Archive for the ‘Growth & Development’ Category

State law forces Antioch Council to approve one of two townhome projects

Wednesday, October 29th, 2025
Renderings of the planned Slatten Ranch Townhomes approved by the City Council on Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2025. Source: DeNova Homes

Embattled DeNova Homes’ 129 units at Slatten Ranch passes on split vote; 159 units at Wildflower Station fails on tie vote with Torres-Walker absent, continued until next Tuesday.

“It’s…unfortunate our hands are going to be tied due to state law” – District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson

“We are very limited in what actions we can take.” – Mayor Pro Tem Louie Rocha

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, October 28, 2025, the Antioch City Council voted to approve one of two new townhome projects by DeNova Homes in the Slatten Ranch area on the eastern edge of the city on a split 3-1 vote. Another townhome project on Hillcrest Avenue and Deer Valley Road in the Wildflower Station development failed on a 2-2 vote with District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker absent. The council members pointed out that their hands are tied by state law, SB330 – The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, under which plans for both developments were submitted, and were forced to approve both.

It was the second time the Council reviewed the projects by the embattled developer, whose father and son leaders were indicted in April on charges of bribing an Antioch city councilman. (See related articles here, here and here).

Slatten Ranch Townhome Development Plan. Source: DeNova Homes

Approve 129 Slatten Ranch Townhomes

Following another presentation on the 179-unit Slatten Ranch Townhomes project by the developer’s representatives as well as public comments by residents including some members of local unions concerned about growth and jobs, the council members discussed the project and questioned City staff.

District 3 Councilman Don Freitas who has been critical of the project, especially that it allows housing in the City’s 200-acre East Lone Tree Focus Area that was intended for commercial and economic development foorr creation of local, well-paying jobs, was first to question staff. He said, “In the report…it states that…the project has been adequately analyzed…under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) and further review is not required. Traffic…will exceed City standards at the intersection…Level of Service F, which is the worst traffic conditions we can have.”

“The mitigation…they’re going to give one-fourth of the traffic light,” he asked with incredulity. “Empire and Wicklow. Level F. How does that pass CEQA?”

Antioch Planning Manager Zoe Merideth responded, “Vehicle miles traveled is a different standard…that’s what’s in the Housing Element EIR (Environmental Impact Report). Also, in the City’s General Plan, we have the Level of Service…and guidelines under that.”

“We’re still going to have Level F at Empire…and Wicklow for all of Eastern Contra Costa County,” Freitas reiterated.

“But we’re going to have mitigation,” Planning Manager Meredith stated.

“One-fourth of traffic signal is adequate?” Freitas asked again.

“There will be a turn pocket,” Meredith responded. “There will be additional left-turn storage prior to…building permit and occupancy. They’re looking at build out (in the area)not just at the project.”

Then Freitas again raised the issue of the children’s park that would be seen at the entrance to the development.

“Even though the public testimony about children’s safety, nothing’s changed,” he stated.

“Our issues and concerns that led us to pausing this until tonight,” said Mayor Pro Tem and District 2 Councilman Louie Rocha. “SB330, it says, is intended to streamline housing…to address the housing crisis in California. The concerns we brought up about traffic, children’s safety, just fall off the table…since they meet CEQA standards, there’s nothing else we can do.”

“As a General Law City we…are being required to follow laws…and in this case it has do with housing laws,” he continued. “We would hope that the applicant would show concerns we have for our residents and families.”

“It’s very clear…as far as local government we are very limited in what actions we can take. That’s what brings us here, tonight,” Rocha stated.

District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson then asked the developer’s attorney, Golub about his possible comment at the last council meeting of not having to care about the working conditions. “I hope I misheard you,” she stated.

“So, am I. I really don’t recall raising that,” he responded. “I certainly don’t have any notes in front of me. I don’t think I mentioned that at all.”

Then he recalled what he did say that Wilson might have misunderstood.

“State law is very explicit and clear…any CEQA review…the opponent has to show any peculiar    I’m not aware of any evidence why this project would address any of those concerns. We reviewed carefully the comments raised by the labor union’s attorney. The issues that seem to be raised don’t relate to any peculiar aspects of this project. It’s a standard development. We’re not taking any kind of unusual conditions that will have any unusual impacts on working conditions. There are a bunch of state laws we have to follow.

“The project is supposed to be approved,” he added.

“I think it’s unfortunate you didn’t take the opportunity to hear all the concerns the last time. I feel like you’re just reiterating in your letter. You didn’t address any of their concerns,” Wilson stated.

“It’s also unfortunate our hands are going to be tied due to state law,” she added.

East Lone Tree Focus Area Map and Slatten Ranch Townhome Project location (in yellow box). Source: City of Antioch

Dana Tsubota, Chief Legal Officer of DeNova Homes said, “We’re happy to have conversations with all of the staff members. We’ve gone through two years of detailed review with staff. We’re happy to continue to have those discussions. When we build something, we’re in partnership with the City for a very long time.

We are limited by the City’s objective standards,” she continued. To make sure all the pieces fit and have all the units in the project as the City is requiring. If there is something we can do we’re happy to.”

“There’s a period of time between an approval and building permit…to ameliorate or soften the impact…there’s a certain amount of latitude we have to change the site plan,” said Antioch Interim Community and Economic Director David Storer.

“This council saw it for the first time a little over a month ago,” said Mayor Ron Bernal.

He then asked about Empire Avenue saying, “Historically, it’s been a joint project with the City of Brentwood. There is no condition of approval for them to build one-half of the street on their side. If this builder doesn’t build it…it falls back on the City and we don’t have any money…we don’t have an impact fee.”

“The center median is not included,” said Scott Buenting.

“Who will build it?” Bernal asked about the additional lane of traffic on the west side of Empire Avenue adjacent to the project.

“We have curb and gutter on our side,” Buenting responded.

“Why isn’t this project being conditioned to do it?” Bernal asked about the widening of Empire Avenue next to the project.

“I’m not sure,” said Buenting.

“I’d like to add it as a condition of approval. As long as Antioch fulfills our responsibility, for our half of the street,” Bernal stated.

“You’ll have to ask the applicant,” Storer responded.

“We’d be happy to look at a specific proposal,” said Golub. “But we don’t necessarily see a nexus of impact by this development. It could be very costly.”

After a 10-minute break for City staff to consult with the developer’s representatives, Interim City Attorney Derek Cole said, “To deal with this issue, there will be a general conditions that will require the improvements to the road…that will allow us to work with the applicant to reduce the concerns of the impacts of nexus. I believe we have to hear from the developer on this.”

Storrer then proposed some language for the council to consider for the additional condition of approval on the road widening.

The developer’s attorney Dan Golub. “I think we just heard there’s an objective standard. The time has come and gone. We’re willing to sit and work with you on this.”

“It’s an arterial design standard,” Bernal stated.

“I must go on the record opposing this. The outcome of that would be something we could agree to. We will work with you,” Golub stated.

