The public record
Tuesday, August 15, 2023 · Government meeting record
The 30-second read
Recorded outcomeWhy it matters
The official meeting record is available below. Item-level plain-language summaries are not available yet.
What happens next
No later meeting or follow-up date is stated in the reviewed record.
This source published text without speaker turns, so speakers and timestamps are not shown.
>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE. IT'S RIGHT ABOUT THAT TIME TO START. I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME, IF WE HAVE ANY, GUESTS JOINING US ONLINE, AS WELL AS OUR STAFF MEMBERS AND OUR COMMISSIONERS HERE. SO LET'S MAKE THIS OFFICIAL. THIS SPECIAL MEETING OF THE OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION IS CALLED TO ORDER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, AT 6:31 P.M. WE'LL BEGIN WITH A ROLL CALL. VICE CHAIR VERDUZCO. >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONER PRICE. >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONERS RAMIREZ AND KRIEG ARE ABSENT. AND I AM CHAIR CHUIKO, ARE PRESENT. VICE CHAIR VERDUZCO, WOULD YOU KINDLY LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF OUR COUNTRY. >> PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR. MOVING ON DIRECTLY TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. THIS SECTION OF THE MEETING . WE DO NOT HAVE ANY SPEAKER'S CARDS. WE DID RECEIVE ONE COMMENT ON THE WIND WAS ALREADY ADDRESSED BY, LET'S SEE, MR. ROHANI. IT WILL BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD AS WELL. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS? OR WOULD SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS READ ? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS READ. >> TO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> SO MOVED AND SECONDED. I WAS IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY? >> AYE. >> >> APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM 4.1. ADOPTION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DENSITY BONUS LAW. REPEALED LOCAL BONUS REGULATIONS AND REPLACE WITH AN OPTION OF THE STATE BONUS LAW BY REFERENCE. WOULD YOU PLEASE KINDLY ADDRESS THE COMMISSIONERS? >> GOOD EVENING , CHAIR, VICE CHAIR , AND MEMBER OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION INTO THOSE THAT MAY BE LISTENING TO THE STREAM. THIS ITEM HERE IS A REQUEST FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO BRING THE CITY OF OAKLEY'S MISCIBLE CODE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CASE OF -- STATE OF CALIFORNIA DENSITY BONUS LAW. THE REQUEST FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION THAT WOULD RECOMMEND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THIS ORDINANCE. THE TECHNICAL ASPECT WOULD BE TO REPEAL IN ITS ENTIRETY THE EXISTING SECTION OF THE MISCIBLE CODE WHICH IS 9.1 .412. THAT IS LOCATED IN THE CHAPTER 9.1 WHICH IS KNOWN AS A ZONING ORDINANCE. AND THEN REPLACE THAT ADOPTION WITH THE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW BY REFERENCE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRAFT ORDINANCE ATTACHED TO YOUR PROPOSED RESOLUTION , YOU WILL SEE THERE IS A BIT MORE LANGUAGE IN THEIR THAN SIMPLY JUST REFERENCING THE STATE LAW. THERE IS STILL A LITTLE BIT OF MEAT TO THE ORDINANCE. ORIGINALLY , THE CITY OF OAKLEY'S ORDINANCE FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW IN INCENTIVES WAS ADOPTED IN 2010 TO THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 11 DASH 10 . THAT ORDINANCE DOES HAVE A SECTION TOWARDS THE END THAT IS A NO CONFLICT WITH STATE LAW STATEMENT , IT ESSENTIALLY SAYS, IN THE EVENT THAT THE STATE LAW IN THE CITY'S ORDINANCE ARE INCONSISTENT , THE STATE LAW WOULD TAKE PRECEDENT , AND IT WOULD SUPERSEDE ANY OF THE INCONSISTENCIES. HOWEVER, SINCE 2010, ALTHOUGH THERE HAVE BEEN UPDATES TO THE STATE LAW , THE CITY'S ORDINANCE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED