Foster City City Council
March 20, 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 915

3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
HE-40 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-E-2-a: Inclusionary 20%
Requirement
 Ensure inclusionary units are
provided consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-2-b: Affordable Housing Overlay
Inclusionary 15% Requirements
Including Extremely Low-Income
 Ensure inclusionary units are
provided consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-6-a: Home Sharing Program  Ongoing: at least 5 new matches per year
 H-E-10-a: Improve Housing Mobility
and Increase Missing Middle Housing
Choices
 Annually review progress; if at midcycle review in 2027 the City is not on track, then initiate necessary zoning
text or map amendments or other
changes.

Foster City’s low production of affordable
housing limits housing choices of Black or
African American and Hispanic households
who have lower incomes.

Foster City has had limited production of
affordable housing. Since 2015, the
housing that has received permits to
accommodate growth has largely been
priced for above moderate-income
households. Pursuant to the City’s
inclusionary requirements, approximately
20% of the new housing units since 2015
are restricted for very low-, low- and
moderate-income households, leaving
approximately 80% at market rate, which
is affordable to moderate or above
moderate-income households. Just 9% of
the City’s rental units rent for $2,000 and
less. San Mateo County has four times the
proportion of rentals priced under $2,000
than the city. High Priority
Increase the supply of affordable
housing through a variety of programs
(described above).

Foster City’s multi-family housing is aging
and vulnerable to redevelopment and
displacement of low- and moderate-income
households.

The high water table in Foster City creates
maintenance needs, particularly for multifamily buildings. Moderate Priority Aging, low-density apartment
developments may have economic
incentives to redevelop. High Priority
Protect tenants from displacement
through an anti-displacement strategy:
 H-C-2-c: Replacement Unit
Requirements

 Amend requirements by December
2023
 H-C-3-a: Anti-Displacement Plan for
Redevelopment of Existing
Multifamily Developments
 Establish submittal requirements by
December 2023

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 916

3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-41
Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  Review and approve of an AntiDisplacement Plan that minimizes displacement for any repair or
redevelopment that would displace
one or more tenants
 H-C-3-b: Anti-Displacement Strategy  Implement program by December 2024
Residents report experiencing fair housing
discrimination in Foster City mostly based on
disability and/or being a voucher
holder/source of income. Few of those
experiencing discrimination file complaints or
take action.

Tenants’ and property owners’ lack of
knowledge about fair housing laws. High
Priority
Property owners violating fair housing
laws. High Priority
Tenants fear of retaliation, few options to
relocate. High Priority
Address housing discrimination
through fair housing outreach and
education:
 H-C-3-c: Facilitate Resolution of
Rental Disputes
 Ongoing
 H-C-3-d: Facilitate Tenant Protection
Act of 2019 (AB 1482)
 Update website by December 2023
 Provide at least one information
session per year
 H-G-1-a: Non-Discrimination  Update website by December 2023  Hold at least one (1) informational
sessions for landlords and tenants
annually beginning in 2024
 H-G-2-a: Anti-Discrimination
Regulations
 Implement program by December
2023
 Provide updated information
annually
 H-G-2-b: Fair Housing Training for
Landlords and Tenants
 Conduct at least one fair housing
training for tenants and landlords
annually, beginning in 2024
 H-G-2-c: Information Specific to Fair
Housing
 Implement program by December
2023
 Number of physical locations the
resources are made available without
requiring internet access
 H-G-2-d: Multilingual Tenant
Resources
 Implement program by December
2024
 Collaboration for provision of
multilingual fair housing services
 H-G-2-e: Rental Registry  Research options and report to City Council by December 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 917

3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
HE-42 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines Provide additional support and
opportunities for housing to meet
special needs:
 H-E-1-a: Existing Unit Purchase
Program-Opportunities for
Supportive Housing
 One (1) unit converted to supportive
housing by 2031
 H-E-9-a: Family Friendly Housing  Facilitate ten(10) rental units of 3 or more bedrooms by 2031.
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing units  Facilitate ten (10) rental units less than 500 SF by 2031
 H-F-1-a: Facilities and Services for
Special Needs
 Establish expedited permit review
process and begin annual proactive
outreach by December 2023
 Facilitate at least one (1) new facility
serving special needs population
during the planning period
 H-F-1-c: Adaptable/Accessible Units
for the Disabled
 Ensure accessible and adaptable
units are provided consistent with
the California Building Code and that
affirmative marketing is included
consistent with Chapter 17.90 and
the City’s BMR Administrative
Guidelines
 H-F-1-d: Reasonable
Accommodation
 Amend Chapter 17.84 by December
2023
 Update City’s website by December
2023
 H-F-1-e: Home Sharing for Special
Needs Population
 At least 50% of home share matches
assist someone with special needs
 H-F-1-f: Support Services for Special
Needs Population
 Roundtable at least annually
 H-F-1-g: Extremely Low-Income
Units for Special Needs
 Ensure affirmative marketing plan is
provided and implemented for ELI
units
 H-F-1-h: Age Friendly Initiative  Adopt Age-Friendly Action Plan by December 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 918

3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-43
Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-F-1-i: Community Care Facilities  Amend regulations by December 2024
 H-F-1-j: Public Investment in
Accessibility
 Target areas with higher disabled
populations – Census Tracts 6083
and 6080.25
 Number of capital improvement
projects identified in the CIP budget
each year that include accessibility
improvements
 H-F-3-a: Transitional and Supportive
Housing Zoning
 Ensure regulations are applied so
that transitional and supportive
housing is subject only to the same
restrictions as other residential uses
in the same zone
 H-F-3-b: Supportive Housing  Amend regulations by December 2023
Black or African American, Hispanic, and
Pacific Islander students are less likely than
other students to meet college admission
standards and have higher high school
dropout rates.

The underlying factors for these
differences are unknown and need to be
examined as part of AFFH actions. Low
Priority
 Increase the supply of affordable
housing through a variety of
programs (described above).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 919

3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
HE-44 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 920
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-45
CHAPTER 4 | CONSTRAINTS
Many factors can constrain the provision of the quantity and affordability of housing. These include governmental factors such as land use controls, development standards, and fees as well as nongovernmental factors, such as the price of land, cost of construction, and environmental constraints.

State law, specifically 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, including both government actions and market forces (non-governmental constraints).

The identification and analysis of these constraints have informed the City of Foster City’s development of appropriate programs that mitigate these constraints, as provided in Chapter 8, Housing Goals, Policies, and Programs.

GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
City policies and regulations designed to address the City’s goals for the overall quality of housing, preservation of neighborhood character, or safety or environmental goals can also result in constraints to housing.

This section describes the City’s policies and regulations that could potentially constrain housing and discusses measures to reduce such constraints.

KEY FINDINGS
Appendix C, Constraints, includes a detailed analysis of the potential constraints imposed by the City’s policies and regulations, including General Plan Land Use designations, zoning regulations, development standards, parking requirements, inclusionary housing requirements, fees, permit processing procedures, and other factors. A summary of the key findings is provided below.
 General Plan and Zoning Standards: The City’s Land Use and Circulation Element of the General Plan includes designations for various types of land uses on the Land Use Plan and also includes policies to guide development. Title 17, Zoning, of the Municipal Code regulates the types of uses, location, density, and scale of residential development as well as specifics such as parking, open space, landscaping, and other design-related requirements through standards. Limited densities in areas with adjacent higher densities

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 921

4. CONSTRAINTS
HE-46 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
and services nearby unnecessarily restrict additional housing. Program H-D-1-b is added to make ‘General Plan and Zoning Amendments to Facilitate Housing on Housing Opportunity Sites in the Site Inventory.’
 Development Standards: There are many locally imposed development standards that can affect the type, appearance, and cost of housing built in Foster City. Uncertainty of the City’s expectation can result in additional processing time and cost. The Housing Accountability Act, among other things, prohibits a jurisdiction from denying or reducing the density of residential and mixed-use projects (comprised of 2/3 or more residential) if the project complies with objective design standards, unless a finding can be made that the project would have an unavoidable impact on public health or safety that cannot be mitigated in any way other than rejecting the project or reducing its size. Programs H-D-6-e and H-D-6-f are added to amend the Zoning regulations, including but not limited to R-3 and R-4, to include objective design standards and objective approval findings for new and redeveloped multi-family or mixed-use developments.
 Minimum Floor Area: Foster City zoning regulations include a minimum floor area for single-family dwelling, townhouse, condominium or apartment and this precludes some type of housing. Program H-D-6-b is added to rescind the minimum floor area requirement. These requirements were rescinded in January 2023.
 Parking Requirements: Parking requirements can add significantly to the cost of housing. Parking requirements are intended to provide adequate on-site parking so that parking doesn’t impact adjacent areas. Program H-D-6-c is added to amend parking requirements for multi-family housing as necessary, including but not limited to setting a maximum of two stalls per unit and reducing guest parking requirements by 50%.
 Fees: Housing construction imposes certain short- and long-term costs upon local government, such as the cost of providing planning services and inspections. As a result, the City relies upon various planning and development fees to recoup costs and ensure that essential services and infrastructure are available when needed. Most, if not all, developers consider any fee a significant constraint to the development of affordable housing. Although the various fees account for a significant portion of the development cost, the fees collected are necessary to pay for much needed infrastructure and to help mitigate new growth throughout the city. Foster City’s fees are higher than the median but within the interquartile range for single-family and multi-family units in a small project but are significantly lower than the median and the quartile 1 for multi-family units in a large project (see tables in Appendix C for more detail).
 Impact Fees: Impact fees are also charged to cover the cost of providing municipal services or mitigating project impacts. Program H-D-6-d is added to provide a 75% reduction in development impact fees for very low- and low-income units, provided that at least 20% of the units in the project are designated as affordable, and a 100% fee reduction for very low- and low-income units if at least 25% of the units in the project are designated as affordable per adopted Resolution No. 2022-75.  Processing Procedures: Permit processing may pose a considerable constraint to the production and improvement of housing. Single-family home applications (a single unit on an existing lot) requires approximately one to two months from a complete submittal; while a multifamily family residential development consisting of 15 or more units can take approximately six to nine months. These timeframes are not unusual for residential developments in the region. The discrepancy in length of approval time between single family and multi-family developments is due to the level of complexity

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 922

4. CONSTRAINTS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-47
of larger multi-family projects. Program H-D-6-a is added to review the entire development process and remove any governmental and regulatory constraints to the production of affordable housing, including streamlining the preliminary review process and to allow more types of projects to be approved at the staff level.
 Standards Flexibility: Foster City provides for a Planned Development (PD) process to allow certain zoning requirements to be different from those which otherwise would be required by a zoning district. PD allows flexibility of design which is in accordance with the objectives and spirit of the general plan. The applicant can choose to comply with the objective standards in the base zoning or may request flexibility in those standards. Program H-D-3-a is added to amend the zoning regulations for the Planned Development Combining District, Chapter 17.36, to align with requirements for objective standards and retain the ability to provide flexibility.  Infrastructure: A Water Capacity Study was conducted to assess total projected water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years during a 20-year projection compared to the projected water demand associated with the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The Water Capacity Study concludes that the water demand associated with the 2023-2031 Housing Element, in addition to the existing and future uses will be accommodated during non-drought years within a 20-year projection. However, during single and multiple dry years, EMID’s total annual water demand is expected to exceed EMID’s available water supplies from 2025 to 2045 with or without the additional demand from the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The estimated demand from the 2023-2031 Housing Element, in addition to the demand from the existing and planned future uses, will exacerbate EMID’s existing projected water supply shortfall during single and multiple dry years. The Housing Element includes Policy H-A-4 Adequate Water Supply and Sewer Capacity for New Housing Development, as well as Program H-A-4-a Adequate Water Supply, to work with EMID to develop water conservation requirements and/or increased water supply that will ensure sufficient water capacity to accommodate the RHNA. See additional discussion of the Water Capacity Study below.  Inclusionary Requirements: While inclusionary zoning is intended to have a positive impact on housing affordability by increasing the supply of affordable units, it has the potential to add to the cost of market rate housing. Historically, Foster City has managed to include 15-30% BMR units in its residential developments as well as providing two 100% affordable senior apartment developments.

