The Seal Beach Planning Commission on Monday, Oct. 19, 2026, approved recommending changes to the Zoning Code related to the latest update of the Housing Element of the city’s General Plan. The updates will now go back to the City Council.
The vote was 3 to 2. District Four Commissioner Patty Campbell and District 3 Commissioner Susan Perrell cast the dissenting votes.
No members of the public spoke at the public hearing. Only one audience seat was occupied. The meeting lasted less than an hour.
Commissioner comments
“I just have to say it’s just kind of heartbreaking that the unfunded mandates have taken away our control of our residential development,” Perrell said.
She said density bonuses seemed to give developers the right to build bigger and higher with less parking.
“When I see, on page 34, only a proven threat to public health and safety, not to the environment, not to our city’s character, but only a threat to public health and safety, can stop rubber stamp approval of density bonuses,” Perrell said.
Community Development Director Shaun Temple said the density bonus section of the code update was conforming to state law.
Perrell asked if Temple could think of one instance when any waiver or bonus would be denied.
District Five Commissioner/Planning Chair Margo Wheeler said they were there to see if the commission could make a finding that the ordinances before them were implementing the city’s General Plan. Wheeler said she was not comfortable with the Planning Commissioners giving their personal opinions.
District Four Commissioner Campbell said the state just wants to push as many people as possible into housing. “We’re down here trying to figure out how to make something work and they just make this mandate and say to the city, ‘You figure it out.’”
In response to a question from District Two Commissioner Karen Nolta, Temple said any determination made by the director of Community Development can be appealed to the Planning Commission.
Perrell proposed adding language to the code update to say that incentives were not “stackable,” that you cannot get multiple incentives of one type.
Assistant City Attorney Amy Greyson recommended leaving the Zoning Code update as it is, mimicking state law.
Perrell was concerned that a developer could get another story.
Background
The council on Oct. 27, 2025, adopted the current housing plan, along with amendments to the Zoning Code, Zoning Map, and the Main Street Specific Plan, according to the staff report prepared by Senior Planner Patricia Garcia and Community Development Director Shaun Temple.
“In addition to the amendments (primarily the adoption of the new Mixed-Use zoning district) that were adopted in October, there are additional zoning amendments listed in the Housing Element that need to be adopted by March of 2026,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
The list of required changes to the code include:
“• Program 1q: Allow Employee/Farmworker Housing Consistent with State Law.” This would apparently apply to housing for fewer than six people, which would be allowed in all zones, according to the staff presentation.
“• Program 2a: Streamline the Density Bonus Review Process. The density bonus and affordable units would be considered administratively, according to the staff presentation
“• Program 2g: Commercial Density Bonus. Developers would receive a bonus when they “collaborate” with affordable housing by building it on-site, or off site or through donations of land or money, according to the staff presentation.
“• Program 3h: Remove Minimum Unit Size Requirements. (See below.)
“• Program 3j: Reduce Parking Requirements for Studios and 1-Bedroom Units,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
“The proposed amendments were initially presented to the Planning Commission on February 2, 2026, however no recommendation was made due to a tied vote (2-2),” Temple and Garcia wrote.
“The code amendments were then presented to the City Council on March 23, 2026, with revisions that removed transitional, supportive, and emergency housing based on commissioner discussions and public hearing comments,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
“After discussion, the City Council requested that the amendments be returned to the Planning Commission for review and that a joint study session between the City Council and the Planning Commission be set,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
The council and planners held a joint session on July 20, 2026.
“Staff is now returning to the Planning Commission for a recommendation as requested by the City Council,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
Size requirements removed
“This program of the adopted Housing Element requires removal of the current minimum unit size requirements because it is recognized as a constraint to housing development, especially affordable housing,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
The current residential minimum is 1,200 square feet in the low density zones and 950 square feet in medium density and high density zones.
“The proposed amendment will replace the 950 and 1,200 square foot minimums with the new standard of 500 square feet for all the residential zones,” Temple and Garcia wrote.
In Surfside, the minimum will be 500 square feet for a primary dwelling unit 150 square feet for a junior accessory dwelling unit, and 400 square feet for an accessory dwelling unit, according to the report.
“The purpose of the amendment is to encourage the development of studios and one-bedroom housing units, which are affordable to lower-income and special needs groups,” Temple and Garcia wrote.