Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Placer County approves Sunrose funding amendment and Ranch affordable-housing agreement; housing-element progress presented
Summary
The Board approved a capital amendment for Sunrose Apartments and an affordable-housing agreement for the Ranch subdivision, while county planning staff presented the annual General Plan and Housing Element progress report showing strong ADU activity but weak very-low‑income production.
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Placer County Board of Supervisors on March 18 approved two housing measures tied to existing projects and received the county’s 2024 General Plan and Housing Element annual progress reports.
The most immediate actions were a contract amendment to finish construction and a separate affordable‑housing agreement for a subdivision. County staff said the moves align county funding with previously awarded state grants and local developer obligations so completed units can be occupied.
County Health and Human Services staff member Amy (last name not provided) told the board the amendment with Advocates for Mentally Ill Housing, Inc., will add previously awarded California Department of Housing and Community Development HOME‑Key funds and the county match to allow completion of remaining work at Sunrose Apartments. Amy said 36 units are occupied and the operator anticipates finalizing the remaining 46 units within weeks for a total of 82 units at the site. The board approved the amendment by roll call: Supervisors Dimitay, Landon, Jones and Chair Anne Gore voted yes; Supervisor Gustafson was absent.
Also approved was an affordable‑housing agreement required as a condition of approval for the Ranch subdivision, which will place deed restrictions on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on 44 lots to meet a 10% affordable‑housing obligation. Nikki Streakand, with the Office of Economic Development and Housing, said deed restrictions for low‑income ADUs require (1) the ADU be under 750 square feet, (2) the ADU not be offered as a short‑term rental, and (3) it not be sold separately from the primary lot. One very‑low‑income unit in the Ranch agreement will have a deed restriction requiring rental to households meeting HCD very‑low‑income limits and annual renter certification. The board approved the Ranch affordable‑housing agreement on a motion by Supervisor Landon, seconded by Supervisor Jones; the motion carried.
Planning Director Chris Pahule and Principal Planner Emily Setzer presented the annual progress reports required by state law. The staff report showed Unincorporated Placer County’s sixth‑cycle regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) at 7,854 units. Setzer highlighted that ADUs have been a major source of counted lower‑income units in the county: of the 180 low‑income units counted so far in the cycle, 173 are ADUs; occupancy of ADUs is high (about 96% in 2024) but only 27% of occupied ADUs charge rent, and of those that charge rent only a minority report rents that would qualify as affordable to low‑income households. Setzer and members of the board discussed limits on counting ADUs as very‑low‑income units: county staff said units must be deed‑restricted at the very‑low‑income level in order to be formally counted as such for RHNA compliance.
Board members and public commenters urged the county to pursue additional tools to encourage deed restrictions and to connect ADU owners to programs that match tenants to units. Staff said they have reached out to organizations such as American River Home Share and will include program work in an upcoming housing action plan to be brought back to the board.
The board did not approve new policy changes during the meeting; the items acted on were the contract amendment and the affordable‑housing agreement that align previously committed funding and development obligations so construction and occupancy can be completed.
What’s next: staff said they expect final Sunrose units to be occupied in the coming weeks and that they will return with operational‑phase items later. The housing action plan work and further ordinance clarifications will be discussed in future hearings.
Speakers quoted in this article are those who spoke on the record at the March 18 meeting.