Bernal, in violation of Roberts Rules of Order, then made  a motion to approve the project with the added condition that the developer is required to improve Empire Avenue to one-half arterial road standard with consultation with Design Review and City Attorney.”

In proportionate share,” Cole added. “The City Engineer will make that determination.”

“From Wicklow to the north property line of the project,” Bernal added.

Rocha seconded the motion which passed 3-1 with Freitas voting against.

Rendering of proposed Wildflower Station Back-Back Townhomes. Source: DeNova Homes

Don’t Approve 159 Wildflower Station Townhomes on Tie Vote

The Council then received a brief presentation on the 159-unit Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project planned for the four-parcel, 10.35 acre vacant property near the intersection of Hillcrest Avenue and Deer Valley Road and bordered by Wildflower Drive to the east and the road next to the KFC restaurant in the Hillcrest Crossroads shopping center which also serves the existing condo development.

“According to our General Plan, developers are supposed to pay their way,” said former Councilman Ralph Hernandez during Public Comments. This project has been another one that’s being dumped on the city, not properly mitigated. You have to charge the right amount of money…for our police services.  The project right next door is already telling you how dangerous it is.” He was referring to the condo project previously built and units sold.

Alora McGuire spoke next “on behalf of Contra Costa Residents for Responsible Development”, representing union members and residents in Antioch and surrounding areas. She said the group did not want the council to oppose the project but wanted the developer to address noise impacts.

Jason Buster of Plumbers and Steamfitters union Local 159, representing 300 Antioch families that are members of other unions, including electricians and sheet metal workers. “We advocate for projects that are more sustainable and equitable for the city of Antioch. We’re proud of our work to reduce the environmental impacts of projects.”

“The project is fully exempt from CEQA due to SB330,” said DeNova’s attorney Golub. “We’re very willing to fence and gate this property. It’s not an objective standard. But it doesn’t mean we’re not willing to consider it.”

Proposed Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Project Site Map. Source: DeNova Homes

Wilson asked, “Why was the commercial piece removed from this plan?”

“This is a Housing Element site, and it was rezoned with the update,” Meredith said.

“That’s unfortunate,” Wilson stated even though she approved the rezoning during a council vote.

Rocha then made a motion to approve the project.

“Obviously, it was intended at one time to be a mixed development. But that was changed in 2023,” he stated.

Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Site Map. Source: City of Antioch

Bernal seconded the motion and without further discussion the council did not approve the project on a two-two tie with both Freitas and Wilson voting to oppose.

“The motion does not carry. This does not preclude us from continuing the item until we have a fifth member present,” Cole explained.

Bernal then made a motion to continue the item until the Council’s next meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 4th. (It will be held instead of the normal second Tuesday, which falls on Veterans Day, Nov. 11th. Rocha seconded the motion and it passed 4-0.

Antioch Council to again consider two housing projects by developer indicted for bribing councilman

Monday, October 27th, 2025
Renderings of the proposed Slatten Ranch Townhomes (above) and Wildflower Station Townhomes (below). Source: DeNova Homes

DeNova Homes proposes 129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project, next to J.C. Penney store which Freitas strongly opposes and 159-unit Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project on Hillcrest Avenue near Deer Valley Road

“I am furious that this is being shoved down our throats. I do not want to give up some prime property for economic development.” – District 3 Councilman Don Freitas

By Allen D. Payton

The two proposed housing projects by DeNova Homes will return for the Antioch City Council to consider during their meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 28, 2025. An indictment by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California of the company’s co-founder and his vice president son for alleged bribery of an Antioch Councilman last year was announced in April.

The alleged bribe was related to a previous project in Antioch, known as Aviano, a multi-phase, 533-unit single-family home residential development in the Sand Creek area on the south side of the city.

Proposed Slatten Ranch Townhome Project Location Map. Source: DeNova Homes

The two developments are the proposed 129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project (#5 on the agenda), located on a  6.41-acre vacant project site north of Wicklow Way next to the J.C. Penney store, east of Slatten Ranch Road and west of Empire Avenue; and the 159-unit Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project (#6 on the agenda) planned for the four-parcel, 10.35 acre vacant property near the intersection of Hillcrest Avenue and Deer Valley Road and bordered by Wildflower Drive to the east and the road next to the KFC restaurant in the Hillcrest Crossroads shopping center which also serves the existing condo development.

Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Site Map. Source: City of Antioch

The Council previously considered the projects during their meeting on Sept. 23, 2025, but postponed both to Tuesday’s meeting following opposition from the public and council concerns. District 3 Councilman Don Freitas offered the strongest opposition to the Slatten Ranch project which is planned for the East Lone Tree Focus Area. The 200 acres north of Hwy 4 and east of Laurel Road were set aside by the City Council in 1998 and planned for commercial and economic development for the creation of local, well-paying jobs. But the previous council rezoned a portion of the property to allow for housing.

“I have lots of problems with this particular project. It’s both a blessing and a curse,” he stated then shared that during his years as mayor from 2000-2008, “J.C. Penney’s came forward and locate on the site they eventually built on,” due to the freeway access.

“That area was envisioned as one of the most important economic development sites in the City of Antioch,” Freitas continued. “This project doesn’t belong in this space. That’s why I oppose this project.”

“While housing is critical, so is economic development,” he added.  “I am furious that this is being shoved down our throats. I do not want to give up some prime property for economic development.” (See 3:01:51 mark of meeting video)

However, plans for the housing projects were submitted under SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (D-Skinner), which Freitas referenced, and gives development special provisions in the approval process, which, among other things, limits the total number of hearings by a local government agency.

Slatten Ranch Townhome Development Plan. Source: DeNova Homes

City staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Maps for both the development of the 17 Slatten Ranch Townhome and 19 Wildflower Station Townhome buildings and Design Review for the proposed architecture and landscaping for each project.

See the agenda packet.

Meeting Information

The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. They can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website and the City’s YouTube Channel, on Comcast Cable Channel 24 or AT&T U-verse Channel 99.

MTC, ABAG release draft of new long-range plan for Bay Area

Wednesday, October 22nd, 2025
Source: Plan Bay Area

Public comment through Dec. 18 on Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+, EIR for housing, transportation, economic development and the environment

East Bay Webinar Nov. 5

By Veronica Cummings, Principal Public Information Officer, Engagement & John Goodwin, Assistant Director of Communications, Metropolitan Transportation Commission 

After more than two years of public discussion, technical analyses and refinement, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) today released Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ and the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Environmental Impact Report for public review and comment.

Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ charts a course for the future of the Bay Area over the next 25 years. Designed to guide growth and investment across the region’s nine counties and 101 cities, the latest plan aims to advance an integrated vision for a Bay Area that is affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant for all. The plan contains 35 strategies for public policies and investments that can be implemented to help the Bay Area build more homes, reduce commute times, and create vibrant downtowns and natural areas for everyone to enjoy. These strategies also aim to keep people safe from natural hazards, support a strong economy and provide stable housing.