In March 2022, the City adopted Chapter 17.90, Below Market Rate Inclusionary Housing Program, establishing objective standards for the inclusionary housing requirements. The required rental percentages are: 10% very low-income, 5% low-income, and 5% moderate-income and the required percentage for ownership units is 20% moderate-income. The City also adopted requirements for the Affordable Housing Overlay Combining District of 4% extremely low-income, 4% very lowincome, and 7% low-income.

In conclusion, Foster City’s development and permitting process is not a constraint to housing development. The relatively small size of the City staff facilitates the various departments working closely to guide applicants through the development process. The City maintains public information on the City’s website to assist applicants, consistent with Government Code Section 65940.1(a)(1)(B), including information on fees, zoning and development standards, application requirements, fee reports, and nexus studies. Review by IDEC and at Planning Commission Study Sessions provide the applicant with early, informal feedback before expending additional time and expense on detailed plans. The additional objective design standards proposed in Programs H-B-4-a Update Architectural and Solar

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 923

4. CONSTRAINTS
HE-48 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Guidelines for Single-Family Homes, H-D-6-e Multi-Family Objective Design Standards, and H-D-6-f SB9 Objective Design Standards will provide additional predictability to the City’s requirements.

Several Housing Programs are proposed to examine and amend some of these requirements to reduce potential constraints, such as the elimination of minimum floor area requirements for specific dwelling unit types (Housing Program H-D-6-b) and amendment of the City’s parking standards (Housing Program H-D-6-c). See the section below on the Housing Constraints Action Plan for additional detail.

WATER SUPPLY
A Water Capacity Study was conducted to assess total projected water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years during a 20-year projection compared to the projected water demand associated with the 2023-2031 Housing Element.1 The Water Capacity Study concludes that the water demand associated with the 2023-2031 Housing Element, in addition to the existing and future uses will be accommodated during non-drought years within a 20-year projection. However, during single and multiple dry years, EMID’s total annual water demand is expected to exceed EMID’s available water supplies from 2025 to 2045 with or without the additional demand from the 2023-2031 Housing Element. The estimated demand from the 2023-2031 Housing Element, in addition to the demand from the existing and planned future uses, will exacerbate EMID’s existing projected water supply shortfall during single and multiple dry years.

The Housing Element includes Policy H-A-4 Adequate Water Supply and Sewer Capacity for New Housing Development, as well as Program H-A-4-a Adequate Water Supply, to work with EMID to develop water conservation requirements and/or increased water supply that will ensure sufficient water capacity to accommodate the RHNA, such as the potential use of water demand offset policies, require new and renovated developments to have “net neutral” water demand, or the use of recycled water for irrigation.

PROVISIONS FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING NEEDS
Appendix C also includes a section on Provisions for a Variety of Housing Needs to discuss how the City’s regulations do not constrain the provision of specific types of housing that address various housing needs, as required by State law. These include accessory dwelling units, housing for persons with disabilities, community care facilities, transitional and supportive housing, emergency shelters, and manufactured housing.

NONGOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Nongovernmental constraints are generally market factors over which individual local governments have little or no control and include land, labor and construction costs, and availability of financing.

Appendix C, Constraints, includes a detailed analysis of development costs, availability of financing, 1 The Water Capacity Study followed the requirements for water supply assessments contained in California Water Code Sections 10910 through 10915, amended by the enactment of Senate Bill 610 (SB 610) in2002. SB 610 requires an assessment of total projected water supplies available during normal, single-dry, and multiple-dry water years, during a 20-year projection, are sufficient to meet the projected water demand.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 924

4. CONSTRAINTS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-49
availability of construction labor, neighborhood opposition, and constraints specific to Foster City, such as:
 Geologic conditions requiring pile-supported foundations for most multi-story buildings;  High water table precluding underground parking; and
 High-voltage electric transmission lines precluding buildings in large areas of the City.

HOUSING CONSTRAINTS ACTION PLAN
This chapter has summarized a wide variety of constraints to the production and affordability of housing that are presented in more detail in Appendix C. The City’s policies and regulations are designed to address the City’s goals for the overall quality of housing, preservation of the City’s waterfront character, or safety or environmental goals, but can also result in constraints to housing. Table 4-1 below identifies the links between the constraints issues and contributing factors and highlights the key actions proposed to address these constraints.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 925

4. CONSTRAINTS
HE-50 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
TABLE 4-1: HOUSING CONSTRAINTS ACTION PLAN
Housing Constraints Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines Zoning densities Limited densities in areas with higher densities already adjacent and services
nearby unnecessarily restrict additional
housing.
 H-D-1-b: General Plan and Zoning
Amendments to Facilitate Housing on
Housing Opportunity Sites in the Site
Inventory
 Prior to or upon Housing Element
adoption
Development standards Uncertainty of the City’s expectations can result in additional processing time and
cost.

Increase certainty of the City’s standards:
 H-B-4-a: Update Architectural and Solar
Guidelines for Single Family Homes
 December 2025
 H-D-4-f: Objective Design Standards for
ADUs
 December 2024
 H-D-6-e: Multi-Family Objective Design
Standards
 December 2023
 H-D-6-f: SB 9 Objective Design
Standards
 December 2024
Zoning constraints such as minimum
unit sizes
Minimum unit sizes limit and/or preclude
some types of housing
 H-D-6-b: Minimize Zoning Constraints  Rescinded minimum floor areas in January 2023
 Amend zoning regulations by December
2024
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing Units  Amend zoning regulations by December 2024;
 Conduct outreach at least annually.
 Facilitate ten (10) rental units less than
500 SF by 2031
Parking requirements Parking requirements in excess of needs add to the cost of housing.
 H-D-6-c: Amend Parking Requirements  December 2024
Fees Fees add to the cost of housing.  H-D-6-d: Development Impact Fee Waivers
 Ongoing as applications submitted
Processing procedures Processing time can add to the cost of development.
 H-D-3-a: Update Planned Development
Process
 December 2026
 H-D-6-a: Minimize Governmental
Constraints
 Engage with affordable housing
developers by December 2024; Amend
code by December 2025; repeat in 2028
Infrastructure Water and sewer availability and roadway capacity can limit the ability to add
housing.
 H-A-4-a: Adequate Water Supply  Prior to or concurrent with adoption of Housing Element
 H-A-4-b: Housing Element Transmittal to
EMID
 Within 5 days of adoption
 H-A-4-c: Update Urban Water
Management Plan
 December 2025

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 926

4. CONSTRAINTS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-51
Housing Constraints Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-A-4-d: Water Conservation  Improve website and handouts by December 2023
 H-B-5-h: Water Supply Assessment  Ongoing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 927

4. CONSTRAINTS
HE-52 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 928
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT HE-53
CHAPTER 5 | HOUSING RESOURCES

AND SITES
Resources to provide additional housing include both physical sites as well as financial and administrative resources. State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3)) requires that cities demonstrate they have adequate sites to meet their housing obligations.

The City must complete an analysis of land resources to demonstrate capacity to meet the projected housing needs during the planning period, taking into consideration zoning, development standards, and the availability of public services and facilities to accommodate a variety of housing types and incomes. (See Appendix D for the detailed analysis of sites.) For a built-out city such as Foster City, finding sufficient sites can be a challenge.

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
The Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is the State-required process that seeks to ensure each California jurisdiction is planning for enough housing to accommodate their “fair share” of the State’s housing needs for all economic segments of the community. For this Housing Element cycle the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provided the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) with a Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) of 441,176 units. ABAG then developed a RHNA methodology to allocate the RHND across all cities, towns, and counties in the region.

Foster City’s RHNA by income category is provided in Table 5-1.

TABLE 5-1: FOSTER CITY REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION, 2023-2031 Income Category Units
Percent
of Total
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 520 27%
Low-Income (51-80% AMI) 299 16%
Moderate-Income (81-120% AMI) 300 16%
Above Moderate-Income (Over 120% of AMI) 777 41%
Total 1,896 100%
Note: AMI = Area Median-Income. Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

Source: Association of Bay Area Governments, Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan, 2021.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 929

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-54 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Recent changes to State law require jurisdictions to
continually maintain adequate capacity in their sites
inventories to meet their RHNA. The State’s “No Net Loss” requirements (Government Code Section 65853) stipulate
that a jurisdiction must provide sufficient sites at all times throughout the RHNA planning period. A jurisdiction can fall out of compliance if they take actions such as:
 Reduce a site’s residential density.
 Approve development applications with fewer units on the site than identified in the Housing Element.
 Approve development applications with higher income units than stated in the Housing Element.

In the event that a site is developed below the density projected in the Housing Element or at a different income level than projected, a jurisdiction must have adequate sites available to accommodate the remaining balance of the RHNA. If a jurisdiction does not have adequate sites, it must identify and potentially rezone additional sites that can accommodate the remaining need. In order to ensure that sufficient capacity exists in the housing element to accommodate the RHNA throughout the Planning Period, HCD recommends that jurisdictions create a buffer of at least 15% to 30% more capacity than required, especially to accommodate the lower-income RHNA.

The sites analysis demonstrates that there is adequate supply of suitable land to accommodate the City’s housing allocation of 1,896 units, including housing for very low-, low-, moderate-, and above moderateincome households.

EVALUATION OF SITES

LOCATION OF SITES
The City examined several factors to assess the suitability and feasibility of properties for residential development, using the criteria included in Housing Element Program H-D-1-a, which are closely related to the recommended “Best Practices” in the HCD Site Inventory Guidebook. In order to have measurable indicators, the following were used:
 Distance to major roadways. The City’s roadway system is classified into arterials, collectors, and local streets as indicated on Map G-5 in the Land Use and Circulation Element. Proximity to an arterial would minimize impacts on local streets.
 Distance to an evacuation route. Foster City is basically an island with limited ingress/egress points:

East Hillsdale Blvd. to San Mateo, SR 92 on/off ramps at Edgewater Blvd. and Foster City Blvd., and East Third Avenue to San Mateo. From the areas south of SR 92, access to East Hillsdale Boulevard was used to gauge distance to a major evacuation route.  Distance to a park.
 Distance to a grocery store.
 Distance to a bus stop (excluding the routes intended for school children).

