CITY OF FOSTER CITY
AND
FOSTER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 (AS AMENDED BY AB 361) WHICH AUTHORIZES TELECONFERENCED MEETINGS UNDER THE BROWN ACT DURING CERTAIN PROCLAIMED STATES OF EMERGENCY. THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA PROCLAIMED A STATE OF EMERGENCY RELATED TO COVID-19 ON MARCH 4, 2020. THIS TELECONFERENCED MEETING IS NECESSARY SO THAT THE CITY CAN CONDUCT ESSENTIAL BUSINESS AND IS PERMITTED UNDER GOVER NMENT CODE 54953 IN ORDER TO PROTECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OF ATTENDEES. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
THAT WISH TO ATTEND AND/OR PARTICIPATE IN A MEETING MAY DO SO IN PERSON OR BY
JOINING THE ZOOM MEETING
HTTPS://FOSTERCITY-ORG.ZOOM.US/J/83670901974 PUBLIC
COMMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED BOTH IN PERSON AND VIA ZOOM MEETING. ANY EMAILS SENT TO [email protected] WILL BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
Consistent with Government Code Section 54953, this City/District Meeting will be held via teleconference in addition to in person. City Council M embers, Planning Commissioners and staff will attend in person or via teleconference.
To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can observe the meeting from home or attend the meeting in person. Below is information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting.
To Attend the Meeting in Person:
• Location: 620 Foster City Blvd, Foster City, California, 94404
To Provide Public Comment in Person:
• Members of the public wishing to speak will be asked to fill out a Request to Speak Form. Forms will be accepted until the staff presentation on an agenda item ends, or until the public comment period on non- agenda items is closed. For special meetings, public comment is limited to item(s) on the agenda only.
To Observe the Meeting via Teleconference/Video Conference:
• To access the meeting by computer / smartphone, go to:
https://fostercity-org.zoom.us/j/83670901974
• To dial-in via phone:
1- 669-900-6833 or
1-408-638-0968
And enter Webinar ID: 836 7090 1974
To Participate in the Meeting by Providing Public Comment via Teleconference/Video Conference:
• During the Meeting: Live verbal public comments may be made by members of the public joining the meeting via Zoom. Zoom access information is provided above. Use the “raise hand” feature (for those joining by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”) during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address. The Zoom Host will call on people to speak by name provided or last 4 digits of phone number for dial-in attendees. Please clearly state your full name for the record at the start of your public comment.
1 Before the Meeting: Written public comments for the record may be submitted in advance by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting by email to: [email protected] and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments submitted by email should adhere to the following:
• Clearly indicate the Agenda Item No. or specify “Public” in the Subject Line for items not on the agenda
• Include the submitter’s full name (Recommended but not required)
Written public comments received by 4:00 p.m. the day of the meeting will be provided in their entirety to the City Council and Planning Commission prior to the meeting and will be made part of the written record but will not be read verbally at the meeting. Written public comments will be posted to the City’s website for review prior to the meeting.
AGENDA
Tuesday, November 15, 2022 6:30 PM
SPECIAL MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Jon Froomin, Sanjay Gehani, Sam Hindi, Patrick Sullivan, and Mayor Richa Awasthi
Planning Commissioners Charlie Bronitsky, Nicolas Haddad, Ravi Jagtiani, Phoebe Venkat, and Chair Evan Adams
3. PUBLIC
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.3(a), members of the public wishing to address the Council may do so, and the comments shall be limited to the Special Meeting notice topic(s). Speakers may join the Zoom meeting via the meeting link and using the “raise hand” feature and the Zoom host will call on people.
4. STUDY SESSION
4.1. Review Comments From the California Department of Housing and Community Development on the 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element Update and Discuss Revisions to Address Comments for Resubmittal – GP2020-0002
a) Staff Report
b) No Action - Comments Only
2 4.2. Overview of Zoning and General Plan Amendments and Modification of the Tenant Preferences for the Existing Unit Purchase Program Related to Implementation of the Housing Element Update – RZ2022-0003; RZ2022-0002 and GP2022-0001
a) Staff Report
b) No Action - Comments Only
5. ADJOURNMENT
The public is invited to attend.
Any attendee wishing special accommodations at the meeting should contact the City Clerk’s Department at (650) 286-3250 at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council or EMID Board regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda packet was distributed will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk Department at City Hall located at 610 Foster City Boulevard during normal business hours and at the meeting.
City Council meetings on FCTV on Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Channel 99:
LIVE every 1st and 3rd Monday of the month
REPLAY next day at 1:00 pm (that week only)
REPLAY Saturday at 5:00 pm (only on Saturday the week the actual meeting occurs) 3 DATE: November 15, 2022
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director Leslie Carmichael, Consulting Planner
Arly Cassidy Dolbakian, Consulting Planner
SUBJECT: REVIEW COMMENTS FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ON THE 2023-
2031 DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE AND DISCUSS
REVISIONS TO ADDRESS COMMENTS FOR RESUBMITTAL –
GP2020-0002
RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of this Study Session is to:
1. Review comments from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on the Draft Housing Element for 2023-2031.
2. Receive feedback and comments from the public, Planning Commission, and City Council on strategies for responding to HCD’s comments.
3. Provide comments to Staff on revisions to Housing Element to address comments from HCD for resubmittal.
The feedback received at the meeting will help staff prepare edits to the Draft Housing Element prior to resubmitting it to HCD for a second round of review.
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
At the May 17, 2022 Joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting, staff presented the Public Review Draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element and received feedback on the draft Element prior to finalizing it and submitting it to HCD for the first round of review. The City submitted the draft to HCD on July 5, 2022 for their required 90-day review. On September 20, 2022, the City had a call with HCD to discuss their preliminary comments, and on October 3, 2022 the City received a letter with HCD’s full comments on the draft Housing Element.
The focus of the November 15, 2022 Joint Study Session is to update the City Council, Planning Commission and the public on comments received from HCD, and to receive comments on revisions to be incorporated into the Draft Housing Element before it is resubmitted to HCD for their second round of review. After the initial review, each subsequent review period is 60 days.
NOTICING / PUBLIC OUTREACH
The public was advised of this Study Session in the following ways:
Public Posting Places – October 28, 2022
Foster City Website: www.fostercity.org – October 28, 2022 Housing Element Update Website: https://engagefostercity.org/housing- element -
Email Notification to HOAs – October 31, 2022
Email Notification to listserves for Housing Element, Planning, Affordable Housing Updates, AHOZ/Multi-Family Design Standards, Gilead Project, Harbor Cove, Land Use and Circulation Update, Lantern Cove Apartments, and News/Press Release – October 31, 2022 ¼ page ad in the Foster City Islander – November 2, 2022 Press release dated October 26, 2022
Public Comments Received
Comments received on the Draft Housing Element prior to the July 5, 2022 submittal of the HCD Draft are included in Appendix F of the Draft Housing Element, specifically on pages F-45 through F-136.
5 As of November 9, 2022, three letters have been received since submittal of the HCD draft on July 5, 2022. These are attached, including:
Letter from HCD dated October 3, 2022 (Attachment 1)
Letter from Bay Area Housing Element Working Group, dated October 13, 2022 (Attachment 2)
Letter from San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, dated November 9, 2022
BACKGROUND
California Government Code Section 65580-65589.8 requires local jurisdictions to update the Housing Element of their General Plan every eight years to adequately plan for the regional housing needs of residents of all income groups. Housing Elements are required to contain a series of goals, policies and implementing programs that are intended to promote housing production within a community. These goals, policies and programs are required to be accompanied by a list of eligible land resources, the Sites Inventory, identified for residential development to accommodate the State- mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA.
A community’s RHNA represents the number of housing units at various income levels that are needed to meet the community’s housing needs during the eight-year planning period. RHNA numbers are determined by a methodology established by the State of California’s Department of Finance (DOF) and Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). HCD then assigns RHNA numbers to each region of the State. In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) receives HCD’s assignments and determines each local jurisdiction’s fair share of housing units. Each jurisdiction must then update the Housing Element to show the locations where future housing can be built and discuss strategies necessary to meet the community’s housing needs.
The existing Housing Element for the 2015-2023 Planning Period covers the fifth cycle of the RHNA process, referenced as RHNA 5; the proposed Draft Housing Element 2023-2031 covers the sixth cycle, referenced as RHNA 6.
The Foster City RHNA 6 Housing Element Update 2023-2031 process began in spring 2021 with community outreach using a variety of methods, including 6 a project website (https://engagefostercity.org/housing-element) with updates, timelines, surveys, and document links. A Public Review Draft was published in spring 2022 and was the subject of public meetings, including two Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Sessions on April 21, 2022 and May 7, 2022. The 30-day public comment period on the Public Review Draft was open from May 4, 2022 to June 3, 2022.
At the previous May 17, 2022 Joint Study Session staff updated the City Council, Planning Commission and the public on changes incorporated in the Public Review Draft, requested direction on a few items, and received other final comments and direction that were incorporated into the Draft Housing Element before submittal of the Draft to HCD for their 90-day review.
A revised Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD on July 5, 2022 for their 90-day review. On September 20, 2022, the City had a call with HCD to discuss their preliminary comments. The City received a comment letter from HCD on October 3, 2022, which recommends revisions before a revised draft is submitted for review. The comment letter included detailed suggestions which can be grouped into the following seven categories:
1. Comments requesting additional evaluation of the previous Housing Element
2. Comments requesting additional analysis of housing needs and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) issues
3. Comments requesting additional analysis related to the Sites Inventory
4. Comments requesting additional analysis of zoning to meet a variety of housing needs and constraints
5. Changes to Implementation Programs
6. Quantified Objectives
7. Public Participation
Any revisions to the Draft Housing Element must be posted for public review for a minimum of seven (7) days prior to submitting a revised Draft Housing Element to HCD.
The deadline for adoption of housing elements for the ABAG region is January 31, 2023. There has been some confusion around a 120-day “grace period” following the due date. To be clear, there is no grace period with regards to housing element compliance. Instead, the 120-day period after the deadline refers only to required rezonings. Jurisdictions with housing 7 elements adopted and found to be in compliance by HCD on or before May 31, 2023 (120 days after the deadline) have up to three years to complete any rezoning required to accommodate their RHNA numbers; jurisdictions that adopt their housing elements after the May 31 date must complete any required rezonings within one year of the January 31st deadline. There is an additional requirement for rezonings to accommodate the lower income RHNA to be completed by January 31, 2023 or be subject to a “by-right” process.
Communities that fail to be in compliance by January 31, 2023, may face adverse consequences. Consequences could include loss of local control, implementation of the “builder’s remedy,” and loss of grant funding for affordable housing and transportation. The “builder’s remedy,” arises from the Housing Accountability Act (1) and generally provides that the City cannot deny a housing development project with at least 20 percent of units affordable to lower income households on the basis that the project is inconsistent with the General Plan and/or the zoning if the City does not have a legally adequate housing element (see Attachment 4, The “Builder’s Remedy” and Housing Elements).
However, the “Builder’s Remedy” only applies to housing projects that include one of the following:
Emergency Shelters;
20% of the total units sold or rented to lower income households; 100% of the units sold or rented to moderate income households; or 100% of the units sold or rented to middle income households (earning no more than 150% of median income).
HCD approval is not required for a housing element to be in substantial compliance with State law; a jurisdiction may adopt its own findings regarding why the housing element is substantially compliant and may also choose to adopt the Housing Element before final HCD approval.
