HomeMy WebLinkAbout03 - Item 1 - Public Comment - 10/8/20191
BENNETT, STACY
From:HAUSER, JANET
Sent:Tuesday, October 8, 2019 1:21 PM
To:GREEN, BRENDA
Cc:BENNETT, STACY
Subject:FW: Housing Study Session 10/8/19 - comment
Janet Hauser
Executive Secretary to Costa Mesa City Council
City of Costa Mesa
77 Fair Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Desk: 714-754-5107
Cell: 714-949-3693
Janet.hauser@costamesaca.gov
Note: Using the “Reply All” option may inadvertently result in a Brown Act violation.
From: Russell Toler <RussellJayToler@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2019 12:53 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL <CITYCOUNCIL@costamesaca.gov>; DEARAKAL, BYRON <BYRON.DEARAKAL@costamesaca.gov>;
HARLAN, JEFFREY <JEFFREY.HARLAN@costamesaca.gov>; ZICH, JON <JON.ZICH@costamesaca.gov>; COLBERT,
KEDARIOUS <KEDARIOUS.COLBERT@costamesaca.gov>; RUSSELL, DIANNE <DIANNE.RUSSELL@costamesaca.gov>;
TOURJE, JENNA <JENNA.TOURJE@costamesaca.gov>; CURTIS, BARRY C. <BARRY.CURTIS@costamesaca.gov>
Subject: Housing Study Session 10/8/19 - comment
8 October 2019
Madam Mayor and Members of the City Council and Planning Commission,
I am glad to hear that the Council will be discussing this important topic tonight, and look forward to hearing your
comments. In my observations there are several reasons that people generally get upset at the idea of more housing in
our city.
1.It will mean more car-congestion on our streets (parking concerns also fall into this category). People tend to
equate more people living here with more people driving on our already-too-crowded streets. Obviously, it is
stressful to be so close to home, yet be stuck behind a frozen river of cars. The rally cry that “we’re full” is
directly tied to this common frustration shared by drivers.
2
2.Ugliness. Most residential developments that are not the traditional street-facing single-family home are
accused for being out of scale or ruining the character of the street or neighborhood. This also is probably true.
Much of the multi-family development built in the last few decades has been out of scale, and characterless.
I think it’s fair to say that a great majority of complaints over new housing are encompassed by these two
considerations. And I think they are valid concerns. As we study this issue and figure out how we might meet our RHNA
numbers in a way that avoids public angst, and rather enhances our neighborhoods, I have a suggestion: missing middle
housing. If you are not familiar with this term, missing middle housing refers to the types of housing that used to get
built before density and parking restrictions caused them to go nearly extinct. They are the types ‘in the middle’
between the single-family home and the 18+ unit apartment building that most would consider out of character with a
residential neighborhood. They are the general size and shape of houses, but contain multiple units: duplexes, triplexes,
quadplexes, rowhouses, mansion apartments, etc. These, if done well (which we can ensure through our development
code), can fit seamlessly into our neighborhoods. They can be built by homeowners to make space for extended family
or to get rental income, or built by small developers. This allows for truly organic community-led growth that is more
likely to keep money in our community. By using missing middle housing as a way to increase our supply, we can rely on
our existing administrative processes (this can be all by-right development), and avoid the fretful public process of
dealing with deep-pocket outside developers and finding the least-worst site in the city to re-zone and build on.
To address the issue of increased traffic. The critics are correct, but only partly so: we don’t have enough room for many
more cars, but we do have enough room for many more people. As we necessarily relax our zoning standards to allow
for more housing, we must make sure that we simultaneously work to reduce driving (reduce the need to drive). This
means safer streets and intersections, better transit service, and more businesses within walking/biking distance of
homes. It also means less parking requirements. High parking requirements (like 2 per unit) easily kills the feasibility of
the much of missing middle housing I’m talking about, and for those that do get built, the added cost is pushed onto the
renter – whether they drive or not. Thanks for reading!
Russell Toler