Belmont City Council
June 14, 2022

CITY OF BELMONT

CITY COUNCIL AND BELMONT FIRE

PROTECTION DISTRICT BOARD OF

DIRECTORS
www.belmont.gov

1. ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Persons wishing to orally address the Council on the items of business listed below will be given an opportunity to do so before or during the Councils consideration of the item.

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, June 21, 2022
1:00 PM
City Council Chambers
City Hall, One Twin Pines Lane, Belmont, California

TELECONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS
Some Members may Participate Virtually
Being held under Gov. Code 54953(e) and
Belmont City Council Resolution 2022-052
The meeting will be broadcast live to Belmont residents on Comcast Cable Channel 27, streamed live via the City’s website at www.Belmont.gov. The public may also attend the meeting in the City Council Chambers and address the council from the chambers. Social distancing must be practiced, and seating will be limited.

PUBLIC COMMENT:

To maximize time for live public comment, we encourage members of the public to provide comments by joining the City Council meeting via Zoom : For web, visit https://belmont-gov.zoom.us/ select “Join” and enter Meeting ID: 95745673035. Use the Raise Hand feature to request to speak. You may rename your profile if you wish to remain anonymous.

For dial- in comments, call *67 1-(669) 900-6833 (your phone number will appear on the live broadcast if *67 is not dialed prior to the phone number), enter Meeting ID: 95745673035, and press *9 to request to speak. All public comments are subject to a 3-minute time limit unless otherwise determined by the Mayor.

If you wish to submit written public comment, you may send an email to [email protected] before the council considers the item. Please indicate the agenda item topic or agenda item number you wish to comment on in your email’s subject line. Any public comment regarding agenda items that are received from the publication of the agenda through the meeting date will be made part of the meeting record, but will not be read during the Council meeting.

REVISED AGENDA continued from June 14, 2022
1 2. CLOSED SESSION
A. Conference with Labor Negotiators (Govt. Code Section 54957.6) Agency designated representative: Afshin Oskoui, City Manager, Employee organization Mid-Management Confidential Employees Association (MMCEA)

3. STUDY SESSION
A. Consideration of an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Linc Housing for an Affordable Housing Project located on El Camino Real at Hill Street, and Authorizing Streamlined Ministerial Review Pursuant to Senate Bill 35 (APN’s 045- 163-070, 045-162-070, 045-162-080, 045-162-090) (Item continued from June 14, 2022 Special Meeting)
Recommendation: Adopt a resolution approving an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Linc Housing for the future purchase, sale, and development of an affordable housing project at Hill Street and El Camino Real, including authorization of an application for streamlined project review pursuant to Senate Bill 35 Attachment(s):

Staff Report - Revised
Resolution - Revised
ENA Term Sheet - Revised
Entitlement Summary Request from Developer
Draft SB35 Eligibility Letter - Revised
Funding Request from Developer -
Revised Funding Award Letter from San Mateo County
Linc Housing Project - Project Plans

4. ADJOURNMENT
If you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (650) 595-7413. The speech and hearing-impaired may call (650) 637-2999 for TDD services. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

Meeting information can also be accessed via the internet at: www.belmont.gov. All staf reports will be posted to the web in advance of the meeting, and any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council/District Board or Commission regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Of ice, One Twin Pines Lane, during normal business hours and at the Council Chambers at City Hall, Second Floor, during the meeting. 2

Linc Housing Project

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: June 21, 2022 (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 14, 2022) Agency: City of Belmont
Staff Contact: Jennifer Rose, Housing & Economic Development Manager Agenda Title: Consideration of an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Linc Housing for an Affordable Housing Project located on El Camino Real at Hill Street, and Authorizing Streamlined Ministerial Review Pursuant to Senate Bill 35 (APN’s 045- 163-070, 045-162-070, 045-162-080, 045-162-090)
Agenda Action: Resolution
Recommendation
Adopt a resolution approving an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement Term Sheet with Linc Housing for the future purchase, sale, and development of an affordable housing project at Hill Street and El Camino Real, including authorization of an application for streamlined project review pursuant to Senate Bill 35.

Strategic Focus Area
Economic Development and Housing
Background
In June 2017, the City of Belmont issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) for development of affordable housing on City-owned project sites located on El Camino Real at Hill Street. After reviewing responses and interviewing three firms, the City selected Linc Housing Inc. (“Developer”) as the preferred developer.  On February 13, 2018, the City Council approved Resolution 2017-007 authorizing the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (“ENA”) with Linc Housing for development of a 100% affordable rental housing project on the project sites (the “Project”). The ENA outlined the general scope, design and financing terms of the project, and directed the developer to proceed with obtaining all project entitlements and funding. The ENA was executed by both parties on August 8, 2018.

Since 2018 the City Council has approved several extensions of the ENA to provide additional time for the applicant and City to work together on completing the entitlement review. The project sites are relatively small and present unique design and engineering challenges. The project was further delayed during the pandemic closures. Following is a summary of the ENA extensions and amendments:
• On August 9, 2019, the City Manager authorized a two-month extension of the ENA to October 8, 2019.
• On October 22, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution 2019-105, making certain amendments to the ENA related to target population to be consistent with the County Affordable Housing Fund guidelines, and extending the negotiating term to July 2020. 3

Linc Housing Project - Staff Reportinc Housing Project
• On July 14, 2020 the City Council adopted Resolution 2020-067 approving an extension to the Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement through July 2021; • On July 13, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution 2021-069 approving an extension of the ENA through July 31, 2022.

The developer has also been successful in securing critical project financing awards through the San Mateo County Affordable Housing Fund (“AHF”), which is an annual competitive funding program. • In September 2018, the Developer was awarded $500,000 from the County AHF 6.0. These funds were targeted to support predevelopment activities such as site due diligence review and entitlement costs.
• In September 2019, the Developer was awarded $1,400,000 from the County AHF 7.0. The project was also awarded 18 project-based housing vouchers that provide an important project revenue source.

Over the past year the Developer has made significant progress addressing outstanding design and engineering issues, working in collaboration with City staff. Additionally, the Developer has worked with the City and staff from San Mateo County to develop an updated project financing plan. The County of San Mateo recently issued a revised funding award that includes several deadlines and milestones required to maintain project funding (see Attachment E). A key requirement of the County’s funding is that the Developer submit an application to the State Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) Multifamily Housing Super NOFA by June 28, 2022.

The Developer is requesting approval of an ENA Term Sheet that aligns with the updated project financing plan and authorizes submittal of a revised project application that qualifies for expedited review pursuant to Senate Bill 35 (SB 35). The City Council is not taking any action on the design review entitlement or property disposition at this time.

Analysis
The City’s role as property owner is to ensure that the project meets the City’s goals and objectives to develop new affordable housing and create a vibrant pedestrian friendly downtown. To ensure the development is consistent with the City’s objectives, staff and the Developer have prepared an ENA term sheet, included as attachment B, that summarizes the project details, general terms of the property disposition, and other Council considerations.

The general size, scope, and design of the Project has not changed significantly since the City Council last considered the project design in 2019. A majority of the outstanding design and engineering issues that have been addressed over the past year were related to off-site improvements, provision of utilities, and vehicular access/circulation. A copy of the most recent project plans is provided as Attachment G. Below is a summary of key project terms:
• Linc proposes a thirty-seven (37) unit, high-quality affordable housing development across two project sites. Site A will contain twenty-four (24) units and Site B will contain thirteen (13) units; total proposed square footage is 43,347 square feet. A total of twelve (12) tuck-under parking spaces would be provided on-site for the project.
4

Linc Housing Project - Staff Reportinc Housing Project
• The project includes 22 very low-income units, 14 low-income units, and one unrestricted managers unit. This project will help the City get closer to meeting its regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) allocation for very-low units.
• The Project is seeking a 68% State density bonus, with 15 of the 37 projects units being “density bonus units”.
• State density bonus law also allows the developer to request project incentives, waivers, and exceptions. The proposed project includes three density bonus incentives, seven zoning waivers, and two design review exceptions. A full description of the request incentives/waivers/exceptions can be found in Attachment B.
• If approved under SB 35, the Project will be required to pay California state prevailing wages. • To comply with the County’s funding conditions and meet the expedited review timeline required by SB 35, the term sheet includes a DDA negotiations and development review timeline. The proposed timeline would complete project review and approval by December 2022. • The Developer has requested that the revised ENA extend through July 31, 2023, to allow sufficient time for multiple rounds of funding applications to be submitted, if needed.

Request for Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) Streamlined Review
Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) was part of a package of housing bills approved by the State of California in 2017 designed to address housing shortages and high housing costs. SB 35 specifically requires that Cities offer streamlined ministerial review for projects that help make progress towards any unfulfilled RHNA allocation—in this case, the Linc Housing project is providing very-low-income units and Belmont has not yet met its RHNA allocation for very low-income housing unit production.

The revised financing plan requires the Developer to submit a funding application to the HCD Multifamily Housing Program (“MHP”) by June 28, 2022. The Developer is applying for over $9,000,000 in funding from the MHP, and projects that are eligible to be processed under SB 35 receive a significant competitive advantage. The County has conditioned their project funding on the Developer receiving an award through the MHP (see Attachment F), so it is critical that the Project maximizes its competitiveness.

Staff has analyzed the impacts of allowing this project to proceed as an SB 35 eligible project which requires the City to implement a streamlined ministerial review process. These impacts are summarized below:

1. Projects eligible for SB 35 review are not subject to minimum parking requirements. The project was already eligible for reduced parking based on the target population, unit affordability, and proximity to the train station. The project includes eleven onsite parking spaces.

2. SB 35 requires that eligible projects receive only ministerial entitlement review. For the Linc Housing project this means that the Developer would still be subject to objective design review at the Planning Commission but would not be required to apply for a conditional use permit. The City still has authority to levy conditions of approval on the design review entitlement, and the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) is still subject to City Council review at a public hearing.

3. Projects eligible for SB 35 review are not subject to CEQA review, but must still complete Native American Tribal notifications. The City sent the required Tribal notifications in May 2022 and has 5

Linc Housing Project - Staff Reportinc Housing Project
not received any responses. The project sites were identified for housing development in the Belmont General Plan and Belmont Village Specific Plan, and as such development of housing on these project sites was analyzed under the General Plan and BVSP environmental impact report.

It is likely that this project would have been categorically exempt from CEQA, and thus exempting the Project from CEQA is not likely to have a significant impact. The Project is still subject to soil and groundwater management through San Mateo County, and they have completed extensive site assessment work as part of their due diligence efforts preparing to purchase the land.

