Housing Element Update for the 6th Cycle 2023-2031

Piedmont expects a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) 6 of approximately 587 new housing units, compared to 60 units in RHNA 5, representing a 979%  increase from the last planning cycle.

The expected allocation includes:

• 163 very low income units
• 94 low income units
• 92 moderate income units
• 238 above moderate income units
• 587 total units

To ensure adequate inventory of adequate sites, City staff anticipates the element update will necessitate modifications to the uses and regulations for each of the City’s five zones.

The 3rd, 4th, and 5th cycle Piedmont Housing Elements were prepared by Barry Miller, FAICP, a contractor who has provided certain long-range planning services to the City since 1991. Mr. Miller has advised the City that he does not have the capacity to be the prime contractor on the City’s 6th Cycle Element, given the significant increase in the RHNA and need for a multidisciplinary team to complete the work.

While a number of important housing issues will need to be considered and addressed through the update process, the most significant work effort is expected to be meeting Piedmont’s RHNA numbers in the site inventory. To achieve that, the City expects the need to consider several approaches, including: amending the site development standards and densities for key housing opportunity sites and for one or more zones, implementing AB 1851 (a bill that allows the conversion of parking areas for religious institutions to housing development), and streamlining review of proposals for the construction and development of affordable housing projects.

Click below to READ the full staff report being considered by the

City Council at 6:00 pm, Monday, March 1, 2021. 

RFP for a Housing Element Update, a Safety Element Update, Other Related General Plan Amendments, and Related Regulatory Modifications as Required by State Law

Send comments to the City Council to> citycouncil@piedmont.ca. gov

Agenda > https://piedmont.ca.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_13659739/File/Government/City%20Council/Agenda/council-current-agenda.pdf

Park Commission will consider Street Tree Plans for Manor Drive March 3, 2021.

Read the Agenda, prior meeting minutes and Street Tree staff report by clicking below.

Park Commission 3-3-2021 Agenda Packet_

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

Do you have the time and interest in volunteering for the City of Piedmont ?

Deadline: Wednesday, March 17, 2021

The City of Piedmont is looking for a few talented volunteers for vacancies on commissions and committees. Interested residents may view [also linked below] the Commission Description of Duties, download the Application for Appointive Vacancy, and/or apply online on the City’s web site at https://www.ci.piedmont.ca.us/. 

Applications are due to City Hall on or before the deadline of Wednesday, March 17th.

Interviews with the City Council for these positions will be scheduled for the evenings of Monday, March 22nd and Monday, March 29th. Applicants will be notified of their interview date after the application period closes. No appointments will be made without a Council interview.  All interviews will be virtual. 

The vacancies are as follows:

Commission and Committee Descriptions of Duties 2021-02-17

Commission and Committee Fillable Application 2021

Notice and Procedural Details of Appointive Vacancies 2021

Residents with questions are invited to contact the City Clerk’s office at (510) 420-3040.

2021-02-23 Volunteers for Commissions-Committees

– Piedmont Priorities –

With life as good as it is in Piedmont, it’s hard to think how it could get better. But there’s always room for improvement so in 2007 the City conducted a community survey as a prelude to updating its General Plan.

The response to the 2007 survey exceeded all expectations. Approximately 3,800 surveys were mailed out, and almost 1,300 surveys were completed and returned. That’s a 34% response rate, the highest ever response rate of any community survey of Piedmont residents.  Question 7 in the survey asked “For which types of projects would you support increases in city taxes or fees?”.  The range of responses to that question are in the table below.  

Now 14 years later, what has come of this community survey?

Additional recreation facilities – check.

City-owned pool? – check.

Backyard service for recycling/green waste – check.

City arts and cultural center – half-check.  The city has a classical arts and cultural center. Chamber music only.

A teen center – negative.

Creating a community gathering place or plaza – negative.

Why this lookback matters is because the city is on the verge of missing a golden opportunity to address the two negatives on the list.  A teen/senior center and community drop-in space could easily be run out of the East Wing of the building with access to the restrooms in the West Wing and the placing of city staff in the West Wing office space.  And no additional taxes required – seniors and the community don’t need to be supervised by staff.  They do need a place to freely gather and schedule meetings and an accessible East Wing would facilitate that.  

Instead, city staff has negotiated a lease for the 801 Magnolia Building with the Piedmont Center for the Arts that reduces both city use of and access to the 801 building for the next 7 years. There are significant flaws in the lease (https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2020/11/29/opinion-four-major-flaws-in-proposed-art-center-lease/) and better ideas for true community use of the space (https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2021/02/03/opinion-arts-center-founder-wants-usage-opened-up/ ; https://www.piedmontcivic.org/2021/01/10/opinion-a-false-choice-has-been-presented-for-arts-center-lease/).