The timing for adoption of the Housing Element is dependent on both the preparation of the Housing Element itself and also the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) being prepared for the Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update. City staff and consultants are making every effort to ensure that the Housing Element is adopted as close to January 31, 2023 as possible. Due to a number of factors, primarily additional time needed to prepare the technical background reports, the timeline for preparation and 8 publication of the Draft EIR on the Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update has been extended. The current timeline includes publication of a Draft EIR in December for a 45-day review period, followed by preparation of a Final EIR with responses to comments. This would allow the City to proceed with a Planning Commission public hearing on the Draft Housing Element in March 2023 and City Council public hearing and adoption of the Final Housing Element in April 2023.
Several other cities in San Mateo County and other parts of the Bay Area appear to be in a similar situation, making it unlikely for them to be able to adopt a housing element by January 31, 2023, either due to preparation of environmental documents or the timing of their first submittal to HCD. Some did not submit their first draft to HCD until October which means that they will get HCD comments only in January (after the 90-day period), including the cities of Brisbane, East Palo Alto, Hillsborough, Millbrae, and San Carlos.
Some have yet to submit a first draft to HCD, including Burlingame, Daly City, Half Moon Bay, and Pacifica. Redwood City and Menlo Park are preparing EIRs but have not yet published the Draft EIR.
ANALYSIS
HCD Comments
On September 20, 2022, staff had a phone call with HCD to discuss their preliminary comments on the Draft Housing Element. The HCD reviewer described their initial findings and allowed staff to ask clarifying questions and provide additional information, which helped refine their final comment letter.
On October 3, 2022, the City received official comments from HCD following their review of the Draft Housing Element submitted on July 5, 2022 (Attachment 1). The comments include a cover letter with basic process related requirements and an appendix with the specific comments on Foster City’s Draft Housing Element.
The cover letter and one other comment on page 11 of the Appendix to the letter reference deadlines for adoption of the Housing Element and zoning actions:
January 31, 2023 Statutory deadline for adoption of Housing Element
January 31, 2023 If rezoning for the lower-income RHNA is not completed by January 31, 2023, then the element must include a 9 program to rezone sites with appropriate zoning and development standards, i.e., “by right” approval. (see comment on H-D-1-b) May 31, 2023 End of 120 Days from statutory deadline – if Housing Element is not adopted, then the jurisdiction has one year to complete any rezonings to accommodate the lower-income RHNA. January 31, 2024 If a jurisdiction fails to adopt a compliant housing element within one year of the statutory deadline, then rezoning to provide sites must be completed prior to certification by HCD.
The Appendix to the HCD letter contains the specific comments on Foster City’s Draft Housing Element.
Since receiving HCD’s comment letter, City staff has strategized on its responses with Root Policy Research (RPR), a community planning and research firm working with San Mateo County jurisdictions to provide data and support during the housing element update process. RPR is assisting the City by providing additional data and information, especially related to comments on the Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) topics. While this material will not be ready in time to include in this staff report, it will be provided as a supplemental packet prior to the meeting and posted on the City’s website. The table below summarizes the City’s proposed revisions in response to HCD’s comments.
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 19
20 21
22 23
24 25
26 27
28 29
30 31
32 33
34 35
36 Sites Inventory
Additional information on some of the sites in the Sites Inventory and the proposed change to the CO Commercial Office District is provided below for Planning Commission/City Council discussion and confirmation of the proposed approach.
1010 Metro Center Boulevard (former OSH site)
The direction provided at the Joint Study Session on May 17, 2022 was to allow either commercial or mixed commercial/residential use at 1010 Metro Center Boulevard. Staff has had additional conversations with the property owner, Vincent Curci, who has reiterated his request to have the allowed uses on the site include commercial, residential, or mixed use. (Mr. Curci’s letter is on pages F-65-66 of Appendix F.)
The July 5, 2022 Draft Housing Element includes the following in Program H- D-1-b:
(4) Rezone Commercial Housing Opportunity Site to Allow Mixed-Use.
Concurrent with or prior to adoption of this Housing Element, rezone the Housing Opportunity Site currently developed with commercial uses to allow mixed-use. This includes the 1010 Metro Center Boulevard site. 37 (5) Mixed-Use Densities. The City will amend the Zoning regulations for the C-2 District, CO District, and others as necessary, and General Plan Land Use Designations for Town Center Commercial, Civic Center Mixed Use, and other land use designations as appropriate, to establish allowed densities in mixed use zoning districts. These amendments will include a housing overlay to allow mixed use on specific sites within the zoning district, including but not limited to 1291-1295 East Hillsdale Boulevard.
Target: Upon Housing Element Adoption Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
1010 Metro Center Boulevard is designated Town Center Commercial on the General Plan Land Use Map. The existing description of Town Center Commercial in the General Plan does not mention residential uses, even though City Homes East and West, City Park Townhomes, and Metro Senior Apartments have been approved within this area. As part of the General Plan Amendment related to the Parkside Towers proposal (reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 and scheduled for City Council consideration on December 5, 2021, the description of the Town Center Commercial Land Use Designation in the General Plan is proposed to be amended to reference the mix of uses allowed including residential and to clarify the allowed density as follows:
Town Center Commercial. This designation is reserved for the area located northwest of East Hillsdale Boulevard, bounded by Foster City Boulevard to the north and State Route 92 to the west. The area includes a 100-acre development known as Metro Center, in addition to Parkside Towers and other office developments. The Town Center area is intended to serve as Foster City’s downtown core and allows for a mix of uses, including residential, commercial office, retail, service and compatible Research and Development (R&D). R&D uses are considered compatible with this designation if project design (i.e., site planning, architecture, and landscape architecture) is consistent with nearby uses and functional or operational characteristics of a hazardous or nuisance nature can be mitigated or reduced to an acceptable level through design control.
Generally, R&D covers facilities for industrial, scientific, or technological research, product design, prototype production, development, and testing.
The highest intensity uses in the City would be allowed, with Floor Area Ratios (FAR) for office/R&D developments ranging from .55 to 2.0 FAR.
Town Center office developments located outside Metro Center, have 38 lower FARs which range from 0.18 to 1.5 FAR. Residential developments range from Cityhomes townhouses at 15 units per acre to Metro Senior Apartments at 60 units per acre.
The C-2 General Business zoning designation already allows residential uses as a conditional use (requiring a conditional use permit). A zoning text amendment would establish minimum and maximum densities and clarify that residential uses consistent with R-3 and R-4 would be allowed as conditional uses.
In the next Draft Housing Element that would be submitted to HCD, staff recommends the following edit:
(4) Rezone Commercial Housing Opportunity Site to Allow Mixed-Use.
Concurrent with or prior to adoption of this Housing Element, rezone the Housing Opportunity Site currently developed with commercial uses to allow mixed-use or residential use. This includes the 1010 Metro Center Boulevard site.
These changes would have the effect of allowing commercial, residential, or mixed use at 1010 Metro Center Boulevard and other sites in the Town Center/C-2 District.
1291-1295 East Hillsdale Boulevard
The direction provided at the Joint Study Session on May 17, 2022 was to not include this site in the Sites Inventory but to amend the CO Commercial Office zoning to allow mixed use on this site. See the language quoted above for Program H-D-1-b (5) to develop an overlay to designate specific sites with a mixed use option.
The CO zoning district includes eight (8) parcels between East Hillsdale Boulevard and State Route 92 from 1261 East Hillsdale Boulevard to 1940 Beach Park Boulevard. Staff is requesting direction on whether to allow mixed use as a conditional use throughout the CO district, similar to how it is allowed in the C-2 district.
Triton Apartments Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
As described on page D-25 of Appendix D, the owner of The Triton Apartments has submitted preliminary plans for 10 multi-family ADUs that 39 would be created from the vacant retail space. State law is not clear on whether this type of space can qualify for conversion to ADUs as Government Code section 65852.2(e)(1)(C) provides for ministerial approval of ADUs “within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings.” Recent revisions to the HCD ADU Handbook provide that Government Code section 65852.2(e)(1)(C) should be interpreted to limit ADUs constructed in mixed use development to the residential areas of a mixed use development and not the areas used for commercial or other activities. It is unclear from the ADU Handbook what the legal bases or reasoning is for HCD’s statement given that is not explicitly in the statutory language. The City Attorney is currently reviewing with staff to determine the appropriate review of the application.
The 10 units have been included in the Sites Inventory, but may be removed if it is determined that they do not qualify for multi-family ADUs.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed Housing Element Update and Safety Element Update are the subject of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that is in preparation. The EIR will be a “program level” EIR rather than a “project level” EIR. A program level EIR analyzes the potential environmental impacts of programs based on the level of specificity included. For program plans such as a Housing Element or Safety Element, the analysis will be at a more general level that does not analyze site-specific impacts. Site-specific environmental impacts will be evaluated as part of the “project level” environmental assessment as part of the development review of each individual project. The Draft EIR will be subject to a 45-day public review period, during which time the Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing to receive comments on the adequacy of the Draft EIR. A Final EIR will then be prepared, including responses to the comments received. The Final EIR will be available prior to the final Public Hearings on the RHNA 6 Housing Element.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
40 The Housing Element Update supports the City Council’s Value/Priority Area under “Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy” which is to protect, maintain, and enhance our community character through thoughtful planning as well as “City Council Operations and Improved Community Engagement” where the City Council operates at the highest level of civil discourse, encouraging resident engagement and full transparency.
NEXT STEPS
Responses to the HCD comments will be incorporated into a revised Draft Housing Element and posted on the project website. Any proposed revisions must be posted for public comment for a minimum of seven (7) days prior to resubmittal to HCD.
Next steps with approximate timing:
Posting of revised Draft Housing Element for 7-day public comment:
early December 2022 (Planning Commission and City Council may also provide individual comments on the revised draft during this time.) Resubmittal to HCD for 60-day comment period: mid-December 2022 Circulation of Draft EIR for 45-day public comment period: Mid- December 2022
Receive any additional HCD comments: mid-February 2023 Preparation of Final EIR including responses to comments: February 2023
Prepare responses to additional HCD comments: late February 2023 Planning Commission Public Hearing: March 2023
City Council Public Hearing: April 2023
(1) Government Code section 65589.5
41 Attachments
Attachment 1: HCD Comment Letter dated October 3, 2022
Attachment 2: Letter from Bay Area Housing Element Working Group, dated October 13, 2022
Attachment 3: Letter from San Francisco Public Golf Alliance, dated November 9, 2022
Attachment 4: The “Builder’s Remedy” and Housing Elements, ABAG, October 20, 2022
USEFUL LINKS
Housing Element Update Webpage
42 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, G overnor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
O
ctober 3, 2022
M
arlene Subhashini, Director
Community Development Department
City of Foster City
610 Foster City Blvd
Foster City, CA 94404
D
ear Marlene Subhashini:
R
E: City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element T
hank you for submitting the City of Foster City’s (City) draft housing element received for review on July 5, 2022. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a telephone conversation on September 20, 2022 with yourself, Thai-Chau Le, and consultants Leslie Carmichael and Arly Cassidy Dolbakian. In addition, HCD considered comments from G.H. Dabado, Housing Leadership Council, and YIMBY Law and Greenbelt Alliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).
T
he draft element addresses many statutory requirements; however, revisions will be necessary to comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code).
The enclosed Appendix describes the revisions needed to comply with State Housing Element Law.