RHNA CYCLES
This current RHNA cycle is the sixth time
the State has gone through the
RHNA/Housing Element process. When
referring to the current RHNA and current
Housing Element planning period, the
term “6th cycle” may be used.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 930

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-55
 Distance to the public library or City Recreation Center.  Adjacencies. The percentage of border not adjoining single-family or townhouse development was used to identify sites with more ability to locate new units away from existing low-density development.
 Affirmatively furthering fair housing by expanding the geographic distribution and variety of housing types and sizes in the city.

A chart showing ratings for these factors is included in Table 5-2.

SIZE OF SITES
Per Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(2)(A), (B), and (C), a site smaller than half an acre shall not be deemed adequate to accommodate lower-income housing need unless the locality can demonstrate that sites of equivalent size were successfully developed during the prior planning period for an equivalent number of lower-income housing units as projected for the site or unless the locality provides other evidence to the department that the site is adequate to accommodate lower-income housing. None of the sites included in the Sites Inventory are less than 0.5 acres (see Table 5-2).

Parcels larger than 10 acres are considered inadequate to accommodate housing affordable to lowerincome households, unless the housing element demonstrates development of housing affordable to lower-income households on such sites was successful during the prior planning period, or there is other evidence that the site is realistic and feasible for lower-income housing. Table 5-2 includes size of the sites included in the sites inventory showing that there are seven sites that are larger than 10 acres. An analysis of recent developments, including Pilgrim Triton with site area 19.6 acres and Foster Square with 15 acres (see Table 2 of Appendix D) demonstrates that large parcels have been successfully developed in the prior planning period. Pilgrim Triton includes 100 Grand Apartments and Triton Apartments which have 20% affordable units with no financial subsidy. Foster Square also includes the 100% affordable senior apartments at Alma Point, which satisfied the 20% affordable requirement for Foster Square.

SUITABILITY OF NON-VACANT SITES/REALISTIC AVAILABILITY
Foster City is built-out with the exception of a few vacant (partially submerged) parcels that are outside the levee flood protection. The City identified several underutilized properties that are ripe for redevelopment. The sites chosen are significantly underutilized given their size, large surface parking lots, aging buildings, marginal uses, aged structures on site, and given the fact that demand for housing is strong. Discussion is included analyzing the specifics for each site regarding why its nonvacant status is not an impediment to housing development. A non-vacant site is a site with any sort of existing use, including sites with structures, improvements, or income production. If the inventory identifies nonvacant sites to address a portion of the RHNA, the Housing Element must describe the realistic development potential of each site within the planning period (2023-2031). The analysis must consider the extent that the non-vacant site’s existing use impedes additional residential development, the jurisdiction’s past experience converting existing uses to higher density residential development, market trends and conditions, and regulatory or other incentives or standards that encourage additional housing development on the non-vacant sites.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 931

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-56 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
TABLE 5-2: HOUSING SITE SELECTION CRITERIA
Site Name
Distance
to
Arterial St
Distance to
E. Hillsdale
Blvd
(Evacuation)
Distance
to Park
Distance
to
Grocery
Store
Distance
to Bus
Stop
Distance
to Rec
Center or
Library
%
Border
with SF
or TH
AFFHExpand
Locations Size
Pipeline Projects
Laguna Vista Condos & Apts 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.5 0 N
Project Applications
Lantern Cove 0.3 1.4 0.2 0.8 0.8 2.0 13% Y 16.8
Schooner Bay 0.0 1.7 0.1 1.0 1.1 2.2 0% Y 24.8
Eaves Apartments MF ADUs 0.0 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.0 42% Y 11 RHNA 5 Sites
Franciscan Apartments 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 30% N 6.4 Sand Cove Apartments 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0% Y 8.77
The Lagoons Apartments 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 0% Y 9.64 Beach Cove Apartments 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.8 14% Y 18.7 Shadow Cove Apartments 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.9 15% Y 7.9 Harbor Cove Apartments 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6 0.0 Y 15.1 Other Residential Sites
Eaves Apartments 0.0 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.1 1.0 42% Y 11.0
Foster's Landing Apartments 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0% N 29.1 Commercial Site to Rezone to Allow Mixed Use
1010 Metro Center Blvd. (to
allow mixed use) 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.1 0.5 0% N 6.345
Non-Residential Site to Rezone to Residential
1601 Beach Park Blvd. 0.0 0,9 0.4 1.1 0.0 1.9 25% Y 1.35 Notes: = Up to 0.5 miles; less than 30% border with SF or TH = 0.6 to 0.9 miles; 30% or more border with SF or TH
= 1.0 miles or more
Y = would expand geographic area of BMR housing
N = would not expand geographic area of BMR housing
Source: Urban Planning Partners and Foster City Community Development Department.

For jurisdictions that rely on non-vacant sites for more than 50% of the lower-income RHNA, the nonvacant site’s use is presumed to impede additional residential development, unless the housing element describes findings based on substantial evidence that the use will likely be discontinued during the planning period. Foster City’s Sites Inventory relies on non-vacant sites for more than 50% of the lowerincome RHNA.

For the redevelopment of existing apartment properties, the existing use does not have to be discontinued, but would instead be reconfigured. Unlike a commercial property, there are not long-term leases to be terminated. The City looked at several factors to evaluate the potential for redevelopment of these properties:

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 932

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-57
 Existing Density. Sites with lower existing densities may be more likely to consider redevelopment if they can increase their density. Many of the older apartment developments have a density of less than 20 units/acre.
 Percent Increase at General Plan Density. Sites with the potential to increase existing densities by more than 50% are considered more likely to have substantial economic incentive to redevelop.  Land to Improvement Ratio (LIR). A parcel’s land to improvement ratio can help identify properties that have potential for redevelopment. An LIR lower than 1.0 means that the value of the land is lower than the value of the improvements. An LIR higher than 1.0 means the value of the improvements is lower relative to the land value. Recently developed projects in Foster City (Plaza Apartments, Triton Apartments, 100 Grand Apartments, and Atria) have an average LIR of 0.16, in other words, the improvements had a value 6.25 times the value of the land. Properties that have a higher LIR than

0.16 present opportunities to redevelop the property to achieve LIRs closer to those of the recently redeveloped properties.
 Land Area. A larger site could mitigate potential impacts with increased setbacks and/or lower heights near the adjacent developments. The larger developments also provide more opportunity to relocate existing tenants within the development if needed for the construction. With the exception of 1601 Beach Park Boulevard, all the sites are more than 5 acres in size.  Age. The older apartment developments are believed to be more likely to be considering making significant investments in either upgrading or redeveloping their property to remain competitive in the marketplace and/or to correct existing problems. The active applications for Lantern Cove and Schooner Bay, both constructed 38 years ago, indicates that developments 35 years or older are likely to be considering making significant investments.
 Owner Interest. Interest by the property owner in adding units to the site is an indication they have done some research into the economics of redeveloping their site. Submittal of an application is a stronger indication of the viability of a proposal. Two of the 12 sites do not have property owner interest at the present time, but as indicted in Table 4, they have similar characteristics to properties that do have owner interest, indicating that they are also likely to be viable sites for additional housing units.
 Infill Potential. Some apartment developments have areas of clustered parking or recreational uses that could be redeveloped with housing and not require removal of existing housing units.  Adjacent Uses. Sites that border streets and/or the lagoon will be able to redevelop with less significant impacts on adjacent development compared to sites that have more adjacencies to singlefamily developments.

Appendix D analyzes the specifics for each site regarding why its nonvacant status is not an impediment to housing development. After analysis of each site, it is noted that the nonvacant status is not an impediment for any of the sites. Barriers to redevelopment include factors applicable to any development such as availability of financing and time required for the entitlement process, as well as factors applicable to redevelopment such as provision of an anti-displacement plan for the existing tenants, as required by Program H-C-3-a.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 933

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-58 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
RE-USE OF SITES (SITES FROM THE PREVIOUS (5TH) CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT) AB 1397 requires stronger justification when nonvacant sites are used to meet housing needs, particularly for lower-income housing, requires by right housing when sites are included in more than one housing element, and adds conditions around size of sites, among others. Table 4 in Appendix D includes list of the sites from the previous 5th cycle Housing Element that are included in this planning period. These sites are included to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA because they remain highly viable sites for redevelopment with new housing. Appendix D also notes the status of these sites including if the owners have submitted applications or are actively preparing plans for review.

REALISTIC CAPACITY
State law requires that jurisdictions demonstrate in the Housing Element that the land inventory is adequate to accommodate that jurisdiction’s share of the region’s projected growth. Consistent with HCD guidelines, methodology for determining realistic capacity on each identified site must account for land use controls and site improvements. The Housing Element sites inventory surveyed large-scale residential development projects approved or built within recent years to develop estimates related to potential development by General Plan designation and zoning (see Appendix D, Table 2, Multi-Family Development Densities: 2002-2022). These recent developments indicate the City’s commitment to allowing the higher densities necessary to accomplish the City’s housing goals and to create more vibrant mixed-use neighborhoods. The application for Lantern Cove and preliminary application for Schooner Bay are examples of how an existing apartment property can be partially redeveloped to achieve the density of 35 units per acre for the entire site, the maximum allowed on sites with the R-3 or R-4 zoning.

Specific circumstances for each site were then evaluated, such as surrounding development, constraints such as PG&E transmission lines, configuration of existing buildings, and other factors to arrive at a realistic capacity.

Appendix D of the Housing Element also includes an analysis of the realistic capacity of each site. This can include:
 Use of minimum densities provided by the zoning of the parcel, or  Utilize various factors to calculate realistic capacity and describe the methodology used including:
o Typical densities of existing or approved residential development at a similar affordability level. o Current or planned availability and accessibility of infrastructure. o Applicable land use controls and site improvement requirements. o Adjust for any areas that cannot be developed.
 The capacity calculation must be adjusted to reflect the realistic potential for residential development, including factors such as local or regional development trends, track records/past production trends for similar sites, and current or planned availability of infrastructure.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 934

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-59

SITES INVENTORY CATEGORIES
The Sites Inventory includes several categories of sites. The types of sites are listed below, followed by a summary of the requirements for all sites and the specific requirements for the various types of sites. The categories of sites in Foster City include:
 Pipeline projects (units permitted or under construction but not completed as of June 30, 2022).  Proposed Projects (projects that have submitted a project proposal but are not yet approved).  Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).
 Previous Housing Element (RHNA 5) Sites.
 Other Residential Sites.
 Commercial Site to Allow Mixed Use.
 Non-Residential Site to Rezone to Residential.

PIPELINE PROJECTS
Units permitted or under construction but not yet completed as of June 30, 2022, will count toward the 2023-2031 RHNA. The only residential units permitted or under construction as of June 30, 2022 are in the Pilgrim Triton Phase C (Laguna Vista) development and four ADUs, as shown in Table 5-2. Of the 70 Laguna Vista condominiums, 22 were granted occupancy as of June 30, 2022, leaving 48 units under construction, all of which are above moderate-income. In addition, the 22-unit Workforce Apartments were not completed as of June 30, 2022, and will therefore count toward the 2023-2031 RHNA. In addition, there are four ADUs under construction, for a total of 74 Pipeline Units.

