Good evening welcome and thank you for joining us for tonight's meeting of
Arinda Planning Commission on February 10th, 2026. In the back of the room
there is a table where you can find copies of tonight's agenda as well as
staff reports for the items that will be heard tonight. At the dais in front of
the Commissioner table you will find a request to speak cards. If you would like
to speak to the Commission this evening, please fill out a speaker card and place it in the
speaker tray on the table at the front here. If you are the applicant or the applicant's
agents, you do not need to complete a speaker card. Once we begin the public hearing portion
of the meeting, each item will be announced with a brief description of what is being
proposed. After any general questions by the commission to staff, the hearing will be open
and anyone wishing to speak to the commission on this item will be invited to do so. When your
name is called, please come to the speaker podium at the front. Each speaker will be allotted three
minutes to speak. Once everyone wishing to speak has made their comments, the public hearing will
them be closed and we will bring the matter up here to the Commission for
discussion. If you will be speaking to us this evening, please be sure to make
all your comments when you come to the podium as a courtesy to all comments
made from the audience during testimony or commission deliberation
will not be allowed and will not be included as part of the official public
record. At the conclusion at the conclusion of the hearing, the
commission's option will be to approve, continue or deny a project
application. Now I will proceed with roll call and confirm certain matters
for the record. Commission roll call. I would like to note that commissioners
Armstrong, Davis, doctors, Huebner, Jelnick, Marola and Schmidt are in
attendance. Item B adoption of agenda planning director. Are there any changes
to the proposed agenda.
I have none.
I would like to move forward with tonight's agenda.
Do I have a motion to adopt the agenda?
I move to adopt tonight's agenda.
Do I have a second?
Second.
Thank you.
All in favor say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
The motion is approved unanimously.
Item C, the public forum.
The first item on tonight's meeting agenda
is the public forum.
The public forum is an opportunity
for you to address the planning commission
on items that are not listed on tonight's agenda.
Is there anyone who would like to address the commission
on an item that is not on the agenda?
Please fill out the speaker card and step forward.
Is there anyone online?
Okay.
Hearing none and seeing none,
we will move on to item D, the consent calendar.
The consent calendar section of the agenda consists
of items that are acted on in one motion,
unless a commissioner or a member of the public requests
that the commission remove an item
from the consent calendar for discussion.
By approval of the consent calendar,
the staff recommendation will be adopted.
If this item is removed from the consent calendar,
The commission will follow procedures described
in the agenda for new public hearings.
May I have a motion to approve the consent calendar
as proposed?
So moved.
Do I have a second?
Second.
All in favor say aye.
Aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
We have a unanimous vote.
Item D1, the Planning Commission Minutes.
Is that also part of the planning,
part of the consent calendar?
Correct.
Item E, policy matters.
For tonight we have state housing legislation
and housing element implementation update
for 2025 calendar year.
We will receive a presentation
and discuss recent state housing legislation
and housing element implementation activities.
and we have a staff presentation.
Ms. Thompson, please present your report.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Chair, I'm sorry to thank you.
Thanks for sharing this, it's great to be here.
Oh, that's not on.
Okay, now it's on, if I go slowly enough.
Yeah, it's great to be here to talk a little bit
about the state housing legislation
and housing element implementation.
And my name is Christine Thompson.
I'm a staff planner with the city of Verinda.
So just to note, as always the state housing legislation
has been very active and we're gonna,
basically this is kind of a two-part presentation
to discuss the state housing legislation,
spend a little bit of time on the most recent bills
that were passed this session this year
and then talk generally about the many housing bills
that we're tracking and we're thinking about.
The second part of the presentation
is about the implementation activities and actions.
And this is an update, so there's no action at this time.
This is really just for informational purposes.
So this year in the land use and planning side
of housing, state housing law,
AB 130 and SB 131 came through and that,
One of the key components of that
was broadening the CEQA exemptions.
SB 684 and 1123, that was focused on small subdivisions
encouraging housing creation through small subdivisions.
And SB 79, which got a lot of press
because it's about transit oriented development
and up zoning near transit.
So those three were active this year.
The 130, 131, these were budget finance
or trailer bills, and they accelerate permit streamlining.
They broaden CEQA definitions and CEQA deadlines.
They address builders remedy projects and CEQA,
and they expand the CEQA applicability.
