common-sense exemption as it is not a project affecting the environment. Staff also noted a clerical correction to a cited Health and Safety Code cross‑reference that was corrected in the record.