AND INSTEAD HAS RELIED ON THE NO CONFLICT STATEMENT. TO PROCESS APPLICATIONS IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. THIS ALL CAME ABOUT , WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT, THIS IDEA MOSTLY CAME ABOUT THROUGH A JOINT EFFORT THROUGH WHAT'S KNOWN AS C4 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COLLABORATIVE. IT HAS VOLUNTARY PARTICIPANTS FOR THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, USUALLY MADE UP OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF OR HOUSING STAFF FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS FOR THE CITY OF OAKLEY. MYSELF, THE PLANNING MANAGER , PARTICIPATE IN THESE MEETINGS. RECENTLY, IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE CONSULTANTS FROM C4 PUT TOGETHER TEMPLATES FOR THIS VERY ITEM, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH UPDATES SO THAT ALL CITIES COULD BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW AND HAVE SOME SORT OF CONSISTENT SORT OF ORDINANCE FOR DEVELOPERS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, NO MATTER WHICH CITY THEY COME TO . THEY WOULD HAVE THAT CONSISTENCY IN PLACE. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW. IT WAS ORIGINALLY ADOPTED IN 1976 . THERE ARE SEVERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT APPLY TO LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. ONE, OBVIOUSLY , IS TO INCREASE DENSITY. AND THEN THERE ARE VARIOUS THINGS LIKE REDUCTION OF DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS AND THE REQUIREMENT TO DEVELOP CERTAIN INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS. SO, AS AN EXAMPLE, A PROJECT MAY COME FORTH FOR A DENSITY BONUS , APPLY THIS LAW , AND SAY THEY WANT A REDUCTION IN PARKING REQUIREMENTS , OFF-STREET PARKING OR APARTMENTS OR A REDUCTION IN SETBACKS FROM THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERLY LINED OR LANDSCAPED PERCENTAGE. WHATEVER IT MAY BE THAT WILL HELP THAT PROJECT OFFSET THE FINANCIAL BURDEN OF SUPPORTING AFFORDABLE RENT OR SALE PRICES AND GET THE PROJECT BUILT. IT APPLIES TO A GROWING NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLD SENIORS, SPECIAL NEEDS, VETERANS, ET CETERA, AND IS AS THE LAW INVOLVES A DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSEHOLDS APPLY , WOULD APPLY TO THIS LAW IF NEEDED. SINCE 2018, IT HAS BEEN UPDATED 10 TIMES. YOU IN THE EARLIER I MENTIONED , WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY UPDATES, BUT THE LAW HAS. THIS WILL ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR US TO GO BACK AND DO ANY ADDITIONAL UP DATES. AGAIN, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WILL REPEAL THE EXISTING LOCAL ORDINANCE AND REPLACE IT WITH THE STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW BY REFERENCE . AS A STATE LEGISLATION IS AMENDED, THE ORDINANCE WILL REMAIN CONSISTENT AND IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. STAFF WILL NOT NEED TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL AND HOLD TWO DIFFERENT PUBLIC HEARINGS JUST TO AMEND THE TEXT IF THE STATE LAW CHANGES . AND PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT ASPECT OF THIS IS, THIS WILL BE EASIER FOR STAFF TO PROCESS APPLICATIONS THAT COME FORWARD FROM DIFFERENT DEVELOPERS. LIKE I SAID EARLIER, WE WILL HAVE CONSISTENT COMMUNICATION FOR THEM . A CONSISTENT ORDINANCE SOUTHERN CITIES WILL HAVE, AND WE WON'T HAVE TO POINT OUT AREAS THAT PERHAPS ARE ORDINANCE IS SLIGHTLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE STATE CODE . THEY WILL JUST GO STRAIGHT TO THE STATE CODE. QUICK ANALYSIS OF THIS . ADOPTING THIS ORDINANCE DOES DO WHAT WE NEED , AND IT COMPLIES WITH THE HOUSING ELEMENT THAT WAS RECENTLY ADOPTED AND CERTIFIED BY HCD . IT REMOVES THE GOVERNMENT CONSTRAINTS THAT MAY APPLY TO TYPICAL MARKET-RATE HOUSING, AND IT ELIMINATES THE NEED TO CONTINUALLY UPDATE THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO STAY IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. IN THE ACTION IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT SPECIFIC TO THIS IS ACTION 1.6 DENSITY BONUS ORDINANCE. ESSENTIALLY , IS IS TO UPDATE THE ORDINANCE TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW. THIS IS DOING ONE BETTER. IT IS MAKING THE ORDINANCE EXACTLY AS IT IS IN STATE LAW. ALSO , ADOPTION OF THIS ORDINANCE WOULD BE COMPLIANT WITH THE OAKLEY STRATEGIC PLAN 27 PLUS. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOAL. ONE OF THE IT JUST GIVES -- OBJECTIVES AND THAT GOAL SPEAKS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO MEET THE NEED ALLOCATION FOR OAKLEY. I WAS THE, BY HAVING AN UPDATED CODE FOR DENSITY BONUS AND MAKING THAT AVAILABLE TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY , THAT SHOULD AT LEAST INDIRECTLY HELP US MEET THOSE NUMBERS BY MAKING THIS THAT MUCH EASIER TO APPLY AND BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW. THIS PROJECT, THIS ACTION IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA AFFIRMATIVE QUALITY ACT. IT FALLS UNDER WHAT IS CALLED THE COMMON SENSE EXEMPTION. IT ONLY ESTABLISHES AND CLARIFIES DEMONSTRATED PROCESSES. IT DOES NOT PROPOSE ANY PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT. WITH THAT SAID, I WILL REFRAIN FROM READING THIS, BUT THIS IS VERBATIM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STAFF REPORTS . IF ANY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THIS MOTION BE MADE. THAT CONCLUDES MY STAFF REPORT . I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU , MR. STRELO. DO COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT? NO QUESTIONS. I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF -- AGAIN, REITERATE . ARE WE CONSISTENT WITH OTHER CITIES THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT BELONG TO C4 IN DOING THIS BONUS LAW? >> YEAH . SEVERAL OTHER CITIES WILL BE DOING THIS AS WELL. WE USED A TEMPLATE PROVIDED BY C4 FOR THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE. NOT ONLY WILL ALL OF THE CITIES HAVE THE ORDINANCE UPDATED AND BE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW, BUT WE MAY HAVE VERY SIMILAR ORDINANCES IN DOING THAT AS WELL. >> RIGHT. WE ARE ESSENTIALLY DOING EVERYTHING THE OTHER CITIES HAVE BEEN DOING , CORRECT? >> YEAH EMMA FOR THOSE CITIES . IT WILL BE VERY SIMILAR. >> EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. WE CAN OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING . SINCE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY COMMENTS THAT WERE SUBMITTED ALMOST ITEM , WE ARE GOING TO CLOSE IT RIGHT AWAY AND WE WANT TO DELIBERATION. JUST TO SUMMARIZE WHAT WAS ESSENTIALLY PRESENTED TO US TODAY IS FOR OUR PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE ACCOMMODATION TO ESSENTIALLY ADOPT THE PROPOSED ITEM IN FRONT OF US . WOULD ANY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. >> THANK YOU VICE CHAIR VERDUZCO. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE SECOND. COMMISSIONER PRICE , SO MOVED AND SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE >> AYE. >> THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU, GENTLEMAN. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS REPORTS . I WOULD LIKE RIGHT NOW TO SHARE ANY REPORTS FROM OUR STAFF MEMBERS. MR. SMITH? MR. STRELO? >> Reporter: THANK YOU. NO REPORTS FOR NOW. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY REPORTS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS? COMMISSIONER PRICE , DID YOU ATTEND ANY OF THE MEETINGS? >> THE TRANSPLANT MEETING WAS CANCELED AGAIN FOR LACK OF AGENDA ITEMS. >> GOT YOU. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS FOR FUTURE SUBMISSIONS ON THE NEXT AGENDA? NONE. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. WELL , THANK YOU ALL. IT'S BEEN A VERY NICE, PRODUCTIVE MEETING. WE WILL ADJOURN AT 6:43 P.M.