4. Streamlined entitlement review of housing projects processed under SB 35 must be completed within 90 days. The ENA term sheet includes a project schedule showing that the Developer would submit a revised project application pursuant to SB 35 in August 2022. The City would be committed to completing design review with the Planning Commission by November 2022, after which the City Council would hold the required public hearing for disposition of property and consideration of the DDA. With this mutually agreed upon schedule, the requirement for streamlined review does not appear to have significant impacts.

As property owner, the City is not required to allow this project to proceed under SB 35. However, as detailed above, determining that the project is SB 35 eligible provides significant financing benefits and allows the project to proceed with financial support from San Mateo County. The impacts on the City’s ability to process the project entitlements appear to be minimal, and the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) will offer the City a tool to ensure the project meets all of the City’s project objectives and design standards. Staff recommends that the City Council make the determination that the project is eligible for SB 35 streamlined ministerial review. A draft SB 35 eligibility letter has been prepared and is included as Attachment D.

Project Financing Considerations
On May 25th, 2022, Linc submitted a project funding request to the City’s Community Development Department in the amount of $2,300,000 to assist funding the construction costs of the Project (see Attachment E). The request is structured as a residual receipts loan that would be repaid to the City over the life of the loan. Projects that receive local funding contributions from a host City or County are able to increase their competitive score when seeking Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) funding from the State. LIHTC funding is a critical component of the proposed financing plan.

In June, Linc submitted supplemental project financing information indicating that their project funding request would likely be increased depending on the final design of several off-site improvements related to utility undergrounding and utility pole relocation.

Original Project Funding Request Submitted 5/25/2022 $2,300,000 Option 1: Utility Undergrounding (Public Works recommendation) + $500,000 Revised Project Funding Request Option 1 $2,800,000
Option 2: Relocation of utility pole within existing private alleyway + $200,000 Revised Project Funding Request Option 2 $2,500,000
6

Linc Housing Project - Staff Reportinc Housing Project
As specific in the Non-Binding ENA Term Sheet, the City intends to donate City Housing Successor property to the Developer for the project. The project sites have most recently appraised at approximately $4,000,000, which will further increase the projects competitiveness for LIHTC funding.

Approval of the attached Resolution and execution of an Amended ENA does not commit the City to any specific financial obligation. Project financial considerations will be negotiated and detailed in the Disposition and Development Agreement.

Alternatives

1. Provide alternative feedback on the non-binding term sheet.

2. Determine that the project is not eligible for SB 35 review.

3. Take no action, allow ENA to expire.

Attachments
A. Resolution
B. ENA Term Sheet
C. Entitlement Summary Request from Developer
D. Draft SB 35 Eligibility Letter
E. Funding Request from Developer
F. Revised Funding Award Letter from San Mateo County
G. Project Plans
Fiscal Impact
☒ No Fiscal Impact
Approval of an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement term sheet does not commit the City to any financial obligation. Project financing commitments and disposition of land will be detailed in the Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) that is anticipated to go to City Council in November 2022.
☐ Funding Source Confirmed:

Source: Purpose: Public Outreach:

Staff Council Vision/Priority Posting of Agenda
7

RESOLUTION NO. 2022 –

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BELMONT

APPROVING AN AMENDED EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF BELMONT AND LINC HOUSING, INC. FOR

DEVELOPMENT OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT AT HILL STREET AND EL CAMINO REAL, AND AUTHORIZATION OF (APN’S 045-163-070, 045-162- 070, 045-162-080, 045-162-090)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Belmont adopted the Los Costanos Community Development Plan ("Plan") for the Los Costanos Community Development Project Area ("Project Area") by Ordinance No. 692 on November 24, 1981, as amended by Ordinance No. 849 on September 10, 1991, Ordinance No. 887 on November 8, 1994, Ordinance No. 1000 on May 11, 2004, and Ordinance No. 1040 on November 12, 2008; and, WHEREAS, the City of Belmont ("City"), as the housing successor to the former Belmont Redevelopment Agency (“Agency”), is vested with responsibility pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 of Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code) to implement the Plan in the Project Area as well as the responsibility for formulating and carrying out necessary redevelopment projects within the City of Belmont; and, WHEREAS, in June 2017, the City issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) seeking affordable housing project proposals from qualified developers for three City-owned project sites located on El Camino Real at Hill Street and Middle Road (“Sites”), located within the Los Costanos Redevelopment Project Area; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council established a two member Affordable Housing Subcommittee to assist staff in vetting project proposals and on January 23, 2018 the Affordable Housing Subcommittee met to review the RFP responses, revised project information, and consider the developer qualifications; and, WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Subcommittee concluded that Linc Housing, Inc. (“Developer”), had the requisite skill, experience, and financial capacity to redevelop the Sites with affordable housing in a timely manner, and that they are the preferred developer for the Sites; and,
WHEREAS, the Affordable Housing Subcommittee recommended that the City Council consider the Developer project proposal and authorize the City Manager to enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (“ENA”) with the Developer; and, WHEREAS, on February 13, 2018, the Council approved Resolution No. 2018-007, entering into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (“ENA”) with Linc Housing, Inc., for a twelve (12) month term, to negotiate development of an affordable housing project on Cityowned property; and, WHEREAS, on August 9, 2019, the City Manager granted a two-month extension to the ENA negotiating term, as permitted in the ENA; and,
8

WHEREAS, on October 22, 2019, the City Council approved Resolution 2019-105, amending certain terms of the ENA, and extending the negotiating term to March 9, 2020; and, WHEREAS, on July 14, 2020, the City Council approved Resolution 2020-067, amending certain terms of the ENA, and extending the negotiating term to July 31, 2021; and, WHEREAS, on July 13, 2021, the City Council approved Resolution 2021-069 extending the negotiating term on the ENA to July 31, 2022; and, WHEREAS, the City and Developer (“Parties”) desire to further extend the negotiating term to allow for negotiation of a Disposition and Development Agreement and completion of project entitlements; and,
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to enter into an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (“Agreement”) pursuant to the revised project terms identified in the ENA Term Sheet, incorporated herein by reference and attached as Exhibit A (the “ENA Term Sheet”); and, WHEREAS, the City of Belmont, as property owner, authorizes the Developer to submit an application for streamlined ministerial review pursuant to Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), and Government Code 65913.4, acknowledging that the project would help the City meet its outstanding regional housing need allocation for very-low income housing units.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Belmont resolves as follows:

SECTION 1. That the Belmont City Manager is authorized to execute an Amended Exclusive Negotiating Agreement, including an ENA Term Sheet (Exhibit A), between the City of Belmont and Linc Housing, Inc., related to development of an affordable housing project on the property described in the ENA Term Sheet, extending the negotiating term through July 31, 2023.

SECTION 2. That the City Manager and his designees are hereby authorized and directed to take such steps as are reasonable and necessary to performance of the City’s obligations under the ENA and carry out the terms and conditions of the ENA.

SECTION 3. Upon preliminary agreement between the City and Linc Housing Inc, on the terms of a Disposition and Development Agreement, the Developer is authorized to submit an application for streamlined ministerial review pursuant to Senate Bill 35, Government Code 95913.4, provided that the application is consistent with the project and all of the terms described in the ENA Term Sheet (Exhibit A), without requests for additional waivers or concessions.

SECTION 4. Through this resolution, the City has made no commitment to approve any particular application for land use approvals for the subject project and there is no possibility that the approval of this resolution in and of itself may have a significant effect on the environment, and the activity is not subject to CEQA. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).) * * *
9

ADOPTED June 21, 2022 by the City of Belmont City Council by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:

ATTEST:

City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
10

876 – 900 El Camino Real
Planning Application No. 2018-0074
ENA Term Sheet
Linc Housing Corporation, Inc. (“Linc”) proposes to acquire the real property located at 876, 884, 898, and 900 El Camino Real, Belmont, CA 94002 (the "Property") from the City of Belmont (“City”) in fee for development of a 100% affordable housing development (the "Project") pursuant to a Disposition and Development Agreement (“DDA”), to be negotiated between Linc and the City.

The purpose of this term sheet is to document proposed business terms for sale of the Property and to inform the public regarding the goals and principles that have been used to define the Project and that will be considered during the public review. The City retains the absolute sole discretion to (i) determine not to proceed with the Project, or (ii) modify the project for consistency with adopted City plans.

No legal obligations will exist unless and until the parties have negotiated, executed and delivered a mutually acceptable DDA based upon information produced from the public review and hearing processes, and the Project has received all applicable governmental approvals. Any agreements resulting from negotiations will become effective only if and after each agreement has been considered and approved by the City following the conduct of all legally required procedures.

Project Information and Basic Terms and Conditions
1 Property The proposed Project is located on two city-owned sites separated by Hill Street located along El Camino Real. “Site A” is located at 900 El Camino Real and “Site B” is located at 876-884-900 El Camino Real. The two sites include a total of four parcels with the following assessor parcel numbers:

Site A:
045-162-090
045-162-080
045-162-070
Site B:
045-163-070
Based on site diligence, site capacity, market analysis, and extensive discussions with the City’s Planning and Public Works departments, Linc proposes a thirty-seven (37) unit, high-quality affordable housing development across the two sites. Site A will contain twenty-four (24) units and Site B will contain thirteen (13) units.
11

2 Project Details Site A Proposed Project Details
Lot Area: 8,415 s.f.

Floor Area: 27,177 s.f.

FAR: 3.23
1 Bedroom Units (@600 nsf): 14
2 Bedroom Units (@792 nsf): 4
3 Bedroom Units (@ 1007 nsf): 6
Total Units: 24
Parking: 7+1EV
Bike Parking: 7
Site B Proposed Project Details
Lot Area: 5,035 s.f.

Floor Area: 16,170 s.f.

FAR: 3.21
1 Bedroom Units (@600 nsf): 4
2 Bedroom Units (@792 nsf): 5
3 Bedroom Units (@ 1007 nsf): 4
Total Units: 13
Parking: 3 + 1 Manager Space
Bike Parking: 5
3 Buyer/Developer Linc will purchase the property directly or through a single-purpose limited liability company or limited partnership, with Linc serving as the Managing General Partner.
4 Purchase Price;
Public Subsidy for
Affordable Housing
The purchase price for the sale of the Property is anticipated to be zero dollars ($0) and will be determined in accordance with the requirements of Health & Safety Code Section 33433. The project is also anticipated to include a public subsidy for affordable housing from the City of Belmont, which may be in the form of a loan, grant or other appropriate funding mechanism to be determined with the final amount of public subsidy, which will be detailed in the Disposition and Development Agreement. Disposition will occur consistent with the site’s status as an asset of the City Housing Successor to the former Belmont Redevelopment Agency and consistent with the Surplus Land Act.
12

5 Project Affordability The proposed Project will be 100% affordable exclusive of one manager’s unit. The Project will meet or exceed the affordability levels described in the table below.