So just a bit of detail,
these were officially California budget trailer bills.
They are effective June 30th, 2025.
So they are effective now.
And the focus as mentioned was on CEQA exemptions,
on infill housing as well as infrastructure.
And a couple of the pertinent details, the near miss rule
is an aspect of this law.
And so it's basically broadening the CEQA exemptions
for housing that is close to qualifying.
It does address a project size of 20 acres
and that caps the builder's remedy at five acres.
To take advantage of AB 130, 131,
a project would have to be consistent
with the general plan and the zoning.
And overall, there are set shorter timeframes
for completeness, for tribal consultation,
and for project approval.
So generally trying to facilitate housing
and specifically addressing CEQA.
Senate Bill 684 and 1123.
This is a bill that allows 10, up to 10 units,
so 10 or less units.
It's streamlined subdivision on urban lots below five acres.
It applies to single and multifamily zones
and they're different thresholds for each of those zones.
It limits design review
and it requires objective design standards.
Again, some details.
It's officially called the Starter Home Revitalization Act
of 2021.
It is effective the 1st of July, 2025,
and that really has to do with the 684-1123 overlap.
It does, as mentioned, it allows 10 or fewer parcels
to be created.
And then those, in the case of a vacant single family,
it can be any parcel up to 1.5 acres.
I mentioned five acres, but that's for subdividing multi-family zones.
So just to note that the vacant single-family parcel is a smaller size parcel.
You're allowed to fit up to 10 lots with 10 smaller residential units.
New parcels must be 1,200 square feet for the vacant single-family project.
For looking at a subdividing of a multi-family zone, the parcels can be 600 square feet.
or larger. The average home size are 1,750 net habitable square feet, so it is meant
to have smaller lots, smaller homes. And an important component is this remainder parcel
idea. So a vacant single family home zone can become vacant by designating a remainder
parcel and identifying the existing single family home as a separate lot. That has been
under discussion by many communities, and that's the approach at this time. Also, for
this law, the local agency has to choose to permit accessory dwelling units or junior
accessory dwelling units as part of this. That's a choice. We'll be discussing that
in the future. And they and if permitted, they wouldn't count towards the 10 residential
unit count. It is important, particularly for Rinda, that there is a limitation around
the very high fire hazard severity zone. So it's not allowed to be subdividing in that
zone, which is a significant part of this community. I don't know how many people saw
I don't know. I saw the news on
our followed the Senate Bill 79.
But they when they initially
were doing the drafts, there
was a tear three. Um right now
there's a tier one and a tier
two. Tier three was dropped in
the final bill. I really would
have been in that tear. Um but
then also in order to qualify
for this, you'd have to be in
you'll be seeing this, you know, the Bay Area dealing with this, particularly the counties of
San Francisco, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Sacramento. And so Contra Costa County was not
considered an urban transit county, so it does not apply to communities in that county. But I wanted
I wanted to also note that the land use and planning
entire context has many, many housing bills
over the last decade.
All of these housing bills are in some level
of application at this time.
And so this is just a review.
So one of the conversations we've been having
is about AB 1287, the density bonus housing law.
developers are taking advantage of this
and affordable units are created as a part of this,
but it also brings with it additional units overall.
So it's a key component for housing creation.
AB 2011 to 2243, that focuses on commercially zoned,
now allowing residential and commercially zoned areas.
SB6 is now allowing residential
and office retail and parking areas.
SB4 streamlines housing in religious sites
or on religious sites.
SB9-450 allows for duplexes and lot splits
within single family zones.
SB330 streamlines the hearing process
and SB35-423 streamlines multifamily development.
So just a quick sort of bullet point list.
I'm not gonna read all of these,
but just to note that 1287,
you do agree to construct a percentage
of affordable housing
and that allows you to get these incentives
and reduced parking requirements or other concessions.
So 2011, again, focused on commercially zoned lands
and commercial corridors,
and then it streamlines the review period
and then also it gives broad exemption from CEQA.
Six, again, residential now allowed on office, retail,
and or parking, and all of these have particular requirements
for eligibility, so it's not just everywhere.
It's narrowly defined based on eligibility.
The eligibility does vary from bill to bill,
so you have to look at each one
in terms of whether it's applicable.
It is subject to local objective standards and hotels,
motels, and transient lighting is not allowed as a usage.
Senate Bill 4, that is related to religious lands
and college lands, so allowing for housing on those sites.