F
or your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), if a local government fails to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), then any rezoning to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation, including for lower-income households, shall be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the local government’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i). Please be aware, if the City fails to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until rezones to accommodate a shortfall of sites pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c), (1) (A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed.
Attachment 1
43 Marlene Subhashini, Director
Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing el
ement is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.
S
everal federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant; the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.
F
or your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.
H
CD appreciates the cooperation the housing element team provided during the review.
We are committed to assisting the City in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Anthony Errichetto, of our staff, at [email protected].
S
incerely,
P
aul McDougall
Senior Program Manager
E
nclosure
44 Cit
y of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 1 October 3, 2022
APPENDIX
CITY OF FOSTER CITY
T
he following changes are necessary to bring the City’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.
H
ousing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/hcd-memos. Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/building-bl ocks and includes the
Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.
A. Review and Revision
Review the previous element to evaluate the appropriateness, effectiveness, and progress in implementation, and reflect the results of this review in the revised element. (Gov. Code, § 65588 (a) and (b).)
A r
eview of the previous element should address past progress in implementation, evaluate the effectiveness of programs and make adjustments in the current housing element. The element (Appendix E) generally states whether programs should be retained, removed, or modified but must also describe progress in implementation and evaluate effectiveness to inform this statement.
I
n addition, as part of this analysis, the element must provide an evaluation of the effectiveness of goals, policies, and related actions in meeting the housing needs of special needs populations (e.g., elderly, persons with disabilities, large households, female-headed households, farmworkers and persons experiencing homelessness). Programs should be revised as appropriate to reflect the results of this evaluation.
F
or more information, please see HCD’s Building Blocks.
B. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints
1. A
ffirmatively further[ing] fair housing in accordance with Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8899.50) of Division 1 of Title 2…shall include an assessment of fair housing in the jurisdiction. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(10)(A).) Fair Housing Issues: The element identifies many contributing factors to fair housing issues. However, the element should also address the fair housing issue of aging multifamily housing that is vulnerable to redevelopment and displacement of low and moderate-income residents. Additionally, the element should discuss the high-water table issue and any disproportionate impacts on protected characteristics to better formulate policies and programs.
45 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 2 October 3, 2022
Enforcement and Outreach: While the element discuss complaints based on state and federal data, it could also identify cases and their characteristics utilizing local data from fair housing service providers. In addition, the element states the City complies with a few housing-related laws such the Housing Accountability Act and No Net Loss Law but it should also discuss how the City complies with state and federal fair housing laws and any past settlements, lawsuits, or other legal actions. Based on a complete analysis, the element should re-assess contributing factors to fair housing issues and policies and programs.
Integration and Segregation: While the element reports on data related to segregation and integration, it must discuss and analyze this data for trends over time and patterns across census tracts as well as comparing the City as a whole to the broader region for race, disability, familial status and income. The analysis should also incorporate local data and knowledge and other relevant factors to better formulate appropriate policies and programs.
For example, the element’s Racial Isolation Index (pp. B-20 to B-21) indicates there is segregation of Asian residents; however, the analysis should discuss and analyze this data for trends over time and patterns across census tracts within the City. As for another example, the element should analyze where concentrations of above-moderate income residents exist geographically in the City as well as include a regional analysis, comparing the higher-incomes within the City to the surrounding region. An example of local data could be a local accessibility assessment into the evaluation of patterns of higher concentrations of persons with disabilities.
Other relevant factors could be historical zoning and land use and potential resulting lack of access to housing choices and affordability.
Disparities in Access to Opportunity: While the element reports some data on disparities in access to opportunity, it largely must analyze that data. For example, the element should describe and analyze whether there is equal access to high performing schools throughout the City as well as include a regional analysis of how surrounding jurisdictions compare with TCAC education scores. The element should also analyze whether there is equal access to jobs for residents of all economic segments, in addition to comparing employment trends in the City to patterns in surrounding areas (e.g., lower economic scores in areas bordering the City). The element should include a map of access to transit within the City, analyze what transit options are available in the City, and whether they are accessible throughout the City. This section should be accompanied by an analysis of such patterns on a regional basis, comparing trends within the City to the region. Lastly, while the element states the City scores well on TCAC’s environmental scores (p. B-52), it should include an analysis of what contributes to such positive environmental outcomes and be compared to environmental trends within the greater region.
Disproportionate Housing Needs including Displacement: While the element reports some data on disproportionate needs, it still must analyze that data. For example, the element states (p. B-62) that there are no concentrations of renter cost burden; however, the maps show a variation with part of the City having a rate of 40 to 60 percent of renters with cost burden near a tract with less than 20 percent cost burden. This perceived concentration of cost burden for renters must be analyzed. The element should also describe and analyze where concentrations of cost burden exist geographically for owners as well as what 46 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 3 October 3, 2022
contributes to this trend. This section should be accompanied by an analysis of such patterns on a regional basis, comparing trends within the City to the region. The element must also include an analysis of where local overcrowding and substandard housing exists geographically as well as an analysis of such patterns on a regional basis. While the element includes a map of local risk of displacement (p. B-69), it only briefly discusses displacement trends. The element should provide analysis and conclusions regarding displacement vulnerability (e.g., half of the City is determined to be vulnerable). The analysis should also discuss displacement risk due to disaster, including seismic activity and flooding. Lastly, this section should be accompanied by an analysis of displacement patterns on a regional basis, comparing trends within the City to the region.
Identified Sites and Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH): The element mentions the City does not have any segregation issues within the City but is somewhat segregated as a whole on a regional level and that the distribution of sites will allow lower-income households access to amenities and services. However, the element should discuss the location (e.g., neighborhoods, census tracks, planning areas) of sites, including the number of units by income group and discuss the impact of identified sites on existing patterns of socio-economic characteristics. The analysis should put special emphasis on any isolation of the regional housing need allocation (RHNA) by income group and distribution of units by income group throughout the community.
Contributing Factors to Fair Housing Issues: The element identifies many contributing factors to fair housing issues, but it must prioritize these factors in Table 2-3 to better formulate policies and programs and carry out meaningful actions to AFFH. Additionally, the element should explain how Table 2-3 and Table 3-1 are related, because while both tie to fair housing issues, contributing factors are different.
Goals, Actions, Milestones and Metrics: The element must be revised to add goals and actions based on the outcomes of a complete analysis. Goals and actions must specifically respond to the analysis and to the identified and prioritized contributing factors to fair housing issues and must be significant and meaningful enough to overcome identified patterns and trends. Actions must have specific commitment, milestones, geographic targeting and metrics or numeric targets and must address, as appropriate, housing mobility enhancement, new housing choices, and affordability in higher opportunity areas, place-based strategies for community preservation and revitalization and displacement protection.
2. Include an analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality's existing and projected needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(1).)
Extremely Low-Income (ELI) Households: The element reports some data on the number of existing and projected ELI households, but it must also include analysis of their housing needs. The analysis should evaluate tenure, overpayment, resources, and strategies available and the gap and magnitude of housing needs to better formulate policies and programs.
47 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 4 October 3, 2022
3. Include an analysis and documentation of household characteristics, including level of payment compared to ability to pay, housing characteristics, including overcrowding, and housing stock condition. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(2).)
Overpayment: While the element identifies the total number of households overpaying for housing, it must quantify and analyze the number of lower-income households overpaying for housing by tenure (i.e., renter and owner) and add or modify policies and programs as appropriate.
Housing Conditions: While the element describes housing conditions of ownership units, the element must also include an analysis of rental units in need of rehabilitation and replacement.
Housing Costs: While the element includes estimated rents for residents, it utilizes American Community Survey (ACS) data. The element should supplement census data with other sources (e.g., local knowledge).
4. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov.
Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).)
Progress in Meeting the RHNA: The element indicates (Table 13, D-34) that pipeline and proposed projects have been built or are under construction or approved but provides no information documenting how affordability of the units was determined. The City’s RHNA may be reduced by the number of new units built since June 30, 2022; however, the element must demonstrate their affordability based on actual sales price, rent level or other mechanisms ensuring affordability (e.g., deed restrictions). The element should also discuss the status, any barriers to development and other relevant factors to demonstrate their affordability in the planning period. For example, the element should clarify whether the Schooner Bay application has been submitted to the City for review. The element should clarify the status of this project and where it is in the permit process and anticipated timeline for completion in the planning period.
Sites Inventory: The element lists parcels based on various factors but must also list the general plan designation and existing uses. In addition, the element must clarify whether the listed capacity is total capacity or includes realistic capacity assumptions. Lastly, the element must clarify whether the sites previously identified in the 5th cycle were vacant or nonvacant and add or modify programs as appropriate.
In addition, the element should consider public commenters on this draft as part of the sites inventory, including the expressed interest of property owner to develop residential uses in the planning period.
Realistic Capacity: While the element provides assumptions for buildout on each site, support must be provided for assumptions. For example, the element should demonstrate 48 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 5 October 3, 2022
what specific trends, factors, and other evidence led to the assumptions. The estimate of the number of units for each site must be adjusted as necessary, based on the land use controls and site improvements, typical densities of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level in that jurisdiction, and on the current or planned availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities. Many of the sites are on parcels with existing apartment developments. The element must clarify whether the City assumes the entire site for each identified apartment complex will be redeveloped, or which portions of the site will be redeveloped (e.g., acreage and location) and provide support. Many of the sites assumes 100 percent of base zoned density for the multifamily units in the Beach Cove, Franciscan, Harbor Cove, Sand Cove, Lagoons, Eaves Apartments, and Shadow Cove sites. The analysis must provide substantial support and demonstrate a significant history of developing at maximum density within the City as well as feasibility including land use control requirements such as parking and open space.
In addition to clarifying realistic capacity assumptions, the Foster’s Landing site must also clarify whether the site will need to be rezoned and whether existing units will need to be demolished to support the additional units. The element must also clarify what the allowed density is on the 1010 Metro Center (OSH) site, whether rezoning is needed, and the basis for the realistic capacity assumptions.
In Table 2 (p. D-7), all project examples are in the CM and PD zones; the element should describe examples of development in residential zones to support assumptions in the sites inventory. In addition, the element must clarify whether it is assumed that projects will have to utilize the PD process and therefore have additional discretionary requirements. In addition, the average density of projects listed in Table 2 is above the allowed density for the R4 zone, the element should clarify whether this includes density bonus units. In addition, Table 11 (page D-32) and Table 12 (page D-33) list the capacity of sites as lower-income, however Table 13 on page D-34 has a different breakdown of affordability for these sites. The unit count and affordability level should be adjusted to clarify the discrepancy.
Suitability of Nonvacant Sites: The element must include an analysis demonstrating the potential for additional development on nonvacant sites, including the extent existing uses impede additional development such as market demand for the existing use and existing leases, contracts or other conditions that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent additional residential development. While the element generally discusses the interest of several property owners to be included in the sites inventory, it should also discuss the potential for additional development in the planning period. The discussion should address any barriers to development in the planning period and any expressed interest in residential development in the planning period. In addition, some of the sites do not have expressed interest in residential development (e.g., Franciscan, Lagoons, Eaves) and generally states recent trends support the assumption of their potential for additional development in the planning period. However, the element should discuss the characteristics and circumstances of recent development and similarities to identified sites.
For example, the analysis could address the redevelopment of carport areas by relating these plans to other projects developing in a similar manner.
49 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 6 October 3, 2022
In addition, if the housing element relies upon nonvacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the RHNA for lower-income households, the housing element must demonstrate existing uses are not an impediment to additional residential development and will likely discontinue in the planning period. (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(2).) Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA.