Unique to this plan cycle is Transit 2050+, a parallel and first-of-its-kind planning effort conducted by MTC and ABAG in partnership with Bay Area transit agencies to re-envision the future of Bay Area public transit.

Plan Bay Area includes all nine Bay Area counties and 101 cities. Source: Plan Bay Area

MTC and ABAG have scheduled a series of webinars and public hearings for comment on Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ and associated supplemental reports, as well as on the Draft Environmental Impact Report for Plan Bay Area 2050+. All interested people, agencies and other organizations are encouraged to attend a webinar or public hearing, where they can ask questions and offer comments on these documents. Full event details are listed below:

  • Webinar #1 — North Bay 
    Wednesday, October 29, 2025 
    12-1:30 p.m. 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/northbaywebinar 
  • Webinar ID: 892 3077 8001 
  • Passcode: 256814 
  • 888-788-0099 US Toll Free   
  • Webinar #2 — West Bay 
    Wednesday, October 29, 2025 
    6-7:30 p.m. 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/westbaywebinar 
    Webinar ID: 831 4140 5598 
    Passcode: 096944 
    888-788-0099 US Toll Free   
  • Webinar #3 — South Bay 
    Thursday, October 30, 2025 
    6-7:30 p.m. 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/southbaywebinar    
    Webinar ID: 822 2561 7467 
    Passcode: 356845 
    888-788-0099 US Toll Free   
  • Webinar #4 — East Bay 
    Wednesday, November 5, 2025 
    6-7:30 p.m. 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/eastbaywebinar  
    Webinar ID: 869 8283 4999 
    Passcode: 682098 
    888-788-0099 US Toll Free 

In addition to these webinars, MTC and ABAG will host three public hearings around the Bay Area to provide opportunities for all interested agencies, organizations and individuals to comment on the Draft Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Report. The full list of hearings is as follows: 

  • Public Hearing #2 — Fremont  
    Wednesday, December 3, 2025, at 6 p.m. 
    Olive Hyde Art Center and Gallery -or- Zoom 
    123 Washington Boulevard, Fremont 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/drafthearing2  
    Webinar ID: 875 7625 3306 
    Passcode: 178983 
    888 788 0099 US Toll Free 
  • Public Hearing #3 — Novato  
    Thursday, December 4, 2025, at 6 p.m. 
    Best Western Plus Novato Oaks Inn -or- Zoom 
    215 Alameda del Prado, Novato 
    Zoom link: https://bit.ly/drafthearing3  
    Webinar ID: 898 0347 9624 
  • Passcode: 129009 
  • 888 788 0099 US Toll Free 

Interested Bay Area residents, agencies and organizations also are encouraged to view and comment on the draft plan online at planbayarea.org/draftplan. Comments will be reviewed by officials from both ABAG and MTC as they consider the adoption of Final Plan Bay Area 2050+, slated for early 2026.

Written comments will be accepted via mail to MTC Public Information Office, Attn: Plan Bay Area -or- Draft EIR Comments, 375 Beale Street, Suite 800, San Francisco, CA, 94105; or via email (Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ inbox: info@planbayarea.org; Draft EIR inbox: eircomments@bayareametro.gov). Comments by phone can made at (415) 778-2292.

The comment period for all documents will close Dec. 18, 2025, at 5 p.m. 

Questions? Visit planbayarea.org, email info@planbayarea.org or call (415) 778-6757. 

Accessible Meetings 

Do you need an interpreter or any other assistance to participate? Please call (415) 778-6757. For TDD or hearing impaired, call 711, California Relay Service, or (800) 735-2929 (TTY), (800) 735-2922 (voice) and ask to be relayed to (415) 778-6700. We require at least three working days’ notice to accommodate requests.

¿Necesita un intérprete u otra asistencia para participar? Por favor llámenos con tres días de anticipación al (415) 778-6757. Para telecomunicaciones para personas sordas y discapacitadas, favor de llamar al 711, el Servicio de Retransmisión de California (CRS) para TTY/VCO/HCO a Voz o para Voz a TTY/VCO/HCO al (800) 855-3000 y pedir que lo retrasmitan al (415) 778-6700.

您是否需要口譯或任何其他協助才能參加?請致電(415)778-6757。若需使用TDD或為聽障人士人士,請致電711,加州轉接服務,或(800)735-2929(TTY),(800)735-2922(語音),然後要求轉接至(415)778-6700。請至少提前三個工作日提出申請,以便我們能為您提供適當的口譯安排。

ABAG is the council of governments and the regional planning agency for the 101 cities and towns, and nine counties of the Bay Area. MTC is the transportation planning, financing and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. 

Antioch Council to consider 137-unit housing project

Saturday, October 11th, 2025
Renderings of the single-family homes and accessory dwelling units (top) and the duplexes (bottom) in the proposed Vineyard Crossing rental housing project. Source: BrightSky Residential

Will discuss $30 million lawsuit by desal plant general contractor

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 14, 2025, the Antioch City Council will consider approving a 137-unit rental housing project in the northeast part of the city, within the City’s Priority Development Area north of the Antioch BART station. They will also consider spending an additional $245,000 on an Organizational Efficiency Implementation Consultant and splitting the $21 million L Street Pathway to Transit Project into two projects.

City Faces $30M+ Lawsuit by Desalination Plant General Contractor

Before the regular meeting, the council will hold a three-hour Closed Session, beginning at 4:00 p.m., for labor negotiations with the Management Unit, Treatment Plant Employees’ Association, Operating Engineers Local Union No. 3, Confidential Unit, Antioch Police Officers Association, and Antioch Police Sworn Management Association. In addition, the council will discuss two lawsuits, including: Shimmick Construction Co v. City of Antioch, Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. C25-01690 for Unlimited Breach of Contract/Warranty by the General Contractor for non-payment for work on the City’s Brackish Water Desalination Plant in which they are seeking damages of $30 million plus interest; and Antioch Adams Warehouse et al. v. Jason Walker (and City of Antioch), Contra Costa Superior Court Case No. MSC 18-02260 regarding a property dispute on Cesa Lane, as well as anticipated litigation.

Consultant for Organizational Efficiency Implementation Services

According to the City staff report, for Item 2.P., “It is recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement with K. Zelenka Consulting to provide organizational efficiency implementation services and other functions in an amount not to exceed $245,000…that will help the City Manager advance the City’s adopted efficiency review recommendations and ensure continuity in several key initiatives. The

consultant will concentrate on facilitating process improvements, coordinating efforts across departments, and supporting the City’s ongoing commitment to organizational effectiveness and customer-focused service delivery.”

In addition, the report reads, “K. Zelenka Consulting is in the process of completing the City’s comprehensive organizational efficiency audits, which have identified a series of actionable recommendations to improve operations, streamline processes, and enhance overall service delivery.