Number of Units Affordability Level (TCAC)
22 50% AMI
14 80% AMI or below
1 Unrestricted Manager’s Unit
Total: 37 Units
6 Prevailing Wages If approved under SB 35 or if otherwise required by another funding source, the Project will be subject to California state prevailing wages. 7 CEQA Compliance If approved under SB 35, the Project’s entitlement process would be exempt from CEQA review. If not approved under SB 35, the Project would be subject to environmental review to determine if the Project is exempt or requires CEQA analysis.
7 Project Timeline
Action Item Date
Linc to submit funding
application to HCD Multifamily
Housing Program; Tribal
consultations completed
July 12, 2022
City and Linc Develop and
Negotiate Draft DDA July – August 2022
DDA negotiations between City
and Linc, preliminary agreement
reached on terms of the DDA;
Submittal of an SB 35 application
that meets the preliminary terms
of the DDA
September 2022
Complete review of SB 35
Application for Completeness
and Consistency (30 days);
Adoption of Resolution Declaring
Property Exempt Surplus Land,
Submittal of Surplus Land
Exemption Resolution to HCD
October 2022
City Council Review of DDA and
33433 Hearing November 2022
13

Planning Commission Review of
Design Review (Less than 90 Days
from revised entitlements
submission)
November 2022
Executed DDA (Following HCD
Approval of Exempt Surplus Land
Resolution)
December 2022
Final Tax Credit Funding
Application (DDA Required) March 2023
Transfer Property and
Commence Construction December 2023
8 State Density Bonus
Project Waivers,
Exemptions, and
Exceptions
As a 100% affordable housing development, the Project qualifies for various waivers, incentives and exceptions under state density bonus law. These items have been reviewed by City planning staff. - Density Bonus

1. The Project is seeking a 68% density bonus, with 15 of the 37 projects units being “density bonus units”
- Height Increase

1. Height increase from 50 feet to 56.5 feet.
- Incentives

1. Relief from required landscaped area

2. Relief from three floor maximum street wall height

3. Relief from the 16-foot ground floor requirement
- Waivers

1. Increase in the maximum allowed floor area ratio (Site A proposed 3.23, Site B proposed 3.21)

2. Relief from the transitional height and setback from R zones

3. Relief from maximum building bulk regulations

4. Reduction in the active use percentage requirement on the ground floor of the Hill Street Frontage

5. Relief from the requirement that at least 90% of the Hill Street frontage maintains a setback of 10 feet or less

6. Relief from the 5-Foot maximum setback requirement
along Hill Street
- Design Review Exceptions

1. Exceptions to the Sec. 31.4.1(j) build-to lines regulation

2. Alternative to the Sec. 31.4.1(k) ground floor
transparency regulation
9 ENA Extension The ENA is extended through July 31, 2023 10 Engineering
Improvements
Belmont Public Works staff provided a written response to the Developer on June 1, 2022 detailing City conditions for approval for certain on and off-site improvements pertaining to the traffic impact fee, alley width and turning radius, alley maintenance, and utility pole relocation. The Developer has received this communication and agrees with all of the public works’ recommendations provided in that letter. 14 Memorandum
To: Mr. Rob Gill, Senior Planner
City of Belmont Community Development Department
Planning Division
One Twin Pines Lane, Suite 110
Belmont, CA 94002
From: C.J. Horvath, Senior Project Manager
Suny Lay Chang, President & COO
Linc Housing
Date: June 9, 2022
Re: 900 El Camino Real: Application No. PA2018-0074 –
Entitlement Actions Summary
Density Bonus Eligibility Statement
The project requests the application of SB-35 for ministerial streamlined approval. The act is contained within CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4, which will be excerpted as needed below.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING STATEMENT
a. As detailed in the affordability table below, the project is a 100% affordable project that dedicates greater than the 15% of units for low income households required by city ordinance.
b. See the table below for precise affordability levels. c. All project units are affordable except for one (1) two-bedroom unit for the resident manager.
d. Save for the one (1) two-bedroom manager’s unit, the entirety of the project’s eighteen (18) one-bedroom units, nine (9) two-bedroom units, and ten (10) three-bedroom units will be dedicated to affordable households. All project open space and amenities will be available for their use, and the project also includes 543 SF of supportive services office space on the ground floor.

Some as-yet-undetermined portion of the 12 parking spaces will be used for supportive services staff, 1 space is for EVs only, and 1 space will be assigned to the resident manager.
15 SUMMARY OF REQUESTED ENTITLEMENT ACTIONS

The proposed project will utilize the following two State Laws:

1. Senate Bill-35 (“SB-35”) state streamlining law, which entitles eligible projects to ministerial streamlined processing and makes the project CEQA-exempt.

Elsewhere in this package is further information about the project’s eligibility under SB-35. SB-35 also eliminates parking requirements near passenger rail stations, prevents the local jurisdiction from requiring a Conditional Use Permit, and sets approval timelines.

2. State Density Bonus Law

UNIT MIX AND PROJECT AFFORDABILITY

The project will meet the affordability requirements for the requested land use approvals in the following manner:

The project will exclusively serve and be affordable to residents who earn at or below 80% area median income, as per TCAC regulations (managers unit excepted).

The project will conform to the requirements of CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4(a)(4)(B)(i) (this is the SB-35 state streamlining law), requiring at least 50% of the base density units within the project to be restricted to households making state HCD 80% AMI or less.

The HCD SB-35 guidelines state in Section 402(b)(3) and Section 402(c) that "The percentage of units affordable to households making at or below 80 percent of the AMI per this section is calculated based on the total number of units in the development exclusive of additional units provided by a density bonus."

As shown in the included Density Bonus Eligibility Statement and density calculations, the project is seeking a 68% density bonus, with 22 of the project's 37 proposed units considered the "base density" units. Therefore the use of SB35 will restrict 11 units to households making at or below 80% AMI.

Projects requesting a CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(f)(3)(D)(i) 80% density bonus with up to 4 incentives must also conform to subsections (b)(1)(G) and (c)(1)(B)(ii).
16 o Per Subsection (b)(1)G), 80% of the project's units will be restricted to lower income households (80% AMI) or below, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, and the other 20% of the project will be restricted to moderate income households (110%) or below, as defined by Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
o Per Subsection (c)(1)(B)(ii), 20% of the units in the development will be set at an affordable rent as defined per Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, and the remainder will conform to maximum rent levels required at each AMI level by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee.

In Summary, the project will meet the following land use affordability requirements:
11 units limited to HCD 80% AMI rents (calced at 60% AMI) reserved for households having incomes at or below HCD 80% AMI 18 units limited to TCAC 80% AMI rents
reserved for households having incomes at or below HCD 80% AMI 7 units limited to state TCAC 110% AMI rents
reserved for households having incomes at or below HCD 110% AMI
1 unit reserved for the on-site manager
Linc understands that the requested approvals will be contingent on signing affordability covenants memorializing the above facts, and Linc is prepared to bind to this effect.

Note regarding Special Needs:

The project will include somewhere between 2 and 18 units reserved for a special needs population, but the final number of units to be reserved as such is subject to ongoing DDA negotiations with the City of Belmont. Since the project will in any case meet land use law affordability requirements as detailed above, these ongoing negotiations – and the yet-to-be-determined final number of special needs units – are not directly applicable to the requested land use approval actions.

DENSITY BONUS ELIGIBILITY STATEMENT
17 The project utilizes CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(f)(3)(D)(i) to provide increased density up to 80%. As calculated below, the requested incentives and waivers result in a 68% density bonus, consisting of an estimated 22 units per the base zoning provisions, and 15 bonus units, for a total of 37 units. Furthermore, the use of SB-35 qualifies the project for CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4(e)(1), which states:
(e) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, a local government, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance governing automobile parking requirements in multifamily developments, shall not impose automobile parking standards for a streamlined development that was approved pursuant to this section in any of the following instances:
(A) The development is located within one-half mile of public transit.

Though per SB-35 no parking spaces are required, the project includes 12 parking spaces, which will serve supportive services, management staff, and residents.

The project further requests the utilization of CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(d)(2)(D), which provides that for projects meeting the affordability requirements of Sec. 65915(b)(1)(G) and "located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, the applicant shall also receive a height increase of up to three additional stories, or 33 feet." The project requests a boost in height from 50 feet (BZO Sec. 31.4.1 Table 31-2) to 56.5 feet. The project additionally requests a number of Sec. 65915(d)(2) incentives and is allowed to request up to four (4) of these incentives per Sec. 65915(d)(2)(D).

All of the concessions and waivers listed below are critical to the feasibility of the project. The 22-unit density possible without them would render construction costs beyond the level of feasibility and prevent the project from attaining competitive financing that ranks projects on cost per unit as well as project size.

Note that per density bonus law the overall project is not subject to required findings. Nevertheless, Linc wishes to note that the proposed project does advance the goals of the city's general plan since it is located in the Village Core subarea of the Historic Belmont Village Specific Plan, which is envisioned as a lively transit-oriented urban core for the city. The project's transit-adjacent density will contribute to making this a reality. The City's Housing Element identifies the site as a prime candidate for housing, and designates it as an ideal location to 18 meet affordable housing needs outlined in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”).

The project will also not have an adverse impact upon public health and safety.

The project is surrounded by light industrial/commercial uses to the Southeast and Southwest of the Southeasterly Site A, and these uses are located in the Village Core zone. Residential R-3 parcels to the Southwest of the Northwesterly Parcel B are separated from the proposed project by a 19'-7" open access easement which effectively acts as a setback between the two uses, and there are no other sensitive uses adjacent to the project. The Site B site plan also includes only one unit per floor with windows that face Southwest toward the two duplexes (4 units total face Southwest).

The project is currently requesting three (3) incentives for:

i. RELIEF FROM THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPED AREA:

Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1(n) and Table 31-2 specify that landscaping is to cover an area equivalent to at least 10% of the lot area. This required landscaping would consume nearly 100% of the project's currently proposed outdoor open space areas, and is therefore impractical on a small site. The project requests an incentive for relief from this requirement and will provide approximately 360 SF of landscaping as shown on the zoning compliance table on Sheet A01.
ii. RELIEF FROM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS ABOVE THE 3RD FLOOR Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.5.2 Table 31-3 specifies a maximum 3 story street wall on both Hill Street and El Camino Real. Complying with this requirement would change the unit mix by eliminating several 3-bedroom units (which is not permissible per financing requirements), and would have a negative effect on the project's visual cohesiveness. The project requests an incentive for relief from this requirement.
iii. RELIEF FROM THE 16 FOOT GROUND FLOOR REQUIREMENT
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1 Table 31-2 specifies a 16 ft minimum ground floor height within the Active Use Frontage Overlay zone. The project requests an incentive for relief from this requirement, and proposes a more standard 12 ft ground floor height.

CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(k) broadly defines the potential subjects and scope of requested 65915(d) incentives, including “A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code requirements or architectural design requirements that exceed the minimum building standards approved by the 19 California Building Standards Commission...” Both this section and CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(d) state that the incentives are for cost reductions and subject to evidence-based health and safety impact, with a presumption of approval unless proven otherwise:

"The city, county, or city and county shall grant the concession or incentive requested by the applicant unless the city, county, or city and county makes a written finding, based upon substantial evidence, of any of the following:
(A) The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs…
(B) The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment… for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.
(C) The concession or incentive would be contrary to state or federal law."

Noting that these incentives carry a presumption of approval unless proven otherwise – and therefore the city doesn’t need to make a finding of no adverse impact – nevertheless the incentives are critical to project feasibility and will have no adverse impact upon public health and safety.

Findings of no "specific, adverse impact upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate," however, can be required for the Sec. 65915(e) waivers we are requesting if the locality wishes to require such. These waivers are to be "for the waiver or reduction of development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of [Sec. 65915(b)] at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted…"

We are requesting six Sec. 65915(e) waivers as follows:

1. INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED FLOOR AREA RATIO
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1 Table 31-2 specifies a maximum floor area ratio of 2.0, while the project requires a 3.22 floor area ratio.

Per Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 26.8, "Modifications to floor area ratio in an amount equivalent to the percentage density bonus utilized 20 shall be allowable as a waiver. Requests for an increase in floor area ratio above that equivalent percentage shall be considered a request for an incentive." The requested FAR boost is 61% above the 2.0 base FAR, which is less than the project's 68% effective requested density bonus.

The request is therefore eligible for a waiver, without which the yield is lower than the 61% FAR boost might allude to - because ground floor infrastructure does not shrink in proportion. Estimated yield without the FAR boost is 22 units, indicating that all of the 15 density bonus units require the use of the FAR waiver.

This request will not have an adverse impact upon public health and safety, as surrounding properties at the Southeasterly Parcel A are commercial uses in the Village Core zone and residential parcels to the Southwest of the Northwesterly Parcel B are separated from the proposed project by a 19'-7" open access easement which effectively acts as a setback between the two uses. Furthermore, the project is consistent with the Belmont Village Specific Plan (“BVSP”). The BVSP identifies the intersection of Hill Street and El Camino Real as a "gateway" to Belmont's downtown core, and specifies high density, signature architecture and an urban typology for what is deemed one of the three or four most important intersections in the plan. Furthermore, the site is designated in the city's Housing Element as a key site for meeting the city's affordable housing RHNA needs.

2. RELIEF FROM TRANSITIONAL HEIGHT AND SETBACK FROM R
ZONES
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1(a) specifies a 10 ft minimum setback from an interior lot line that abuts an R zone, and Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1(b) and Figure 31-2 specify transitional height requirements from such an interior lot line abutting an R zone. Considering this waiver in isolation, the provisions in question, if applied per code irrespective of the existing 19'-7" access easement between the proposal and the residential improvements to the Southwest, would result in a loss of about 46% of the upper floor buildable area on Site B, or approximately 6 units. This Site B building would be 4 floors, as the 5th floor would contain about 1,000 SF if built under these transitional height requirements, and would therefore be infeasible. The remaining 7-unit Site B building would likely also be infeasible to construct, and the redesign would likely be less dense, meaning that this waiver is one of the requests strictly necessary to build somewhere between 6 and 10 of the units in the current 37-unit proposal. The proposed 37-unit density is - as calculated below - within the state-allowed density bonus.
21 This request will not have an adverse impact upon public health and safety, as the residential parcels to the Southwest of Parcel B are separated from the proposed project by a 19'-7" open access easement which effectively acts as a setback between the two uses. Furthermore, the project provides courtyards and side yard setbacks such that considering the 19'-7" open access, only a section of building approximately 35' wide is out of compliance with the requirement. Only one unit per floor has windows that face Southwest.

3. RELIEF FROM MAXIMUM BUILDING BULK REGULATIONS
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1 Table 31-2 specifies building mass step backs on upper floors, defined as a percentage of the ground floor plate. To achieve the proposed density the project requests the following increases:

Counting this waiver in isolation, this approximately 8.5% floor area increase mathematically represents 4 of the proposed 37 units but more likely represents at least 6 of the proposed units because of the significant floor plate inefficiencies that are introduced by applying these step backs to the two separate, small parcels that comprise the proposed project. The proposed 37- unit density is – as calculated below – within the state-allowed density bonus.

This request will not have an adverse impact upon public health and safety, as surrounding properties at the Southeasterly Parcel A are commercial uses in the Village Core zone and residential parcels to the Southwest of the Northwesterly Parcel B are separated from the proposed project by a 19’-7” open access easement which effectively acts as a setback between the two uses.

4. REDUCTION IN THE ACTIVE USE PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENT ON

THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE HILL STREET FRONTAGE
22 Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.5.2 Table 31-3 specifies that Village Main Streets like Hill Street are to include active uses along 75% of their ground floor frontage. This is not feasible due to code-required parking ingress/egress, fire command rooms for each building, an electrical room, and a transformer, each of which must be directly accessible from the public right of way rather than through the interior of the building. The Sheet A01 zoning diagrams show the calculations for this item, and Sheet A03 shows the location of the required infrastructure facilities that prevent compliance with the zoning code as written.

The project requests the removal of the 75% active uses requirement along Hill Street. This is the first of 3 requested waivers necessary for the provision of mandatory building and fire code infrastructure requirements.

5. RELIEF FROM THE REQUIREMENT THAT AT LEAST 90% OF THE HILL STREET FRONTAGE MAINTAINS A SETBACK OF 10 FEET OR
LESS
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.5.2 Table 31-3 requires that at least 90% of the building façade on Village Main Streets maintains a setback of no more than 10 ft from the property line which if adhered to, would prevent the installation of a code-compliant transformer pad. The building and fire codes require that transformer pads are open to the sky, and that minimum setbacks are provided between the transformer and the building. The approximately 13'x14' transformer pad represents the code-mandated minimum for a project of this size. Because Belmont City Planning is currently indicating that this transformer pad is considered at "setback" of more than 10 feet, the project requests the removal of this requirement. This is the second of 3 requested waivers necessary for the provision of mandatory building and fire code infrastructure requirements.

6. RELIEF FROM THE 5-FOOT MAXIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENT

ALONG HILL STREET
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.5.2 Table 31-3 requires that buildings along Village Main Streets like Hill Street provide no greater than a 5 ft front setback, which would prevent the installation of a code-compliant transformer pad. The building and fire codes require that transformer pads are open to the sky, and that minimum setbacks are provided between the transformer and the building.

The approximately 13'x14' transformer pad represents the code-mandated minimum for a project of this size. Because Belmont City Planning is currently indicating that this transformer pad is considered at "setback" of more than 5 feet, the project requests the removal of this requirement. This is the third of 3 23 requested waivers necessary for the provision of mandatory building and fire code infrastructure requirements; Linc is happy to combine this waiver request with the previous one if Belmont staff would prefer.

Linc may request further waivers of additional development standards that may arise, which would have “the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of [Sec. 65915(b)] at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted…" (Sec. 65915(e)). Note that per CA Gov Code Sec. 65915, in making findings for waivers – or in trying to make negative findings against incentives - the above-required findings are to be made for the particular requests themselves, not for the project as a whole. Other aspects of the development for which relevant incentives are not sought – such as the parking waived through SB-35 and the Sec. 65915(d)(2)(D) height increase – are not subject to adverse impact findings at all.

What, then, is adverse impact upon health or safety? It’s pretty narrow - Sec. 65915(e) refers to Gov Code Sec. 65589.5(d)(2) for a definition, which states:

“As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. The following shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety:
(A) Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation. (B) The eligibility to claim a welfare exemption under subdivision (g) of Section 214 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.”

The project is also currently requesting two (2) design review exceptions:

I. EXCEPTION TO THE Sec. 31.4.1(j) BUILD-TO LINES REGULATION Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1(j) specifies that for "sites that are within the Active Use Frontage Overlay, streetwalls shall be located at (or within 10 feet of) the sidewalk for at least 90 percent of the primary street frontage… Along other street frontages, at least 70 percent of the street wall shall be located at or within 10 feet of the sidewalk."
24 Since there's an AUFO along El Camino Real, the 90% requirement applies on that frontage. The Site B design is only compliant for 89.4% of the frontage, however, due to the necessary pedestrian exit route from one of the two coderequired exit stairs. While it would seem that the zoning code would prefer that the stair be located at the corner with no setback from ELC, the struggle on such a small, 5,035 SF site is to minimize hallway circulation and try to maintain the 3- bedroom units. Therefore the project requests an Exception for pedestrian access, approved through Design Review as allowed by Sec. 31.4.1(j).

II. ALTERNATIVE TO THE Sec. 31.4.1(k) GROUND FLOOR

TRANSPARENCY REGULATION -
Belmont Zoning Ordinance Sec. 31.4.1(k) allows up to 20 ft spans without the required transparent openings. Sheet A01 shows the lengths of all façade areas without compliant transparent openings. Each side of Hill Street includes a noncompliant length necessary to accommodate building code-required infrastructure. At Site B, on the Northwest side of Hill Street, the project requires 34'-7" of non-compliant area to accommodate the exit stair, fire command room, and electrical room. At Site A, on the Southeast side of Hill Street, the project requires 21'-6" of non-compliant area to accommodate the transformer pad and the short distance of wall between the transformer pad and the drive aisle to the parking garage.
25 In both instances, the project proposes architectural relief and detail in these locations as part of a Sec. 31.4.1(k)(3) Alternative through Design Review. Color and façade articulation are provided along both areas.

DENSITY BONUS "BASE DENSITY" CALCULATION FOR WAIVER

JUSTIFICATIONS
The following calculations show the effective density bonus attained through the requested incentives and waivers, showing the delta between the base Belmont Zoning Ordinance provisions and the post-requests proposed project.

