AGENDA
Antioch City Council
SPECIAL MEETING/STUDY SESSION
Date: Tuesday, September 16, 2025
Time: 6:00 P.M. – Special Meeting/Study Session
Place: Council Chambers
200 ‘H’ Street
Antioch, CA 94509
PLEASE TURN OFF CELL PHONES BEFORE ENTERING COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
Ron Bernal, Mayor City Clerk
Louie Rocha, Mayor Pro Tem (District 2) Jorge R. Rojas, City Treasurer Tamisha Torres-Walker, Council Member District 1
Donald P. Freitas, Council Member District 3 Bessie Marie Scott, City Manager Monica E. Wilson, Council Member District 4 Derek Cole, Interim City Attorney
ACCESSIBILITY: In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and California law, it is the policy of the City of Antioch to offer its public programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including individuals with disabiliti es. If you are a person with a disability and require information or materials in an appropriate alternative format; or if you require any other accommodation, please contact the ADA Coordinator at the number or address below at least 72 hours prior to the meeting or when you desire to receive services. Advance notification within this guideline will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. The City’s ADA Coordinator can be reached @ Phone: (925) 779-6950, and e-mail: [email protected].
ANTIOCH CITY COUNCIL -1- SEPTEMBER 16, 2025
Notice of Opportunity to Address Council
The City Council can only take action on items that are listed on this agenda. The public has the opportunity to address the Council on each agenda item. To address the Council, fill out a Speaker Request form and place in the Speaker Card Tray near the City Clerk before the meeting begins. Please identify the specific agenda item number you would like to speak on. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak. When you are called to speak, please limit your comments to the time allotted (up to 3 minutes, at the discretion of the Mayor). The Speaker Request forms are located at the entrance of the Council Chambers. No one may speak more than once on an agenda item.
6:00 P.M. ROLL CALL – SPECIAL MEETING/STUDY SESSION – for Council Members
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
STUDY SESSION
SM-1. CONTINUED STUDY SESSION RE GARDING THE POSSIBLE ADOPTION OF AN
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING ORDINANCE (IHO)
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council provide direction regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and direct staff to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
MOTION TO ADJOURN – The Mayor will make a motion to adjourn the Special Meeting. A second motion is required, and then a majority vote is required to adjourn the Special Meeting.
SM-1
Agenda Item #
S
TAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DAT
E: Special M eeting of September 16, 2025
T
O: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
S
UBMITTED BY: Zoe Merideth, Planning Manager
A
PPROVED BY: David A. Storer, AICP, I nterim Community & Economic Development Director
S
UBJECT: Continued Study Session Re garding the Possible Adoption of an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO)
RE
COMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council provide direction regarding the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO) and direct staff to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
F
ISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact as a result of the City Council providing staff direction as part of the study session. Should the City Council choose to adopt an IHO in the future, there would likely be a fiscal impact due to increased staffing and administrative costs to implement the ordinance should a charge/fee not be included within the program documents. 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.
DI
SCUSSION
O
n 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 6 th 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.
S
taff and t he 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.
Antioch City Council Report
September 16, 2025 Agenda Item# SM-1 2
For reference, the complete staff report from the meeting is available here:
https://www.antiochca.gov/fc/government/agendas/CityCouncil/2025/agendas/052725/0 52725.pdf
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 is requesting direction on several policy points that are suggested for inclusion in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. The table below includes the question, staff’s recommendation, and any additional relevant information, including means of compliance with the MTC TOC Policy.
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
1. Should staff move forward with
preparation of an IHO?
Yes The Planning Commission will
forward a recommendation after
receiving public input to the City
Council.
2. Should the IHO apply to rental
projects, for -sale projects, or
both?
Both project types – For
Sale and Rental units
Most cities include both project
types in their IHOs. The MTC TOC
Policy requires an IHO apply to
for-sale and rental projects.
3. What inclusionary requirement
should the IHO include?
15% total inclusionary
requirement and this
should apply to rental and
for-sale projects.