“The consultant will immediately continue the Operational Assessments with the Human Resources Department (in final draft phase) and will begin assessments for Antioch Police Department (APD) Dispatch Center, Community and Economic Development Department, and Parks and Recreation Services Department this month. The consultant will also identify new opportunities for process improvement, recommend strategies to enhance service delivery, and assist with community engagement and stakeholder communication related to organizational changes. As directed by the City Manager, the consultant may provide policy and program analysis and attend City Council or community meetings to present updates.

“Because K. Zelenka Consulting conducted the original organizational efficiency audits and possesses specialized knowledge of the City’s operations, her continued involvement is essential to maintain momentum and ensure consistency in implementation.

“Funding for this initiative will come from cost savings achieved during the vacancies of the Assistant City Manager and Executive Assistant positions within the City Manager’s office, while recruitment efforts to fill the open roles continue and commence.”

Vineyard Crossing Project Site map. Source: City of Antioch

Vineyard Crossing Rental Housing Project – Part of Almondridge, City’s PDA

Under Item 6, the Council will consider approving a 137-unit housing project by Walnut Creek-based BrightSky Residential on 14.6 acres located northwest of the intersection of Phillips Lane and Oakley Road within the City’s Priority Development Area near the BART Station. According to the City staff report, the proposed project would subdivide the project site into 71 individual lots containing 137 residential units total with 45 single-family residential lots and 40 accessory dwelling units (ADUs) on the western parcel. A condominium map could be recorded for the duplex lots 46-71 on the eastern parcel, for 26 duplex building lots creating 52 condominium lots.

In addition, the “proposed project designates 10% of base units (13 of the ADUs total) as affordable to low-income households to obtain a density bonus of 16 additional units (included in the 137) as well as waivers from certain development standards, in accordance with state density bonus law.” They would be deed-restricted and available for households earning 60 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). The City’s proposed Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, which would require designating 15% of units in new developments as affordable, cannot apply as the Council has not yet adopted it.

The applicant has indicated that they intend to own and operate the entire project after construction as a rental housing community. However, the proposed Vesting Tentative Map is for condominium purposes for the duplex lots on the eastern parcel and would allow for the possible future sale of each residential duplex unit.

The project site is part of the Almondridge South Planned Development District that was entitled in 1991 but only partially developed since that time. Single-family residences were developed to the west of the project site, but both of the project parcels have remained undeveloped.

As part of the City’s 2003 General Plan, the western project parcel was designated Medium Low Density Residential with a density of up to 6 dwelling units/acre permitted and the eastern project parcel was designated Medium Density Residential with a density of up to 10 dwelling units/acre permitted.

The project applicant submitted a preliminary development plan and received feedback from the Antioch Planning Commission and City Council in December 2023 and January 2024 respectively.

The applicant submitted a Preliminary Application under SB 330 (The Housing Crisis Act of 2019). Through the Preliminary Application process put in place under SB 330, housing developments may only be subject to the ordinances and objective standards in effect at the time when a completed Preliminary Application is submitted. To qualify, projects had to be submitted prior to Jan. 1, 2025.

Vineyard Crossing Vesting Tentative Map. Source: BrightSky Residential

Rezoning Not Required, ADU’s Not Counted Toward Density per State Law

While the project does not conform to the adopted Planned Development zoning standards for the site such as lot size and setbacks, it is consistent with the density established in the General Plan, and therefore per state law, a rezoning is not required to develop the project. Additionally, per state law, accessory dwelling units are not counted as units for the purposes of determining the proposed density of a project.

As part of Plan Bay Area, each of the 101 cities in the nine-county Bay Area were required to set aside land for a Priority Development Area (PDA) near public transit planned for new homes, jobs and community amenities, including higher-density housing. In order for Antioch to obtain approval for a BART extension and station, the city council had to agree to 2,500 housing units in the City’s 400-acre PDA. It includes the land east of the BART station and north to E. 18th Street.

Amenities located on the western parcel of the site would include a recreation center with an outdoor pool area as well as a children’s play area. Amenities located on the eastern parcel would include an activity lawn area with park benches in the northern portion of the parcel.

Parking

The project provides a total of 408 parking spots. This includes 194 spots within 2-car garages for each single-family home and duplex unit, 130 spots within the single-family home and ADU driveways, and 84 spots on streets. Projects receiving a density bonus are entitled to reduced parking standards, with a maximum parking requirement of 1.5 parking spaces for a 3-bedroom unit (all units proposed for the development, with the exception of the ADU’s are 3-bedroom). The 45 single family homes and 52 duplex units would therefore require 146 parking spots.

The project parking therefore exceeds what is required for a density bonus project, and in fact also exceeds standard municipal code requirements for parking (single family detached – 2 spots per unit in a garage plus 1 guest spot – 135 total – single family attached – 2 spots per unit plus 1 per 5 units for guest parking – 114 spots total).

L Street Improvements Plan. Source: City of Antioch 5-Year CIP 2025-30

Split $21 Million L Street Pathway to Transit Improvement Project into Two

Under Item 8 the council will consider splitting the planned $21 million L Street improvement project into two projects to reserve funding.

According to the City staff report for the item, the L Street Pathway to Transit (“Project”) will improve accessibility for all modes of transportation and beautify the L Street corridor between Highway 4 and the Antioch Marina.

“The first phase of work on the Project will consist of modifying portions of the roadway, constructing new concrete curb, gutter, sidewalks and curb cuts, installing landscaping and decorative hardscape, improve bicycle access and upgrading signage, and striping throughout the Project from Highway 4 to Sycamore Drive, and from West Tenth Street to the Marina.

“The second phase of work will consist of widening the roadway to four lanes between West 10th Street to West 18th Street, installation of new sidewalks on the western side of the roadway, ADA-compliant upgrades, signal improvements at the intersection of W. 10th and W. 18th Streets, enhanced bus facilities, and the addition of bike lanes. (P. W. 234-16).

“In order to keep the funding sources separately, staff recommends separating this work into two projects. The first phase will be funded by Measure J funds in the amount of 1,191,465 and the One Bay Area Grant (OBAG2) in the amount of $1,469,000. The second phase will be funded by the state’s Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account (RMRA) in the amount of $5,244,167, and a U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) Grant in the amount of $13,008,000, which has already been budgeted for in the 5 Year Capital Improvement Program 2025-2030.”

Meeting Information

The meetings will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. They can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website and the City’s YouTube Channel, on Comcast Cable Channel 24 or AT&T U-verse Channel 99.

See full meeting agenda packet.

Antioch Council to consider two housing projects by developers accused of scheme to bribe former councilmember

Tuesday, September 23rd, 2025
Renderings of the proposed Slatten Ranch Townhomes (above) and Wildflower Station Townhomes (below). Source: DeNova Homes

DeNova Homes proposes 129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project, next to J.C. Penney store and 159-unit Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project on Hillcrest Avenue near Deer Valley Road

By Allen D. Payton

During their regular meeting beginning at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, Sept. 23, 2025, the Antioch City Council will consider approving two new housing projects proposed by developer DeNova Homes whose co-founder and vice-president son accused of allegedly bribing a council member believed to be former Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe.