Minutes of the Special Meeting of the City of Oakley Planning Commission August 15, 2023 1) OPENING MATTERS 1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley Planning Commission Chair Oleksii Chuiko called the meeting to order at 6:30p.m. in the Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California. Vice Chair Diego Verduzco and Planning Commissioner Leonard Price were also present. Planning Commissioners Jeanne Krieg and Jimmy Ramirez were Absent, 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag Vice Chair Verduzco led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag 2) PUBLIC COMMENTS Staff received one online comment from Jennifer Solopow regarding construction and roadwork during school hours on E. Cypress and Picasso. Public Works director, Kevin Rohani provided an email response to Ms. Solopow, which was also provided to the Planning Commission. 3) CONSENT CALENDAR 3.1 Approve Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting held July 18, 2023 (Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk) It was moved by Vice Chair Verduzco and Seconded by Commissioner Price to approve the minutes. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (3-0) 4) PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Adoption of the State of California Density Bonus Law (SBDL) - Repeal Local Density Bonus Regulations (Oakley Municipal Code 9.1.412) and Replace with Adoption of the State Density Bonus Law by Reference (RZ 03-23) (Ken Strelo, Planning Manager) Planning Manager Ken Strelo presented the Staff Report. Chair Chuiko asked if this is consistent with what other cities are doing. Mr. Strelo responded that several other cities will be doing this as well. Chair Chuiko asked if essentially, we are doing what every other city is doing in our county. Mr. Strelo confirmed that is correct, for cities that choose to do it, it will be very similar.
It was moved by Vice Chair Verduzco and seconded by Commissioner Price to adopt the resolution. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (3-0) 5) REGULAR CALENDAR None 6) REPORTS 6.1 Reports from Staff Members None 6.2 OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION (a) Reports from Commission Members Commissioner Price reported the TRANSPLAN meeting was canceled due to lack of agenda items. (b) Requests for Future Agendas None 7) WORK SESSIONS None 8) ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:43p.m. Respectively Submitted, Kim Snodgrass Deputy City Clerk
Showing the first 24,000 of 46,461 characters. The full document is at the source.
AGENDA SPECIAL MEETING OF THE OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, August 15, 2023 6:30 PM Oakley City Council Chamber, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California Unless stated otherwise, every item on the agenda is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065 MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley will create a resilient future that fosters and attracts a vibrant and evolving community that welcomes and values all people. VISION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley celebrates our unique Delta lifestyle and small-town feel where we Live in a safe, dynamic community, Work together to build the future, and Play in our own backyard. Agendas are posted in Oakley at Oakley City Hall-3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School-4901 Frank Hengel Way and outside the Library at Freedom High School-1050 Neroly Road; agendas are also posted on the City’s Internet Website www.ci.oakley.ca.us. A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item is available for public review prior to an Oakley Planning Commission meeting at Oakley City Hall, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Oakley Planning Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection, during regular business hours, at the front counter in the Main Lobby of the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Agendas may be picked up at the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 for no charge. To request information regarding placement on the City’s agenda e-mail distribution list, please contact us at (925) 625-7000. We provide social media options to stay connected to City Hall through Facebook, Twitter, Next Door and Instagram. Other opportunities to connect with City Hall include Engage In Oakley, Oakley OnDemand on the city's website; and by emailing info@ci.oakley.ca.us. Please contact us at (925) 625-7000 for additional information or visit www.oakleyinfo.com. If you have a physically challenging condition and require special accommodations, please call the City Clerk’s office at (925) 625-7013. 1
