Piedmont council declares intent to seek exemption for Moraga Canyon parcels from Surplus Lands Act

The Piedmont City Council on Tuesday adopted a resolution expressing the city’s intent to determine one or more city-owned parcels in the Moraga Canyon Specific Plan (MCSP) area as exempt from the Surplus Lands Act (SLA), a step staff said will preserve local control over developer selection and design standards.

Mayor Anderson put the item before the council after a staff presentation from Kevin Jackson, the city’s planning and building director. Jackson said the exemption would avoid the extensive oversight and mandatory good-faith negotiation procedures that apply when land is nonexempt under the SLA, including potential limits on the city’s ability to enforce architectural design standards and to choose contractors. “If we are nonexempt, then we have to follow all these protocols set up in the surplus lands act,” Jackson said, adding that the city had consulted the California Department of Housing and Community Development and “they’re the ones telling us we’re well placed to get an exemption.”

Jackson told the council the MCSP was developed to support the city’s housing element obligations and implementation plan. He said the plan designates 132 units overall, with 60 units targeted for low-income occupants — “45% of the units, which is in excess of the 40% required to qualify for the exemption,” Jackson said — and that meeting a deeper affordability requirement would also improve eligibility for Measure A1 bond funds and federal tax credits for the affordable developer.

During public comment on the item, Vincent Fisher, vice president of Friends of Moraga Canyon, urged the council to revisit the inclusion of two single-family parcels included as incentives in prior proposals. “Do we need to have those two single-family houses right there?” Fisher asked, suggesting the parcels had been used as a carrot for developers and recommending the council consider declaring only other parcels surplus.

Council members pressed staff on tradeoffs between local control and SLA procedures. Councilman Ramsey said the council’s preference for local control had guided work on the plan and emphasized the possibility that a nonexempt process could require accepting the developer offering the deepest affordability even if the city found other qualifications lacking. A staff member clarified that the builder’s remedy — a state provision that can compel approvals where a jurisdiction lacks a compliant housing element — applies to private property and was not relevant to these city-owned parcels.

Vice Mayor moved the resolution to declare intent to determine the parcel(s) exempt and to authorize the city administrator to proceed with preparation of a request for qualifications/proposals; Council member Long seconded the motion. The council voted unanimously to adopt the intent resolution.

Jackson said the action does not itself transfer property; it authorizes staff to prepare solicitation materials and return to council with a preferred solicitation strategy before issuing an RFQ/RFP. He said staff expects to consult a professional services firm to help prepare and evaluate the solicitation documents.