SB 9 and 450, again, expanding the single-family lots,
lot splits and duplexes.
So in some cases, you're subdivising land
you may or may not get units. In other cases, you're getting additional units. This is duplexes,
but this also includes ADUs and JDUs. So, you can allow up to four units on a lot,
limits designer view, and requires objective design standards.
Senate Bill 330, again, this is about streamlining. So, in addition to reducing public hearings,
It deals with development standards and fees and setting the time for the preliminary application.
And so, at the time of submitting of the application,
so it doesn't change over time and you're not dealing with different conditions.
And then finally Senate Bill 35, and that was, it's actually now 423 because it was extended.
And then it also has the streamlining approval. It's focused on multifamily.
But it also limits designer view and requires objective design standards.
So that is the kind of review.
The laws really have started in 2017.
So it's a decade of lawmaking that is all, you know, in some form of implementation.
And this year didn't stop.
We got three more things to think about.
And so we continue to handle those and move forward with trying to find places for housing.
So it is a two-part presentation.
I'm going to take a pause right now, see if there are any questions around legislation,
the next part of the conversations about the housing element and implementation activities.
I will open it up to the commissioners for questions.
I will start with, you kind of touched on one of my questions that I wrote down here,
that. Well, these do laws retroactively impact our housing element, and it sounds like you
said mentioned perhaps two of them will, but have you your staff given any analysis to
that? I don't know. I'm not sure the question about what were the two that you were thinking
of that would be actually I don't know in specifically, but I'm just more saying the
the laws that you have just highlighted,
will there be any type of retroactive impact
on the housing element that we're gonna be looking at
in the future for adoption?
Yeah, it's a good question.
I think our focus has more been about sort of the number
of tools to create units and whether that's working
and what applicants are finding viable
what they're not. So I think that the SP nine applications, the ADUs, you know, those are
people are really beginning to understand that now that it's been in place for a little while.
You know, people are still trying to figure out 1123, which came on this year, as a subdivision,
small subdivision focus. So yeah, so that remains to be seen, although we did get a first application.
So if I may, Chair, I'm strong, I, because I think I'm hearing your question is retroactive,
I guess I won't use retroactive because any of those bills
An advocate can come in and ask for it now
I think we have a certified housing element and so my experience with speaking with many other developers is they're willing to work with
Us and sort of abide by the rezoning that we have done and what we've changed
But to answer your question remember we only resolved housing element sites
A lot of that is up to 1.5
acres.
So yes,
another of those properties could come in and say,
I want to exercise SP six.
Yeah.
The, I think it's oops.
1123 is a little bit concerning to,
I would think many folks in Orinda.
Am I, did I hear that right?
A lot that's up to one and a half acres.
Can be divided into 10 parcels.
And.
in a single family zone and that that's very
formidable now under this rule?
Yeah, it's it's there are physical limitations.
So so I think the bigger theme is that first.
Is it vacant? You know, is there an infill?
Can it be split? Can it have the
lots at that minimum size?
Or can it make that and then can it have
those houses at the maximum size?
So I think an example of that,
Okay, so an example is that has come forward that is for four units. And that has to do with that physical limitation of, you know, what particular site, what particular configuration.
So yes, so yes, the upper limit is 10.
But you will get smaller projects as well.
I'm sorry, so it's a minimum lot size 100, an acre and a half or maximum lot size eight and a half that this can apply to, or did I misunderstand that 1.5 is maximum.
is the maximum, but so it's really trying to facilitate the small sites.
If I may, Commissioner, one and a half is the maximum, but I know, because I know the
word's a little bit more intimate, what you really are missing too, if you're not aware,
is that 130 and 131 expanded again on 1123.
now what we're dealing with is not only the what 65,000 square foot the one and a half acre lot vacant
now what they've done is they've said now it doesn't have to be vacant you can do a designated
remainder and subdivide off that existing portion with the existing house and what remains as vacant
that has to now meet so they're expanding if you tear the house down is it now vacant i mean
and that was a question I actually had today.
I said, hey, because SB9 looks at it that way.
SB9, I can say, well, no, there's an existing house there.
In the cases that I've been looking at,
they've been dilapidated and uninhabitable.
What would, 1123, that question doesn't even come into play.
Do we have any more questions from the commission?
No question, just thank you.