Large Sites: Sites larger than ten acres in size are deemed inadequate to accommodate housing for lower-income households unless it is demonstrated that sites of equivalent size and affordability have been developed or other evidence is provided to demonstrate how the sites facilitate the development of housing for lower-income households. The element contains several sites larger than ten acres and as a result, the element should either demonstrate their suitability to facilitate development affordable to lower-income households or remove the sites. For example, the element could discuss the application of the City’s inclusionary requirements or other incentives to promote the assumed affordability and number of units.
Availability of Infrastructure: The element describes infrastructure constraints in the City (p. C-8). However, it must also demonstrate sufficient total water capacity (existing and planned) to accommodate the RHNA. In addition, the element must analyze availability and constraints of dry utilities to accommodate the regional housing need, including potential impacts on identified sites, and add programs to address constraints, if needed. Lastly, while the element states that there are some utility constraints, the element must describe whether they affect any identified sites and add programs as appropriate.
Environmental Constraints: The element should include an analysis of the effectiveness of mitigation measures to address potential environmental constraints (e.g., seismic activity, high water tables). The element must describe how environmental conditions relate to identified sites including any other known conditions within the City that could impact housing development in the planning period.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types:
• Emergency Shelters: The element must demonstrate the PF, C-1, and C-2 zones still has sufficient capacity to accommodate the identified housing need for emergency shelters. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(4).) For example, identifying the number of parcels, typical parcels sizes, whether the sites are nonvacant, the potential capacity for adaptive reuse, and analyze their access to opportunities and services. In addition, the element must demonstrate the permit processing, development, and management standards for emergency shelters are objective and encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to, emergency shelters.
In particular, the element describes a maximum of 1ten beds, a maximum stay of 60 days, and parking requirements that do not appear to comply with statutory requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (a)(4)(A). 50 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 7 October 3, 2022
• Transitional and Supportive Housing: Transitional and supportive housing must be allowed in zones that allow for residential uses (e.g., downtown commercial, community commercial, etc.,). The element should reconcile this information and specifically clarify whether the City permits these types of housing as a residential use and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone pursuant to Government Code section 65583 (a)(5).
• By-right Permanent Supportive Housing: Supportive housing shall be a use by-right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses pursuant to Government Code section 65651.
The element must demonstrate compliance with these requirements and include programs as appropriate.
• Single Room Occupancy (SRO): The element must describe where SROs are allowed or add a program as appropriate.
• Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): The element indicates the City modifies its zoning code to ease barriers to the development of ADU’s. However, after a cursory review of the City’s ordinance, HCD discovered several areas which are not consistent with State ADU Law. HCD will provide a complete listing of ADU non- compliance issues under a separate cover. As a result, the element should add a program to update the City’s ADU ordinance in order to comply with state law. For more information, please consult HCD’s ADU Guidebook, published in December 2020, which provides detailed information on new state requirements surrounding ADU development.
5. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).)
Land Use Controls: While the element lists various development standards (p. C-4), it should also evaluate those standards for impacts on housing costs, feasibility, and ability to achieve maximum densities. This analysis should specifically address minimum lot and unit sizes and open space requirements, particularly in multifamily zones.
Fees and Exaction: The element provides a cumulative analysis of fees on various housing types but, to better evaluate the impacts on housing development costs, it should also list the various impact fees (e.g., transportation fees, library fees, park fees, affordable housing fees, capital improvement fees, utility). The element should also separately list and evaluate planning fees (e.g., variance, conditional use permits (CUPs), planned developments, site plans, specific plans, subdivisions, and environmental fees).
Zoning and Fees Transparency: The element must clarify its compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all fees, zoning, and development standards for 51 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 8 October 3, 2022
each parcel on the jurisdiction’s website pursuant to Government Code section 65940.1(a)(1).
Local Processing and Permit Procedures: While the element includes information about processing times, it should also describe the procedures for a typical single family and multifamily development. The analysis should address the approval body, the number of public hearing if any, approval findings and any other relevant information. The analysis should address impacts on housing cost, supply, timing, and approval certainty. The element should describe the findings and procedures for CUPs in the City, as well as the site review process and explain whether they follow the same processes and timelines for single family and multifamily developments.
In addition, the element should clearly describe whether the Planned Development process, including subsequent use permit, is required or optional to applicants. If required, the element should include specific analysis of the impacts of absence of fixed development standards on housing supply (number of units), cost, timing, feasibility and approval certainty.
Design Review: The element must describe and analyze the design review guidelines and process, including approval procedures and decision-making criteria, for their impact as potential constraints on housing supply and affordability. For example, the analysis could describe required findings and discuss whether objective standards and guidelines improve development certainty and mitigate cost impacts. The element must demonstrate this process is not a constraint or it must include a program to address this permitting requirement, as appropriate.
Inclusionary Requirements: While the element describes mandated affordability levels, it should also analyze the inclusionary requirements for impacts on housing costs. The analysis should address any discretionary processes, interaction with State Density Bonus Law and alternative means of compliance that may include, but are not limited to, in-lieu fees, land dedication, off-site construction, or acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units. The City could engage the development community to facilitate this analysis.
State Density Bonus Law: The City’s current density bonus ordinance should be reviewed for compliance with current state density bonus law and programs should be added as necessary.
On/Off-Site Improvements: The element must identify subdivision level improvement requirements, such as minimum street widths (e.g., 40-foot minimum street width), and analyze their impact as potential constraints on housing supply and affordability.
Codes and Enforcement: The element must describe which building code (e.g., 2019) is enforced, any local amendments to the code, the City’s building and zoning code enforcement processes and procedures, and analyze their impact as potential constraints on housing
supply and affordability
52 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 9 October 3, 2022
Constraints on Housing for Persons with Disabilities: The element excludes group homes for seven or more persons from some residential zones and subjects the use to a CUP, unlike other similar uses. The element should specifically analyze these constraints for impacts on housing supply and choices and approval certainty and objectivity for housing for persons with disabilities and include programs as appropriate. Lastly, the element must describe the process and decision-making criteria such as approval findings for the City’s reasonable accommodation procedure and analyze any potential constraints on housing for persons with disabilities.
6. Analyze any special housing needs such as elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability; large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(7).)
Persons with Disabilities: While the element provides the percent of persons with disabilities within the City and their type of disability, the element must include an analysis of the special housing needs for this population. The analysis should discuss challenges faced by persons with disabilities, the existing strategies, and resources to meet those needs, an assessment of any gaps in resources and magnitude of needs, and proposed policies, programs, and funding to help address those needs.
7. Analyze existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change to non-low- income housing uses during the next 10 years due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of use restrictions. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(9) through 65583(a)(9)(D).).
While HCD data shows the Metro Center Senior Homes affordability as expiring in 2026, the element lists these units as expiring in 2050. The element should clarify how affordability was determined, what it is based on and if necessary, revise the analysis of units at-risk of conversion to market rate uses.
C. Housing Programs
1. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
To have a beneficial impact and achieve the goals and objectives of the housing element, program must have specific commitment and discrete timing (e.g., at least annually, by a specific date). Examples of programs that should be revised include:
• Program H-B-1-a (Continue Code Enforcement): The program could clarify whether this program is linked to Program H-B-2-a and whether there are specific programs 53 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 10 October 3, 2022
or outreach for rehabilitation assistance. The program should also include a metric or targeted numerical outcome.
• Programs H-B-2 (Encourage Rehabilitation): The programs should include proactive outreach and discrete timing (e.g., at least annually). • Programs H-C-4-a (Rental Housing Assistance Information), H-E-3-c (Cooperative Ventures): The programs should be revised to include proactive outreach, discrete timing and a metric.
• Program H-C-3-b (Anti-Displacement Strategy): The program should include discrete timing upon establishing the strategy.
• Program H-D-2-a (Potential Re-Use of Commercial Sites): While the program provides meaningful criteria for evaluating future sites, it could also commit to amending zoning with a discrete timeline.
• Programs H-D-5-a (School Sites) and H-D-5-b (Religious and Nonprofit-Owned Sites): The program should consider actions beyond meeting to have a beneficial impact in the planning period, including establishing appropriate zoning, anticipated outcomes, and discrete timelines.
• Program H-D-6-a (Minimize Governmental Constraints): The program should consider actions beyond reporting recommendations and more frequent review of potential governmental constraints.
• Program H-D-6-g (Farmworker Housing and Employee Housing Act): The program should specifically commit to amend zoning consistent with the Employee Housing Action (i.e., Health and Safety Code sections 17021,5, 17021.6 and 17021.8). • Program H-E-3-a (Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing Projects): Based upon a complete analysis, the program should commit to amend the ordinance by a specified date.
• Program H-E-5-a (New Agreements for Affordability of Existing Rental Units): The program should specify how often the City will pursue funding and include a metric. • Program H-F-1-a (Facilities and Services for Special Needs): The program must include proactive outreach, discrete timing, and actions for persons with developmental disabilities.
• Program H-F-1-f (Support Services for Special Needs Population): The program should include commitment to implement following the roundtable, as well as how often meetings and implementation will occur.
• Program H-F-1-h (Age Friendly Initiative): The program should include commitment to implement the plan.
• Program H-F-2-d (Emergency Shelter Zoning): Based on a complete analysis, the program must include specific commitment to address parking and other identified constraints by a specified date.
• Program H-F-3-a (Transitional and Supportive Housing Zoning): Based on a complete analysis of requirements, the program should include commitment to address identified constraints by a specified date.
• P
rogram H-G-2-a (Anti-Discrimination Regulations): The program must include commitment to how often the City will conduct outreach after 2023.
2. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to 54 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 11 October 3, 2022
accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).)
The element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:
• Program H-D-1-b (General Plan and Zoning Amendments): The program commits to amend the general plan and zoning to accommodate the RHNA upon adoption of the housing element. Please be aware, if rezoning, specifically for the lower-income RHNA, is not completed by January 31, 2023, the element must include a program(s) to rezone sites with appropriate zoning and development standards pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c)(1), and 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i).
• Program H-D-4-h (ADU Monitoring): The program should monitor production in addition to affordability, including for ADUs anticipated in multifamily development.
Further, monitoring affordability should be consistent with assumptions in the inventory (58 percent) and alternative actions should be taken more than once in the planning period and should specifically commit to rezoning if necessary.
3. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities.
The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).)
The element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental and nongovernmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:
• Parking: While the element includes Program H-D-6-c (Parking Requirements), the program should include a specific commitment to revise parking standards to mitigate constraints on housing development.
• Program H-D-6-b (Minimize Zoning Constraints): The program must include specific commitment to amend all listed and necessary zoning amendments and should manufactured homes are allowed as a single-family use in all zones allowing single family uses.
55 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 12 October 3, 2022
• Program H-F-1-d (Reasonable Accommodation): Based on a complete analysis of constraints in reasonable accommodations, the program must include a commitment to mitigate constraints and revise timing if needed. • Program H-F-1-i (Community Care Facilities): Based on the outcomes of a complete analysis, the program should commit to allow community care facilities in all residential zones and revise procedures with an objective process and facilitate approval certainty.
4. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics. (Gov.
Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
As noted in Finding B1, the element must include a complete analysis of AFFH. The element must be revised to add goals and actions based on the outcomes of a complete analysis.