As previously reported, on Tuesday, April 22, 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California announced an indictment for alleged bribery of an Antioch Councilmember by the father and son, former and current, leaders of the Concord-based company. 

While the project applicant is Kathryn Watt, with DeNova Homes Inc., Dave Sanson is CEO Emeritus and a Co-Founder of the company, with his wife, and their son Trent is the company’s Vice President for Land Acquisition and Entitlements. Dave’s attorney Winston Chan claims his client had nothing to do with the alleged bribery, writing, “We are confident the facts will show that Dave is innocent, and that he was unfairly targeted.”

According to the company’s Chief Legal Officer, Dana Tsubota, “While Mr. (Dave) Sanson has been an important figure in the company’s history, he semi-retired in 2020 when he moved to Montana and he is no longer involved in the leadership or daily operations.”

In the indictment, the terms “he” and “him” are used to describe the unnamed councilmember, which could refer to either former Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe or former Councilman Mike Barbanica.

The alleged bribe was related to a previous project in Antioch, known as Aviano, a multi-phase, 533-unit single-family home residential development in the Sand Creek area on the south side of the city.

Proposed Slatten Ranch Townhome Project Site Map. Source: DeNova Homes

Slatten Ranch Townhomes Project

The first DeNova Homes project the Council will consider Tuesday night is the 129-unit Slatten Ranch Townhome Condominium Project. The application includes a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map for 17 residential lots for the 17 condominium buildings.

According to the City staff report for the agenda item, #4, the proposed 6.41-acre vacant project site is located north of Wicklow Way, east of Slatten Ranch Road, and west of Empire Avenue. The project site is located within the East Lone Tree Specific Plan (ELTSP), is designated as East Lone Tree Specific Plan Focus Area in the City of Antioch General Plan and the site is zoned

High Density Residential District (R-25) allowing for the development of multifamily housing with a density of 20 to 25 dwelling units (du)/acre.

Although the land was part of 200 acres designated by the City Council in 1998 for employment and commercial and development purposes, in February of 2023, the City of Antioch adopted the Housing Element EIR, which analyzed adoption and implementation of the City’s Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update (2023-2031), including the adoption and implementation of rezoning and General Plan amendments to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), requiring 3,016 more housing units in Antioch between 2023 and 2031.

Each residential unit would include a two-car garage, and the centrally located play area would include 19 additional vehicle parking spaces. The 129 residential units would consist of a mix of two- and three-bedrooms units, ranging in size from 1,293 to 1,791 square feet.

Slatten Ranch Townhome Development Plan. Source: DeNova Homes

The Row Townhome buildings include entryways with covered porches at the front elevations and garages at the rear elevations. The Back-to-Back (B2B) Townhome buildings will include entryways with covered porches and garages at both the front and rear elevations. Each building would have either five, six, eight or 10 units. Three Row Townhome floorplan types would be offered with two- and three-bedrooms, ranging in size from 1,432 to 1,791 square feet. Two B2B floorplan types would be offered with two- and three-bedrooms ranging in size from 1,293 to 1,414 square feet.

The proposed project would include a total of 1.77 acres of landscaping and open space, consisting of a 0.34-acre open play area, dog park, and open space for bio retention.

The project was submitted in 2023 as a Preliminary Housing Application under SB330 (The Housing Crisis Act of 2019). Through the Preliminary Application process put in place under SB 330, housing developments may only be subject to the ordinances and objective standards in effect at the time when a completed Preliminary Application is submitted.

Proposed Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Project Site Map. Source: DeNova Homes

Wildflower Station Townhomes 2

The second DeNova Homes project the Council will consider is a 159-unit townhome-style condominium development, known as Wildflower Station Townhomes 2 Multifamily Residential Project. It is planned for the four-parcel, 10.35 acre vacant property near the intersection of Hillcrest Avenue and Deer Valley Road and bordered by Wildflower Drive to the east and the road next to the KFC restaurant in the Hillcrest Crossroads shopping center which also serves the existing condo development.

According to the City staff report for the agenda item, #5, the proposed project consists of a Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map to create 19 residential lots for 19 three-story buildings, containing 159 new townhome condominiums in two different building styles: “back-to-back” and row townhome-style. Both styles of townhomes include individual one-car or two-car garages with the living areas primarily on the second and third levels above the garage parking.

The proposed project would include a total of 2.8 acres of landscaping and open space, consisting of two open play areas and open space for bioretention. The play areas would include 25 additional parking spaces with another 57 surplus shared parking spaces with the adjacent Wildflower Station development. The 159 residential units would consist of a mix of two- and three-bedrooms units, ranging in size from 1,135 to 1,381 square feet.

Rendering of proposed Wildflower Station Back-Back Townhomes. Source: DeNova Homes

The project site was part of the larger 23-acre Wildflower Station project that includes 22 single family homes (on the ridgeline above), the 98-condominium stacked flat homes immediately adjacent and planned commercial development that was entitled in 2018. The single-family homes and condos were built, but the commercial parcels along Hillcrest Avenue (the current project site) weren’t and the land sat undeveloped.

In 2023, the City Council revised the General Plan and rezoned the four parcels to High Density Residential District (R-25). The proposed project would result in a density of approximately 20 du/ac.

The project was also submitted in 2023 as a Preliminary Housing Application under SB330.

Meeting Information

The Council’s regular meeting will be preceded by a Closed Session meeting beginning at 4:00 p.m. during which the Council will consider the use of the City-owned parking lot at the north end of G Street by developer Sean McCauley, owner of the adjacent property at 113 G Street, which is planned to be a restaurant. (See related article) That will be followed by a Special Meeting at 5:30 p.m. to appoint a new City Clerk. (See related article)

The meetings will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. They can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website and the City’s YouTube Channel, on Comcast Cable Channel 24 or AT&T U-verse Channel 99.

Efforts to reach media representatives in the U.S. Attorney’s Office to verify if the investigation is ongoing or if settled, the disposition of the case were unsuccessful prior to publication time. Please check back later for any updates to this report.

TONIGHT! Antioch Council to hold special meeting on possible Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

Tuesday, September 16th, 2025
Source: City of Antioch

Would require developers to allocate percentage of housing units in market-rate developments as affordable or below-market rate

May increase costs to new home buyers, reduce number of new housing units; “there would likely be a fiscal impact” to City, possibly increase revenue from developer fees

By Allen D. Payton

During  a special meeting tonight, Tuesday, September 16, 2025, beginning at 6:00 p.m., the Antioch City Council will hold a study session to discuss a possible Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and give direction to staff to develop one for a future vote.

According to the City staff report for the one item on the agenda, “An IHO, often referred to as inclusionary zoning, is an ordinance that requires developers to allocate a percentage of housing units in market-rate developments as affordable, or below-market rate (BMR) units.” Staff is recommending the Council support an IHO and a apply a 15% total inclusionary requirement to both rental and for-sale projects.