Code-required parking:
1bedroom: 18 x1 = 18
2bedrooms: 9 x1.5 = 13.5
3bedrooms: 10 x2 = 20

51.5 spaces round up to 52
Rule of thumb 385 SF of garage per space
52*385=20,020 SF
Number of on-grade spaces possible without subterranean:

The combined site area is approximately 13,450 sf split between two sites, and 52 parking spaces cannot be fit in an area this size.
13450/385=34.9351
35/52=67.31%
37*67.31%=24.9047 units
If not for the Active Uses Overlay requiring commercial uses throughout the 50 ft of site depth nearest El Camino Real the ground floor could park a project of 26 about 24 units. With that requirement the estimated unit yield drops to approximately 10 units. The project cannot financially support the costs of subterranean parking while remaining competitive in competitive financing rounds.

Number of parking spaces in the "base project"
The actual "base project" parking for SB-35 housing project use is zero because zero parking is non-discretionary for SB-35 projects, which do not necessarily have to utilize the density bonus law.

SB-35 specifies in Sec. 65913.4(d)(1): "Notwithstanding any other law, a local government, whether or not it has adopted an ordinance governing parking requirements in multifamily developments, shall not impose parking standards for a streamlined development that was approved pursuant to this section in any of the following instances:
(A) The development located within one-half mile of public transit" This is not an incentive or a discretionary action, but rather reads "a local government… shall not impose… "
Consider, therefore, the "base project" to be an SB-35 project which is entitled to by-right zero parking, and actually proposes 12 spaces as ours currently does.

Explanation of methodology:

The following calculations will start with the project as proposed and "remove" the requested incentives and waivers to find the theoretical "base" project density. In brief, consider:
• The height requirement would result in one fewer floor • the 2.0 FAR would place a smaller cap on total building size. • The floor plate would be reduced by
o the 10% requirements for site landscaping,
o an additional 6 ft required dedication on El Camino Real to reach the 18 ft sidewalk standard,
o the 10 foot required rear setback near the R zone at the rear of Site B, which could not both accommodate the landscaping and the required parking.
• Upper floor plates would be reduced in size by
o building bulk regulations,
o transitional height at the rear of the Northwesterly site, o the requirement for a setback above a 3-story street wall height.

CALCULATIONS
27 Calcs are often based on floor plate widths within each new setback area. Each width number is italicized in blue.

Reductions in Building Footprint
6ft x width= 114width site A 62width site B
10ft rear setback Site B - 67.5*10
Loss to Upper Floors Square Footage
Loss of 5th floor and set back above 3rd not 4th floor
Site A: removes 6,431sf of existing site plan's floor area Site B: removes 3,459sf of existing site plan's floor area Next, we'll need to check against 2.0 FAR and against building bulk regulations:
1st floor 100% of ground floor footprint
2nd floor 100%,
3rd floor 85%,
4th floor 75%,
5th floor 75%
28 SITE B

REDUCTIONS IN BLDG FOOTPRINT
Additional 6ft ECR dedication to reach 18'
sidewalk:
-6*62=-372
10ft rear setback

67.5*-10=-675
'Base case' footprint = current less the difference
4306-372-675=3259
3,259 sf 1st floor footprint

UPPER FLOOR LOSSES
Loss of 5th: -3,459sf vs current proposal.

Use roof decks above trans. Ht. setbacks for
landscaping

For all:
6ft ECR front dedication above 1st floor:: -6*64=-
384
Rear 10ft setback: 35*-6.5=-227.5

Transitional Ht. - 3.5' floorplate is 0ft wide, 22' is
35' wide, further in it's 67' wide
15ft setback 2nd flr, current plan 3,443sf
5*35=175
3443-384-228-175=2656sf 2nd Flr
25ft setback 3rd flr, current plan 3,459sf
12*35+3*67=621
3459-384-228-621=2226sf 3rd Flr
35ft setback 4th flr, current plan 3,148sf
12*35+13*67=1,291
3148-384-228-1291=1245sf 4th Flr
4th floor too small to be feasible

Building bulk check
2nd: 2656/3259=0.815
3rd: 2226/3259=0.683
4th: 1245/3259=0.382

Calced 'base case' upper floor SF:
2656+2226+1245=6127
check vs base FAR: less than max
5035*2=10070

Current upper floor SF: 13,509
6127/13509=45.35% of current proposal

Current upper floor units: 12
Likely 'base case' units: 12*45.35%=5.442
round up to 6

Proposal is 13/6=
116% bonus vs base case
SITE A

REDUCTIONS IN BLDG FOOTPRINT
Additional 6ft ECR dedication to reach 18'
sidewalk:
-6*114=-684

'Base case' footprint = current less the difference
7511-684=6827
6,827 sf 1st floor footprint

UPPER FLOOR LOSSES
Loss of 5th: -6,431sf vs current proposal
Use a roof deck above 4th floor for landscaping

For all:
6ft ECR front dedication above 1st floor: -
6*116=-696

2nd: current plan 6,032sf 6032-696=5336 sf
3rd: current plan 6,242sf 6242-696=5546 sf
4th: current plan 5,984sf 5984-696=5288 sf

Building bulk check
2nd: 5336/6827=0.7816
3rd: 5546/6827=0.8124
4th: 5288/6827=0.7746 reduce to 75% of
ground floor footprint
6827*0.75=5120.25
Calced 'base case' upper floor SF:
5336+5546+5120=16,002
check vs base FAR: less than max
8415*2=16830

Current upper floor SF: 24,689 sf
16002/24689=64.81% of current proposal

Current upper floor units: 24
Likely 'base case' units: 24*64.81%=15.5544
round up to 16

Proposal is 24/16=
50% bonus vs base case
29 TOTAL PROJECT
37 current proposal units
22 calculated "base case" units
37/22=68.2% bonus vs base case.

Since the project utilizes CA Gov Code Sec. 65915(f)(3)(D)(i), which provides increased density up to 80%, the proposed project is a Sec. 65915(e) "development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities… permitted under this section," and the requested waivers are necessary in order to achieve the permitted density.

Please contact Suny Lay Chang or Cody Snyder for further questions or clarification on any of these items.

Thank you very much for all your help.

Best Regards,
C.J. Horvath
Linc Housing Corporation
C: 978-828-6783
[email protected]
Suny Lay Chang
President & COO
Linc Housing Corporation
[email protected]
30 June 21, 2022
Ben Winter
Linc Housing Corporation
3590 Elm Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90807
RE: Confirmation of Eligibility for SB 35 Application Review, 876-900 El Camino Real, Belmont CA 94002
Dear Mr. Winter,
This letter confirms that the City of Belmont (“City”) has determined that Linc Housing Corporation’s 37- unit Hill Street project located at 876, 884, 898, 900 El Camino Real, Belmont, CA 94002 with assessor parcel numbers 045-162-070; 045-162-080; 045-162-090; 045-163-070 is eligible to apply for streamlined ministerial approval under Senate Bill 35 (“SB35”).

Projects that qualify for SB 35 streamlined ministerial review are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review.

If you have any questions, please contact Carlos de Melo, Community Development Director – City of Belmont, Community Development Department at [email protected] or (650) 595-7440.

Sincerely,
Carlos de Melo
Community Development Director
City of Belmont
31 32
City Funding Impact on 9% Tax Credit Competitiveness
Table 1: Winning Tiebreaker Scores in the South and West Bay Region (Belmont’s geographic region)
9% Tax Credit Round Winning Tiebreaker Scores
2021 First Round 36% - 46%
2021 Second Round 36%
2022 First Round 46% - 111%
2022 Second Round TBD
2023 First Round TBD, proposed application round
Table 2: The Project’s Tiebreaker Score Under Different Funding Scenarios Funding Scenario Tiebreaker Score
No City or County Funding 45%
$2,300,000 in City Funding 62%
Table 2 Scenario Assumptions:
• Loss of San Mateo County capital funding and 9 Project Based Vouchers, which are the terms of the conditional commitment letter the County provided if the project is not awarded HCD’s Multifamily Housing Program funds.
• With the loss of San Mateo County’s 9 project-based vouchers, the 9 units set-aside at 30% AMI are increased to 50% AMI (Very Low Income) to help the City meet its RHNA requirement to build housing for Very Low Income households.

Conclusion:
• A funding commitment of $2,300,000 from the city of Belmont will boost the Project’s 9% tax credit tiebreaker score from 45% to 62%.
• A tiebreaker of 45% would have been a winning tiebreaker score in only two of the last three 9% tax credit funding rounds.
• A tiebreaker score of 62% would have been the top tiebreaker score in two of the three last 9% tax credit funding rounds, and that score is also projected to be competitive enough to receive an award in the first round of 2022, while a 45% score would not receive an award. 33 Main Office - Department of Housing
264 Harbor Blvd., Building A Belmont, CA 94002-017
Housing Community Development
Tel: (650) 802-3332
Housing Authority of the County of San Mateo
Tel: (650) 802-3300
Board of Supervisors:

Dave Pine
Carole Groom
Don Horsley
Warren Slocum
David Canepa
Director: Raymond Hodges
Department of Housing website: www.smchousing.org • E-mail: [email protected] Ben Winter, Sr. Vice President
Business Development & Strategic Initiatives
LINC Housing Corporation
3590 Elm Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90807
RE: Revised Conditional Award Letter for Belmont Affordable Housing Approved Awards: $1,400,000 – Affordable Housing Funds 7.0 (Measure K) 18 Project Based Vouchers (HACSM)
On April 20, 2022, representatives from LINC Housing, City of Belmont, and County of San Mateo met to discuss the overall status of the Belmont Affordable Housing project (“Project”). As a result of that meeting, the County has determined that the project may retain the $1,400,000 Measure K award and 18 Project Based Vouchers so long as the Project meets both of the following conditions:

1. By June 2022 SuperNOFA deadline, the City of Belmont (“City”) shall make a determination on the Project’s eligibility for streamlined ministerial approval processing under Senate Bill 35 (SB-35).
a. LINC shall provide the County a written confirmation of the determination within five (5) business days of said determination. If the project is eligible for SB-35, the written confirmation shall also include a timeline of the new entitlements approval schedule under SB-35.

2. By June 2022 SuperNOFA deadline, submit an application to the Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) under the Multifamily Finance Super NOFA. a. LINC shall provide a copy of the full application to County within five (5) business days of said submission.

The Measure K award of $1.4MM and the 18 Project Based Vouchers will be immediately rescinded if the Project fails to meet conditions 1 or 2 stated above. Should the Measure K award be rescinded, LINC is encouraged to reapply to the County’s Affordable Housing Fund NOFA. Any future award of Measure K funds and/or Project Based Vouchers is not guaranteed. The County also reserves the right to modify said conditions and will notify LINC and the City of any such modifications.

3. By June 2022 SuperNOFA deadline, if the Project is determined ineligible for SB-35, County shall rescind its award of $1.4MM in Measure K funds and rescind nine (9) vouches from its project-based voucher award to the Project.