5. The housing program shall preserve for low-income household the assisted housing developments identified pursuant to paragraph (9) of subdivision (a). The program for preservation of the assisted housing developments shall utilize, to the extent necessary, all available federal, state, and local financing and subsidy programs identified in paragraph (9) of subdivision (a), except where a community has other urgent needs for which alternative funding sources are not available. The program may include strategies that involve local regulation and technical assistance. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(6).)
While the element includes Program H-C-2-b (Continue to Monitor Expiration of Affordability Covenants), it should incorporate proactive outreach to owners and State Preservation Notice Law requirements (Government Code Sections 65863.10, 65863.11, and 65863.13).
D. Quantified Objectives
Establish the number of housing units, by income level, that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time frame. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (b)(1 & 2).)
The element must include quantified objectives to establish an estimate of housing units by income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over the planning period. While the element includes these objectives, it should specifically list objectives for extremely low-income households and conservation objectives should not be limited to at-risk preservation.
56 City of Foster City’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Draft Housing Element Page 13 October 3, 2022
E. Public Participation
Local governments shall make a diligent effort to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the Housing Element, and the element shall describe this effort. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd.(c)(9).)
While the element includes a general summary of the public participation process, it should also include a summary of how public comments were considered and incorporated into the element. Further, the element should describe additional methods for public outreach efforts in the future, particularly to include lower-income and special needs households and neighborhoods with higher concentrations of lower-income households. The element must describe whether translation services were available for various outreach methods.
F. Consistency with General Plan
The Housing Element shall describe the means by which consistency will be achieved with other general plan elements and community goals. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).)
While the element discusses how internal consistency will be achieved with other elements of the general plan as part of the housing element update, it should also discuss how internal consistency will be maintained throughout the planning period. 57 October 13, 2022
To: Bay Area Local Planning Directors
RE: Proposed Update Process for Bay Area Housing Elements to Achieve Meaningful Public Participation
Dear Bay Area Planning Directors,
We, the Bay Area Housing Element Working Group, are writing to urge you to prioritize community input to develop strong housing policy in the final stages of the 2023-2031 Housing Element Planning process. The Bay Area Housing Element Working Group is convened by the 6 Wins for Social Equity Network, a regional equity coalition founded in 2010. The Housing Element Working Group consists of housing law and policy experts working together to ensure the region is one where everyone can find a home. We believe that strong housing policy and planning is an essential step towards that vision.
Deep community engagement is at the heart of the Housing Element process in California. True community engagement requires more than just extensive outreach to the community. It must be designed to facilitate the meaningful dialogue and co-planning with your residents necessary to realize the potential of the Bay Area as a vibrant, diverse, and healthy community. After months of work, the Bay Area jurisdictions have largely submitted first drafts of your 2023-2031 Housing Elements to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), and have recently received or are awaiting a letter from HCD reviewing your draft and recommending changes. In this next stage it is important not only to respond to HCD’s comments, but to do so in a way that meaningfully involves the community in that response.
This requires that you give community members an adequate opportunity to read, analyze, and comment on the updates, and then transparently incorporate that feedback into your final Housing Element before submitting a final version to HCD.
State law requires local governments to make “a diligent effort...to achieve public participation of all economic segments of the community in the development of the housing element.” (Gov. Code 65583(c)(9) (emphasis added)). “A diligent effort means going beyond simply giving the public an opportunity to provide input and should beproactively and broadly conducted through a variety of methods to assure access and participation.” (Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Guidance Memo, April 2021, p. 21).
In order to ensure that your communities continue to have the opportunity to understand and influence your decisions, we recommend you take the following steps:
1. Publish the review letter you receive from HCD on your Housing Element website as soon as you receive it. This will ensure that community members have as much time as possible to understand HCD’s opinions and concerns, so that they can best participate in updating your Housing Element and ensure it prioritizes equity and fairness.
Attachment 2
58 2. Holdoneor morecommunitymeetings, worksessions, and/or publichearingstotakecommentsontheHCDreviewfindingsandhowbest toaddressthembeforethenext draft isprepared.Incorporateasmuchcommunityinputaspossible,includingexpertise from local community based organizations, about housing needs andsolutions. Consider all proposed analyses and recommendations. A diverse range ofmethodsfor solicitingcommentsfromthecommunitywill facilitatetheinput ofresidentswith disabilities and language access needs. This input is necessary to your ability tofullyconsiderthehousingneedsofdisabledresidentsandEnglishLanguageLearnersinyour jurisdiction, as the State Housing Element law requires.
3. Once the revised draft is finalized, post it on your Housing Element website inboth a clean version and a version with visibleredlinesagainst theinitial publicreviewdraft. Thiswill allowcommunitymemberstomoreeasilyreviewthechangesyouhave made, which will in turn: enable the community to help ensure compliance withstate law; clarifythereasonsbehindthejurisdiction’sdecisionsregardingrevisionsandcommunity input; and help build trust. Ensuring transparency and accountability intheprocess will yield the strongest possible final Housing Element.
4. Publish a summary of comments received and a list of changes made to theoriginal draft identifying which comments or policy suggestions were accepted,which were not, and why. This, again, enablesthecommunityeaseinreviewingandunderstanding the changes the jurisdiction has made. It is similar to the federalAdministrative Procedure Act standards for public input in decision-making processes,and provides a best practice towards developing trust between governmentsandtheirconstituents. That trust is even more important at the local level.
5. While state law only requires a 7-day comment period, you should provide a30-daypubliccommentperiodafterreleasingreviseddrafts.Allowingthenecessarytimefor communitymemberstoreviewtheHousingElement will improvethequalityofthe public input receivedbythecity. Citiesthat usehigher-qualitypublicinput toinformtheir Housing Elements will increase the likelihood of certification by HCD, as theirHousing Elements will better address the needs of the community. Providinga30-daypublic comment period additionally furthers the spirit of the legal requirements underCalifornia Housing Element law, and will allow for better policy outcomes.
The Housing Element Working Group remains committed to working in partnership with BayArea jurisdictions to ensure that, fromstart to finish, the Housing Element update process isinclusive, laying out a roadmap to effectively and equitably address the affordable housingcrisis. All BayArearesidentsdeserveasafe,accessible,andaffordableplacetocall home,witha range of choices free of barriers to fair housing. The Housing Element update processprovides the tools to do just that. We look forward to continuing this work with you.
Regards,
Bay Area Housing Element Working Group
59 1
1370 Masonic Ave., San Francisco, CA 94117 • 415-290-5718 • [email protected] N
ovember 9, 2022
By e-mail: [email protected]
C
ity of Foster City
City Council
Planning Commission
Community Development Department
Attn: Marlene Subhashini, Director
610 Foster City Blvd.
Foster City, CA 94404
Re: CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT MEETING, NOV. 15, 2012, RE: FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT
PUBLIC COMMENT: SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC GOLF ALLIANCE
SUPPORTS GOLF AND OPPOSES HOUSING AT MARINERS POINT.
Dear Foster City Council and Planning Commission Members and Director Subhashini, The San Francisco Public Golf Alliance urges the City of Foster City and its departments and agencies to preserve the existing golf and other public recreational uses at Mariners Point. We are a non-profit, all-volunteer, public benefit corporation with over 7,000 members, mostly public course golfers primarily in San Francisco and the mid- and north Peninsula, including many Foster City residents. Our members are of all ages, genders, persuasions, colors, ethnicities, languages, and economic and social strata, including large numbers of seniors and students.
Attachment 3
60 2
Mariners Point is a wonderful compact public golf facility, including a large and busy driving range (one of only six public ranges between San Francisco and Palo Alto), practice greens, and a 9- hole 3-par course. All of these facilities are very high quality, fairly priced, and are heavily used by Peninsula golfers from north to south. Virtually all of the Midpeninsula girls’ and boys’ high school golf teams use Mariner’s Point as their practice facility. Foster City should be proud of such a great community recreational asset. The popularity of public golf has been much in evidence over these past Pandemic years, with reported golf play increases over 30% around California since golf courses reopened in May 2020. From our personal experience and observation, it is clear that golf at Mariners Point has been exceptionally heavy during the Pandemic.
Mariners Point is environmentally sensitive, surro unded by sloughs, wetlands, and the Bay. It is not a good housing site -- remote from other housing and centers of employment. Housing would introduce cats and other household pets and trash to the area, threatening the birds and other wetland species. Mariner’s Point is not within the enhanced walls of Foster City’s Levee Improvement Project, so is directly exposed to the rising tides of San Francisco Bay. It would be an unwise and potentially disastrous choice for housing, whether low-income or otherwise. New housing should not be built in the obvious path of sea level rise. At such time that rising bay waters come – whether in 2040, 2050, or in some succeeding decade, it will be relatively easy to modify the golf facility to attenuate the effects of sea level rise. Not so with housing. Moreover, the golf course is less than a mile from San Mateo’s sewage treatment plant and will provide ideal green acreage, with only a short purple pipe extension, for reclaimed water.
Mariner’s Point Driving Range (L), and Bay Winds Bo ard Sailing Park (R)
In times of climate change and increasingly hot summer inland temperatures, it is extremely important for regional and state public physical and mental health that coastal cities such as Foster City, and their public officials, prioritize their obligation to maintain and improve public access to low- cost public recreation in the baylands, where the summer air and breezes are cool.
61 3
Mariners Point is an ideal public recreation site, not only for golf but also for Board Sailing at Bay Winds Board Sailing Park (http://sfbaywatertrail.org/trailhead/baywinds-park-2/ ). Located on the Bay Trail adjoining the golf course and driving range, Bay Winds is one of the premier board sailing parks on San Francisco Bay, and is a key component of the Bay Conservation and Development Commission’s Bay Water Trail, established under California Government Code Sections 66690 ff:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=GOV&division=&title =7.2.&part=&chapter=7.&article= .
A key consideration in the BCDC’s design review of the Foster City Levee Improvement Project has been public access to and use of the Bay. Both the golf course and the board sailing park are low-cost public bayside recreation resources, under the protection of BCDC and other regulatory agencies. If, after obtaining BCDC approval for its Levee Project, Foster City were to turn around and develop housing on the site so as to eliminate or compromise these public recreational assets, both the recreating public and the regulating agencies would justifiably be concerned.
Moreover, the Surplus Land Act provides, at California Government Code Section 54227(b), a super-priority for continued park and recreation uses of local government-owned open space land used currently used for park or recreation.
“ . . . first priority shall be given to an entity that agrees to use the site for park or recreational purposes if the land being offered is already being used and will continue to be used for park or recreational purposes, or if the land is designated for park and recreational use in the local general plan and will be developed for that purpose.” 1
Finally, like most of Foster City, the levee and Mariners Point are built on what was originally submerged or tidal lands, subject to public trust. On April 5, 2019 the State Lands Commission approved a 35-year Lease agreement with Foster City for parcels of state trust lands at or very near the Mariners Point property. 2 Any such trust lands would not be usable for housing development.
We acknowledge that housing is an important issue as well. But disregarding – or attacking – valued public recreational properties and their devoted constituents is not the way to get our society to come together to solve complex and difficult issues such as the housing supply. Such divisive tactics are often counterproductive.
