Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lake County supervisors review comprehensive housing action plan; direct staff to make edits and return
Summary
Supervisors heard a yearlong Housing Action and Implementation Plan that sets goals across ADUs, homeless housing, infill, and post‑disaster rebuilding. Staff were directed to refine language, coordinate with city partners and tribal nations, and return with a revised document for formal adoption.
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lake County supervisors on July 29 reviewed a draft Housing Action and Implementation Plan (HAPE) that lays out strategies to increase housing of many types across the county, then instructed staff to update language and return the plan for further review.
The HAPE, drafted over more than a year with consultants from PlaceWorks and input from city officials, tribal representatives, developers, housing providers and residents, sets goals including expanding accessory dwelling units, creating homeless and workforce housing options, prioritizing infill and fire‑safer sites, and maintaining an online sites inventory and interactive web map. "We are very excited to be here today, to present our housing action and implementation plan," Lisa Judd, Deputy County Administrative Officer for Housing, told the board. Amy Zinsheimer of PlaceWorks said the plan "started with a robust community input and data gathering effort" and is intended as a countywide playbook.
Board members raised detailed questions about the data and about coordination with the two incorporated cities. Supervisor Sabatier and others said some demographic projections and household forecasts needed clarification before the plan is presented to city councils. Sabatier said she was "concerned by those numbers" and asked staff to confirm data sources and whether Department of Finance figures had been reconciled with local counts. Supervisor Pyska and others urged stronger language on climate and fire resilience and asked the plan to more clearly identify which changes would require city action versus county implementation.
The HAPE identifies a forecasted need of roughly 1,590 new housing units through 2037 (about 150 units per year) and catalogs needs across tenure and income: for example, the gaps analysis estimated about 960 overcrowded households in 2022 and noted that many mobile homes need rehabilitation. The plan also recommends tools such as expanding ADU production, pursuing mixed‑use infill, creating small‑lot and manufactured housing opportunities, seeking state pro‑housing designation, and pursuing project‑based vouchers.
County staff and the PlaceWorks team detailed extensive community engagement — public meetings in Cobb Mountain, Kelseyville, Lakeport, Lower Lake, Middletown, Riviera, Shoreline and Upper Lake; open houses; festival outreach; and meetings with agricultural and tribal stakeholders. "Appendix A lists a detailed account of the outreach," Amy Zinsheimer said during the presentation.
Supervisors pushed on several policy specifics raised during discussion: whether the county should fund a landlord‑tenant matching program, the timing and design of first‑time homebuyer loans, and how to ensure long‑term durability of ADUs and other alternative housing types. Director Turner of Community Development and county staff said building codes, Title 24 and state ADU law will govern construction standards and that staff are already consulting with building officials about acceptable new materials and plan libraries that can speed post‑disaster rebuilding.
After the presentation and public comment, the board gave direction to staff to revise selected sections — including clarifying language about cultural/tribal references, refining the plan's maps, and adding stronger climate and post‑disaster recovery language — and to return the HAPE to the board for formal action at the next scheduled meeting. Staff indicated they would continue outreach to city councils and local partners before adoption.
The plan remains a draft and staff emphasized it is intended as a living document to be updated as state law and local conditions change. The board requested annual updates on progress and directed staff to present the revised plan for consideration at a near‑term meeting.