PROPOSED PROJECTS
Proposed projects are those that have submitted a project proposal but have not yet been approved.

Affordability must be based on the projected sales prices, rent levels, or other mechanisms establishing affordability. These include two large apartment redevelopment projects at Lantern Cove (356 units) and Schooner Bay (646 units) to remove some buildings and replace them with larger buildings with more units, and the multi-family ADU proposal at The Eaves Apartments for 22 units.

These projects equal 1,024 units.

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
In addition to pipeline projects, HCD guidance stipulates that a projection of ADUs expected to be built within the 8-year planning period can also be counted as part of the inventory. The units projected in this section include ADUs and Junior ADUs (JADU) at single-family houses (not multi-family ADUs). The City has had a few ADUs permitted and constructed at single-family houses in recent years, particularly since 2018 State legislation was enacted to facilitate the construction of ADUs. Even if no more ADU permits were issued in 2022 after March 31, the City has issued an average of 2.66 building permits for ADUs over the last 3 years (2020-2022), with the biggest growth in the last 2 years.

The significant growth in ADUs, including three permits issued in the first 3 months of 2022, indicates that the City can reasonably expect increased ADU production at the 2021 rate of three per year through

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 935

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-60 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
the duration of the planning period, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted permitting and construction during much of 2020. At a rate of 3 ADUs/year, a total of 24 ADUs would be constructed in Foster City during the 8-year planning period this cycle. This number is conservative given additional changes in State law, the City’s efforts to further facilitate ADU construction, actual ADU production over the last 2 years, and new programs to promote the production of ADUs.

SITES FROM THE PREVIOUS (5TH) CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT
Sites that were used in the previous Housing Element can be reused if certain requirements are met:
 A program is included requiring rezoning to allow residential use “by right” at specified densities for projects that include at least 20% of units affordable to lower-income households. – OR –
 If a site is rezoned to a higher density, it can be considered a “new” site (only if it was not utilized to accommodate a shortfall of sites to accommodate the previous RHNA).

Sites proposed to be used from the previous Housing Element include:
 Harbor Cove
 Beach Cove
 Franciscan
 Sand Cove
 Lagoons
 Shadow Cove
This Housing Element includes Program H-D-1-c providing zoning actions to be approved concurrently with or prior to adoption of this Housing Element, including these actions that relate to the RHNA 5 sites:
 Rezone R-3 RHNA 5 sites to R-4. These sites include Harbor Cove, Franciscan, Sand Cove, and The Lagoons. (completed in January 2023)
 Rezone R-4 RHNA 5 sites to allow by right development for projects with 20% or more lowerincome units. These sites include Beach Cove and Shadow Cove. (completed in January 2023)  Amend R-3 (Chapter 17.18) and R-4 (Chapter 17.20) for consistency with General Plan minimum and maximum densities. (completed in January 2023)
Four of the RHNA 5 sites have active owner interest in developing plans for additional housing units. The two sites without active owner interest have similar characteristics to the other sites. A realistic capacity of 90% of the General Plan maximum capacity was used for these sites. Collectively, these RHNA 5 sites include a capacity for 670 additional units.

OTHER RESIDENTIAL SITES (NON-VACANT)
In addition to the previous Housing Element sites, the City has selected some other non-vacant residentially zoned sites with potential for additional residential development. Given the difficulties of aggregating and redeveloping ownership units, apartment developments as the most likely candidates in the “residentially zoned” category. The Eaves Apartments and Foster’s Landing sites were selected

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 936

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-61
based on the criteria for housing sites and owner interest in developing additional units. Realistic capacity estimate for the Eaves at 90% of General Plan maximum density yields a capacity of 59 additional units.

Realistic capacity for Foster’s Landing used 80% of General Plan maximum density due to the area encumbered by a PG&E easement, yielding a capacity of 907 units. Collectively these two sites have capacity for 966 additional units.

COMMERCIAL SITE TO ALLOW MIXED USE (NON-VACANT)
The City has included the non-vacant non-residential former OSH site at 1010 Metro Center Boulevard in the Sites Inventory. The site is 6.345 acres with frontage on both Metro Center Boulevard and Foster City Boulevard. The General Plan allowed density is 15 to 60 units per acre. Given the large area of the property encumbered with easements, a realistic capacity for a mixed-use development is 35 units per acre applied to the entire site but with the development concentrated in the buildable portion of the site.

A building of 4 to 8 stories would be similar to the height of other buildings adjacent to this site. This Housing Element includes Program H-D-1-b providing General Plan amendment and zoning actions to be approved concurrently with or prior to adoption of this Housing Element to allow commercial or mixed use at this site.

At 35 units per acre, a realistic capacity is 222 units. Because the owner has the option to develop the site with either commercial or mixed-use commercial/residential, a “discount” of 50% is applied to the capacity listed in the Sites Inventory, providing a capacity of 111 in the Sites Inventory.

NON-RESIDENTIAL SITE TO REZONE TO RESIDENTIAL
The City has included the non-vacant non-residential former Lutheran Church site at 1601 Beach Park Boulevard in the Sites Inventory. The site is 1.35 acres with frontage on Beach Park Boulevard, Gull Avenue, and Sea Island Lane. A preliminary application was submitted in 2019 for 32 townhouse style condominiums on 1.35 acres at 1601 Beach Park Boulevard. A General Plan Amendment from Public/Semi-Public to Two-Family Residential and a rezoning from PF Public Facilities to R-2 Two-Family Residential is included in Program H-D-1-b, to be approved concurrently with adoption of this Housing Element. A realistic capacity under the R-2 zoning for the 1.32-acre site is 16 units. The proposed project would be subject to the City’s inclusionary housing regulations in Chapter 17.90, requiring 20% affordable housing. Developments of for-sale units require 20% moderate-income units.

SITES INVENTORY LIST
The Sites Inventory List with realistic capacities including the sites discussed above is provided in Table 5-3.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 937

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-62 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
TABLE 5-3: SITES INVENTORY
Site Name
Extremely
Low
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Total
Capacityb
Pipeline Projects
Laguna Vista Condominiums 48 48
Workforce Apartments 5 12 5 22
ADUs Under Construction 2 1 1 4
Proposed Projects
Lantern Covea 14 14 25 303 356
Schooner Bay 26 26 45 549 646
Eaves Apartments MF ADUs 7 7 7 1 22
Accessory Dwelling Units
ADUs 7 7 7 3 24
RHNA5 Sites
Franciscan Apartments 21 14 14 32 81
Sand Cove Apartments 29 19 19 45 112
The Lagoons Apartments 33 22 22 51 128
Beach Cove Apartments 46 29 29 69 173
Shadow Cove Apartments 23 14 14 34 85
Harbor Cove Apartments 25 15 15 36 91
Other Residential Sites
Eaves Apartments 16 10 10 23 59
Foster’s Landing Apartments 236 154 154 363 907
Commercial Site to Allow Mixed Use
1010 Metro Center Boulevard 30 18 18 45 111
Non-Residential Site to Rezone to Residential
1601 Beach Park Boulevard 3 13 16
Total 560 392 322 1,611 2,885
RHNA 520 299 300 777 1,896
Total with EL, VL, L = Lower 952 322 1,611 2,885
RHNA 819 300 777 1,896
Remaining Need (Surplus) 133 22 834 989
Percent of Surplus 16% 7% 107% 52%
a Numbers of units per project application including City’s inclusionary requirements per Chapter 17.90 and if in AHO, 17.92. b Realistic Capacity based on analysis provided in Appendix D.

Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

The location of these sites is shown on Figure 5-1.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 938

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-63
Figure 5-1: Sites Inventory Map
Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 939

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-64 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

ANALYSIS OF SITES INVENTORY

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING ANALYSIS OF SITES INVENTORY The location of housing is a key factor in addressing disparities in access to all types of housing and to facilitating inclusive communities. Providing additional housing opportunities in high resource areas can provide improved access to public services, recreation amenities, educational and employment opportunities, and other essential services such as grocery stores and medical services.

AB 686 requires an analysis of sites identified to meet RHNA obligations for their ability to affirmatively further fair housing. As indicated in the AFFH analysis, all of Foster City is considered a high resource area. In addition, there are not concentrations of poverty or significant racially segregated housing areas.

Foster City’s primary fair housing issue is the high cost of housing and the need for more affordable housing.

LOCATION OF EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
The geographic distribution of existing deed restricted below market rate housing is shown in Figure 5-1.

These units are located primarily in the central core of the City along East Hillsdale Boulevard from Metro Senior Apartments on Village Lane and Town Green Lane on the west to Miramar Apartments at Gull Avenue on the east, with Marlin Cove Apartments on Foster City Boulevard being the most southerly location. ADUs and the Existing Unit Purchase Program provide scattered additional affordable housing units throughout the single-family neighborhoods.

DISTRIBUTION OF SITES IN THE SITES INVENTORY
The proposed housing sites in the Sites Inventory are well distributed throughout the city. The additional housing site locations in the Sites Inventory will expand deed restricted affordable housing to the southern edge of the city with inclusion of the Lantern Cove and Schooner Bay sites, farther west to the Harbor Cove site, and farther east to the 1601 Beach Park Boulevard site. In addition, ADUs distributed throughout the single-family neighborhoods with increase housing options in these areas.

POTENTIAL EFFECT ON PATTERNS OF SEGREGATION
Although Foster City doesn’t have significant segregation issues within the city, from a broader regional perspective, providing increased lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Foster City will help overcome Countywide and regional patterns of segregation, disparate impacts for impacted racial and ethnic groups, and foster more inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity.

POTENTIAL EFFECT ON ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
The wide distribution of housing sites will provide additional housing options for lower-income households to choose housing near amenities and services that are important to them, such as parks, schools, transit, or other features. The sites in the Sites Inventory were selected based on accessibility to a variety of services and amenities, such as parks, schools, shopping, transit, and transportation. From a

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 940

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-65
broader regional perspective, providing increased lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Foster City will help overcome Countywide and regional patterns of disparate impacts for impacted racial and ethnic groups by providing more affordable housing choices near desirable resources such as employment and high-quality education. This will foster more inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity.

POTENTIAL EFFECT ON DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS
“Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing need are based on such factors as cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, homelessness, and substandard housing conditions.”1 Overpayment is a significant housing challenge for lower-income residents. There is not a significant geographic concentration of cost burdened renters, but there are slight concentrations of cost burdened owners (the percentage of cost burdened owners in each census tract varies between 26.20% to 46.50%).

There are disparities in housing cost burden in Foster City by race and ethnicity. Black or African American (58%) and Hispanic households (42%) experience the highest rates of cost burden in the city.

Asian (29%) and non-Hispanic White households (30%) are least likely to be cost burdened.

