Pacific Grove City Council Special Meeting - Housing Element Update 12/17/2025

The Pacific Grove City Council convened on December 17, 2025, for a special meeting to deliberate on the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update, which includes amendments to the General Plan's Housing and Health & Safety Elements, as well as necessary zoning and land use map changes. The meeting was conducted in two segments due to a potential conflict of interest regarding Councilmember Rao's property ownership. While the Council received extensive public testimony expressing strong support for regional housing needs and concerns regarding neighborhood character, infrastructure, and notification processes for specific residential rezonings, the Council ultimately moved to certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), adopt the Housing Element, and approve the related zoning and land use amendments to maintain local control and avoid state penalties.

Consent Calendar

• The Consent Calendar, containing routine and non-controversory matters, was approved unanimously with no items pulled by the council or public.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Speaker Positions:
  • Supporters: Multiple speakers, including representatives from Landwatch, the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership, the Pacific Grove Chamber of Commerce, and residents, expressed full support for the Housing Element. They argued that adoption is critical to maintain local control, avoid the "builder's remedy" (which could force high-density, non-compliant developments), and address the severe housing affordability crisis affecting service workers and seniors.
  • Opponents/Concerned Residents: A significant number of residents, particularly those living near the proposed Dennett/Cynex/Grove Acre parcel (Sites 38-41), expressed strong opposition to the specific rezoning to 29 units per acre. Their positions focused on: lack of adequate prior notification (some found out only days before), insufficient infrastructure (narrow streets, lack of sidewalks, poor parking), negative impacts on wildlife corridors and wildlife (specifically butterflies and deer), and concerns that the site was chosen unfairly because of the single owner's development interest while other viable commercial sites were ignored.
  • Nuanced Views: Several speakers, including a former Planning Commission member and a biologist, acknowledged the need for housing but argued the specific density levels proposed for the residential site were inappropriate and lacked necessary technical studies (e.g., field surveys for biological resources). Others voiced concern that the EIR failed to adequately address traffic, water pressure, and tree impacts specific to the site.

Discussion Items

• Strategic Necessity: Mayor Smith and Councilmembers Rao, Garfield, and others emphasized that the City is under a state mandate to plan for 1,125 new units. They discussed that failure to adopt the element by the deadline results in the loss of local control, potential fines of up to $100,000 per month, exclusion from state grant funding, and the imposition of the "builder's remedy," where developers could build large, high-density projects anywhere without city input. Councilmember Rao presented an image of a Menlo Park "builder's remedy" project (towers in a residential area) to illustrate the risk of not acting.
• Site Selection Debates: Council members Garfield and Rao explained why alternative sites (Mission Laundry, LaPort property) were not selected, citing lack of owner interest, existing citizens' initiatives protecting open spaces, and state approval criteria. They reiterated that the current sites were the only feasible options that met state requirements for density and size while avoiding areas protected by citizen initiatives.
• Infrastructure and Process: In response to concerns about narrow streets and lack of infrastructure, Councilmember Rao and Mayor Smith clarified that the zoning change permits future development but does not grant immediate approval for building. They stated that the City would retain control to require specific infrastructure upgrades (widening streets, adding sidewalks, lighting) as part of individual project reviews. They also noted the Council is not in "Builder's Remedy" yet but is in a precarious position where the state's temporary restraining order on water usage might lift soon, making immediate housing element approval crucial.
• Affordability Concerns: While the element includes affordable housing goals, Councilmember Garfield noted that the element alone does not guarantee affordability in the market but allows the City to contractually obligate developers through inclusionary housing agreements and binding contracts once local control is restored.

Key Outcomes

• Environmental Impact Report (EIR): The Council, with Councilmember Rao present (excluding herself from the conflict portion later), voted 6-0 to certify the Final EIR. Councilmember Paduri was absent.
• Housing Element Adoption: The Council, with Councilmember Rao present, voted 6-0 to adopt the Resolution certifying the Housing Element and Health & Safety Element updates and the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Minor text corrections to the Land Use Element and page references were requested to be included.
• Residential Zoning Amendments: The Council, with Councilmember Rao present, voted 6-0 to introduce the first reading of the ordinance amending Title 23 (Zoning Code) to implement the residential zoning changes (including the R3 density increases). Publication requirements were directed to be satisfied by summary publication.
• Recess: The Council took a brief recess to allow Councilmember Rao to recuse herself from the second half of the meeting due to her ownership interest in the 215 Forest Avenue property and the associated commercial zoning amendments.
• Land Use Element & Commercial Zoning: Upon reconvening, the Council, with six members present (Councilmember Rao abstained/recused, Paduri absent) voted 5-0 to adopt the Land Use Element and Map amendments unanimously.
• Commercial Zoning Ordinance: The Council voted 5-0 (with one abstention due to recusal and one absence) to introduce the first reading of the ordinance amending Title 23, Chapter 23.31, regarding commercial and industrial zoning districts to allow for residential uses and higher densities in commercial zones.
• Next Steps: The ordinances are pending final reading and adoption, and the City will submit the complete package to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for final state certification.