Cities range between 0% (no IHO)
to up to 20% in Contra Costa
County, generally. A rental
percentage above 15% may
trigger HCD review and requires
an alternative means of
compliance.
4. Should the IHO include specific
income category breakdowns –
for example 5% VLI, 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.
Breakdown of specific
income categories:
5% ELI, 5% VLI, 5% LI
Maintain compliance with
the MTC TOC Policy.
Some cities in Contra Costa
County include an income
breakdown by category while
others require a different
inclusionary percentage for each
income category (12.5% for VLI
but 17% for MI).
Antioch City Council Report
September 16, 2025 Agenda Item# SM-1 3
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
5. Should rental housing and for -
sale housing have different
inclusionary requirements or the
same inclusionary requirements?
All housing types maintain
the same inclusionary
requirements.
In a few cities in Contra Costa
County, the percentages differ. In
most cities with differences, there
is a higher inclusionary
percentage required for for -sale
housing.
6. What should the threshold
project size be to be included in
the IHO?
5 units & projects less than
5 pay an in-lieu fee
MTC TOC Policy states that an
ordinance may exempt projects
with fewer than 11 units.
7. Should the units be affordable
in perpetuity?
Yes Recorded Affordable Housing
Agreements - includes a funding
source – would be required.
MTC TOC Policy requires
affordability for at least 55 years
for rental housing and/ or at least
45 years for ownership housing.
8. Should an in-lieu fee option be
included as an alternative
means?
And should other alternative
means be included?
An in -lie fee option should
be included.
Per AB 1505 an alternative means
of compliance is required if the
rental inclusionary requirement is
above 15%.
9. Should the ordinance
encourage on- site construction?
If so, then by what means?
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?
Waivers and fee deferrals Other Contra Costa cities have:
fee waivers, smaller lot sizes,
smaller unit sizes, different interior
finishes for the affordable units,
reduced parking requirements,
density or FAR increase, provision
to use ADUs as the affordable
units.
Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance
City of Antioch
City Council Study Session
September 16, 2025
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
COUNCIL STUDY SESSIONS TO DATE
May 27, 2025
August 26, 2025
» Council requested staff return with
specific questions
September 16, 2025
» Specific policy questions were
included in the staff report
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
DIRECTION ON POLICY POINTS
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
1. Should staff move forward with
preparation of an IHO?
Yes The Planning Commission will forward a
recommendation after receiving public
input to the City Council.
2. Should the IHO apply to rental
projects, for-sale projects, or both?
Both project types – For Sale
and Rental units
Most cities include both project types in
their IHOs. The MTC TOC Policy requires
an IHO apply to for-sale and rental
projects.
3. What inclusionary requirement
should the IHO include?
15% total inclusionary
requirement and this should
apply to rental and for-sale
projects.
Cities range between 0% (no IHO) to up
to 20% in Contra Costa County,
generally. A rental percentage above
15% may trigger HCD review and
requires an alternative means of
compliance.
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
DIRECTION ON POLICY POINTS
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
4. Should the IHO include specific
income category breakdowns – for
example 5% VLI, 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.
Breakdown of specific income
categories:
5% ELI, 5% VLI, 5% LI
Maintain compliance with the
MTC TOC Policy.
Some cities in Contra Costa County
include an income breakdown by
category while others require a different
inclusionary percentage for each
income category (12.5% for VLI but 17%
for MI).
5. Should rental housing and for-sale
housing have different inclusionary
requirements or the same inclusionary
requirements?
All housing types maintain the
same inclusionary requirements.
In a few cities in Contra Costa County,
the percentages differ. In most cities
with differences, there is a higher
inclusionary percentage required for
for-sale housing.
* Extremely Low Income households make less than 30% AMI. The ELI category is not a separate category for the 6th Cycle Housing Element but is considered to make up 50% of the units in the VLI category.
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
DIRECTION ON POLICY POINTS
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
6. What should the threshold project
size be to be included in the IHO?
5 units & projects less than 5 pay
an in-lieu fee
MTC TOC Policy states that an
ordinance may exempt projects with
fewer than 11 units.
7. Should the units be affordable in
perpetuity?