Respectfully,
San Francisco Public Golf Alliance
RRRRichard ichard ichard ichard HHHHarris arris arris arris Richard Harris, President
Copies: see next page
1 Surplus Land Act, California Government Code Section 54227(b):
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=GOV§ionNum=54227
2 State Lands Commission Staff Report, Item C-28, 4.5 .19, Re Acceptance of Lease Quitclaim Deeds and Issuance of a General Lease, etc., Lessees, City of Foster City and Estero Municipal Improvement District; Term, 35 years, beginning April 5, 2019: http://www.slc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/04 -05-19_C28.pdf ; Site Map at Ex. B (17/127)
62 4
ccs:
Mayor Richa Awasthi
Vice Mayor Jon Froomin
Councilmember Sanjay Gehani
Councilmember Sam Hindi
Councilmember Patrick Sullivan
Planning Commissioner Evan Adams
Planning Commissioner Ravi Jagtiani
Planning Commissioner Charlie Bronitski
Planning Commissioner Nicolas Haddad
Planning Commissioner Phoebe Venkat
City Manager Stefan Chatwin
San Mateo County Supervisor Carole Groom
San Mateo County Supervisor David Pine
Hilary Papendick, San Mateo County Office of Sustainability Chris Aliaga, Mariner’s Point
Lennie Roberts, Committee for Green Foothills
Michael Ferreira, Loma Prieta Chapter, Sierra Club
Mandi Browning, Steward, Bay Winds Board Sailing Park
William Fried
Bo Links, Esq.
63 11/3/2022 1
DISCLAIMER: This document is intended solely as a technical overview of the provisions of certain provisions of the Housing Accountability Act. It is not intended to serve as legal advice regarding any jurisdiction's specific policies or any proposed housing development project. Local staff should consult with their city attorney or county counsel when determining the applicability of these provisions to any proposed housing development project in their jurisdiction.
The “Builder’s Remedy” and Housing Elements
There have recently been press reports regarding the so-called “Builder’s Remedy” that can be used to avoid local zoning requirements when a locality’s housing element does not substantially comply with state law. These reports have stated that, if a locality has a noncompliant housing element the city or county must approve the housing development project, regardless of the local zoning.
The “Builder’s Remedy” arises from the Housing Accountability Act (Government Code Section 65589.51; the HAA). This paper describes the provisions of the HAA that constitute the “Builder’s Remedy” and how they may apply to a proposed housing development project.
How Does the “Builder’s Remedy” Work?
The HAA requires that cities and counties make one of five findings to deny, or to apply conditions that make infeasible, a housing development project “for very low, low- or moderate-income households” or an emergency shelter. (Section 65589.5(d).) A housing development project with 20 percent of the total units available to lower income households or with all of the units available for moderate or middle income households may qualify as housing “for very low, low- or moderate income households” (see detailed description below). Any of the five findings would allow denial of an eligible project:
1. The city or county has met or exceeded its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the proposed income categories in the development.
2. The housing development or emergency shelter would have a specific adverse impact on public health and safety, and there is no way to mitigate or avoid the impact without making the development unaffordable. The impact must be based on objective, written public health or safety standards in place when the application was deemed complete.
3. The denial or condition is required to meet state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without making the development unaffordable.
4. The project is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agriculture or resource preservation or there are not adequate water or sewage facilities to the serve the project.
1 All future references are to the Government Code unless otherwise specified.
Attachment 4
64 Regional Housing Technical Assistance Program
2 5. The project is inconsistent with both the zoning ordinance and the land use designation as specified in any general plan element. However, a city or county cannot make this finding if it has not adopted a housing element in substantial compliance with state law.
If a locality has not adopted a housing element in substantial compliance with state law, developers may propose eligible housing development projects that do not comply with either the zoning or the general plan. The term “Builder’s Remedy” is used to describe the situation where a local agency may be required to approve an eligible housing development project because it cannot make one of the other four findings.
Are Projects Using the “Builder’s Remedy” Exempt from CEQA Review? The HAA contains no exemptions from the California Environmental Quality Act. The HAA states specifically that nothing relieves the local agency from making the required CEQA findings and otherwise complying with CEQA. (Section 65589.5(e).) However, there is a growing debate as to the interplay between the Builder’s Remedy and CEQA. A project may be exempt from CEQA under other provisions of CEQA, other state laws, or the CEQA Guidelines. Agencies may wish to consult their legal counsel regarding the appropriate CEQA review.
When Does a Housing Element No Longer Comply with State Law? Is There a Grace Period If the Housing Element Is Not Adopted by the Due Date? Housing elements are required to comply with current state housing element law on the established due date (January 31, 2023 in the ABAG region). State law has changed significantly since fifth cycle housing elements were adopted, and it would be unlikely that a fifth cycle housing element would substantially comply with current state law. If a sixth cycle element has not been adopted by the due date, the housing element would likely be out of compliance with state law until a complying sixth cycle housing element is adopted. There is no grace period, even for the period when a housing element is being reviewed by the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).
HCD approval is not required for a housing element to be found substantially compliant with state law. State law provides that a city or county may adopt its own findings explaining why its housing element is substantially compliant with state law despite HCD’s findings. (Section 65585(f).) However, HCD is authorized to refer agencies to the Attorney General if it finds a housing element out of compliance with state law. (Section 65585(j).) Are a Local Agency’s Development Standards Null and Void If the Housing Element is Not in Compliance with State Law?
No, the local agency’s development standards are not null and void if the housing element is not in substantial compliance with state law. The “Builder’s Remedy,” however, may require a local agency to approve an eligible housing development project despite its noncompliance with local development standards. Conversely, other projects may be challenged because a finding of general plan consistency cannot be made if the general plan is out of compliance with state law.
What Projects Are Eligible to Use the “Builder’s Remedy”? The “Builder’s Remedy” applies only to a housing development project “for very low, low- or moderate-income households” and to emergency shelters. The HAA defines a “housing development project” as either:
• Residential units only;
• Mixed-use developments with at least two-thirds of the square footage designated for residential use; or 65 Regional Housing Technical Assistance Program
3 • Transitional housing or supportive housing.2 (Section 65589.5(h)(2).) “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households” includes either:
• 20% of the total units sold or rented to lower income households; • 100% of the units sold or rented to moderate income households; or • 100% of the units sold or rented to middle income households.3 Monthly housing costs for lower income households cannot exceed 30 percent of 60 percent of median income, adjusted for household size, and the units must remain affordable for 30 years. Monthly housing costs for moderate income households cannot exceed 30 percent of 100 percent of median income. There are no standards in the HAA for housing costs for middle income households. (Sections 65589.5(h)(3), (h)(4).) An emergency shelter is housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay. (Section 65582(d); Health & Safety Code Section 50801(e).)
2 As defined in Section 65582.
3 Those earning no more than 150 percent of median income. 66 DATE: November 15, 2022
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Chair and Members of the Foster City Planning Commission
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
FROM: Marlene Subhashini, Community Development Director Leslie Carmichael, Consulting Planner
Arly Cassidy Dolbakian, Consulting Planner
SUBJECT: PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENTS AND MODIFICATION OF THE TENANT
PREFERENCES FOR THE EXISTING UNIT PURCHASE
PROGRAM RELATED TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE – RZ2022-0003; RZ2022-0002
AND GP2022-0001
RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of this Joint Planning Commission and City Council meeting is to provide an overview of proposed:
1. Text amendments to Title 17, Zoning, of the Foster City Municipal Code (RZ2022-0003);
2. Map amendments to the Foster City Zoning Map (RZ2022-0002);
3. General Plan Amendment to the land use descriptions in the Land Use Element to clarify densities already allowed in the mixed use designations in the General Plan, including Civic Center Mixed Use, and Service Commercial with Housing (GP2022-0001); and
4. Update to the preferences for tenants of affordable housing units in the Existing Unit Purchase Program.
67 No action is requested at this time. The proposed actions listed above will be scheduled for a Planning Commission Public Hearing in December and City Council Public Hearing in early January 2023.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The proposed zoning and general plan amendments are a portion of the actions that are necessary to implement policies and programs contained in the RHNA Cycle 6 Housing Element for 2023-2031. The changes described in this staff report make up the initial group of changes needed; in the Housing Element, their target timeline is “upon Housing Element adoption,” which means that they should be adopted prior to or at the same time as the Housing Element.
In the case of the zoning actions for “carry-over” housing sites identified in the Sites Inventory in both the RHNA 5 Housing Element and also in the RHNA 6 Housing Element and zoning actions needed for sites to accommodate the lower income RHNA, adoption by January 31, 2023 is required in order for the City to avoid providing for a “by-right” process for these sites (explained in more detail in the Analysis section below).
In addition, a variety of zoning text amendments are proposed to bring the City’s zoning regulations into compliance with changes in State law. Many of these are in response to comments from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on the Draft Housing Element.
These amendments are tentatively scheduled for Planning Commission consideration on December 1, 2022 and City Council in January 2023.
BACKGROUND
California Government Code Section 65580-65589.8 requires local jurisdictions to update the Housing Element of their General Plan every eight years to adequately plan for the regional housing needs of residents of all income groups. Housing Elements are required to contain a series of goals, policies and implementing programs that are intended to promote housing production within a community. These goals, policies and programs are required to be accompanied by a list of eligible land resources, the Sites Inventory, identified for residential development to accommodate the State- mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation, or RHNA.
68 A community’s RHNA represents the number of housing units at various income levels that are needed to meet the community’s housing needs during the eight-year planning period. RHNA numbers are determined by a methodology established by the State of California’s Department of Finance (DOF) and Housing and Community Development Department (HCD). HCD then assigns RHNA numbers to each region of the State. In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) receives HCD’s assignments and determines each local jurisdiction’s fair share of housing units. Each jurisdiction must then update the Housing Element to show the locations where future housing can be built and discuss strategies necessary to meet the community’s housing needs.
The existing Housing Element for the 2015-2023 Planning Period covers the fifth cycle of the RHNA process, referenced as RHNA 5; the proposed Draft Housing Element 2023-2031 covers the sixth cycle, referenced as RHNA 6.
The Foster City RHNA 6 Housing Element Update 2023-2031 process began in spring 2021 with community outreach using a variety of methods, including a website (https://engagefostercity.org/housing-element) with updates, timelines and document links. A public review draft was published in spring 2022 and was the subject of public meetings, including two Joint Planning Commission/City Council Study Sessions on April 21, 2022 and May 7, 2022.
A revised Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD on July 5, 2022. The City received a comment letter from HCD on October 3, 2022, which recommends revisions before a final draft is submitted for review.
The proposed zoning and general plan amendments are a portion of the actions that are necessary to implement policies and programs contained in the RHNA Cycle 6 Housing Element for 2023-2031. The changes described in this staff report make up the initial group of changes needed; in the Housing Element, their target timeline is “upon Housing Element adoption,” which means that they should be adopted prior to or at the same time as the Housing Element.
In the case of the zoning actions for “carry-over” housing sites identified in the Sites Inventory in both the RHNA 5 Housing Element and the RHNA 6 Housing Element, and any zoning actions needed for sites to accommodate the lower income RHNA, adoption by January 31, 2023 is required in order for the City to avoid providing for a “by-right” process for these sites (explained in more detail in the Analysis section below). As mentioned in HCD’s comment letter of October 3, 2022 (see p. 11 of the Exhibit attached to 69 the letter), if any rezoning necessary to provide adequate sites for the lower- income RHNA is not completed by January 31, 2023, the housing element must include program(s) to rezone the site with appropriate zoning and development standards pursuant to Government Code section 65583(c)(1) and 65583.2 subdivisions (h) and (i), which includes provisions for “by-right” approvals.
The Draft Foster City Housing Element includes policies and programs to address the City’s housing needs, some of which can be implemented by updating the zoning ordinance and General Plan as proposed in this package of amendments. Many of the amendments to the zoning ordinance proposed as part of this package are required for consistency with recent changes in State law, as explained in the Analysis section below. Additional code amendments and program implementation will be necessary throughout the eight year Housing Element cycle.