4. By approximately November 2022, and upon State’s announcement of MHP awards, if the Project does not receive an MHP award, County shall rescind its award of $1.4MM in Measure K funds and rescind nine (9) vouches from its project-based voucher award to the Project.
34 Further, County will not execute an agreement for the $1.4MM Measure K award until the following condition is met:

5. LINC and the City of Belmont finalize a financial commitment, if any, from the City to the Project.
a. Once financial commitment from the City is finalized, if any, LINC to send a revised proforma, if applicable, to the County for review and approval. Should the City make a financial commitment to the Project, the County reserves the right to adjust its award of $1.4MM after review of the additional subsidy from the City.

Please sign and return the Acknowledgement below by June 1, 2022 to Barbara Deffenderfer at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Babs Deffenderfer
HCD Supervisor
Attachment: Measure K ($1,400,000) Award Letter, issued October 8, 2019 35 36
Site A Program Summary
Address: 900 El Camino Real
Belmont, CA 94002
Zone: Village Core, Belmont Village Specific Plan (BVSP) C2
Land Use: Commercial Residential
Lot Area: 8,415 sf (0.193 acre)
Floor Area Ratio: 2.0 Base

3.23 w/ 61.5% bonus via a Sec. 65915(e) waiver request = 27,180 sf FAR proposed 3.23
Floor Area proposed: 27,177 sf
Unit Mix Provided
1 Bedroom 14
2 Bedroom 4
3 Bedroom 6
Total 24 DU
Parking Req Provided
Residential 0***** 7+1EV
***** Per the SB-35 state streamlining law (CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4(e)(1)) “a local government… shall not impose automobile parking standards for a streamlined development… located within one-half mile of public transit.”
Bike Parking
Short term (class2) 2 2
Long term (class1) (1 per 5DU) 5 5
Site B Program Summary
Address: 876, 884, 898 El Camino Real
Belmont, CA 94002
Zone: Village Core, Belmont Village Specific Plan (BVSP) C3
Land Use: Commercial Residential
Lot Area: 5,035 sf (0.116 acre)
Floor Area Ratio: 2.0 Base

3.23 w/ 61.5% bonus via a Sec. 65915(e) waiver request= 16,263 sf FAR proposed 3.21
Floor Area proposed: 16,170 sf
Unit Mix Provided
1 Bedroom 4
2 Bedroom 5
3 Bedroom 4
Total 13 DU
Parking Req Provided
Residential 0***** 3+1Manager's space
***** Per the SB-35 state streamlining law (CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4(e)(1)) “a local government… shall not impose automobile parking standards for a streamlined development… located within one-half mile of public transit.”
Bike Parking
Short term (class2) 2 2
Long term (class1) (1 per 5DU) 3 3
Sites A & B Program Summary
Lot Area Total: 13,450 sf
FAR allowed (with Bonus***): 3.23
Floor Area allowed: 43,443 sf
FAR proposed: 3.223
Floor Area proposed: 43,347 sf****
Site A 27,177 sf
Site B 16,170 sf
*** 61.5% bonus via a Sec. 65915(e) waiver request
**** Excluding garage (per BVSP, page 2-15)
Unit Mix Provided
1 Bedroom (@ 600 nsf) 18 (48.6%)
2 Bedroom (@ 792 nsf) 9 (24.4%)
3 Bedroom (@ 1007 nsf) 10 (27.0%)
Total 37 DU
Parking Req Provided
Residential 0***** 10+1EV+1Manager's space
***** Per the SB-35 state streamlining law (CA Gov Code Sec. 65913.4(e)(1)) “a local government… shall not impose automobile parking standards for a streamlined development… located within one-half mile of public transit.”
Bike Parkings
Short term (class2) 4 4
Long term (class1) 8 8
Note:

Refer to zoning compliance tables on A01 for additional information.

A00 COVER SHEET
A01 ZONING COMPLIANCE
A02 SITE PLAN
A03 LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN
A04 LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN
A05 LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN
A06 LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN
A07 LEVEL 5 FLOOR PLAN
A08 ROOF LEVEL PLAN
A09 BUILDING SECTIONS
A10 BUILDING STREET ELEVATIONS
A11 BUILDING ELEVATIONS
A12 SAMPLE UNIT PLANS
A13 COLORS AND MATERIALS
A14 SITE PHOTOS
A15 SITE PHOTOS

PROJECT SITE
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A00

COVER SHEET
December 13, 2021

PROJECT INFORMATION

SHEET INDEX

CONTEXT MAP

FLOOR AREA BUILDING A

LEVEL AREA
LEVEL 1 2,488 SF
LEVEL 2 6,032 SF
LEVEL 3 6,242 SF
LEVEL 4 6,431 SF
LEVEL 5 5,984 SF
FLOOR AREA 27,177 SF

FLOOR AREA BUILDING B

LEVEL AREA
LEVEL 1 2,661 SF
LEVEL 2 3,443 SF
LEVEL 3 3,459 SF
LEVEL 4 3,459 SF
LEVEL 5 3,148 SF
FLOOR AREA 16,170 SF

FLOOR AREA SUMMARY
Floor area is determined by the area taken from the outside surface of exterior walls per the Belmont Village Specific Plan page 4-22; Balconies are not include in the area per the City of Belmont Zoning Ordinace Definition of "Floor Area, Gross"

2.60; Garages are not included per the Belmont Village Specific Plan page 4-22.

FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES

1. All buildings shall be provided with a Knox Key-Lock Box. The approved location shall also be clearly indicated on the project plans. Please contact Fire Department to determine an approved location for its installation.

2. Passive smoke control shall be provided for all buildings greater than four stories or 40 feet in height. All stair shaft doors shall be self-closing with smoke seals. All cross-corridor doors (these may be on hold-open magnets) shall be provided with smoke seals. Said doors shall be fire-rated assemblies.

3. The applicant must install infrastructure, including conduit and subpanel, for possible installation of Emergency Responder Radio Coverage (ERRC) components. This determination will be made by third party special inspection and testing, which will be required prior to occupancy to determine the need for ERRC installation.

4. If the proposed roof elevation is different by 3 feet or more, and where the slope is at or exceeds 1-inch riser over 4- inch run stationary, interconnected ladder and footpath systems to the roof top shall be provided on any plans submitted for a building permit. Please submit the design of these ladders for review and approval of the Fire Code Official.

5. All buildings shall be provided with an Automatic Fire Extinguishing System. A NFPA 13 fire sprinkler system is required.
37 (Active Use- 21.6%)
14' - 2 1/2"
(Non-active Use- 78.4%)
51' - 7 1/2"
(Setback < 10'- 78.7%)
51' - 10"
(Setback > 10'- 21.3%)
14' - 0"
21' - 4"
(Recess)
12' - 1" 22' - 11"
(Recess)
10' - 3"
66' - 7" (Frontage Length)
65' - 10" (Frontage Length)
Limitations on Blank Walls- 1' recess @ 33.5%
Ground Floor Active Uses
Build to Line / Min % of Front Facade within 10' of sidewalk 65' - 10" (Frontage Length)
1' - 0" 8' - 1" 7' - 6"
Ground Floor Transparency- Continuous Plane No Opening
2' - 6"
7' - 0"
(Different Planes)
14' - 0"
Ground Floor
Transparency
Datum
(Alternative Through Design Review Req)
34' - 7"
31' - 2 1/2" (Non-active Use- 47%) 33' - 11" (Active Use- 53%) (Recess)
30' - 0" 37' - 5"
67' - 5" (Frontage Length)
Limitations on Blank Walls- 1' recess @ 44.5%
Ground Floor Active Uses
Build to Line / Min % of Front Facade within 10' of sidewalk Ground Floor Transparency- Continuous Plane No Opening
65' - 1 1/2" (Frontage Length)
65' - 1 1/2" (Frontage Length)
(Setback < 10'- 100%)
65' - 1 1/2"
4' - 8" 1' - 0"
Ground Floor
Transparency
Datum
7' - 8" 1' - 10" 1' - 10" 2' - 5" 7' - 0" 2' - 7" 1' - 7" 1' - 7" 2' - 7" 1' - 0" 1' - 0" 2' - 11" 6' - 11" 4' - 0" 2' - 7" (Setback < 10'- 89.4%)
61' - 5"
(Setback < 10'- 10.6%)
7' - 3"
Limitations on Blank Walls- 1' recess @ 47.0%
Wall Area- 3780 sf
Openings with 1' recess x 5' wdith (Diagonal Lines)- 1778 sf Percent of Openings with 1' recess x 5' width= 47.0%
Limitations on Blank Walls- 1' recess @ 26.6%
Wall Area- 2267 sf
Openings with 1' recess x 5' wdith (Diagonal Lines)- 604 sf Percent of Openings with 1' recess x 5' width= 26.6%
Ground Floor Active Uses- Not Required on El Camino Real Ground Floor Active Uses - Not Required on El Camino Real Build to Line / Min % of Front Facade within 10' of sidewalk Build to Line / Min % of Front Facade within 10' of sidewalk Ground Floor Transparency- Coninuous Plane No Opening Ground Floor Transparency- Coninuous Plane No Opening 68' - 8" (Frontage Length)
Build to Line: Design
Review Req for
Pedestrian Access
1' - 6"
113' - 9" (Frontage Length)
(Setback < 10'- 100%)
113' - 9"
5' - 0" 5' - 0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A01

ZONING COMPLIANCE
December 13, 2021
Zoning Diagrams Outdoor Living Area Zoning Compliance
38 A10
1 2 A10 3

EL CAMINO REAL
HIL
L
S
T
R
E
E
T

EASEMENT

TO BELMONT STATION UNDERPASS
SITE B

PROPOSED

BUILDING B
5 STORY

MIXED-USE
SITE A

PROPOSED

BUILDING A
5 STORY

MIXED-USE

BELMONT STATION PARKING

PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE

EXISTING

BUILDING
1 STORY

EXISTING

BUILDING
2 STORY

EXISTING

BUILDING
2 STORY

EXISTING

BUILDING
1 STORY

EXISTING

BUILDING
2 STORY

EXISTING

BUILDING
1 STORY

LANSCAPED
OPEN
SPACE

LANSCAPED

OPEN SPACE

GORDON AVE
± 70' - 0" ± 120' - 0"
9' - 0".
± 120' - 6"
±
74' - 2"
±
7 0' - 0"
±
7 0' - 0"
±
7 0' - 4
EXISTING 1
"
STORY

BUILDING

OUTLINE

EXISTING
2 STORY

BUILDING

OUTLINE

EXISTING
1 STORY

BUILDING

OUTLINE
SOLAR
SOLAR
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
± 69' - 10"
±19' - 7"

EXISTING FIRE

HYDRANT

GROUND FLR

FOOTPRINT

GROUND FLR

FOOTPRINT

STAIR ROOF
ACCESS

STAIR ROOF
ACCESS
2 0' - 0"
7' - 6".