I think it's super helpful to,
There's a lot flying around, as you mentioned,
and I think to just have a dedicated session
to understand some of what's going on,
how that may impact not only the housing element,
but it's just in general, right?
The projects or lack thereof
that may come across our desk.
So I appreciate you guys taking the time to do this.
Yeah, thank you.
Okay, well with that,
I will move on to the housing element implementation.
So this is an update.
So we'll be coming back to you with the annual reporting.
But just as a reminder, this we're in the six cycle housing element. We do have a certified housing element. It is part of the general plan. It's a state requirement. It was approved in 2023 and the, you know, it plans for 1359 housing units.
that's the target, the RINA target.
And I'm really here today to talk about
the implementation activities because as it gets certified,
which happened in 2023, then there's a general movement
to how do we, how much progress are we making?
How do we implement this housing element
now that it's certified?
So we do it through six main strategies,
housing production, conservation,
creating new opportunities,
making sure we remove constraints,
make sure there's fair housing
and we're focused on energy conservation.
With that in mind, that's sort of the main headers
of the implementation actions.
But at the end of the day,
we have 1,359 targeted units
and they're spread across income categories.
So you're not only trying to get the total amount,
but you're also trying to get them in income categories.
There is a very long and detailed descriptive table
that goes with the annual reporting.
the board. I'm going to show you.
I'm going to show you what it
looks like. And we update this.
But really what we're focused on is looking at these.
Areas of implementation work.
Which are turned, which turn into agenda items.
Come before your.
Your board come before other committees and commissions.
building. And this is page one.
And some of them are really,
you know, notable big efforts,
the housing opportunity sites
you just saw go by. The
downtown precise plan has been
under discussion, but you may
have heard about Caltrans and
then AD use as well,
multifamily development,
affordable housing development.
around the no net loss, trying to make sure we're always
have the capacity to have the housing that we need.
Senate bill nine, that's the lot splits
and the unit creation, ADUs, JUs, duplexes.
And then they also have a couple of sites
that have carried from the previous housing element
and a couple other methods, non-vacant sites,
lot consolidation.
So just a reminder, housing opportunity sites,
this graphic might look familiar.
They were rezoned this year.
And so that's great for meeting HCDs requirements.
And it's been a topic of conversation and moving forward
and making sure that there is the capacity
to bring housing units should applicants come forward
with them.
Another implementation strategy is housing conservation.
So this is more about preserving the at-risk housing,
making sure there's rehabilitation happening,
there's maintenance and repair opportunities
and first time home buyer programs and replacement housing.
And that might be more descriptive
in terms of what the programs are
and who they're available to showing up in Table D.
And then the third area of work is housing opportunities.
So shared housing programs, low-income housing,
making sure that there's assistance
for developmental disabilities and disability services.
In this set is also the objective design standards
and inclusionary housing ordinance.
And I've come with those two topics to this group
with study sessions,
and we're working towards potential adoption.
So we're still in that in-between space.
So we did do part of the inclusionary housing ordinance.
We did a market study and then worked on writing the ordinance.
We're still moving through that process.
The objective design standards, this is an old draft.
We have a new draft that people will see shortly.
And then another area is housing constraints,
making sure that development standards aren't
inhibiting housing, that development review
and processing is helping, building codes and order,
infrastructure is available, parking standards assist
with housing creation, there's reasonable accommodation
and development fees are monitored.
And then fair housing and energy conservation,
these are two areas they only have one initiative each,
the affirmatively furthering fair housing
and promoting energy conservation.
And so, and we've gotten the question a lot
about, you know, that's a big number 1359.
You know, how do we show progress?
You know, what happens if we don't show progress?
So it just a note about showing progress.
We all hope to show progress.
We're all making efforts to do that.
But insufficient progress can result
in increasingly onerous state law streamlining requirements.
So that is important to note that Arinda today
is subject to streamlined ministerial SB35
and 423 approval processes with a project
that has at least 50% affordability.
This year, because we're coming up
on the midterm of that cycle,
if insufficient thresholds are met for above moderate,
Arundel will be subject to mandatory SB 35,
423 streamlining at 10% affordability.
So the push is on to get housing
And so it is, to every local community's advantage
to invite the housing they want
so that they can really participate in that process
and see their community grow as they would like.
So this is really the summary of the update.
We're gonna continue to track the housing laws.