PUBLIC NOTICING/OUTREACH
The public was advised of this Study Session in the following ways:
Public Posting Places – October 28, 2022
Foster City Website: www.fostercity.org – October 28, 2022 Housing Element Update Website: https://engagefostercity.org/housing- element -
Email Notification to HOAs – October 31, 2022
Email Notification to listserves for Housing Element, Planning, Affordable Housing Updates, AHOZ/Multi-Family Design Standards, Gilead Project, Harbor Cover, Land Use and Circulation Update, Lantern Cove Apartments, and News/Press Release – October 31, 2022
¼ page ad in the Foster City Islander – November 2, 2022 Press release dated October 26, 2022
ANALYSIS
Table 1 below contains a summary of this first set of proposed amendments to the City’s zoning ordinance, General Plan, and policies as called for by the RHNA 6 Draft Housing Element. The amendments are described in more detail following Table 1.
70 Table 1: Summary of Proposed Zoning, General Plan, and Policy Updates by Housing Element Program Number
71 72
73 Below, each item in the table is discussed in more detail. Some items are grouped, such as Items 1-2, which are action items listed within a single program. The Items are listed by number and described in two parts:
A description of the proposed change.
State law requirements relevant to the change. Many of these changes are required by the state law.
Item 1: Rezone R-3 RHNA 5 sites to R-4
Item 2: Rezone R-4 RHNA 5 sites to allow by-right development
Description. Items 1 and 2 are requirements under the same rule governing sites which were used in the previous Housing Element cycle. Namely, any site that is included in the Sites Inventory in both the current (RHNA 5) and proposed (RHNA 6) Housing Element must either be “up-zoned” (meaning zoned for a higher intensity of use) or rezoned to allow for “by right” development of housing at specific densities if the project includes at least 20% of its units as affordable to lower income (very low- and low- income) households. “By-right” development means that the use is allowed by right, and does not need discretionary review, but does not preclude the imposition of objective design review standards.(1)
There are six (6) sites identified in both the RHNA 5 housing element and RHNA 6 Draft Housing Element. These sites are discussed in more detail in Appendix D of the RHNA 6 Draft Housing Element on pages D-11 through D-20 of the HCD Draft Housing Element dated July 2022. The six (6) sites are included in the Map of Sites from the Draft Housing Element (Attachment 1). The RHNA 6 Housing Element proposes a zoning map amendment to either up-zone or apply an overlay for by-right development to these sites:
Table 2: Zoning Map Amendments for RHNA 5 Sites
Site Name APN Address Existing
Zoning
Proposed
Zoning
Harbor
Cove
094-470-420 900 E. Hillsdale
Blvd.
R-3 R-4/PD
Franciscan 094-091-020 888 Foster City
Blvd.
R-3/AHO R-4/PD/AHO
Sand Cove 094-470-160 777 Shell Blvd. R-3/PD/AHO R-4/PD/AHO Lagoons 094-472-010 611 Bounty Dr. R-3/PD/AHO R-4/PD/AHO 74 Beach Cove 094-320-040
094-330-010
699-703
Catamaran St.
R-4/PD/AHO R-4/PD/AHO
with By-Right
Overlay for
development
with 20% lower
income
Shadow
Cove
091-312-420 1055 Foster
City Blvd.
R-4/PD/AHO R-4/PD/AHO
with By-Right
Overlay for
development
with 20% lower
income
All six (6) sites are designated Apartment Residential on the Land Use Map of the General Plan. As described in the Land Use Element of the General Plan (see p. 3-17), Apartment Residential allows densities of 20-35 units per acre, with additional density above the density ranges pursuant to Density Bonus Law and other incentives. The General Plan Land Use Map designation for the sites will remain Apartment Residential. The zoning of a city generally must be consistent with its general plan(2).
Recent California court cases have clarified that the General Plan land use designation prevails with respect to any zoning regulation that may describe a lower density. With the zoning text amendment described below, both R-3 and R-4 zoning would allow up to 35 units/acre, giving them equal density potential. The difference in height allowance between the two zones is seven feet (7’), a minor change.
As currently written, the R-3 district allows densities up to 19.89 units per acre and the R-4 district allows densities up to 34.99 units per acre (see additional discussion on amending the R-3 and R-4 maximum density for conformance with the General Plan under Item 4, below). The first four (4) sites would be up-zoned, from their current R-3 or R-3/PD zone to the proposed R-4/PD zone, with a Zoning Map Amendment .
The last two (2) sites are already zoned R-4 and therefore cannot be up-zoned, as there is no higher intensity residential zone in Foster City; they would therefore be zoned for by-right development using an overlay district. This overlay is described in a new section of the Zoning Code, Chapter 17.94, By Right Housing Overlay and would be applied to the two (2) properties with a Zoning Map Amendment. In practical terms, if a residential development with at least 20% lower income affordable units is proposed for these sites, the application would need to be processed ministerially, using objective design standards for its review.
State Law Requirement.Government Code Section 65583.2 contains the requirements for the Sites Inventory. HCD’s Site Inventory Guidebook provides guidance for complying with these requirements. The Guidebook notes on p. 11 that for sites that have been rezoned to allow a higher density and therefore increasing potential housing 75 capacity of the site, they can be considered a “new” site for the purposes of the housing element inventory. This avoids the requirement for a “by right” process for reused sites.
For the first four (4) sites currently zoned R-3 (including R-3/AHO and R-3/PD/AHO), rezoning them from R-3 to R-4 will allow them to be considered “new” housing sites and avoid the “by-right” process requirement as well as assist in providing evidence that the projected capacities can be achieved. If they are not rezoned, the required alternative is to provide a “by-right” process for these sites.
For the last two (2) sites, a “by right” process is required for housing developments in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households.
Housing developments that do not contain the requisite 20 percent would still be allowed to be developed according to the underlying (base) zoning but would not be eligible for “by right” processing.
Item 3: Rezone Foster’s Landing from R-3/PD to R-4/PD and Eaves from R-3 to R- 4/PD
Description. Although a zoning change for Foster’s Landing or the Eaves apartment communities is not mentioned in the HCD Draft Housing Element dated July 2022, rezoning of the Foster’s Landing site from R-3/PD to R-4/PD and the Eaves from R-3 to R-4/PD is proposed to be included in the next Draft Housing Element in order to demonstrate that the capacity included in the Sites Inventory can be achieved on these sites in response to a comment from HCD that the element must also clarify whether a site will need to be rezoned.
State Law Requirement. As indicated above, Government Code Section 65860 generally requires that the zoning be consistent with the General Plan. Rezoning to R-4 will allow these sites to more clearly be able to achieve the 35 units/acre allowed by the Apartment Residential Land Use designation currently allowed in the General Plan and to be consistent with the capacities included for them in the Sites Inventory of the Housing Element of the General Plan.
Although Foster’s Landing and Eaves were not housing sites in the RHNA 5 Housing Element and not subject to the “carry-over” requirements, the City is required to provide substantial evidence that the capacities projected can be achieved on all of the sites.
The proposed rezoning to R-4 will have the same 35 units/acre density allowed by the General Plan, but the additional 7’ height limit will help support the projected capacities.
Item 4: Amend R-3 and R-4 for consistency with General Plan minimum and maximum densities
Description. Chapters 17.18 R-3 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residence District and 17.20 R-4 High Density Multiple-Family Residence District would be modified to more clearly reflect the allowed densities described in the General Plan. The General 76 Plan allows for densities of 15-35 units/acre for sites designated Condominium Residential, and for 20-35 units/acre for sites designated Apartment Residential. These densities are reflected in the “Area, bulk, yard and height regulations” table present in each zoning chapter.
In R-3, the Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit column would be revised from 2,190 to 1,244 square feet, to correctly reflect the maximum density of 35 units/acre, and a Maximum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit column has been added, with 2,178/2,904 square feet shown, to reflect the minimum densities of 15 units/acre for condominiums and 20 units/acre for apartments, respectively.
In R-4, the Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit column has been updated from 1,245 to 1,244 square feet, to correctly reflect the maximum density of 35 units/acre, and a Maximum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit column has been added, with 2,178/2,904 square feet shown, to reflect the minimum densities of 15 units/acre for condominiums and 20 units/acre for apartments.
State law requirement: As noted above, Government Code Section 65860 generally requires that the zoning be consistent with the General Plan. In addition, Government Code Section 65589.5(j)(4) of the Housing Accountability Act, as amended in 2018, states in part:
For the purpose of this section, a proposed housing development project is not inconsistent with the applicable zoning standards and criteria, and shall not require a rezoning, if the housing development project is consistent with the objective general plan standards and criteria but the zoning for the project site is inconsistent with the general plan. If the local agency has complied with paragraph (2), the local agency may require the proposed housing development project to comply with the objective standards and criteria of the zoning which is consistent with the general plan, however, the standards and criteria shall be applied to facilitate and accommodate development at the density allowed on the site by the general plan and proposed by the proposed housing development project.(3)
Item 5: Rezone Commercial Housing Opportunity Site to Allow Mixed Use
Description. The Commercial Housing Opportunity Site at 1010 Metro Center was identified by the Housing Element as a site for future housing. The site is within the boundaries of the General Plan land use designation of Town Center Commercial and is zoned C-2 General Business District. The language in the Town Center Commercial designation in the Land Use Element is currently being modified to accommodate requests to allow R&D uses and include residential uses allowed in Town Center and to specify allowed densities.
The C-2 District does include the following as a conditional use: “F. Any permitted use in any residential (R) districts” but does not specify allowed densities. Chapter 17.26 C- 2 General Business District is proposed to be modified to allow only R-3 and R-4 77 residential uses in future development. Two columns are proposed to be added to the chapter’s Area, bulk, yard and height regulations table for Minimum and Maximum Lot Area Per Dwelling Unit (2,904 and 544 respectively) to reflect a density range of 15-60 units/acre. This reflects the existing allowed densities in the C-2 District, including:
Metro Senior Apartments: 60 units/acre
Citypark Townhouses 26 units/acre
Cityhomes East and Cityhomes West: 15 units/acre
This would allow the property owner of 1010 Metro Center Blvd. the option to propose commercial use, residential use, or a mix of commercial and residential uses. In additional discussions with the property owner following the publication of the Draft Housing Element in July 2022, he reiterated his desire to have flexibility to propose commercial, residential, or a mix of uses.
State law requirement.Government Code Section 65583(a)(3) requires that cities demonstrate they have adequate sites to meet their housing obligations. Sites can be located in both residential and mixed use zones. Government Code Section 65583.2(a)(3) includes “residentially zoned sites…” and “sites zoned for nonresidential use that can be redeveloped for residential use…” This change, combined with Item 4 below, will provide consistency between the General Plan Land Use designations and the zoning for the densities allowed in the mixed use designations.