So the City has two choices – hold a public hearing on the use of the 801 Magnolia building or a second reading of the flawed lease.  By all indications, city staff is proceeding with a second reading of the lease with PCA.  Unless Council steps up and calls for a public hearing, this opportunity for Piedmonters to achieve long-standing aspirations of a community space will be lost for another 7 years.   To that end, newly elected Councilwoman Conna McCarthy could honor her campaign pledge and call for public meetings on the use of 801 before any lease is approved:

“I want to be part of the leadership that encourages large conversations where all stakeholders thoughtfully plan and manage limited resources for the benefit of Piedmont now and into the future.” 

Elected Council Candidate Conna McCarthy  

https://www.piedmontcivic.org/category/new-elections/page/8/

If you want the City Council to hold public hearings on the use of 801 Magnolia Avenue, you can reach all Council members at citycouncil@ci.piedmont.ca.us.

Garrett Keating, Former Member of the Piedmont City Council

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

Ideas have included increasing the number of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), converting large homes into multiple housing units, rezoning single-family residential zones, reducing lot size requirements, modifying requirements in the Estate Residential Zone, building multiple housing on Grand Avenue and in the Civic Center, rezoning Blair Park for multiple housing, increasing height limits, and development emphasizing low-income and affordable housing.  Piedmont has indicated an interest in adding approximately 600 new housing units to the existing approximate 3,800 households.

To learn more about the February 1, 2021 meeting, please watch the video on the City webpage. For more information, sign up to receive housing updates in your email in-box or email from Senior Planner Pierce Macdonald-Powell.

– Piedmont REACH Code problems explained to the California Building Standards Commission –

To: cbsc@dgs.ca.gov

February 12, 2021

Dear CA Building Standards Commission,

As a resident of Piedmont CA, I have some serious concerns regarding the passing of the “REACH” codes. Here is a copy of my letter to the council that states my concerns. They said there was a survey, but none of our friends were in the survey, so it seemed not to be representative of the residents.

First, Piedmonter’s were not all included in the survey – many friends are upset because they were not included. Many disagree with the Reach concept and do not feel represented thus my suggestion of A ballot vote for all.

.

Second is the impact of cost to the residential home owner.  In Piedmont, a normal bathroom remodel will cost say $40,000. If one adds the Reach upgrades, it could add another $10,000. or more.  Or consider the cost of a new roof…then add the insulation etc.. As a designer, I am familiar with those costs. Does this mean homeowners will not proceed with the work?

Third is our local enforcement of the use of less gas. This should be handled by an overall state building code to reduce off gassing. The changes are now being studied for action by the State. (Our use is small in the overall scheme. Consider the air pollution of autos and air  travel.)

Fourth we also have our regional wildfire electric blackouts which could leave residents without ability to cook and heat our homes if we rely on electric power source.

Years ago, Title 24 was added to the California code requirements and we had a time limit to reduce electric usage by lowering the voltage of electric bulbs. This was handled by the state and the manufacturers were put into a position to create products for the market that fit the bill. We now have those products and enforcement in our building codes. This is a more reasonable course of action.

Sylvia Willard Fones, Piedmont Resident

Editors Note: Opinions expressed are those of the author.

Nomination period for Piedmont’s Heritage Tree program is now open !

• the grove of Eastern Redbuds at the west end of Piedmont Park off Wildwood, nominated by Lisa Kieraldo;
• the massive Coast Redwood growing in front of 71 Hazel Lane, nominated by Cindy Rafton;
• the four evergreen Dogwoods that frame the City Hall entrance, nominated by Bobbe Stehr and Mark Enea;
• the reclining Coast Live Oak in Piedmont Park, nominated by Will, Finn, and Max Brumfiel;
• the dense grove of 18 Coast Redwoods in the traffic triangle at Wildwood, Nova and Magnolia, nominated by Gail Lombardi and Claire Faughnan;
• the Coast Redwood outside Community Hall (used as the annual holiday tree), nominated by Sue Herrick and Cameron Wolfe;
• a group of ten Highland Poplars behind Exedra Plaza, nominated by Jim Horner;
• a row of seven Dawn Redwoods growing in the former quarry at Dracena Park, nominated by Lyle Gordon;
• and the Southern Magnolia in the median triangle at Lexford and Hampton, nominated by Betsy Goodman.

>Nomination Form

  Nomination Forms are also available on the City’s website: https://piedmont.ca.gov/cms/one.aspx?portalId=13659823&pageId=17431167

For more information, please contact:

Nancy Kent at nkent@piedmont.ca.gov

or 510-420-3064.