Although there are not existing patterns of socio-economic concentrations that could be exacerbated by the inclusion or exclusion of housing sites, there are a few tracts with some larger deviations from citywide averages that may be suitable for geographic targeting of programs. Observations on the factors that have more variation from citywide averages include:
 Disability. Census tracts 6083 (Neighborhood 3) and 6080.25 (central Foster City) have the highest percentage of persons with a disability at 9.2% and 9.6%, respectively, compared to the citywide average of 7.1%. Tract 6080.25 includes the City’s two affordable senior apartments and Atria assisted living facility. Geographic targeting of Program H-F-1-j Public Investment in Accessibility could be utilized in these two tracts.
 Renter Cost Burden. Census tract 6080.13 and 6080.23 (Neighborhoods 7 and 8) include the highest renter cost burden at 49.5% compared to the citywide average of 32.6%. The Lantern Cove and Schooner Bay sites in this area will increase the significantly housing options and affordable housing in this neighborhood.
 Owner Cost Burden. Census tracts 6083 (Neighborhood 3) and 6082 (Neighborhood 2) include higher owner cost burden at 41.1% and 38.9%, respectively, compared to the citywide average of

32.9%. Geographic targeting of Program H-B-2-a Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance could help address this. 1 California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 39.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 941

5.HOUSING RESOURCES AND SITES
HE-66 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The increased quantity and distribution of affordable housing as proposed in the Sites Inventory will address disproportionate housing needs by providing more affordable housing in a wider variety of locations in the city. From a broader regional perspective, providing increased lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Foster City will help overcome Countywide and regional patterns of disproportional housing needs. Geographic targeting is included in many housing programs designed to increase housing choices and mobility by including more affordable options in or near existing single-family areas. This includes programs related to funding, ADUs, rental housing assistance, home sharing program, Existing Unit Purchase Program, and new housing options at school sites, religious sites, and commercial sites. As stated in Program H-E-10-a Improve Housing Mobility and Increase Missing Middle Housing Choices, the City will implement a suite of programs targeted to include more housing choice with the goal of expanding housing opportunities affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income households as well as missing middle housing (duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes).

FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE HOUSING RESOURCES
In addition to physical resources such as housing sites, the City also has financial and administrative resources that can be utilized to assist the development of housing as well as address other housing needs. The City has funding sources dedicated to affordable housing from the Successor Housing Agency (to the former Community Development Agency), City Affordable Housing Fund that received payments from the Commercial Linkage Fee and other sources. Other housing resources are described in more detail in Appendix D, including:
 Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC)
 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
 Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers
 Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART)
 HIP Housing
 Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Vouchers
See Appendix D for additional detail on financial and administrative housing resources.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 942
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-67
CHAPTER 6 | OVERVIEW OF
2015-2023 HOUSING ELEMENT

ACCOMPLISHMENTS
This Housing Element builds upon the successes of the City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element. This is described in more detail in the appendices, which include a matrix that lists all of the 2015-2023 Housing Element programs and describes whether the program target has been achieved and if it should be retained, deleted or modified.

REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS
For the 2015-2023 planning period, the City was required to plan for a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of a minimum of 430 units in four income categories. For this planning period, the City issued permits for 885 dwelling units including 166 below market rate (BMR) units. (Units completed by June 30, 2022, will count toward the 2015-2023 RHNA; units under construction but not yet completed as of June 30, 2022, will count toward the 2023-2031 RHNA.) This addressed between 18% and 60% of the Below Market Rate (BMR) RHNA, as shown in Table 6-1.

Foster City was one of only 38 out of the 539 jurisdictions in California to be exempted from the streamlined ministerial approval process as of June 1, 2022 (per SB 35, Chapter 366, Statues of 2017) based on the prorated progress toward meeting the lower (very low- and low-income) and above moderate-income RHNA for the RHNA 5 Cycle (2015-2023).

TABLE 6-1: RHNA PROGRESS FOR 2015-2023 UNITS COMPLETED BY

AFFORDABILITY
Income Level RHNA
Total Units
Completed
(As of 6/30/22)
% RHNA
Met
Very Low 148 89 60%
Low 87 50 57%
Moderate 76 14 18%
Above Moderate 119 679 571%
Total 430 832 193%
Source: City of Foster City, 2022.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 943

6. OVERVIEW OF 2015-2023HOUSING ELEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS HE-68 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Some of the particularly noteworthy accomplishments of the 2015-2023 Housing Element include:

TIER 1 HOUSING OPPORTUNITY SITES
The City has worked with developers to facilitate the Pilgrim Triton and Foster Square mixed-use developments, which include 20% affordable housing. Included in the Pilgrim Triton Phase C development is the 22-unit Workforce Apartments, which will be owned by the City. The preference categories adopted by the City Council will enable the units to provide preference to house first responders and disaster service workers to retain/improve the City’s emergency response capabilities (HD-2-a Tier 1 Housing Opportunity Sites and H-D-4-a Mixed Use Housing).

HOUSING IMPACT FEE
The City adopted a Commercial Linkage Fee in December 2016 applicable to new commercial developments to support the provision of affordable housing (H-D-8-a Housing Impact Fee and H-E-1-a Funding for Affordable Housing).

MINIMIZE IMPACTS OF EXPIRATION OF AFFORDABILITY

COVENANTS
The City worked with Essex Properties to develop and implement several programs to assist the BMR tenants at Foster’s Landing as the affordability covenants began to expire in phases between 2020 and 2023. In September 2020, the City Council approved the execution of the Post BMR Expiration Rent Agreement, which is an agreement between the City and Essex Property Trust to provide up to $800,000 (split 50/50 between the City and Essex) to preserve the affordability of 50 units for 1 year for Phase I tenants of Foster’s Landing BMR units, which were set to expire on December 31, 2020. In February 2021 an Early Relocation Assistance Program was approved to provide financial assistance to off-set relocation costs. The City obtained a Permanent Local Housing Assistance (PLHA) grant from San Mateo County to provide additional relocation assistance and rental subsidies and hired Housing Industry Foundation (HIF) to administer the program (H-E-5-b New Agreements for Affordability of Existing Rental Units) and (HE-5-d Minimize Impacts of Expiration of Affordability Covenants).

AT-RISK TENANT PREFERENCE POLICY
On March 18, 2020, City Council Approved Resolution 2020-24, an amendment of Resolution 2000-123 to place tenants at-risk of displacement in the top tier (1a) of the affordable housing preference categories. This allowed impacted tenants at Foster’s Landing Apartments to move to the top of BMR waiting lists at other properties because of termination of the affordability restrictions at Foster’s Landing (H-E-5-e Affordable Housing Preference for Displaced Residents).

SPECIAL NEEDS
The City worked to address special housing needs through a variety of strategies. A large part of the City’s efforts to address senior housing needs during the RHNA 5 Planning Period was to facilitate the

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 944

6. OVERVIEW OF 2015-2023HOUSING ELEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-69
development of Foster Square. As part of the development of Foster Square, the City contributed funding for the 66-unit Alma Point Senior Apartments completed in 2016 which includes 65 very lowincome and extremely low-income units, including 5 units for persons with specified health care needs, and 2 units for homeless. The City approved the 131-unit/24 bed Atria Assisted Living facility completed in 2016. Senior market rate condominiums (200 units) at Foster Square were completed in 2017-2021.

Accessible and adaptable units are required in new developments to address the needs of people with disabilities. Four accessible units in the Workforce Apartments were affirmatively marketed to people/groups with disabilities. Between 2015 and 2022, 161 accessible and 234 adaptable units were constructed.

Home sharing is a strategy to provide additional affordable housing that can address special needs. Since FY 2007-08 through 2021, the Home Sharing Program provided through an agreement with HIP Housing has placed 129 people from Foster City into shared housing arrangements; provided information and counseling to 547 Foster City residents or workers and helped 11 families complete the self-sufficiency program.

In addition, there are four licensed Adult Residential care homes and six licensed Assisted Living care homes in the city.

The City has supported emergency shelters and housing assistance through funding for CALL Primrose, HIP Housing, Samaritan House, and LifeMoves.

COMMUNITY OUTREACH
The City launched a number of community outreach initiatives (H-A-3-a Community Outreach) (see the Community Outreach section for a summary of findings from these efforts).  Foster City’s CommUNITY Dialogue Series. This community engagement series was initiated in 2017 and included workshops regarding the evolution of the city, housing, transportation and mobility, and commercial retail.
 Foster City Age Friendly Community Initiative. In September of 2020, Foster City initiated the process of planning for an Age Friendly Community. The City asked residents who are age 55 and over what they think would help make Foster City a more “livable” community than it already is for older adults. Residents were invited to participate in one of a series of virtual focus group discussions that took place throughout the month of September. These meetings were facilitated by the Center for Age Friendly Excellence (CAFE).
 Home is Foster City Initiative. In FY 2019-2020, the City launched the “Home is Foster City” initiative that began with the intent of hosting conversations on who we are as a community, to better learn together, and understand various factors as they relate to housing. Due to the public health orders, the initiative was paused but was resumed in 2021 with Community Workshops held on September 28 (virtual) and September 30, 2021 (in-person).
 Housing Element Update Engagement. In 2020, the City launched a Housing Element Update webpage with basic information and an invitation for people to sign up for a notification list to stay involved. In February 2022, the City launched an updated community engagement website for the

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 945

6. OVERVIEW OF 2015-2023HOUSING ELEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS HE-70 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Housing Element Update, including a combination of tools from Bang The Table and MapSocial, to provide opportunities for community engagement and feedback on the Housing Element Update.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 946
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-71
CHAPTER 7 | PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Foster City believes that community input is a critical aspect of developing a Housing Element that promotes a community-based vision for housing and responds to community needs and preferences. While the Housing Element provides an opportunity to have a community conversation about how to address local housing challenges, develop policies, and find solutions, in Foster City we ensure that the community engagement process is ongoing throughout the 8-year RHNA cycle. This included the CommUNITY Dialogue Series and the Home is Foster City outreach program. Specific to the Housing Element update, Foster City hosted web-based information, workshops, meetings, surveys, and City Council and Planning Commission Study Sessions (see Appendix F for a complete list). In addition, the City completed focused outreach to groups that are historically under-represented in planning processes, including renters, low-income households, and disabled residents.

Focused efforts included selecting appropriate meeting formats and extensive publicity; outreach through service providers, employers, and property managers; and guidance from a countywide Equity Advisory Group.

In 2020, the City launched a Housing Element Update webpage with basic information and an invitation for people to sign up for a notification list to stay involved. In February 2022, the City launched an updated community engagement website for the Housing Element Update, including a combination of tools from Bang The Table and MapSocial, to provide opportunities for community engagement and feedback on the Housing Element Update. The website is available here: https://engage fostercity.org/housing-element. The website includes links to:
 Housing Preferences and Priorities Survey
 Interactive Map with opportunities to provide feedback on sites  Share your Foster City Housing Story
 Link to subscribe to project updates
 Background information on the Housing Element
 Links to related documents and related websites
 Links to agenda packets for previous meetings
In addition to conversations focused on Foster City, the 21 Elements working group provided additional opportunities for community input. 21 Elements is a multi‐year, multi‐phase collaboration between all San Mateo County jurisdictions, along with partner agencies and stakeholder organizations, that aims to support jurisdictions in developing, adopting, and implementing local housing policies and programs.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 947

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
HE-72 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The Draft Housing Element was posted on the City’s website and notification sent to stakeholders on May 4, 2022 for a 30-day review period ending June 3, 2022. During this time, the draft Housing Element was advertised for public review and comment. Revised versions of the Draft Housing Element were also posted on July 5, 2022, February 6, 2023, February 16, 2023, May 1, 2023, and May 15, 2023.