Item 6: Mixed Use Densities: Amend General Plan Land Use Designations
Description. The General Plan land use designations of Civic Center Mixed Use and Service Commercial with Housing already allow housing, but the descriptions do not include density ranges that reflect what has been allowed in these areas. This modification would add language to these sections in the General Plan, to provide guidance on what densities are allowed:
For Civic Center Mixed Use, the maximum density would be revised from 20-35 acres to 35-80 units/acre. This reflects existing densities in the Foster Square development including:
1. Alma Point Senior Apartments: 80 units/acre
2. Atria Assisted Living: 77 units/acre
3. Foster Square Condominiums: 40 units/acre
For Service Commercial with Housing, a description of this land use designation was missing from the General Plan. The existing description for Service 78 Commercial was replicated, with the addition of a density range of 14-60 units/acre. This reflects existing densities in the Pilgrim Triton Area including:
1. Triton Apartments: 58 units/acre
2. Plaza Apartments: 50 units/acre
3. One Hundred Grand Apartments: 49 units/acre
4. The Pilgrim Apartments (Workforce): 31 units/acre
5. Laguna Vista Townhouses: 17 units/acre
6. Waverly Cove Townhouses: 14 units/acre
State law requirement. Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3)) requires that cities demonstrate they have adequate sites to meet their housing obligations. Sites can be located in both residential and mixed use zones. The clarification of the allowed densities will support the capacities proposed in the Sites Inventory.
Item 7: Minimize Zoning Constraints
Description. Two constraints were identified for immediate removal in the Housing Element: floor area standards and manufactured homes. The first, Item 7a, describes floor area standards, or minimum sizes for each type and size of dwelling unit. By requiring larger units, this standard prevents the development of smaller units, which are inherently more affordable. To remove this constraint, Chapter 17.65 Floor Area Standards is proposed to be rescinded, along with all references to the chapter throughout the code (list of impacted chapters is provided in the table above).
The second constraint, Items 7b and 7c, revolves around manufactured homes, building materials and types, and the evolution of the construction industry. Many new types of manufactured and factory built homes have been developed, and State law has changed to incorporate them. In order to stay consistent with State law and ensure homes of all sizes and construction types are encouraged, the following changes are proposed:
1. In Chapter 17.04 Definitions, “Mobilehome” would be rescinded, to be replaced with “Manufactured Home”
2. In Chapter 17.12 R-1 Single Family Residence District, new language describing factory built and manufactured homes would be inserted.
The new language in R-1 would clarify that modular or factory built homes should be considered the same as any other construction type, and lists the federal regulations which apply to manufactured homes when they are used as permanent dwellings.
An additional program to minimize constraints is proposed to streamline the Planned Development (PD) process for housing developments. The current PD process requires 79 a General Development Plan (GDP) to be established by a zoning map amendment by City Council Ordinance and the Specific Development Plan/Use Permit (SDP/UP) to be approved by Planning Commission Resolution. The GDP is the more general framework for the development and the SDP/UP includes the more specific site plan, building architecture, and landscape planning. The current requirement for a zoning map amendment may not meet HCD’s guidance for sites in the Sites Inventory to be considered “suitable for residential development if zoned appropriately and available for residential use during the planning period.” By changing the process for housing developments to have their GDP approved by City Council Resolution instead of by Ordinance eliminates the need for a zoning amendment, but still provides for review by both the Planning Commission and City Council.
State law requirements. Government Code Section 65583(a)(5-6) requires that the Housing Element include a discussion of the factors that present constraints to the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels and for persons with disabilities. Government Code Section 65852.3 requires that manufactured homes on a foundation system be allowed on lots zoned for conventional single family dwellings.
Item 8: Replacement Unit Requirements
Description. State law requires that each jurisdiction have a policy of “no net loss,” meaning that the total count of residential units in the jurisdiction shall not be reduced, even when housing units are demolished or altered. In these cases, new units must be built as replacement units. The focus of this policy is on affordability and ensuring that affordable units are not replaced with market rate units. To this end, the replacement provisions of the policy must state that all units shall be replaced at the same level of affordability.
A new chapter is proposed to comply with these requirements, Chapter 17.55 Replacement Units.
State law requirements. Government Code Section 65915 contains density bonus provisions and includes affordability provisions for replacement units in subdivision (c)(3) that replacement units shall match the proportion of lower income renter households previously existing at the site and if the proportion is not known, it shall be rebuttably presumed that the proportion of lower income renter households is the same as the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) data for the jurisdiction.
Government Code Section 66300(d) of the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 references the requirements in 65915 and includes requirements for replacement units, relocation benefits, and existing tenants’ right of first refusal for a comparable unit in the new development.
Item 9: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
80 Description. The California state legislature has made changes to the State ADU laws for many years running. Proposed updates at this time would simply bring the City’s ADU ordinance into compliance with the most recent updates and changes. Changes focus on the following areas:
Attached ADUs were limited to sixteen (16) feet in height, now revised to twenty-five (25) feet or the primary dwelling height, whichever is lower.
1. Where ADUs are located within ½ mile of a major transit stop or on a lot with a multifamily multistory dwelling, it shall not exceed eighteen (18) feet, with exceptions.
2. Any properties with ADUs built or developed by a nonprofit corporation, as defined, may qualify to be sold or conveyed separately from the primary residence.
3. If a local agency has not acted upon the completed application for an ADU within 60 days, the application shall be deemed approved.
4. Various minor clarifications.
State law requirements.California Government Code Section 65852.2 et seq. contains the regulations pertaining to ADUs. New legislation regarding ADUs has been adopted each year since 2016. Staff also used the Accessory Dwelling Unit Handbook Updated July 2022 published by HCD to review the recent legislation.
Item 10: Employee Housing Act
Description. The Employee Housing Act requires that all jurisdictions allow for the provision of employee housing for six (6) or fewer employees. Employee housing of this size must be permitted where single family housing is permitted, without any additional permitting or regulation requirements. Two changes are proposed to meet this requirement: 1) the addition of Employee Housing to Chapter 17.04 Definitions, and the addition of Employee Housing to the permitted uses listed in Chapter 17.12 R-1 Single Family Residential District.
State law requirements. California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5 (Employee Housing Act) requires jurisdictions to permit employee housing for six or fewer employees as a single-family use. Other provisions of the Employee Housing Act apply to larger employee housing uses, which are deemed agricultural uses and therefore not relevant to Foster City.
Item 11: Existing Unit Purchase Program-Opportunities for Supportive Housing
Description. The City has an Existing Unit Purchase Program, created in 1997 pursuant to the Community Development Agency’s Affordable Housing Strategic Plan, with the goal of acquiring existing residential units to provide affordable rental housing for larger families. The City now owns six units that are rented to very low- and low-income families as part of this program. As part of this program, the City established a 81 preference order for tenants of the units. The Housing Element has identified a need for supportive housing, especially for persons with disabilities, due to compounding issues such as low income, racial discrimination, need for supportive services, and/or other factors. The proposed change to the Existing Unit Purchase Program would adjust the preferences, so that when vacancies occur, supportive housing providers would have an opportunity to propose renting the unit to provide supportive housing for people with disabilities. If no acceptable proposals are received, then the unit would continue to be rented to very low- and low-income households.
State law requirements. Government Code Section 65583(a)(7) requires an analysis of special housing needs. Section 65583(c)(3) requires the jurisdiction where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental constraints to housing, including housing for persons with disabilities.
Item 12: Low Barrier Navigation Center
Description. Low Barrier Navigation Centers are homeless shelters that focus on moving clients into permanent housing, providing services, and presenting as few barriers to their use as possible. State law requires that they be allowed by right in areas zoned for mixed use and non-residential zones permitting multifamily uses. In order to comply with state law, changes to the zoning code would include:
The addition of “Navigation Center, Low Barrier” to Chapter 17.04 Definitions; The addition of Low Barrier Navigation Centers to the list of uses permitted by right in the C-1 Neighborhood Business District zone;
The addition of Low Barrier Navigation Centers to the list of uses permitted by right in the P-F Public Facilities District zone; and
The addition of text describing Low Barrier Navigation Centers, their development standards and requirements, permitting, processes, and definitions specific to their use, to Chapter 17.82 Emergency Shelters.
State law requirements. Government Code Section 65660 (added by AB 101 in 2019) requires a Low Barrier Navigation Center (LBNC) be a use by right in areas zoned for mixed use and nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses if it meets specified requirements
Item 13: Supportive Housing
Description: Supportive Housing is housing with no limit on length of stay that is linked to on- or off-site services that assist residents in retaining housing, improving health, and maximizing residents’ ability to live and work in the community. State law requires that supportive housing be allowed by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including in non-residential zones. In order to comply with state law, changes to the zoning code would include the addition of text describing Supportive 82 Housing, their development standards and requirements, permitting, processes, and definitions specific to their use, to the existing provisions in Chapter 17.82 Emergency Shelters.
State law requirements. Government Code Section 65651(added by AB 2162) requires that supportive housing shall be a use by right in zones where multifamily and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multifamily uses. The regulation requires a local government to approve, within statutory timelines, a supportive housing development that complies with specified criteria.
SUMMARY
These zoning actions will follow through on the City’s obligations for implementation of housing sites identified in the Sites Inventory in the RHNA 5 Housing Element and make certain changes in order to implement the RHNA 6 Housing Element for 2023- 2031. The zoning actions that are necessary to provide sites for the lower income RHNA and to allow the reuse of “carry over” RHNA 5 sites without a “by right” process must be adopted by January 31, 2023.
Jurisdictions that fail to adopt a Housing Element and have those Housing Elements certified by HCD within 120 days of the statutory deadline must complete all other necessary rezones within one year of that statutory deadline (as opposed to three years if the City has a certified Housing Element by May 31, 2023) to maintain housing element compliance.
NEXT STEPS
The proposed amendments will be noticed for consideration at Planning Commission Public Hearing tentatively scheduled for December 2022 and City Council public Hearings tentatively scheduled for January 2023.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
The Housing Element Update supports the City Council’s Value/Priority Area under “Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy” which is to protect, maintain, and enhance our community character through thoughtful planning as well as “City Council Operations and Improved Community Engagement” where the City Council operates at the highest level of civil discourse, encouraging resident encouragement and full transparency.
Footnotes:
(1)HCD Housing Element Site Inventory Guidebook, 6/10/2020, p.12. 83 https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing- element/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf
(2) Govt C §65860.
(3) Cal. Gov. Code § 65589.5(j)(4).
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 - Map of Sites
USEFUL LINKS
Foster City Municipal Code
Foster City General Plan
Foster City Draft Housing Element: 2023-2031
Local Zoning Best Practices for Shelter and Transitional and Supportive Housing, Public Counsel, October 2017
Programs to Rezone-Technical Memo, ABAG, March 10, 2022 The “Builder’s Remedy” and Housing Elements, ABAG, November 3, 2022 84
'FFU
N
0RYHIUDPHWRSURMHFWORFDWLRQ
6HWVFDOHWRSUHIHUUHGVFDOH
6DYHSUHIHUUHGVFDOHWRERRNPDUNVZLWKVSHFLILFGHWDLOV 7XUQRQ$GGOD\HUVDVDSSURSULDWH
,IXVLQJDHULDOGHFLGHEHWZHHQ(65,RU%LQJ
ZKLFKHYHULVEHWWHU
2QFHVHWFRQYHUWVWUHHWODEHOVWRDQQRWDWLRQVDQGDGMXVWSRVLWLRQDFFRUGLQJO\ RUGRLQ$,
([SRUWDV$GREH,OOXVWUDWRUILOH
Miles
N 0 0.25 0.5 1
Foster City Municipal Boundary
Foster City Zoning Sites
Harbor Cove
Apt Site
Fosters
Landing
Site
Sand Cove
Apt Site
Lagoons
Apt Site
Franciscian
Apt Site
Beach Cove
Apt Site
Shadow Cove
Apt Site
Eaves Apt
Site
MAP OF SITES
85