Please keep cell phones/electronic devices turned off during the meeting. Please be advised that Oakley Planning Commission meetings are video recorded and attendees may appear on video. Members of the public may address the Oakley Planning Commission on items of interest that are within the City’s jurisdiction. Public comment on items not listed on the agenda will be heard under the Public Comments section of the agenda. In compliance with State law, the Oakley Planning Commission may not take action on an item that is not specifically listed on the agenda. If you would like to speak on any agenda item, please fill out a public speaker card available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item being called. The Oakley Planning Commission Chair will call you by name to the podium to hear your comments and you have up to 3 minutes to speak. 1.OPENING MATTERS 1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley Planning Commission 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag 2.PUBLIC COMMENTS At this time, the public is permitted to address the Planning Commission on non-agendized items. 3.CONSENT CALENDAR Consent Calendar items are typically non-controversial in nature and are considered for approval by the Planning Commission with one single action. Members of the audience, Staff or the Planning Commission who would like an item removed from the Consent Calendar for purposes of public input may request the Chair remove the item. The public may request to remove an item(s) to provide input by completing a public speaker card and submitting it to the City Clerk prior to the item(s) being called by the Chair. 3.1 Approve Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting held July 18, 2023 (Kim Snodgrass, Deputy City Clerk) Minutes 071823 4.PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 Adoption of the State of California Density Bonus Law (SBDL) - Repeal Local Density Bonus Regulations (Oakley Municipal Code 9.1.412) and Replace with Adoption of the State Density Bonus Law by Reference (RZ 03-23) (Ken Strelo, Planning Manager) Suggested Action: Staff Recommendation: 1) Receive the Staff Report, 2) Receive Questions from the Planning Commission, 3) Open the Public Hearing, 4) Receive 2
Public Testimony, 5) Close the Public Hearing, 6) Deliberate, 7) Summarize the Deliberation, 8) Introduce the Ordinance, 9) Adopt the Resolution Staff Report 1. Legislative History Summary (2019-2023) 2. Summary of Pending 2023-2024 Legislation 3. Proposed Resolution 3.a. Draft Ordinance 5.REGULAR CALENDAR 6.REPORTS 6.1 Reports from Staff Members 6.2 OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION (a) Reports from Commission Members (b) Requests for Future Agendas 7.WORK SESSIONS 8.ADJOURN 3
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the City of Oakley Planning Commission held July 18, 2023 1) OPENING MATTERS 1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley Planning Commission Vice Chair Diego Verduzco called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California. Planning Commissioners Leonard Price, Jeanne Krieg and Jimmy Ramirez were also present. Chair Oleksii Chuiko was absent. 1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag Vice Chair Verduzco led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2) PUBLIC COMMENTS None 3) CONSENT CALENDAR 3.1 Approve Minutes from the Planning Commission Meeting held May 2, 2023 (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk) It was moved by Commissioner Price and seconded by Commissioner Krieg to approve the minutes. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (4-0) 4) PUBLIC HEARINGS 4.1 7-Eleven Sales of Distilled Spirits Conditional Use Permit (CUP 02-23) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner) Planning Manager Ken Strelo introduced Associate Planner Evan Gorman to the Planning Commissioners. Mr. Gorman presented the staff report. Commissioner Krieg asked if there was a discussion with the Police Department regarding this item, Mr. Gorman responded that the item was routed through the Police Department, and it was stated they had no additional comments. 4
Commissioner Ramirez thanked Mr. Gorman for presenting his analysis and asked if the location is near any elementary schools or day cares. Mr. Gorman responded there are none within 500 feet, but he did not look past that distance. Ryan Kroll Attorney for 7-11 along with the Franchisee Surjeet Virk, thanked Evan for making this an easy process. Mr. Kroll stated this is a very small addition of spirits that will be in a locked case. He also stated that they volunteered conditions to appease any concerns and their number one priority is having the convenience of one stop shopping, he also mentioned that in the process of filing an application with the ABC, a mailing went out to everyone within 600 ft of the premises and not a single protest was received. Richard Whicker, Jennifer Helton, FNU Deetika, Gaurav Kumar, Tamara D. Covington-White, and Zain Mehmood all commented that they approve of this project. It was moved by Commissioner Price and seconded by Commissioner Krieg to adopt the resolution as conditioned with staff’s recommended amendments. Motion was unanimous and so ordered. (4-0) 4.2 4601 Rose Avenue Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 01-23) (Evan Gorman, Associate Planner) Mr. Gorman presented the staff report. Applicant, Lynnda Mori stated that this project has been in the works for many years and rather than be forced to have two homes it’s time to do something different. She stated in real estate it's always harder to sell a parcel with two homes that are very different from each other, and it makes sense for us to move forward. She thanked Ken, Evan, and the Planning Commissioners for their assistance. It was moved by Commissioner Price and Seconded by Commissioner Ramirez to adopt the resolution as conditioned. Motion was unanimous and so ordered (4-0) 4.3 Grand Cypress Preserve Development Agreements Master Amendment (DA 01-23) (Ken Strelo, Planning Manager) Planning Manager Ken Strelo presented the staff report. Andrew Han, represents the ownership entity ACD-TI Oakley LLC., He mentioned he appreciates all the work that went into the analysis and stated they concur with the analysis. Commissioner Ramirez asked for context on the request for a ten year extension. Mr. Han responded that these development Agreements have been in existence for some time with about two years remaining and two years is an insufficient amount of time to carry out the remaining tasks. It was moved by Commissioner Krieg and Seconded by Commissioner Price to adopt the resolution as conditioned. Motion was unanimous and so ordered (4-0) 5