SUMMARY OF OUTREACH ACTIVITIES
This section summarizes key outcomes from all the outreach activities. A more detailed summary of the feedback received from all community engagement methods is contained in the Appendix F.

COMMUNITYDIALOGUE SERIES
The CommUNITY Dialogue Series (CDS), a series of
conversations that brings together community members
that live and work in Foster City to discuss the challenges facing Foster City, held dialogues on land use, affordable workforce housing, transportation, traffic and commercial retail. Foster City community members were first invited to participate from May through December 2017. Home is
Foster City is a continuation of the CommUNITY Dialogue series that took place from 2019 to early 2020. Home is Foster City included a webpage with facts about housing and related issues, a photo contest, and an online survey.

The effort was promoted through a series of “pop-ups” at community gathering spaces, such as grocery stores,
soccer games, food truck events, etc. The Community
Meeting scheduled for April 21, 2020 was cancelled due to COVID.
21 ELEMENTS / LET’S TALK HOUSING
21 Elements organized a Let’s Talk Housing series of
countywide meetings and provided community members
with an introduction of the Housing Element update and
why it matters in fall of 2021. These meetings were
attended by more than 1,000 community members.

Additionally, an All About RHNA webinar and a
countywide four‐part webinar series helped educate and
inform San Mateo County residents and stakeholders on
regional and local housing issues.

CITY-WIDE COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
The City of Foster City held two community workshops on September 28, 2021 (virtual) and September 30, 2021 (inperson). A presentation about the contents and goals of

TOPICS REVIEWED
 Why Affordability Matters
 Housing and Racial Equity
 Housing in a Climate of Change
 Putting it All Together for a Better Future
 Building Market‐Rate and Affordable
Housing
 Addressing Fair Housing Issues
 Housing needs for low-income, disabled, and
underserved households

WHAT WE HEARD
 Housing cost is too high.
 People value that Foster City is close to their
work and is community oriented.
 Need more playgrounds and open space.
 No more low-income housing, it brings in the
wrong people.
 Congested housing takes away green spaces
for children.

TOPICS REVIEWED
 Infrastructure that should be paired with new
housing.
 Sites to prioritize for new housing, including
repurposing commercial space.
 Preserving green space and community
character while building new housing.
 How to balance affordable and market rate
housing.
 Housing types to prioritize (e.g., mixed-use,
townhomes, and workforce housing).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 948

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-73
the Housing Element update, including the findings to
date about related trends and needs. Following the
discussion, groups reconvened to share what each group
discussed and receive any additional ideas. about 80
community members participated.

ONLINE SURVEY
A Housing Preferences and Priorities survey was
publicized by the City and available on the City’s website from February 23, 2022, until March 28, 2022. Invitations to participate were distributed to community members,
organizations, local employers, renters, and others with the intent to reach more members of the community
than were represented during meetings. The
questionnaire included questions about a set of housing policies and a set of resiliency policies, the same policies which were presented during the meeting. Participants
were asked to select any and all policies which they
supported.

ONLINE MAP-BASED FEEDBACK
A map-based engagement tool was provided to provide
information on potential housing sites and to gather
community feedback on the pros and cons of specific
sites. Participants could suggest new sites, leave
comments, or give a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” to
sites suggested by the City or by other previous
participants. Full results can be found in Appendix F:

Public Engagement Input.

STUDY SESSIONS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS
A Planning Commission Study Session was held on July
15, 2021, to present and receive feedback on housing
needs identified to date, policies and programs, and next steps for engaging the community. Additional Joint City Council and Planning Commission Study Sessions were held on March 2, 2022, April 21, 2022, and May 17, 2022.

The Public Review Draft Housing Element was available for public review and comment for over 30 days between May 4, 2022, and June 3, 2022. The availability of the draft Housing Element was publicized online, in social media, and in the local newspaper. The Planning Commission and City Council received a presentation on the Public Review Draft Housing Element on April 21, 2022, and also had the opportunity to provide comments. Joint Study Sessions were held on May 17, 2022 and November 15, 2022.

WHAT WE HEARD
 Foster City Residents are concerned about
the impact of new housing on existing infrastructure (schools, transportation, services).  Safety/security is a top priority.
 Residents want to maintain a single-family
character and open space in the city.
 There are many underutilized sites,
primarily office spaces and older duplexes
and apartments.
 Housing should be placed near the
highways.
 Residents approve of mixed-use housing
and retail, but do not want to lose the retail
that exists.
 There are mixed opinions about building on
the golf course.
 There is a need for more affordable
homeownership options.
 Existing tenants need to be protected from
displacement.
 Housing discrimination impacts people with
disabilities and people trying to use housing
vouchers.

TOPICS REVIEWED
 RHNA
 Scoping of Issues for Environmental Impact
Report
 Housing Element Requirements
 Housing Needs
 Evaluation of Current Housing Element
 Considerations for Housing Sites
 Policies and Programs

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 949

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
HE-74 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The Housing Element was considered for adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council at public hearings in May 2023.

AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING (AFFH)
Changes in Housing Element Law since the last cycle require the careful consideration of populations who have historically been under-represented in planning processes and deliberate and proactive actions to remove barriers to participation. Consistent with HCD guidance, the following best practices were utilized to include public participation from all economic segments of the community.  Leveraged the efforts of 21 Elements to engage with historically under-represented communities, including low-income households and those with disabilities.  Promoted survey conducted by Root Policy Research on AFFH issues.  Public meetings scheduled outside of working hours and in a variety of formats.  Robust and diverse meeting publicity implemented digitally and in person.  Publication of various Fact Sheets one pagers (examples shown below) explaining terms to avoid jargon and make information more accessible.
 Tabling at public events, such as the Farmer’s Market.  Outreach to historically underrepresented groups, such as renters, through apartment property managers.
 Outreach to Foster City workers who may not live in Foster City through Chamber of Commerce and major employers.
 Outreach to nonprofit housing and service providers to discuss potential housing programs.  Use of a wide variety of print and social media.
 Met with Equity Advisory Group facilitated by 21 Elements to receive feedback on proposed policies and programs.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 950

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-75

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 951

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
HE-76 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
s

SUMMARY OF HOW PUBLIC INPUT IS INCORPORATED
Public input gathered through the public engagement efforts influenced the development of the Housing Element, including the selection of sites as well as the housing policies and programs. Key themes and strategies are summarized below.

HOUSING SITES
 Focus on sites that do not impact single-family neighborhoods and parks/open spaces. Given that the City is predominantly built-out, the Sites Inventory is predominantly apartment sites from the previous RHNA 5 Housing Element and similar sites including existing low-density apartment properties with potential to add housing units.
 Preserve existing neighborhood commercial sites, such as Edgewater Shopping Center but look for other sites to convert, such as office buildings. The 1010 Metro Center Boulevard commercial site was included in the Sites Inventory as a mixed-use site, which has excellent access to major roadways and transit. Program H-D-2-a Potential Re-Use of Commercial Sites to evaluate potential re-use of commercial sites was retained with a biannual review beginning by July 2026.  Focus on sites with access to major roads and highways due to the limited evacuation routes. The majority of the sites in the Sites Inventory are located on major arterial roadways.

HOUSING POLICIES AND PROGRAMS
 Housing cost is too high. Lack of affordability impacts health, economic equity, environmental and racial justice. Programs were included/modified to add affordable units through inclusionary requirements (H-E-2-a Inclusionary 20% Requirement, H-E-2-b Affordable Housing Overlay Inclusionary 15% Requirement Including Extremely Low-Income, expanded incentives for ADUs in programs under H-D-4). Programs expanded support for low-income homeowners with H-B-2-a Lower Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and H-B-2-b Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance.
 Increase affordable housing supply, protect renters and vulnerable households by providing stability, fill the gaps with subsidies. Programs were included/modified to protect the rental housing stock (H-C1-a Condominium Conversion Regulation, H-C-2-b Continue to Monitor Expiration of Affordability Covenants, H-C-2-c Replacement Unit Requirements) and incentivize production of affordable housing (H-E-3-b Financing and Subsidy Programs).
 The use of existing apartment sites for new housing increases the risks of displacement for existing apartment residents. Tenant protections were included in H-C-3-a Anti-Displacement Plan for Redevelopment of Existing Multi-family Developments, H-C-3-b Anti-Displacement Strategy, and H-C3-d Facilitate Tenant Protection Act of 2019.  Housing discrimination disproportionately impacts people with disabilities and people trying to use housing vouchers. Program H-C-4-a Rental Housing Assistance Information was expanded. Several programs were included under H-G-2 Improved Access to Fair Housing Information.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 952

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-77
 There is a lack of housing options for people with special needs/disabilities, including supportive housing. Program H-E-1-a Existing Unit Purchase Program Opportunities for Supportive Housing was included to facilitate use of City-owned units for supportive housing. Program H-E-2-b Affordable Housing Overlay Inclusionary 15% Requirement Including Extremely Low-Income will provide extremely low-income units. Several programs were included under H-F-1 Special Needs.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 953

7. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
HE-78 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 954
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-79
CHAPTER 8 | HOUSING GOALS,

POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
The section below contains the City’s Goals, Policies, and Programs related to the Housing Element. Goals are shown in capital letters, e.g., H-A. Policies related to each Goal include the Goal plus a number, e.g., H-A-1. Programs related to each Policy include the Goal and Policy reference followed by a lower-case letter, e.g., H-A-1-a.

H-A Reinforce the City's Commitment to Meeting Housing
Needs
Establish and monitor goals, policies, and programs to address the City's housing needs, encourage public participation in all housing policy matters, and promote equal housing
opportunities.

H-A-1 City Leadership. Provide an active leadership role in helping to attain the objectives of the City's Housing
Element by following through on the actions prescribed
in the Housing Element in a timely manner and
monitoring progress annually to review housing goals
and target achievements.

H-A-1-a Annual Tracking of Housing Activity. The
City will provide a statistical summary of
residential building activity tied to various
types of housing, household need, income
and Housing Element program targets.