A01
3 2 A01 1

NEW FIRE

HYDRANT

SIDEWALK
12' - 0".

TO BLDG
16' - 9"

SIDEWALK
12' - 6"

SIDEWALK
12' - 6".

EASEMENT
2' - 0".

EASEMENT
2' - 0"
0 8' 16' 32' 64'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/16" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A02

SITE PLAN
December 13, 2021
39 UP
UP
A10
1 A10 3
706 SF

COMMUNITY ROOM
95 SF
OFFICE
457 SF
LOBBY
238 SF

TRASH-RECYCLE
42 SF

FIRE CMND
116 SF

UTILITY
543 SF
OFFICE
1020 SF
UNIT C3
3BR
126 SF
TRASH
385 SF
LOBBY
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
BIKE

LOCKERS
(3)
BIKE LOCKERS (3)

ACCESSIBLE
6 ACCESSIBLE
4 5 EV
7 1 2 3
235 SF

UTILITY

EL CAMINO REAL
HIL
L
ST

EASEMENT
MAIL
MAIL

PLANTER
1' - 0" 9' - 0" 8' - 0" 8' - 6"
64 SF

RESTROOM
33 SF
CLOSET

TRNSFRMR
PAD
28' - 4 1/2" 24' - 5" 8' - 6 1/2" 52' - 10"
5' - 0 7/8" 6" 114' - 2"
3' - 0"
14' - 0" 7' - 6" 21' - 6" 11' - 1 1/2" 11' - 2 1/2" 6"
1' - 0"
3 1/8"
3' - 1 3/8" 65' - 10" 1' - 2 3/8"
13' - 0" 106' - 8 1/8"
2 7/8" 119' - 8 1/8" 7 1/8"
65' - 10"
7' - 0 1/2" 21' - 10" 7' - 2" 8' - 10" 7' - 9" 12' - 8 1/2" 10' - 9" 33' - 4 1/2" 18' - 0" 24' - 0"20' - 0" 1' - 0" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 1' - 0" 1' - 0" 8' - 6 1/2" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 1' - 0" 1' - 0" 9' - 0" 8' - 0" 9' - 0" 1' - 0" 18' - 0"
8' - 6" 1' - 0"
1 2 3
4 PLANTER
96 SF

LAUNDRY
184 SF

UTILITY
115 SF
UTILITY 19' - 0"
1' - 0" 8' - 6" 8' - 6" 9' - 6"
45' - 4 1/2" 16' - 0 1/2"
7' - 3 1/4" 61' - 5" 1' - 3 7/8"
29' - 3" 28' - 3" 9' - 11"
67' - 5" 1' - 4 7/8" 1' - 0"
24' - 3" 18' - 10 1/2"
19' - 10" 5' - 10 1/2" 2' - 10 3/4"
8 1/2" 23' - 1" 1' - 11"
21' - 8 1/2" 9' - 6" 8' - 2 1/2"
2' - 10 3/4"
16' - 0" 8' - 3"
A11
1 8' - 4 1/2"
63 SF
DECK

SIDEWALK
12' - 0".

SIDEWALK
12' - 6".

A01
3 2 A01 1
62 SF

FIRE CMND
EA
SEMENT
2' - 0"
± 3' - 1 1/4"
± 5' - 7 5/8"
EA
SEMENT
2' - 0".

COMPACT COMPACT

COMPACT
BIKE
LOCKERS (2)
SHORT

TERM BIKE
SPACES (2)
SHORT

TERM BIKE
SPACES (2)
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A03
LEVEL 1 FLOOR PLAN
December 13, 2021
40 DN
UP
DN
A10
1 A10 3
681 SF
UNIT A3
1BR
610 SF
UNIT A1
1BR
610 SF
UNIT A1
1BR
641 SF
UNIT A2
1BR
776 SF
UNIT B1
2BR
963 SF
UNIT C1
3BR
17 SF
TRASH
1043 SF
UNIT C4
3BR
771 SF
UNIT B2
2BR
58 SF
TRASH
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
67' - 5"
67 SF
DECK
61 SF
DECK
61 SF
DECK
67 SF
DECK
56 SF
DECK
13' - 4 3/8" 28' - 9 1/2" 8' - 5 1/2" 7' - 9" 7' - 5 1/2" 13' - 3 1/2" 11' - 8 1/2" 12' - 2 1/2" 12' - 9 1/2" 3' - 9"
5' - 8 1/2" 15' - 3" 4 1/2" 12' - 1" 21' - 11" 11' - 3" 14' - 0 1/2" 24' - 6 1/2" 15' - 11 1/2" 13' - 11" 34' - 1" 13' - 2 7/8" 4' - 8 5/8"
119' - 6 7/8" 5 1/8"
66' - 7" 3' - 3"
102' - 6 1/2"
33' - 10" 27' - 6 1/2" 3' - 0"
64' - 4 1/2" 1 3/8" 5' - 7 7/8"
27' - 10 1/2"
11' - 7" 12' - 0" 11' - 8"
1' - 8 1/2"
5' - 6" 10' - 10" 7' - 6 1/2" 7' - 5 1/2"
5' - 2" 5' - 6"
20' - 11 1/2" 45' - 7 1/2"
23' - 8" 25' - 0" 25' - 0"
1' - 6" 5' - 7 1/2"
143 SF
DECK
957 SF

OUTDOOR LIVING
1' - 0" 45' - 4 1/2" 17' - 6" 5' - 1"
63' - 10 1/2"
1' - 0" 27' - 0"
42' - 1 7/8"
3' - 6" 20' - 8" 1" 18' - 10 1/2"
5' - 6"
1' - 6" 18' - 5" 8' - 5" 34' - 10" 4' - 3"
21' - 11" 8' - 0 1/2" 37' - 5 1/8"
67' - 4 5/8" 2' - 7 1/4
2 "
' - 9"
20' - 8"
6' - 3 1/4"
1' - 4 7/8" 1' - 0"
CL CL
514 SF
UNIT A6
1BR
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
588 SF

OUTDOOR LIVING
61 SF
DECK
56 SF
DECK
71 SF
DECK
Ground Floor
Footprint
Ground Floor
Footprint
A01
3 2 A01 1
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A04
LEVEL 2 FLOOR PLAN
December 13, 2021
41 UP
DN
A10
1 A10 3
963 SF
UNIT C1
3BR
776 SF
UNIT B1
2BR
641 SF
UNIT A2
1BR
614 SF
UNIT A2-1
1BR
614 SF
UNIT A2-1
1BR
684 SF
UNIT A4
1BR
17 SF
TRASH
1043 SF
UNIT C4
3BR
771 SF
UNIT B2
2BR
58 SF

TRASH CL
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
201 SF

OUTDOOR LIVING
96 SF
Laundry
55 SF
DECK
57 SF
DECK
62 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
56 SF
DECK
13' - 9 7/8" 10' - 6 1/2" 17' - 9 1/2" 8' - 5 1/2" 7' - 9" 7' - 5 1/2" 13' - 9" 11' - 3" 12' - 8" 12' - 4" 20' - 11 1/2" 4 1/2" 12' - 1" 21' - 11" 11' - 3"
14' - 0 1/2" 24' - 6 1/2" 15' - 11 1/2" 13' - 11" 34' - 1" 13' - 2 7/8" 4' - 8 5/8"
115' - 9 7/8" 4' - 2 1/8"
102' - 6 1/2"
33' - 10" 16' - 11 1/2" 13' - 7"
64' - 4 1/2" 1 3/8" 5' - 7 7/8"
27' - 10 1/2"
11' - 7" 12' - 0" 11' - 8" 5' - 6" 10' - 10" 7' - 6 1/2" 7' - 5 1/2" 5' - 2" 5' - 6"
42' - 1 55/64" 23' - 8" 25' - 0" 25' - 0"
20' - 11 1/2" 45' - 7 1/2"
66' - 7" 3' - 3"
1' - 6" 5' - 7 1/2"
4' - 6" 7' - 6 1/2" 15' - 10"
1' - 0" 45' - 4 1/2" 17' - 6" 5' - 1"
63' - 10 1/2"
1' - 0" 27' - 0"
3' - 6" 20' - 8" 1" 18' - 10 1/2"
5' - 6"
1' - 6" 18' - 5" 8' - 5" 34' - 10" 4' - 3"
21' - 11" 8' - 0 1/2" 37' - 5 1/8"
1' - 0"
2' - 9"
20' - 8"
6' - 3 1/4"
67' - 5" 1' - 4 7/8"
CL
514 SF
UNIT A6
1BR
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
56 SF
DECK
61 SF
DECK
67 SF
DECK
Ground Floor
Footprint
Ground Floor
Footprint
A01
3 2 A01 1
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A05
LEVEL 3 FLOOR PLAN
December 13, 2021
42 UP
DN
UP
A10
1 A10 3
681 SF
UNIT A3
1BR
776 SF
UNIT B1
2BR
963 SF
UNIT C1
3BR
1035 SF
UNIT C2
3BR
610 SF
UNIT A1
1BR
610 SF
UNIT A1
1BR
1043 SF
UNIT C4
3BR
514 SF
UNIT A6
1BR
771 SF
UNIT B2
2BR
58 SF
TRASH
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
67 SF
DECK
61 SF
DECK
67 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
56 SF
DECK
13' - 4 3/8" 28' - 9 1/2" 8' - 5 1/2" 7' - 9" 7' - 11" 12' - 10" 11' - 8 1/2" 12' - 2 1/2" 12' - 9 1/2" 5' - 8 1/2" 15' - 3" 4 1/2" 12' - 1" 21' - 11" 11' - 3" 13' - 2 7/8" 4' - 8 5/8"
66' - 7" 3' - 3"
102' - 6 1/2"
33' - 10"
64' - 4 1/2" 1 3/8" 5' - 7 7/8"
11' - 7" 12' - 0" 11' - 8"
1' - 8 1/2"
5' - 6" 10' - 10" 7' - 6 1/2" 7' - 5 1/2"
5' - 2" 5' - 6"
20' - 11 1/2" 45' - 7 1/2"
23' - 8" 25' - 0" 25' - 0"
1' - 6"
115' - 9 7/8" 4' - 2 1/8"
30' - 6 1/2"
14' - 0 1/2" 24' - 6 1/2" 15' - 11 1/2" 48' - 0"
14' - 4 1/2" 20' - 4 1/2" 13' - 3"
27' - 10 1/2"
4' - 6" 23' - 4 1/2"
42' - 1 7/8"
1' - 0" 45' - 4 1/2" 17' - 6" 5' - 1"
63' - 10 1/2"
1' - 0" 27' - 0"
20' - 8" 1" 18' - 10 1/2"
5' - 6"
18' - 5" 8' - 5" 34' - 10" 4' - 3"
8' - 0 1/2" 37' - 5 1/8"
2' - 9"
20' - 8"
6' - 3 1/4"
65' - 11" 1' - 0" 2' - 10 7/8"
3' - 6"
18' - 5" 3' - 6"
CL CL
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
56 SF
DECK
61 SF
DECK
71 SF
DECK
Ground Floor
Footprint
Ground Floor
Footprint
A01
3 2 A01 1
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A06
LEVEL 4 FLOOR PLAN
December 13, 2021
43 DN
DN
A10
1 A10 3
597 SF
UNIT A2-2
1BR
1035 SF
UNIT C2
3BR
963 SF
UNIT C1
3BR
578 SF
UNIT A5
1BR
776 SF
UNIT B1
2BR
937 SF
UNIT B3
2BR
502 SF
UNIT A7
1BR
771 SF
UNIT B2
2BR
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
597 SF
UNIT A2-2
1BR
56 SF
DECK
63 SF
DECK
4' - 6 3/8"
4' - 0" 16' - 11 1/2" 4 1/2" 12' - 1" 21' - 4 1/2" 6 1/2" 11' - 3" 13' - 2 7/8" 4' - 8 5/8"
66' - 7" 3' - 3"
102' - 6 1/2"
33' - 10"
64' - 4 1/2" 1 3/8" 5' - 7 7/8"
11' - 7" 12' - 0" 11' - 8"
1' - 8 1/2"
5' - 6" 10' - 10" 7' - 6 1/2" 7' - 5 1/2"
5' - 2" 5' - 6"
20' - 11 1/2" 45' - 7 1/2"
37' - 7 1/2" 23' - 8" 1' - 0" 48' - 0" 1' - 0"
1' - 6"
30' - 6 1/2"
14' - 0 1/2" 24' - 6 1/2" 15' - 11 1/2" 48' - 0"
14' - 4 1/2" 20' - 4 1/2" 13' - 3"
27' - 10 1/2"
4' - 6" 23' - 4 1/2"
36' - 7 1/2" 9' - 5 1/2" 7' - 9" 7' - 5 1/2" 1' - 0" 24' - 0" 24' - 0" 5' - 2 1/8"
110' - 3 1/2"
CL CL
58 SF
TRASH
0" 4' - 7 7/8"
62' - 11 7/8"
5 1/2" 27' - 6 1/2"
20' - 8" 1" 18' - 10 1/2"
5' - 6"
18' - 5" 8' - 5" 34' - 10" 4' - 3"
8' - 0 1/2" 37' - 0"
2' - 9"
20' - 8"
6' - 8 3/4"
65' - 11" 1' - 0" 2' - 10 7/8"
3' - 6"
18' - 5" 3' - 6"
41 SF