Background: “On May 27, 2025, the City Council held a study session on the possible adoption of an IHO, which is an Implementation Measure contained within the City’s Certified 6th Cycle Housing Element at Program 2.1.10. The possible adoption of an IHO can also be used for compliance with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Transit Oriented Communities (MTC TOC) Policy, as discussed in the May 27, 2025 staff report, linked below.

“Staff and the project team provided a project overview, discussed the legal and local contexts of IHOs, presented the draft financial feasibility analysis, discussed the outreach process to date, and detailed next steps. Members of the community provided public input, however, due to time constraints, the City Council was unable to provide feedback and direction to staff.

“A second study session was held by the City Council on August 26, 2025. Similar to the prior study session, members of the public provided input and yet again, the City Council was unable to provide feedback and direction to staff due to the lateness of the hour. The City Council requested a Special Meeting for consideration of an IHO and has dedicated tonight’s meeting to this singular policy discussion.”

Staff Questions and Recommendations to Council

During tonight’s study session the staff are asking for answers from the Council on a variety of questions to develop an ordinance including:

  1. Should staff move forward with preparation of an IHO? Staff Recommendation: Yes.
  2. Should the IHO apply to rental projects, for-sale projects, or both? Staff Recommendation: Both
  3. Should the IHO include specific income category breakdowns – for example 5% VLI (Very Low Income), 5% LI, 5% MI – or should the developer be able to choose any affordability or combination of affordabilities? Other breakdowns could be 5% ELI, and 10% VLI or 5% ELI, 5% VLI & 5% LI or 3% ELI, 7% VLI & 5% LI, etc. Staff Recommendation: 15% total inclusionary requirement and this should apply to rental and for-sale projects.
  4. Should rental housing and for sale housing have different inclusionary requirements or the same inclusionary requirements? Staff Recommendation: Breakdown of specific income categories: 5% ELI, 5% VLI, 5% LI Maintain compliance with the MTC TOC Policy.
  5. Should rental housing and for sale housing have different inclusionary requirements or the same inclusionary requirements? Staff Recommendation: All housing types maintain the same inclusionary requirements.
  6. What should the threshold project size be to be included in the IHO? Staff Recommendation: Developments of 5 units and projects less than 5 pay an in-lieu fee.
  7. Should the units be affordable in perpetuity? Staff Recommendation: Yes.
  8. Should an in-lieu fee option be included as an alternative means? And should other alternative means be included? Staff Recommendation: An in-lie fee option should be included.
  9. Should the ordinance encourage on-site construction? If so, then by what means? Staff Recommendation: Encourage on-site construction by requiring a higher inclusionary ordinance requirement when a developer pays the in-lieu fee.
  10. Should there be developer incentives, beyond State Density Bonus Law? If so, by what means? Staff Recommendation: Waivers and fee deferrals

Challenges With IHO’s

According to the National Housing Conference, “ While advocates view inclusionary zoning as a way to increase the stock of economically integrated affordable homes at little cost to the public, critics charge that inclusionary zoning policies amount to a ‘tax’ on new development that unduly burdens developers and adversely impacts the cost and availability of market-rate homes.”

In addition, “Common opposition arguments include:

  • Inclusionary zoning ordinances increase the cost of new development, which may then be passed on to market-rate buyers through increased home prices.
  • Inclusionary zoning ordinances cause developers to build fewer units — either because developers choose to build in jurisdictions without inclusionary policies and/or because the inclusionary policies change the economics of development such that other land uses (e.g., retail) are more profitable.
  • By reducing the supply of new homes, inclusionary policies increase the cost of market-rate housing in the community implementing the policy and in neighboring areas (as reductions in supply in one jurisdiction may increase home prices for the whole metropolitan area by reducing the supply of housing available to satisfy the area’s demand).
  • Inclusionary zoning policies unfairly place the burden of economic integration on housing developers.
  • The possibility that units produced by an inclusionary housing program might have a negative impact on nearby home values.”

A commentary on SRQmagazine.com by Christine Robinson, Executive Director of The Argus Foundation, entitled, The Negative Effects of Inclusionary Housing reports, “According to a study on Pittsburgh’s (Pennsylvania) inclusionary zoning policies, developers often respond to mandatory affordability requirements by decreasing the total number of units they build. This occurs because the cost of providing affordable units often makes projects financially unfeasible. As developers struggle to balance profitability with affordability requirements, some may abandon projects that require affordable housing even with increased density or scale back their ambitions.”

“While inclusionary zoning policies aim to create a more equitable housing market, the negative effects seen in Pittsburgh and elsewhere demonstrate that these policies may have unintended consequences that worsen housing affordability and reduce the availability of housing overall.”

Possible Fiscal Impacts to the City

Also according to the staff report, “Should the City Council choose to adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in the future there would likely be a fiscal impact due to increased staffing and administrative costs to implement the ordinance. There is also the possibility of additional revenue generation for housing production should the City Council choose to adopt an in-lieu fee as an alternative means of compliance.”

Meeting Details

The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street, in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can also be viewed can also be viewed via livestream on the City’s website and on the City’s YouTube Channel.

Click to read the full agenda packet, tonight’s presentation and the May 27, 2025 City staff report.

Contra Costa Water District working to repair canal for $1 billion

Monday, June 9th, 2025
The Contra Costa Water District Canal Replacement Project includes 20 miles of the waterway. Photo: CCWD

Lake Shasta is source of all water, Los Vaqueros Reservoir will not be expanded, CoCoTax members learn

By Allen D. Payton

During the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association Members and Leaders monthly luncheon in May, Contra Costa Water District Board President, Ernesto Avila provided an update on the district’s current work and plans. They include repairing 20 of the 48-mile canal at a cost of $1 billion, keeping water rates as low as possible and expanding service to keep up with growth.

The district includes the Central County cities and communities of Martinez, Pleasant Hill, Concord, Clayton, Pacheco, Clyde, Port Costa and portions of Walnut Creek, and in East County, the cities and communities of Pittsburg, Antioch, Oakley, Bay Point, and portions of Brentwood.

CCWD Board President Ernesto Avila provides an update during the CoCo Taxpayers Association luncheon on May 23, 2025. Photo: Allen D. Payton

Half of the district’s water is provided to treated water customers and the other half to raw water customers, Avila stated and then spoke about ensuring adequate “water supply during disasters such as fire and earthquake emergencies.”

“When PG&E outages occur all of our tanks go full,” he shared. “Water only stays sweet for six to seven days to meet the water quality requirements of the state.”

“Lake Shasta is where we get all of our water from through the Central Valley Project,” he continued. “It’s currently 94% full.”

The district owns Los Vaqueros Reservoir for storage, which is currently 93% full. But “we can’t just draw water whenever we want,” Avila stated. “All of our intakes are screened to protect fish.”

“We are out of our drought,” Avila added. However, “during the drought there were no constraints on water supply for development and growth.”

Source: CCWD

Canal Replacement Program

There have been “landslides on the west side of the canal and repairs can cost millions,” he stated and spoke of the district’s “Canal Replacement Program” which will cost “$1 billion”.