Responsible Agency: Community
Development Department
Timeframe: Provide information annually by
April 1 as part of the General Plan Annual
Progress Report
Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-1-b No Net Loss/Development Pipeline
Monitoring. Evaluate residential
development proposals for consistency with
the 2023-2031 Housing Element Sites
Inventory. If a development approval will
cause the Sites Inventory to be unable to
accommodate all income levels of the RHNA,
then additional site(s) shall be added
pursuant to Government Code Section

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 955

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-80 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
65863(b)(1). No later than December 2023, the City will develop a procedure to monitor the development of proposed projects and vacant and non-vacant sites in the Sites Inventory and ensure that adequate sites are available throughout the 6th Cycle Planning Period to meet the remaining RHNA by income category to implement “no net loss” requirements. The City will monitor and report on the “no net loss” requirement on an annual basis with the Annual Progress Report. The procedure will monitor:
1) Unit count and income/affordability assumed on parcels included in the sites inventory as proposed projects, vacant, and underutilized sites. 2) Actual units constructed and income/affordability when parcels are developed.
3) Net change in capacity and income/affordability and a summary of remaining capacity and income/affordability in meeting the City’s remaining RHNA.
4) Within one year of report on the “no net loss”, if necessary, make adjustments (e.g., incentives, rezonings, etc.) or identify additional sites. 5) In 2027 conduct a mid-term evaluation of the effectiveness of strategies in promoting housing opportunities throughout the City, including but not limited to programs geographically targeted in single-family areas, and make adjustments to achieve the quantified objectives by 2031 as called for in H-E-10-a.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Planning Commission, Community Development Department
Timeframe: Develop procedure for monitoring by December 2023 and provide information annually by April 1 as part of the General Plan Annual Progress Report; 2027 mid-term evaluation
Performance Metric(s): Maintenance of Sites Inventory sufficient to accommodate the RHNA
Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-1-c Future Housing Element Updates. The City will update its Housing Element, consistent with State Law requirements.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Provide the next update by January 2031
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-A-1-d Evaluate General Plan Amendments for Consistency with Housing Element. Any future amendments to the General Plan will be evaluated for consistency with the Housing Element.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Ongoing
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 956

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-81
H-A-2 Community Engagement. Encourage and support community engagement in the formulation and review of the City's housing policy, including encouraging neighborhood level planning and working with community groups such as homeowners associations and service clubs as well as the building and real estate industry to advocate for programs that will increase affordable housing supply and opportunities.

H-A-2-a Community Outreach. The City will build on the success of “Home is Foster City” and “Community Dialogue Series” outreach programs to improve citizen awareness of housing needs, rehabilitation and disaster assistance loan subsidy programs, code enforcement, energy conservation programs, fair housing laws and affordable housing resources by:
(1) having printed housing information available at City Hall, library, and other key locations;
(2) providing public information through articles in the local newspaper, on the City’s website, the digital marquee, social media, and with cable TV public service announcements;
(3) using additional methods to reach underserved and/or often underrepresented members of the community, including but not limited to low-income households, renters, and persons with disabilities.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department,
Communications/City Clerk Department
Timeframe: Update website and print materials by December 2023; update social media and local newspaper articles at least once per year Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-3 Cooperation with Other Agencies. Continue participation in County-wide housing assistance programs and coordinate with other public and private agencies in the use of available programs to provide lower-cost housing in Foster City.

H-A-3-a Technical Assistance to Non-Profits. The City will update the City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines to provide technical assistance, such as information on applicable regulations and policies and how to coordinate various programs, to non-profit groups organized to encourage provision of affordable housing and sponsors of affordable housing projects and programs. The City will facilitate provision of affordable housing by providing technical assistance in a liaison role with non-profit housing groups and managers of affordable housing units in the City.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Attorney Timeframe: Update City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines and post on the City’s website by December 2023; hold annual roundtable meetings and/or trainings with non-profit housing groups and managers of affordable housing units
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Citywide
H-A-4 Adequate Water Supply and Sewer Capacity for New Housing Development. The City will work with the Estero Municipal Improvement District (EMID) Board of Directors to ensure there is adequate water supply and sewer capacity to support the development of the sites identified in RHNA 6.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 957

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-82 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
H-A-4-a Adequate Water Supply. Work with EMID to develop water conservation requirements and/or increased water supply that will ensure sufficient water capacity to accommodate the RHNA, such as the potential use of water demand offset policies, require new and renovated developments to have “net neutral” water demand, or use of recycled water for irrigation.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, EMID Timeframe: Prior to or concurrent with adoption of Housing Element Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-4-b Housing Element Transmittal to EMID. Upon adoption of the Housing Element, Provide a copy to EMID in compliance with California Government Code Section 65589.7.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Within five (5) days of adoption
Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-4-c Update Urban Water Management Plan. Work with EMID on updates to the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) and other policies and procedures to ensure implementation of the required priority for water and sewer service for developments with units affordable to lower-income households, as required by California Government Code 65589.7.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department
Timeframe: Assist with update of next UWMP by 2025
Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-4-d Water Conservation. Work with EMID to develop, promote, and implement water conservation methods and programs for new and existing developments, such as low flow fixtures, rebate programs, “lawn begone”, etc. Improve promotion by providing information on conservation programs to building permit applicants.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, and EMID Timeframe: Improve Building Division website and handout information on conservation programs by December 2023
Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-5 Funding for Housing Programs. Identify and/or develop sources of funding for affordable housing programs.

H-A-5-a Commercial Linkage Fee. Continue to implement the City’s commercial linkage fee on new commercial development as a way to require new commercial development to contribute to the supply of affordable housing and to provide funding for affordable housing programs, including periodic review and update of the fee every five to seven years following the update in 2022.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeframe: Review and update by 2028; review and update every five to seven years thereafter
Performance Metric(s): Total fees collected annually
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 958

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-83
H-A-5-b Local, State and Federal Funding for Affordable Housing. Monitor the availability of and apply for local, state or federal funding sources that could be used to provide funding for affordable housing programs.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Report on funding applications to City Council annually in the General Plan Annual Report
Performance Metric(s): Number of funding applications annually Quantified Objective: Apply for at least one funding opportunity per year Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Funding that will expand housing choices in singlefamily areas such as for ADUs, home share programs, and lower-income homeowners.

H-A-5-c Expand Sources of Funds for the City Affordable Housing Fund. Provide the necessary legal framework to be able to accept grants and donations to the City Affordable Housing Fund as a qualified trust fund from County, State, or Federal programs; employers; organizations; and individual donors.

Evaluate potential sources of reliable funding for affordable housing programs.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Attorney, City Council
Timeframe: Recommend legal framework to City Council by December 2023 Funding Source: General Fund
H-A-5-d Budgeting for Housing Programs. As part of the annual budget, allocate funds from the City Affordable Housing Fund or other sources to fund programs to address housing needs identified in the Housing Element and based on timing commitments specified for each program, that may include but are not limited to:
(1) Staffing and other resources to administer housing programs. (2) H-B-2-a: Lower Income Homeowner Rehabilitation.
(3) H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation and Maintenance Assistance. (4) H-D-4-b: ADU Financial Incentive Program.
(5) H-F-2-a: Emergency Housing Assistance.
(6) H-G-2-b: Fair Housing Training for Landlords and Tenants.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Community Development Department Timeframe: Implement funding for programs as part of the annual budget process
Performance Metric(s): Amount of funding allocated annually Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund1
H-A-5-e NOFAs for Affordable Housing. Develop a funding program and outline criteria objectives affordable housing developers to apply for Notices of 1 Affordable Housing Fund is used to reference all City funds that are restricted to affordable housing purposes, including but not limited to: Fund 122 Los and Moderate-Income Housing Fund, Fund 124 City Affordable Housing Fund, and Fund 137 Commercial Linkage Fee.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 959

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-84 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Funding Availability (NOFAs) funded by the City’s Affordable Housing Funds.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Community Development Department Timeframe: Biannually beginning in 2024.

Performance Metric(s): Amount of funding allocated annually Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-A-6 Encourage Local Hiring. Encourage developers and contractors to evaluate hiring local labor, hiring from, or contributing to apprenticeship programs, increasing resources for labor compliance, and providing living wages.

H-A-6-a Local Labor Program List. Establish and post a list of local labor unions and apprenticeship programs on City’s website and encourage the developers and contractors to hire local labor.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Attorney Timeframe: Establish the list by December 2023. Bi-annually update the list or upon requests from the local unions to be added to the list.

H-B Protect Existing Housing, Waterfront Character, and Resources Maintain the high quality of existing housing and waterfront character and assure energy efficiency in new and existing housing.

H-B-1 Encourage Maintenance of Existing Housing. Encourage maintenance of the existing housing stock by continuing to enforce zoning and property maintenance regulations, housing and other codes for all types of residential units.

H-B-1-a Continue Code Enforcement. Continue the existing Zoning and Building Code Enforcement and Property Maintenance programs. In addition, continue the mandatory fire code inspection program. Provide referrals to assistance programs in cases where owner is eligible per H-B-2-b.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department; Fire Department Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Performance metric: Close 90% of code enforcement cases within 90 days Performance Metric(s): Percentage of cases closed within 60 days.

Funding Source: General Fund
H-B-2 Encourage Rehabilitation of Existing Housing. Encourage rehabilitation to the extent feasible and when necessary for lower- and moderate-income homeowners.

H-B-2-a Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans. The City will provide or partner with a regional program to provide rehabilitation loans, energy improvement such as weatherization or solar, disaster assistance programs, and proactive outreach to lower-income homeowners.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Quantified Objective: 18 new loans by 2031 or 3 per year, half of which being very low income and half of which being low income
Performance Metric(s): Number of new loans by 2031
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 960

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-85
Geographic Targeting: Increased outreach for program participation to owners in census tracts with higher reported cost burden, 6082 and 6083 H-B-2-b Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance. The City will initiate a rebate program to provide up to $5,000 in funding to very lowincome homeowners who cannot otherwise afford the repairs. Eligible repairs include weatherization of doors and windows, broken windows and doors, installation of smoke detectors, water-heater replacement, electrical/mechanical work, plumbing repairs, solar photovoltaic, and accessibility improvements. The City will identify possible non-profit organizations (such as Rebuilding Together Peninsula, churches, service clubs, or Girl or Boy Scouts) that can provide assistance/proactive outreach and will provide information on the City’s website and handouts at City Hall.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Quantified Objectives: 6 units improved with assistance by 2031 or one very low-income owner unit improved with assistance per year Performance Metric(s): Number of units assisted by 2031 Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
Geographic Targeting: Increased outreach for program participation to owners in census tracts with higher reported cost burden, 6082 and 6083 H-B-3 Encourage Energy Conservation in Housing. Encourage adoption of energy conservation measures and promote energy conservation programs and City staff training that provide assistance for energy conservation improvements.

H-B-3-a Encourage Energy Conservation. The City will continue to encourage Energy Conservation measures by enforcing CALGreen Energy requirements and continue to waive building permit fees for solar permits (photovoltaic panels).

The City will continue the solar photovoltaic $1000 rebate program as long as funds are available.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Quantified Objectives: Issue 15 electric vehicle charging and 50 photovoltaic permits per year
Performance Metric(s): Number of electric vehicle charging and photovoltaic permits issued per year
Funding Source: General Fund
H-B-3-b Expedited Energy Conservation Permits. Continue to streamline permit processes for expedited review of solar permits and Electric Vehicle charging stations permits.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Objectives: First review 80% of expedited permits in 10 business days Performance Metric(s): Percentage of permits reviewed within ten business days
Funding Source: General Fund

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 961

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-86 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
H-B-3-c Increase Awareness Regarding Energy Conservation. The City will continue to partner with regional agencies, such as Peninsula Clean Energy, RICAPS, and BAYREN. Update the City’s website to make information easy to find and promote energy conservation resources, programs, and rebates Responsible Agency: City Manager Department, Community Development Department
Timeframe: Update website by December 2023 and annually thereafter Funding Source: General Fund
H-B-3-d Climate Action Plan. Implement recommended energy conservation measures for housing upon completion of the 2023 Climate Action Plan update.