We're gonna continue with the implementation actions.
And this is an update in advance
the annual progress report um that happens in a month or two um so you know spring 2026 we'll come
back um with some numbers um that's more about the annual tracking so thank you happy to answer any
questions thank you are there any questions from the commission when you talk about insufficient
progress are we talking about like building permit applications or are we talking about
going. I mean, we're talking
as far as these low moderate
force process. Yeah, I think
that the applications, you
know, approved projects is a
key indicator for HDD. Um but
I think the but the zoning was
about capacity. Um making sure
there was the capacity to have
places for projects to come
are talking about building permits. I don't have a comment, but I just wanted to know if this was a
really informative presentation and really well done. Thank you. Thanks. Yeah, I could be very
informative. A quick question for both of you is how would you characterize have we seen an
increase in interest? Are we seeing things in the pipeline? Is this triggering and incentivizing
what it intends to? Or do we think it's going to have that impact? Kind of your subjective
point of view from what you see in the office? Yeah, Commissioner, I don't want to give away
too much because I don't have officially something in hand, but yes, we are, let me just put it this
way, I've been in a few meetings myself, I received several calls from real estate agents.
Thank you. Okay, if there's no more questions from the commission at this time,
we're going to have public comment. If there are, if there's anyone wishing to speak
from the public please step forward or online. Hearing no comments from the room and online
we will close the floor and with that we'll I'll bring the matter up to the commission for further
discussion if there's any. I'll just add my thanks to staff for the effort and curiosity if that
little list of bills and their summary impacts is that something you can get online or is that
something that the presentation actual documents that that's something that's available. Yeah,
we can make it available. Yeah. Anyway, thank you. It was it was very informative.
I'd also like to say thank you. And I would like to also see the slides or have those made available.
So thank you very much. And with that, we will move on. It looks like there's no further questions
from the commission. We'll move on to item F. Continued public hearings. There are none.
We'll move on to item G. New public hearings. There are none. Item H. Other commission matters.
There are none. Item I. Planning commissioners report. I have none. And we will go to item J.
planning director's update. All right thank you. I understand from staff last meeting I don't hear
well so I came prepared to answer Vice Chair this evening and Christine hinted at some of the
things so the objective design standards we did have to push back a little bit due to the
consultant's availability as well so we were gunning for March 24th to come back before
planning commission and that will put us at April before the City Council. The
Christine mentioned inclusionary housing ordinance. Those dates are going to begin
to be D to be determined is we have to go back to the subcommittee for the
housing subcommittee on a few things that we were acquired upon us. Christine
has also mentioned the housing element the full report because we have a
deadline April 1st to submit to the state. Our progress report so we'll
will probably come back around March 10th
with the actual full report.
Now the next thing, the reason why she broke it up
is because there's something I put forth
after learning about SB 1123.
The key with that ordinance,
you don't have to have accessory dwelling units
and junior accessory dwelling units.
So we've put forth this to the city council.
Do you wanna start talking about that?
Do you wanna give us direction on that?
and put together a presentation of how that would look.
So we're going to try to use SB9 and how we look at the,
I'm going to say JDUs now, JDUs and ADUs
and how that may have impacted SB9 lot splits.
And then try to bring you all along
to help give direction of whether you also
want to allow ADUs and JDUs on that SB1123 lots.
So you can allow those seven,
that 1,700 square foot home plus that 1,200 square foot lot.
Yes, you can or cannot allow
the smaller accessory building.
So that's what we're coming back for.
Chair, I'm sure you asked me about the federal grant.
And so I did go back and ask about that.
And so it was a federal grant that was issued to Moraga
and Arinda because they applied for the safe streets
for all grant, and I guess they were excited
that they received that, and it's a feasibility study.
They told me for the Morago Way trail project
that has been selected for the grant,
but the grant would fund planning, stakeholder,
and community engagement, conceptual design,
and planning level cost estimates
for proposed Orinda Moraga regional trail,
a class one multi-use facility trail
along Camino Pablo and Morago Way
from downtown Arrinda.
And then they said the award amount was about 508,000,
but the total estimated cost of the projects
were about 635,000.
So that was the grant.
And that's the conclusion of my report.
Thank you.
Does the commission have any questions
for starting the update?
Thank you very much.
And with item K, do I have a motion to adjourn?
So moved.
Thank you.