Yes Recorded Affordable Housing
Agreements - includes a funding source
– would be required.
MTC TOC Policy requires affordability for
at least 55 years for rental housing
and/or at least 45 years for ownership
housing.
8. Should an in-lieu fee option be
included as an alternative means?
And should other alternative means be
included?
An in-lie fee option should be
included.
Per AB 1505 an alternative means of
compliance is required if the rental
inclusionary requirement is above 15%.
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
DIRECTION ON POLICY POINTS
Question Staff Recommendation Additional Information
9. Should the ordinance encourage
on-site construction? If so, then by
what means?
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?
Waivers and fee deferrals Other Contra Costa cities have: fee waivers, smaller lot sizes, smaller unit
sizes, different interior finishes for the
affordable units, reduced parking
requirements, density or FAR increase,
provision to use ADUs as the affordable
units.
Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance
City of Antioch
City Council Study Session
September 16, 2025
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
STATE HOUSING ALLOCATION
Income Affordability Level: $159,800 Average Median Income (AMI) 31-50% AMI 51-80% AMI 81-120% AMI Over 120% AMI
6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Very Low
Income (VLI)
Low Income
(LI)
Moderate
Income (MI)
Above Moderate Income
(AMI) TOTAL
792 456 493 1,275 3,016
26.3% 15.1% 16.3% 42.3% 100%
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
WHAT IS “LOW INCOME” IN 2025?
Median Family Income in Contra Costa County: $159,800
Household Size Very Low Income:
50% AMI
Low Income: 80%
AMI
Moderate
Income:
120% AMI
1 $55,950 $87,550 $134,250
2 $63,950 $100,050 $153,400
3 $71,950 $112,550 $172,600
4 $79,900 $125,050 $191,750
5 $86,300 $135,100 $207,100
6 $92,700 $145,100 $222,450
7 $99,100 $155,100 $237,750
8 $105,500 $165,100 $253,100
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
WHAT IS “AFFORDABLE”?
Contra Costa County Gross Rent Limits, June 1, 2024
Bedroom Count Very Low Income:
50% AMI
Low Income: 80%
AMI Fair Market Rent
Studio $1,362 $2,179 $1,825
1 $1,460 $2,336 $2,131
2 $1,752 $2,803 $2,590
3 $2,024 $3,238 $3,342
4 $2,258 $3,613 $3,954
5 $2,491 $3,986 $4,547
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Local Housing Pressure
63% households “rent burdened:” Spend more than 30% of income on rent Lower Displacement Risk
Income Group Displacement
Income Groups Displacement
At Risk of Displacement
Low Data Quality
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
FOR-SALE DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
Feasibility
Threshold:
15% IRR
Large Lot SF Subdivision Small Lot SF Subdivision Townhome Development Fully Market Rate Scenario
No Inclusionary Housing 18.3% 21.0% 20.6%
15% Inclusionary Requirements
15% Very Low-Income -1.6% 26.5% 15.5%
15% Low-Income -7.1% 19.9% 12.8%
15% Moderate Income -14.3% 11.1% 19.9%
10% Inclusionary Requirements
10% Very Low-Income -2.6% 24.6% 16.3%
10% Low-Income -5.3% 21.8% 12.6%
10% Moderate Income -12.1% 13.4% 19.8%
5% Inclusionary Requirement
5% Very Low-Income -1.3% 24.5% 18.2%
City of Antioch Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
FOR-RENT DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
Feasibility
Threshold:
6% CoC Yield
Medium/High Density
Apartments
High Density
Apartments
Fully Market Rate Scenario
No Inclusionary Housing 6.1% 6.6%
15% Inclusionary Requirements
15% Very Low-Income 6.2% 6.3%
15% Low-Income 4.9% 6.4%
15% Moderate Income 5.2% 6.8%
10% Inclusionary Requirements
10% Very Low-Income 6.1% 6.3%
10% Low-Income 4.8% 6.4%
10% Moderate Income 5.0% 6.6%
5% Inclusionary Requirement
5% Very Low-Income 6.1% 6.3%