Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Element topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves Madera County housing element and zoning updates; residents urge stronger timelines and protections
Summary
The board approved the 2024–2032 housing element and related rezones to meet regional housing needs allocation, 5–0. Community advocates urged higher numeric objectives, earlier program timelines and a wider pesticide buffer around disadvantaged unincorporated communities.
The Madera County Board of Supervisors voted 5–0 on Oct. 7 to approve the county’s 2024–2032 housing element, related zoning and land‑use updates intended to accommodate the state‑assigned regional housing needs allocation (RHNA). Planner Jamie Backs told the board staff proposes rezoning 89 sites, updating residential density standards and adopting programs to support affordable housing, tenant protections and infrastructure improvements.
Backs said the County received a letter of substantial compliance from the California Department of Housing and Community Development and that staff determined the action was exempt from CEQA under the applicable provisions for plan updates. The package includes rezones targeted to sites within water and sewer districts and updates required by Senate Bill 244 to identify disadvantaged unincorporated communities.
Public commenters from Leadership Council raised specific concerns before final adoption. Ashley Marie Suarez argued multiple programs (including housing rehabilitation, rental assistance and weatherization) have low numeric objectives that will under‑serve the county’s 23 unincorporated communities and urged increasing those objectives and accelerating timelines so benefits reach households sooner. Suarez also asked the county to set a 1,000‑foot pesticide buffer for certain actions rather than the 100‑foot buffer in the current draft.
Andrea Oribe, a land‑use and transportation policy advocate, thanked staff for outreach but said the analysis for disadvantaged communities needs deeper detail — for example, on water and wastewater deficiencies, firefighting infrastructure, and inconsistencies between documents. Oribe cited a discrepancy flagged in staff materials about Fairmead well production (one document listing ~500 gallons per minute and another 673 gallons per minute) and asked that figures be reconciled before moving forward.
Staff responded that outreach and coordinated planning with cities had taken place and recommended adoption. The board approved the second reading and related zoning updates by roll call vote, 5–0. Backs said after county certification the package will be returned to HCD for final adoption steps.
