The Placer County Planning Commission on Oct. 16 took up the Hope Way Apartments, a proposed 240‑unit, 100% affordable multifamily development on an 11.43‑acre site at 3130 Penryn Road in unincorporated Penryn.

The hearing, which drew hundreds of in‑person attendees and more than 200 written comment letters, included a staff presentation, technical testimony on traffic and public safety, a developer presentation and nearly four hours of public testimony. The commission approved the project's CEQA conformity determination and most of the applicant's requested concessions and waivers under state density bonus law, but tied on a waiver that would have allowed the project to exceed a community plan circulation policy (keeping an intersection at LOS C), producing no majority to approve the overall design review agreement.

Why it matters: The project is one of the county's sites targeted to meet its housing element goals and uses state streamlining and density bonus provisions that substantially limit local discretion. Commissioners and residents spent the day focused on traffic and emergency evacuation, school impacts and site design, in a dispute that illustrates the tension between state housing mandates and local infrastructure and safety concerns.

What the project proposes: USA Properties Fund, the developer, proposes 12 residential buildings totaling 240 apartments (including two manager units), two community buildings, 463 parking spaces and on‑site amenities such as play areas, a fitness area and outdoor common space. Staff estimated an anticipated resident population of about 792 people based on county zoning occupancy assumptions; the applicant emphasized the project would be income‑restricted to households at 30% to 70% of area median income and financed largely with federal low‑income housing tax credits.

Key approvals requested: The commission was asked to (a) approve a design review agreement under county standards, (b) approve nine concessions/waivers (two concessions and seven waivers) under California's density bonus law (Gov. Code
65915 et seq.), and (c) determine the project is consistent with the previously certified Housing Needs Rezone Program EIR (CEQA conformity checklist). Staff recommended approval of all three actions, subject to conditions of approval.

Traffic, roundabout and evacuation: The most repeated public concerns addressed traffic and emergency evacuation. The project would fund off‑site improvements that include a single‑lane roundabout at Penryn Road and Hope Way, signal modifications and a hammerhead turnaround at the end of Hope Way. Traffic consultants (Fair & Piers) estimated the project would add about 1,326 daily trips (252 AM peak, 110 PM peak); under cumulative conditions the Penryn/Boyington/I‑80 westbound intersection would operate at LOS D (instead of the HBPCP policy LOS C). Consultants said the proposed roundabout and other improvements would not reduce the number of lanes and would be designed to allow emergency vehicles (and large trucks) to travel over a mountable apron.

Public safety debate: County staff and consultants presented evacuation planning as a shared, operational responsibility of first responders; Placer County Sheriff's Office and local fire representatives described unified command and mutual/automatic aid arrangements. Penryn Fire representatives and many residents countered with concerns that a single‑lane roundabout and existing queuing at the I‑80 ramps would create evacuation choke points in a high‑wind, wind‑driven wildfire. Commissioners pressed staff and the district about baseline response times; Penryn Fire noted an average response time around six minutes and said the project could increase call volume. County counsel and staff repeatedly noted the narrow legal standard for denying density bonus waivers: a waiver must be denied only if the county finds a specific, unmitigable public health or safety impact or that the request conflicts with state or federal law.

Schools and other community impacts: Loomis Union School District officials told the commission the project could generate dozens of additional students (district estimates were presented during public comment) and said facility and capacity planning is handled by the district and the school board. Residents and neighborhood groups emphasized impacts on small businesses, pedestrian safety and the community's low‑profile character; neighbors and a faith group raised concerns about retaining walls, stormwater piping at the southern boundary and potential impacts to on‑site wetlands and oak woodland.

Waivers/concessions and votes: The commission first attempted a single bundled vote on the nine density‑bonus requests; that motion failed on a 3‑3 tie. The commission then voted item‑by‑item. The body approved eight of nine individual concessions/waivers (including allowing resident parking within the front setback, reduced porch sizes, three‑story massing, taller wall/fence combinations in portions of the site and underground stormwater conveyance). The commission deadlocked on waiver number 8: a requested deviation from the Horseshoe Bar–Penryn Community Plan policy that would maintain LOS C; the applicant sought to allow LOS D at Penryn/Boyington/I‑80 westbound in peak hours. That LOS waiver failed 3‑3.

Design review and CEQA conformity: Because the design review agreement relies on several waivers to comply with community plan and design manual standards, commissioners asked whether a failed waiver would prevent approval of the design review agreement. After debate the commission did not approve the design review agreement (the motion failed on a 3‑3 vote); the commission did determine the project is consistent with the previously certified Housing Needs Rezone Program EIR (the CEQA conformity determination passed unanimously).

What commissioners said: Commissioners and staff repeatedly described a narrow legal framework. County counsel told the commission state law intentionally restricts local discretion when a project fits the housing element and meets the statutory affordability threshold. Counsel warned that unjustified denials can expose the county to litigation and penalties under the Housing Accountability Act, and could undermine the county's housing element status. Several commissioners said they supported affordable housing but wanted more objective evidence that specific waivers would cause unmitigable health or safety impacts before denying them.

Next steps and appeals: The commission's action leaves the design review application without majority approval. County staff advised that the project and the decisions made today are appealable to the Board of Supervisors; anyone who commented at the hearing or submitted written comment may file an appeal within 10 days (a filing fee was stated on the record). Staff and counsel also noted statutory deadlines and the narrowness of potential continuances under SB 330 and related statutes.

Ending: The meeting continued through a series of public comments and expert answers. The commission concluded its October 16 hearing without approving the design review agreement; it approved the CEQA conformity finding and most of the requested density bonus concessions/waivers. The record and many public submissions will form the basis for the Board of Supervisors appeal period and any future legal challenge.

Ending note: The meeting exposed the tension between statewide housing directives and local safety and infrastructure concerns. Commissioners said they wanted to make a defensible, evidence‑based ruling and flagged follow‑up tasks for staff, including further technical answers about evacuation modeling, response times and whether the Penryn Road corridor is an official primary evacuation route in county emergency plans. The matter may be appealed to the Board of Supervisors and could prompt follow‑on technical studies or additional mitigation if the project proceeds.