“Nobody likes to raise rates,” Avila continued. “We’ve replaced four miles, so far and have 16 miles to go. It will be a pipeline”

Asked what happens to the pipe during an earthquake he said, “If it’s an older pipe, it will probably crack. We’re looking at a very ductile pipe that can move easily.”

Asked if there will be solar panels over the canl

Click here to learn more about the Contra Costa Canal.

Water Supply

Avila then spoke about providing enough water to meet the demands of residential growth including “redevelopment of the Concord Naval Weapons station” where “15,000 homes” are projected to be built.

“Ten percent of the district’s water is provided through recycling,” he stated. “We want to bump that up to fifteen percent.”

Budget & Water Costs to Users

“Energy costs have been the greatest increases from 2020 to 2024, medical coverage is second greatest,” he shared. Those are followed by “pension and OPEB (other post employee benefit) liabilities.”

“The average customer spends about $3.00 per day for water,” Avila stated. “The cost is 1.3 cents per gallon per day.”

He compared that to EBMUD rates which are at 2.0 cents per gallon.

Contra Costa Water District Production Costs. Source: CCWD

According to the slide show from his presentation, costs to the district for water production include the following:

INVESTMENTS IN INFRASTRUCTURE – Pipeline Renewal, Canal Replacement, Water Treatment Plant Upgrades;

PURCHASED WATER

WATER SUPPLY AND RESOURCE PROTECTION – Water Supply Planning, Watershed Management, Recreation;

SYSTEM OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE – Water Treatment, Water Delivery, Leak Inspection and Repair;

ADMINISTRATION – Human Resources, Safety, Accounting and Payroll;

CUSTOMER CARE – Customer Service, Billing, Water Efficiency Support, and Public Affairs; and

COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT K-12 Water Education and Field Trips, and Internships.

The district has an AAA Bond Rating which keeps interest costs on bonds down, Avila shared.

He was then asked about “money going to DEI programs. I this something you should be doing anymore?” Avila responded, “there are three employees dedicated to it. There are 317 employees which is 30-40% of the budget We have one person in Human Resources dedicated to it. We have a $200 million per year budget. Not even one percent is dedicated to it.”

“It’s about trying to enhance the culture for our employees to work together better,” he added. “We review it every six months. Our Master Plan is on the website.”

Asked about “EPA clean water requirements getting tougher each year” Avila spoke about “unfunded mandates we have to comply with. We work with various associations and collaborate on a national level as regulations are mostly at the federal level.”

“Our biggest concern is the issue of diminishing return on conservation,” he explained. “During the drought, people in our area reduced use by 25 percent while Southern California only reduced 2-3 percent.”

According to the chart in Avila’s presentation total water use has actually decreased over the past 17 years even though the population has significantly increased.

Source: CCWD

No Los Vaqueros Capacity Increase Due to Too Much Cost and Regulation, Offline for Too Long

Asked about increasing capacity at Los Vaqueros, Avila said, “The district spent $10 million on raising the…reservoir, for a cost/benefit analysis funded by the state. It was over subscribed with more customer demand than supply, 250,000 versus 120,000 acre feet.”

“But with so many constraints on pumping water into the reservoir, demand dropped to 50,000 acre feet then to zero,” he continued. “The cost increase with inflation went from $800 million to $1.6 billion, mainly from more material and labor cost increases, plus, engineering costs.”

Finally, Avila shared, “Los Vaqueros Reservoir would have had to be offline for six to seven years. It just wasn’t viable. They knew that, going in. The issue was negotiating supply from EBMUD and others” who “couldn’t guarantee any water.”

He also spoke about future supply including the proposed offstream Sites Reservoir project west of Colusa in the Sacramento Valley.

“In California, for every one million acre-feet of storage, there is eight to nine acre-feet of surface storage,” Avila stated.

Finally, in response to a question, he said, “Water from a canal behind a house is not grandfathered in if the home is sold.”

See Avila’s complete presentation slide show.

CoCoTax June Luncheon

The next CoCoTax Members and Board Luncheon will be held on Friday June 27, 2025, at 11:45 AM at Denny’s Restaurant, 1313 Willow Pass Road in Concord, and will feature Oakland Mayor recall leader Seneca Scott as the speaker. Advance registration is available on the CoCoTax website where you can pay online, or bring cash or check on Friday and pay at the door: $25 for members, $30 for guests. www.cocotax.org/event-6189658/Registration

About CoCoTax

Founded in 1937, CoCoTax leads the way in providing fiscal oversight of local government.  We actively resist unwarranted taxes and fees, discriminatory regulations, ill-advised public expenditures and government secrecy, inefficiency and waste. For more information and membership visit www.cocotax.org.

About CCWD

The Contra Costa Water District delivers safe, clean water to approximately 520,000 people in central and eastern Contra Costa County in Northern California. Formed in 1936 to provide water for irrigation and industry, we are now one of the largest urban water districts in California and a leader in drinking-water treatment technology and source water protection. For more information visit www.ccwater.com.

Antioch Council to discuss Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, more violence prevention spending Tuesday

Monday, May 26th, 2025

Will consider adopting “Pride Month” proclamation, flying “Pride Progress” flag at City Hall in June

By Allen D. Payton

At their meeting on Tuesday, May 27, 2025, the Antioch City Council will discuss the possible adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance for more below-market-rate housing during a Special Meeting Study Session at 5:00 p.m. They will also receive a Land Use Housing Planning and Permitting Presentation and consider increasing spending on violence prevention programs using state grant funds. The regular meeting begins at 7:00 p.m.

Before the regular and special meetings, the Council will first hold a Closed Session at 4:00 p.m.

Closed Session on Civil Rights Lawsuit, Sale of Land to Fire District and Business Owner

During Closed Session beginning at 4:00 p.m. the Council will discuss an existing lawsuit by Trent Allen, et al. v. City of Antioch, et al., U.S.D.C. N. Dist. Cal. Case No. 3:23-cv-01895-VC (and consolidated cases). Allen is one of four suspects convicted of the 2021 murder of Arnold Marcel Hawkins and the attempted murder of Aaron Patterson. (See related article) He and a variety of other plaintiffs claim civil rights violations by several current and former Antioch Police officers.

In addition, the Council will consider the sale of a lot at E. 18th and Wilson Streets to the Contra Costa Fire District and a small portion of land near the Antioch Marina to local business owner Sean McCauley who owns the land where Smith’s Landing Seafood Grill is located.

Study Session on Inclusionary Housing Ordinance

During the Special Meeting beginning at 5:00 p.m., the Council will hold a Study Session to discuss the possible adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) as Program 2.1.10 in the City’s existing Housing Element. According to the City staff report for the agenda item, inclusionary ordinances are designed to produce affordable housing and require that a specific percentage of units in market-rate development projects be offered at below-market rates.

IHOs may include requirements for rental and/or for-sale housing projects and may include different requirements for rental and for-sale housing projects, projects of different sizes and locations and housing units of different levels of affordability.