5) REGULAR CALENDAR None 6) REPORTS 6.1 Reports from Staff Members (a) August Planning Commission Meeting Date Community Development Director Brent Smith thanked Vice Chair Verduzco for stepping in tonight, he also mentioned that the next scheduled meeting on August 1st would be postponed to August 15th due to National Night Out on August 1st. 6.2 OAKLEY PLANNING COMMISSION (a) Reports from Commission Members Commissioner Ramirez reported he attended the Juneteenth celebration; he also attended the last City Council Meeting where he accepted a proclamation for Pride Month. Commissioner Krieg reported she attended Summerfest. (b) Requests for Future Agendas None Vice Chair Verduzco confirmed with Commissioner Krieg that she will miss the next Planning Commission Meeting on August 15th. 7) WORK SESSIONS None 8) ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. Respectively Submitted, Kim Snodgrass Deputy City Clerk 6
STAFF REPORT City of Oakley | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.ci.oakley.ca.us DATE: August 15, 2023 TO: Joshua McMurray, City Manager FROM: Ken Strelo, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Adoption of the State of California Density Bonus Law (SBDL) - Repeal Local Density Bonus Regulations (Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.412) and Replace with Adoption of the State Density Bonus Law by Reference (RZ 03-23) Summary This is a City-initiated request for approval of a Zoning Text Amendment (RZ 03-23) to repeal Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.412 “Residential Density Bonus and Incentives” which consists of Oakley’s local regulations related to residential density bonuses and replace with adoption of the State Density Bonus Law (SDBL) by reference (California Government Code Sections 65915-65918). The purpose of this amendment is to ensure the City’s ordinance is always up to date and in compliance with State law, which has been updated 10 times between 2018 and 2023. This amendment will also direct potential applicants to the most up to date State regulations providing them with accurate density bonus tools and regulations. The Planning Commission is considering a proposed resolution that recommends the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the proposed Zoning Text Amendment. Background LOCAL ORDINANCE AND STATE LAW Oakley Municipal Code (“OMC”) Section 9.1.412 (Residential Density Bonus and Incentives) regulates and implements the State of California Density Bonus Law (“SDBL”). The local regulations closely mirror the SDBL. Specifically, the code allows for a sliding scale of density bonuses and the granting of one or more concessions based on the amount and type of affordable housing that is provided, an unlimited number of waivers or reductions of local regulations, and parking reductions based on unit size. OMC Section 9.1.412 was adopted by Ordinance No. 11-10 on September 10, 2010. The last part of the ordinance includes a “No Conflict with State Law” statement which clarifies if any part of Oakley’s ordinance conflicts with any density bonus State law that the State law shall supersede. This statement ensures that, in practice, the City implements density bonuses in compliance with State law. As stated in Chapter 6 of the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update, while the Zoning Code language defers to State law, some of the criteria, such as levels of density Approved and Forwarded to the Planning Commission 7
STAFF REPORT 2CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US bonus allocations and maximum parking requirements, are not up to date. As a result, one of the Housing Element’s programs is to review and update the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance to ensure consistency with State law. Between 2018 and 2023, the State amended the SDBL ten times. Staff have found it challenging to regularly update the Municipal Code to keep pace with changing State laws. When it comes to complex regulations, such as density bonus law, it can be confusing to communicate to applicants and the public what regulations apply to density bonus projects, especially when the City’s ordinance and State regulations do not match word for word. Oakley’s ordinance largely replicates and codifies SDBL requirements; however, since it was adopted in 2010 and has not undergone any amendments, the ordinance does not currently comply with the SDBL. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COLLABORATIVE (C4) Since mid-2021, the City of Oakley has been receiving housing-related technical assistance through the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) as part of the Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) Grant Program from the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). The Contra Costa County Collaborative (C4) allows housing staff (represented by the Planning Manager for Oakley) to meet monthly to discuss housing-related issues, including getting the housing elements completed and certified, strategizing housing element implementation, and complying with evolving state laws. Recently, several Contra Costa County agency staff discussed repealing their local density bonus regulations/ordinances and simply referencing State law. This approach may simplify and clarify local implementation and eliminate the need for future amendments to the zoning ordinance. STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW (CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTIONS 65915–65918) The SDBL was adopted in 1976 to address California’s affordable housing needs. The SDBL required local agencies to allow increased density, reduced standards, and development incentives based on the number and type of affordable housing units proposed. Over time, the law has been expanded to include housing for households at a wider range of income levels and with specialized needs (e.g., seniors, students, foster youth, formerly homeless persons, or disabled veterans). The SDBL applies to housing projects, including mixed-use developments, new subdivisions, or common-interest developments. Density bonuses and associated incentives and concessions are intended to offset the financial burden of constructing affordable units. The density bonus and associated concessions are based on the amount and type of affordable units provided and include the following: 8
STAFF REPORT 3CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US Density Bonus: An increase above the maximum allowed density permitted in the General Plan Land Use Element or Zoning Code. The amount of the bonus is set on a sliding scale based on the percentage of affordable units at each income level. Incentives/Concessions: Modifications to City regulatory or development standards that result in actual and identifiable cost reductions to provide for affordable housing costs or rents. The number of required incentives is based on the percentage of affordable units provided in the qualifying project. For example, developers may ask for increased height above that allowed by the zoning regulations. Reductions/Waivers: Modification to City development standards that would physically prevent the construction of a housing development at the density permitted with a bonus and any concessions, except where the waiver would cause a public health or safety concern, harm historical property, or would be contrary to the law. There is no limit to the number of reductions/waivers that may be requested. For example, applicants may request decreased setbacks and/or increased floor area ratio and/or waiver of hillside regulations. Reduced Parking Ratios: Parking ratios are defined based on unit size: o Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space per unit o Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces per unit o Four or more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces per unit. Like many jurisdictions, the reduced parking ratios for Oakley are lower than the Municipal Code parking requirements. Proposed Ordinance Staff proposes to repeal and replace the existing density bonus regulations with the ordinance attached to this staff report (Attachment 3.a). The new regulations would adopt the SDBL by reference and identify when the regulations apply. The draft ordinance also contains requirements related to physical constraints and parking reductions, outlines application requirements, and specifies the approval process for projects. The draft ordinance also acknowledges future State law amendments may occur. With adoption of this ordinance, in future years as the legislature continues to amend and/or refine SDBL, the Oakley Municipal Code would remain consistent with State law; zoning text amendments for density bonuses would not be necessary. In 9
STAFF REPORT 4CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US addition, by referencing State law, City staff will find it easier to process applications and communicate relevant regulations to applicants, the public, and appointed/elected officials. Analysis Repealing the existing density bonus regulations and replacing to reference State law would be consistent with the Housing Element of Oakley’s General Plan, would result in the removal of government constraints, and eliminate the need to annually review the State law and continually update the Zoning Ordinance when it is amended. Consistency with the Housing Element is through direct implementation of Action 1.6 titled “Density Bonus Ordinance” found in Chapter 8 (Housing Plan) of the Housing Element. Action 1.6 includes a couple of subitems such as using the Density Bonus Ordinance and associated incentives to encourage affordable housing and revising the Density Bonus Ordinance to comply with State law. It also requires the City to monitor State law and revise the Density Bonus Ordinance when required by any future revisions to SDBL. The main objective of this Action is to “Implement Density Bonus Ordinance in compliance with State law.” The timeframe for implementation is January 31, 2024. Adoption of this ordinance will