STORAGE
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
189 SF
DECK
91 SF
DECK
Ground Floor
Footprint
Ground Floor
Footprint
A01
3 2 A01 1
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A07
LEVEL 5 FLOOR PLAN
December 13, 2021
44 A10
1 A10 3
3 A09
2 2
A09
4 A09
1 A09
SOLAR
SOLAR
2' - 0"
1' - 9"
A11
1 A11 3 2 A11
A01
3 2 A01 1
0 4' 8' 16' 32'
GRAPHIC SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A08

ROOF LEVEL PLAN
December 13, 2021
45 T ectoni Cp yright 207
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
11' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 12' - 0"
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
GARAGE
UNIT B2
UNIT B2
UNIT B2
UNIT B2

UTILITY

PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
11' - 0"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
11' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 12' - 0"
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
GARAGE
UNIT A2-2
UNIT A1
UNIT A2-1
UNIT A1
LOBBY

SIDEWALK WIDTH
12' - 10" TO 13' - 6" PROPERTY LINE
4' - 0" STEPBACK
RES
G
R

OUND FLR HGHT
12' - 0"

PROPERTY LINE
11' - 0"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
11' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 12' - 0"
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
GARAGE

PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE

SIDEWALK WIDTH
13' - 0" TO 16' - 9"
UNIT C3
UNIT C4
UNIT C4
UNIT C4
UNIT B3
3' - 8 1/2"
5' - 8 1/2" ± 2' - 7 3/4"
11' - 0"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
11' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 10' - 0" 12' - 0"
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
GARAGE
UNIT C2
UNIT C2
UNIT A2
UNIT B1 UNIT A2
UNIT B1
UNIT B1
UNIT C1 UNIT B1
UNIT C1
UNIT C1
UNIT C1

PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
11' - 0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A09

BUILDING SECTIONS
December 13, 2021
3 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING B SECTION 1
2 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING A SECTION 2
4 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING B SECTION 2
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
BUILDING A SECTION 1
46 LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
53' - 0" 3' - 6"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'

42.00'
LEVEL 5

32.00'
LEVEL 4

22.00'
LEVEL 3

12.00'
LEVEL 2
53' - 0" 3' - 6"53' - 0" 3' - 6"

53.00'
ROOF B

56.50'
T.O. PARAPET B
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A1 0

BUILDING STREET ELEVATIONS
December 13, 2021
2 1/8" = 1'-0"
Site B Hill Street Elevation
3 1/8" = 1'-0"
Site A Hill Street Elevation
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
El Camino Real Elevation
LEGEND:

1. Corrugated Metal Siding

2. Metal Panel System
3a. Stucco Color 1
3b. Stucco Color 2
3c. Stucco Color 3
3d. Stucco Color 4

4. Synthetic Wood Gaurdrail
5a. 3'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5b. 5'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5c. 2'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5d. 3'-0" x 4'-4" Window

6. Storefront Window

7. Wood look Aluminum Cladding

8. Metal Canopy

9. Concrete
NOTES:

1. Ground level windows along El Camino Real are
to have a min window transparency of 25%;
Ground level windows along Hill Street are to
have a min window transparency of 75%.

2. Provide a pattern and/or recess on the concrete
garage walls facing Hill Street.
3d 1 2
2 6
5a 5d
8 4
8 2 5a 1
4 8 4 7
5c 5a
5a
3a
3d
2 2 1
3a
5b
3c
4 3b
5b
4 5a
7 6 6
1 6
8 5a 1
3a
7 4
3c
5a
5b
4 5b
6 8
8 2
9 3a
3d
2 9
3a
47 LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'

ADJACENT BUILDING OUTLINE

42.00'
LEVEL 5

32.00'
LEVEL 4

22.00'
LEVEL 3

12.00'
LEVEL 2

53.00'
ROOF B

56.50'
T.O. PARAPET B
3' - 6" 53' - 0"3' - 6" 53' - 0"
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'

ADJACENT BUILDING OUTLINE
LEVEL 1

0.00'
LEVEL 2

12.00'
LEVEL 3

22.00'
LEVEL 4

32.00'
T.O. PARAPET

56.50'
LEVEL 5

42.00'
ROOF

53.00'

ADJACENT BUILDING OUTLINE
3' - 6" 53' - 0"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A1 1

BUILDING ELEVATIONS
December 13, 2021
5d 2 3a 5a
4 1 5b 8
3a
3b
5a
5a
1 1/8" = 1'-0"
South-West Elevation (Back)
3 1/8" = 1'-0"
Site B North-West Elevation 2 1/8" = 1'-0"
Site A South-East Elevation
4 LEGEND:

1. Corrugated Metal Siding

2. Metal Panel System
3a. Stucco Color 1
3b. Stucco Color 2
3c. Stucco Color 3
3d. Stucco Color 4

4. Synthetic Wood Gaurdrail
5a. 3'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5b. 5'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5c. 2'-0" x 6'-0" Window
5d. 3'-0" x 4'-4" Window

6. Storefront Window

7. Wood look Aluminum Cladding

8. Metal Canopy

9. Concrete
3a
Site A Building
Beyond
3a
9 9
5a 3a 2 3d 5a 1 2 3b 5b 3a
3c
3a
7 9
48 25' - 3 1/2" 5' - 8 1/2"

BEDROOM
10'-9" X 13'-3"

LIVING / DINING
11'-9" X 13'-2"
ENTRY
BATH

KITCHEN
CLOSET
DECK
13'-0" X 5'-0"
610 SF
UNIT A1
1BR
24' - 0"
LIVING
12'-0" X 13'-0" BEDROOM 1
11'-0" X 13'-0"
CLOSET BATH2
ENTRY

KITCHEN/
DINING
DECK
1043 SF
UNIT C4
3BR
BEDROOM 2
10'-0" X 11'-4"
BEDROOM 2
10'-0" X 11'-4"
BATH1
DECK
28' - 0"
46' - 4 1/2"

LIVING / DINING
12'-3" X 19'-9"
DECK
11'-9" X 5'-0"

KITCHEN
ENTRY
CLOSET
BEDROOM 2
10'-8" X 10'-3"
BEDROOM 1
10'-7" X 12'-0"
BATH
776 SF
UNIT B1
2BR
CLOSET
26' - 3"
35' - 3"
11' - 8" 12' - 0" 11' - 7"
24' - 6 1/2"

LIVING / DINING
12'-0" X 13'-0"

KITCHEN
ENTRY
BATH
CLOSET
CLOSET
BEDROOM 1
10'-11" X 11'-7"
BEDROOM 2
10'-0" X 10'-4"
771 SF
UNIT B2
2BR
CL
25' - 10"
34' - 10"
10' - 2" 24' - 8"
20' - 8"
BEDROOM 1
10'-0" X 10'-1"
BEDROOM 2
10'-0" X 10'-6"
BEDROOM 1
10'-10" X 10'-9"

KITCHEN /
DINING
LIVING
12'-0" X 13'-3"
DECK
12'-0" X 4'-6"
BATH 1
ENTRY
963 SF
UNIT C1
3BR
BATH 2
45' - 7 1/2"
27' - 11 1/2"
14' - 5" 14' - 2 7/8"
11' - 3" 21' - 11" 12' - 5 1/2"
©2018 Torti Gallas + Partners 601 West 5th Street, Suite 600, Los Angeles, CA 90071 213.607.0070

BELMONT AFFORDABLE HOUSING
A1 2

SAMPLE UNIT PLANS
December 13, 2021
1 1/4" = 1'-0"
UNIT A1
2 1/4" = 1'-0"
UNIT C4
3 1/4" = 1'-0"
UNIT B1
4 1/4" = 1'-0"
UNIT B2
5 1/4" = 1'-0"
UNIT C1
49