The three categories of affordable housing typically accommodated in IHOs are:

  • Very Low-Income (VLI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 0-50% of the Area Median Income (AMI).
  • Low-Income (LI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 51-80% of AMI.
  • Moderate Income (MI) Housing. Units affordable to households earning 80-120% of AMI.

IHOs typically include different requirements for these three above income levels.

Previously Considered & Rejected by Council

The staff report further reads, Antioch has considered adopting an IHO since approximately 2009. Past City leadership concluded that market rate housing in Antioch was already adequately affordable. In 2016, the Contra Costa Grand Jury released a report titled Where will we Live: The Affordable Housing Waiting List is Closed. The report recommended that Antioch should consider adopting an IHO. The City responded to this recommendation on August 9, 2016, stating that the City, assuming 2000-2009 home values, “already provides a diversity of housing options and is accessible to households of all income levels…” Therefore, an IHO was “not warranted and is not reasonable.”

The inclusion of Program 2.1.10 in the Antioch Housing Element is indicative of current statewide and local housing challenges and new housing priorities. Technical analyses and community outreach performed as part of the Housing Element demonstrate the need for housing-forward policies and the potential value of an IHO.

Community Survey & Virtual Workshop, Developer Input

Also, according to the staff report, a community survey was conducted but only more than 50 residents responded. Over 80% of responders either “Fully” or “Somewhat” support an IHO in Antioch but over 60% are either “Unfamiliar” or “Somewhat familiar” with IHOs.

The IHO Project team conducted a virtual Focus Group with local housing developers on December 5, 2024. Attendees were shown the results of preliminary feasibility analyses for a 15 percent inclusionary requirement and shared their concerns:

o Concern over reliance on density bonus. Developers stressed that maintaining feasibility under inclusionary regulation is often based on maximizing State density bonus. However, the costs associated with constructing denser, taller projects may outweigh financial returns. Developers described Antioch as a “secondary market” that cannot support multifamily projects over three stories tall, which may limit additional density.

o Necessity of in-lieu fees. Developers stated that if the City were to adopt an IHO, it should include the option to pay in-lieu fees. Participants stressed that real estate is unpredictable, and that these fees offer vital “stability and

clarity” in the IHO process. Because of this certainty, most developers will choose the in-lieu fee option.

o Value of in-lieu fees. Developers stated that in-lieu fees can be transferred to affordable housing developers who specialize in maximizing funds and partnerships for affordable housing projects. Developers stressed that partnering with affordable housing developers in mixed-income developments often provides the greatest number of affordable units at the lowest income levels.

o Barriers to for-sale affordable housing. Developers stressed that the difficulty of qualifying for home loans may impede the function of an IHO. Per participants, lower income households in Contra Costa typically face severe economic barriers to mortgage qualification, including an adequate down payment. As such, requiring the construction of for-sale units for very low-income or low-income households may be an unproductive path toward privately subsidized affordable housing.

In addition to the community survey, the staff report, without mentioning the number of participants, shares that members of the public participated in a bilingual, interactive virtual Community Workshop on February 4, 2025. Participants were introduced to the IHO project and responded to a series of Zoom-based polls regarding various IHO topics. The polls included the following questions:

1. What household affordability levels do you want to see accommodated in Antioch?

64% of responders selected Very Low-Income households as the most needed.

2. What bedroom counts are most needed in affordable units in Antioch?

67% of responders selected 2-3 bedroom units.

3. What type of affordable housing units does Antioch need?

“For-rent apartments” was identified as the most needed housing type, and “for-sale single family homes” was identified as the least needed.

4. Should the default requirement in Antioch’s IHO be “constructing affordable units with the option to pay a fee,” or “paying a fee with the option to construct affordable units?”

67% of responders selected “constructing affordable units with the option to pay a fee.”

5. Select areas of Antioch where new affordable housing will provide extra benefit to future residents.

The two answers that received the most selections were “In and near downtown” and “Around the BART Station.”

6. What are the most important aspects of affordable units created by the IHO?

The two answers that received the most selections were “They are evenly distributed across the development site” and “Their exterior design and construction quality matches the market rate units.”

7. Participants were asked whether 1) They support adopting an IHO and to identify issues the City Council should consider ensuring the IHO is effective, or 2) They do not support adopting an IHO and to identify alternative approaches to increasing affordable housing.

78 percent of participants stated they support adopting an IHO. Comments included:

  • The need to place upper limits on IHO requirements.
  • The value of collaborating with developers on a 15% IHO requirement near transit.
  • Lack of support for in-lieu fees, which require significant staff resources to administer.

22 percent of participants stated they do support adopting an IHO.

Comments included:

  • The City should purchase land for 100% affordable housing. This is the only way to build the minimum of more than 1 new affordable home for every market rate home.
  • Antioch is already largely affordable; the City should focus on fully staffing the police force and bringing anchor businesses to downtown and shopping mall.
  • IHOs benefit only a few who can secure the units, while driving up costs for everyone else. Antioch should look for alternative sources of funding that do not drive up housing costs.

No decision will be made during Tuesday’s meeting, and any adoption of an IHO must occur during a future council meeting.

Regular Meeting Agenda

A day after Memorial Day, although complaints have arisen across the country, that veterans and those who died defending freedom each only get one day to be honored and remembered annually, during their regular meeting, under item 1, the Council will consider adopting a “Pride Month” proclamation and under Consent Calendar item R, approval of flying the “Pride Progress” flag at City Hall during the month of June to recognize the LGBTQIA+ community in Antioch. It will be only the seventh year the Council will be asked to consider and vote on both matters.

Under item 3, the Council will receive a Land Use Housing Planning and Permitting Presentation by David Storer, Interim Community Development Director and Derek Cole, Interim City Attorney. They will discuss Land Use regulations/permits (Discretionary and Ministerial…i.e., Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezonings, CEQA, General Plans and the Subdivision Map Act, etc.). as well as Housing (State laws and their implementation…HAA, SB 330, SB9, etc.).

The Council will then vote on item 5, to adopt the new Master Fee Schedule effective July 1, 2025, which includes minor increases to several fees and no changes to most.

The Council will also consider increasing the amounts paid for violence prevention programs using state grant funds. Under item 6 they will consider approving the second amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with One Day at a Time (ODAT), with fiscal sponsor Community Initiatives, for the City of Antioch’s 2022–2025

California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) grant. The amendment increases the total contract amount by $587,174 to an amount not to exceed $927,980 and extends the term of the agreement through June 30, 2026.

Finally, under item 7, the Council will consider approving the third amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement with Advance Peace for Technical Assistance/Support, Training and development for the 2022-25 City of Antioch’s California Violence Intervention and Prevention (CalVIP) in the amount of $50,000.

The meeting will be held inside the Council Chambers at City Hall, 200 H Street in Antioch’s historic, downtown Rivertown. It can be viewed via livestream on the City’s website, on Comcast local access cable channel 24 or on ATT U-verse channel 99. See the complete meeting agenda package.