Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development Miramonte topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Soledad officials briefed on Miramonte project as residents urge stronger affordable-housing and road planning
Summary
At a special joint meeting, residents and LandWatch urged Soledad City officials to require that the Miramonte development include a high share of affordable units, be built concurrently with market-rate housing, and include infrastructure improvements to address Highway 101 congestion. City staff presented an update; no formal action was taken.
SOLEDAD, Calif. — City staff on Monday updated the Soledad City Council and the city’s Successor Housing Agency on the Miramonte development project while residents urged the council to secure stronger affordable-housing commitments and concurrent road improvements.
At a public comment period during the special meeting at the Soledad Community Center, Angelica, a lifelong Soledad resident, said housing prices and the current supply force many young people to live with family and that Miramonte risks delivering mostly high-priced single-family homes. “Affordable housing should be built at the same time as market rate homes,” Angelica said, and she called for a mix of townhomes, apartments and smaller units so young professionals and working families can remain in Soledad.
Why it matters: Miramonte is described by speakers as the city’s primary growth area for coming decades. Residents and advocacy groups told the council that decisions in development agreements will have long-term effects on who can live in the community and on traffic and emergency-response conditions if roadway upgrades do not keep pace with new construction.
During public comment, Christy Markey of LandWatch urged the city to follow its planning documents and legal authority when negotiating development agreements. “The general plan and housing element provide that 58% of the units in Miramonte should be affordable,” Markey said, adding that the city should use “affordability by design” — higher-density zoning to produce multifamily units — and consider a subcommittee to add oversight to negotiations. Markey also urged careful legal review of development agreements to prevent developers from later renegotiating away affordability commitments.
Speakers also raised infrastructure concerns. Angelica warned that Highway 101 is already congested and said the city must ensure road improvements occur alongside housing construction rather than afterward, citing potential impacts on commute times, emergency response and local air quality.
City staff said the meeting was an update: the Community and Economic Development Department and the city manager presented an overview of the Miramonte specific-plan area and ongoing work, and the council held a discussion. No formal action or vote was taken Monday.
What was cited: Commenters referred to the city’s planning documents and to the sequence of approvals. Markey told the council that the 2005 General Plan and the 2009 Housing Element were in place when the developer submitted a vesting tentative map, a fact she said is relevant to what rules the developer agreed to follow. She also noted that a more recent housing element exists, but argued the earlier documents and the specific plan inform current negotiations.
Next steps: Staff did not announce a vote or formal direction at the meeting; the presentation was described as an informational update and an opportunity for public engagement. LandWatch and residents said they expect to participate in future meetings and urged the council to keep affordable-housing commitments, require concurrency for infrastructure, and consider additional oversight during development-agreement negotiations.
Ending: The council and successor agency will continue review of the Miramonte specific-plan area in future meetings; the city did not set a deadline or take action at Monday’s session.