implement the subitems in this Action related to the Objective to implement the Density Bonus Ordinance in compliance o comply with State law. Findings Draft findings can be found in the proposed resolution. Consistency with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ Approval of this application would be consistent with the Oakley Strategic Plan 27+ Community and Economic Development Goal. One of the Objectives within the Goal speaks to providing affordable housing sites that meet our legislative Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). While this ordinance will not directly create or identify specific sites, it will ensure that all sites eligible for affordable housing will be processed under the most up to date State Density Bonus Law. Environmental Determination The proposed ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) – Common Sense Exemption in that the proposed ordinance would only establish and clarify administrative processes and would not facilitate new construction or other 10
STAFF REPORT 5CITY HALL | 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 O (925) 625-7000 | F (925) 625-9859 | www.CI.Oakley.CA.US groundbreaking activities. There is no potential to result in either a direct physical change to the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change to the environment. None of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact is associated with the preparation of this staff report and accompanying attachments. Costs associated with revising the Zoning Code on City-initiated projects, including staff time associated with this zoning text amendment, are funded through the City’s General Fund. Adopting State law by reference may reduce future costs associated with monitoring and updating the Ordinance. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Planning Commission Adopt the Resolution recommending the City Council adopt an Ordinance repealing Oakley Municipal Code Section 9.1.412 and replace with adoption of the State Density Bonus Law by reference, finding the action exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). Attachments 1. Legislative History Summary (2019-2023) 2. Summary of Pending 2023-2024 Legislation 3. Proposed Resolution a. Draft Ordinance 11
California State Density Bonus Law Legislative History Summary (2019 – 2023) 2019 • SB 1227 requires a 35% density bonus for housing developments that include at least 20% of its units for low-income college students. • AB 2797 requires density bonuses in the Coastal Zone to be consistent with the California Coastal Act. • AB 2372 allows developers to request a floor-area-ratio bonus rather than a traditional density bonus for projects that meet specific requirements. • AB 2753 requires local governments to notify applicants of required information for a project to be determined complete and provide information on the project’s eligibility for density bonus and reduced parking ratios. 2020 • AB 1763 provides incentives for 100% affordable housing projects, such as an 80% density bonus and an additional concession entitlement. For projects located within ½ mile of a major transit stop, AB 1763 eliminates all local government limits on density and parking and allows a height limit of up to three stories or 33 feet. 2021 • AB 2345 provides for up to 50% density bonus for mixed-income developments, reduces parking requirements for many projects qualifying for a density bonus, lowers some thresholds for obtaining concessions, and adopts density bonus reporting requirements. 2022 • AB 571 prohibits local governments from charging affordable housing impact fees, including inclusionary zoning fees and in-lieu fees, against affordable units in density bonus housing developments. • AB 634 allows local government to adopt an ordinance requiring an affordability period of more than 55 years in density bonus housing projects, except for developments financed with low-income housing tax credits. • SB 290 provides additional incentives to student housing development, reconciles text regarding public health and safety between the Housing Accountability Act and Density Bonus Law, defines ‘total units’ in a density bonus project, reduces parking requirements for moderate-income units, and clarifies 12
that the Density Bonus Law applies to both rental and for-sale housing developments. • SB 728 allows developers in for-sale density bonus housing developments to sell affordable units to nonprofit housing corporations instead of selling the units directly to a low- or moderate-income homebuyer. 2023 • AB 682 establishes “shared housing” as a new category of housing eligible for a density bonus and other associated benefits and establishes a method of determining base densities. • AB 1551 readopts legislation that sunsetted at the end of 2021 requiring that cities and counties provide a “development bonus” to commercial developers if they meet certain requirements. • AB 2334 provides special benefits to hou
Recording and media
Records considered
Not claimed by this page
No source correction or revision history is recorded for this meeting. A corrected artifact will appear here as a new version rather than replacing what is shown above.
Canonical record: 81ccd3c94febfdf644257f746d97727e. This page changes as stronger artifacts are published; it never overwrites an agenda with minutes.
Publisher tools
