Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Inclusionary Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Atherton planning commission recommends inclusionary-housing ordinance to council but excludes RM-10 sites from local fee
Summary
Staff recommended an inclusionary ordinance (20% baseline affordability for RM-10/20/40) to council. Commissioners expressed concern about SB 1123 and SB 79 impacts and voted to forward the draft with an exception that RM-10 sites be excluded from the local inclusionary fee requirement.
The Atherton Planning Commission on Dec. 10 recommended that the City Council consider adopting a draft inclusionary housing ordinance, but the commission added a specific exception excluding RM-10 sites from the local inclusionary fee.
Town planner Britney Bendix summarized the draft ordinance and its rationale. The proposal would apply to RM-10, RM-20 and RM-40 overlay sites, require a minimum 20% of units as affordable for qualifying multifamily projects of five or more units, and set a 55-year affordability term for included units. The ordinance would also allow in-lieu fees, land dedication and other alternative compliance paths.
Bendix highlighted two state laws that shaped the discussion: SB 1123 (a 2025 law enabling certain lot splits in single-family zones, potentially creating up to 10 lots on qualifying vacant parcels) and SB 79 (which enables higher-density development near transit stations). She told commissioners the town needs local policy to capture inclusionary outcomes if these state pathways are used.
Commissioners debated whether a 20% requirement should apply to RM-10 sites and whether the ordinance should allow the state’s density-bonus/bonus-density concessions to effectively expand development beyond the town’s intent. One commissioner proposed excluding RM-10 sites from the local inclusionary fee to avoid incentivizing subdivisions or bonus-driven density on small parcels; that motion was moved, seconded and adopted by roll-call (four ayes, one abstention).
Commissioners asked staff to forward the draft ordinance and to relay the commission’s preferences and the RM-10 exclusion to the city council. Bendix said staff will present the package to council and prepare standards for SB 79 developments and other implementation details.
What happens next: The planning commission’s recommendation — including the RM-10 exception — will be transmitted to the City Council for its consideration and final action. Staff will develop implementation standards for SB 79 projects and return with additional materials.