Responsible Agency: City Manager Department, Community Development Department
Timeframe: Adopt CAP implementation programs by the end of 2024 Funding Source: General Fund
H-B-4 Housing Design. Assure excellence in housing design consistent with existing architecture, site planning, and amenities, including room additions. Provide adequate flexibility to allow a variety of housing types to meet different housing needs, including room additions that provide affordable housing opportunities by allowing families to more economically meet their needs than by moving and purchasing a new home.

H-B-4-a Update Architectural and Solar Guidelines for Single Family Homes.

Update the Architectural and Solar Guidelines to implement the City’s Architectural Review requirements contained in Chapter 17.58 of the Foster City Municipal Code to ensure that development preserves the architectural character and scale of the neighborhoods and community and is well designed.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Update Architectural and Solar Guidelines by December 2025 Funding Source: General Fund
H-B-5 Review Potential Environmental Impacts of New Housing. When a new housing development is proposed that meets threshold requirements for review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), perform a review of potential environmental impacts to ensure that the impacts on existing and prospective residents are considered.

H-B-5-a Air Quality Impacts. When site-specific development is proposed and/or a Rezoning application is processed, potential air quality impacts from project traffic and other significant sources shall be studied, and mitigation measures to ensure compliance with the Bay Area Air Quality Management District standards in effect at the time shall be recommended if necessary.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-b Geotechnical Studies. Prior to any residential construction on the project sites, geotechnical studies would be required by the City unless a site-specific

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 962

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-87
geotechnical study is already on file with the City.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-c Seismic Hazards. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the latest adopted edition of the California Building Standards Code to reduce potential seismic-related hazards.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-d Environmental Site Assessment. When a site-specific development is proposed for housing on a site that was previously used for commercial or industrial uses, a Phase I and II Site Assessment shall be conducted to identify the extent of contamination and the clean-up measures necessary to meet the requirements of the Department of Toxic Substances Control and the Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-e NPDES Requirements. All National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements will be met or required as mitigation measures for applicable housing projects.

Responsible Agency: Public Works Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-f Noise Studies. Noise studies shall be undertaken for each site when a sitespecific housing development is proposed. These studies will identify needed mitigation measures to reduce noise levels to an acceptable level for residential uses of the sites as identified in the Noise Element of the Foster City General Plan.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-B-5-g Traffic Impacts. Traffic impacts shall be evaluated for housing development pursuant to the threshold requirements for CEQA analysis of traffic impacts.

Each site-specific evaluation will consider Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), intersection and freeway impacts, TDM measures incorporated into the project, parking, transit, pedestrian/bicycle safety, and potential impacts on neighborhood streets and evacuation.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department and Public Works Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 963

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-88 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
H-B-5-h Water Supply Assessment. A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) shall be performed for housing development proposals not previously analyzed pursuant to the threshold requirements for WSAs contained in California Water Code Section 10910 et seq. and California Government Code Section 66473.7.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: Development Permit Fees
H-C Protect the Supply and Affordability of Rental Housing H-C-1 Regulation of Conversions. Regulate the conversion of apartments to condominiums, community apartments and stock cooperatives to preserve the existing stock of rental apartments.

H-C-1-a Condominium Conversion Regulation. Continue implementation of the condominium conversion ordinance linking any conversions to the development of additional rental housing within the city. The ordinance provides for lifetime leases for seniors and handicapped tenants. Continue the requirement for deed restrictions on resale (unless financing is impossible), or 1% of gross sales must be contributed to the City, and comparable rental housing must be available in the Housing Market Area.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Funding Source: General Fund
H-C-1-b Amend Percentage of BMR Units in Conversions. Review the existing conversion regulations in Chapter 17.76 of the Municipal Code to ensure conformance with applicable state law pertaining to the percentage of converted units required to be set aside for qualified lower- and moderateincome owners.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Report to City Council regarding conformance by December 2024 Funding Source: General Fund
H-C-2 Protection of the Rental Housing Stock. Promote the retention of rental units and encourage rental subsidy programs that can be applied to existing housing.

H-C-2-a Monitor Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreements. The City will continue to monitor and enforce existing affordable housing regulatory agreements, including but not limited to exploration of ways to improve the efficiency of the process, and updating the City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines to incorporate procedures for investigating complaints.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Adopt efficiency improvements and update the BMR Administrative Guidelines by December 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 964

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-89
Quantified Objectives: Retain 426 existing and any new deed restricted affordable rental units
Funding Source: City Affordable Housing Fund
H-C-2-b Continue to Monitor Expiration of Rental Affordability Covenants. Monitor affordable rental housing developments that are at risk of conversion to market rate (there are none in this 2023-2031 planning period). Work with landlords, tenants, and other agencies at least five years prior to the expiration date of affordability covenants to minimize the impacts of the expiration of affordability covenants as follows:
 Proactively reach out to owners to ascertain their intentions and discuss alternatives;
 Work with owners and property managers to evaluate preservation options in exchange for extensions of affordability covenants;  Hold public hearings upon receipt of any Notice of Intent to Sell or Notice of Intent to Convert to Market Rate Housing pursuant to Section 65863.10 of the Government Code and provide tenant education on housing rights.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Include information in General Plan Annual Report listing any expiration dates within ten years; reach out to owners at least five years prior to expiration
Performance Metric(s): Number of units subject to affordability covenants monitored
Funding Source: City Affordable Housing Fund
H-C-2-c Replacement Unit Requirements. The City shall not approve a housing development project that will include the demolition of existing housing units unless provisions are included to demonstrate compliance with California Government Code Sections 65915(c)(3) and 66300(d), requiring replacement units to be restricted to lower-income households to match the percentage of lower-income tenants, as provided in Chapter 17.55, Replacement Units, adopted in January 2023. The City shall include the necessary information in the planning application submittal requirements.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend submittal requirements by December 2023 Performance Metric: Consistent with state law, confirm that no housing development project will demolish residential dwelling units regardless of whether the parcel was listed in the Sites Inventory unless a) the project will create at least as many residential dwelling units as will be demolished, and b) certain affordability criteria are met
Funding Source: General Fund
H-C-3 Tenant Protections. Mitigate potential impacts of displacement and promote greater awareness of tenant and landlord rights and obligations.

H-C-3-a Anti-Displacement Plan for Redevelopment of Existing Multifamily Developments. If an existing multifamily apartment development is repaired or redeveloped including the displacement of one or more tenants, the application submitted for repairs or redevelopment including displacement of

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 965

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-90 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
any tenants shall include a plan that demonstrates how impacts to existing tenants that are being displaced are minimized through such means as phasing, financial assistance, and relocation services. Such plan shall also include a robust outreach plan to affected tenants.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend submittal requirements by December 2023 Funding Source: General Fund
H-C-3-b Anti-Displacement Strategy. Develop an Anti-Displacement Strategy, including assessment of a variety of tenant protection measures to determine if appropriate for Foster City, including but not limited to: a) expansion of relocation benefits beyond those required by California law for landlords to pay to lower-income tenants to also apply to moderate-income tenants; b) expansion of the amount of relocation benefits beyond those required by California law for lower-income tenants; c) minimum lease terms; d) required notifications to tenants and landlords of legal requirements; and e) expansion of any other relocation/anti-displacement provisions.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-C-3-c Facilitate Resolution of Rental Disputes. Continue working with the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center and the Tri-County Apartment Association as vehicles to moderate rent increases and minimize displacements in the City and to resolve rental disputes between renters and property owners.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Community Development Department Timeframe: Update website by December 2023Funding Source: General Fund H-C-3-d Facilitate Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482). In coordination with programs promoting fair housing under H-G, provide information on laws regarding maximum annual rent increases, just cause evictions, and financial compensation requirements.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Community Development Department Timeframe: Update website by December 2023; Provide at least one information session per year
Funding Source: General Fund
H-C-4 Rental Assistance Programs. Continue to publicize and participate in rental assistance programs such as Section 8, Housing Voucher programs, and other available rental programs.

H-C-4-a Rental Housing Assistance Information. Encourage the use of federal, State and local rental housing programs by providing information on the City’s website. Continue to publicize and promote programs offered by the San Mateo County Housing Authority through proactive public outreach including but not limited to the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program, landlord incentive programs (such as Landlord Continuity Bonus, New Landlord Bonus, and Landlord “No Loss” Bonus) programs for landlords to rent to holders of Housing Choice or HUD-VASH (Veteran) Vouchers.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 966

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-91
Responsible Agencies: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Update website by December 2023 and then annually Quantified objectives: Increase the number of voucher holders by 2 per year Performance Metric(s): Number of housing vouchers used in Foster City Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D Pursue Public and Private Redevelopment Opportunities to Increase the Supply of Housing
Assure excellence in architecture and site planning in all new projects, provide a variety of housing types and tenure and meet the City's "fair share" of regional housing need.

H-D-1 Housing Opportunity Areas. Given the diminishing availability of developable land, the City will continue to identify housing opportunity areas and sites with potential to provide additional housing consistent with other General Plan policies.

H-D-1-a Selection of Housing Opportunity Areas. The City will use the following criteria in selecting Housing Opportunity sites or areas for the Housing Sites Inventory:
(1) Housing on the site will help affirmatively further fair housing by expanding the distribution and variety of housing types and sizes in the City. (2) Potential for adequate and safe internal and external vehicular and pedestrian circulation, including emergency evacuation. (3) Convenient access to existing public transportation or the potential for such access as public transportation systems are expanded.
(4) Convenient access to typical neighborhood services and amenities typically required by residents.
(5) Convenient access to typical neighborhood recreation amenities or designed to provide adequate recreation amenities on-site. (6) Cost effective mitigation of physical site constraints (including geologic hazards, flooding, drainage, soils constraints, wetland limitations, etc.) (7) Cost effective provision by the City/EMID of typical residential services and adequate utilities to the site.
(8) Ability to meet internal residential noise standards. (9) Adequate size to provide required parking; parking requirements should be flexible based on the expected needs of the project’s prospective residents. (10)The development of a specific project on the site will not result in significant adverse individual or cumulative environmental impacts on other properties in the neighborhood or area, unless the City/District adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act.

Responsible Agency: City Council, Planning Commission, Community Development Department
Timeframe: Use criteria to evaluate applications as they are submitted; use to evaluate new sites as part of mid-cycle review of RHNA progress by December

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 967

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-92 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
2026.

Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-1-b General Plan and Zoning Amendments to Facilitate Housing on Housing Opportunity Sites in the Sites Inventory. Concurrent with or prior to adoption of the Housing Element, adopt the following General Plan and zoning amendments:
(1) Rezone R-3 RHNA 5 sites to R-4. These sites include Harbor Cove, Franciscan, Sand Cove, and The Lagoons. (Adopted January 2023) (2) Rezone R-4 RHNA 5 sites to allow by right development for projects with 20% or more lower-income units. These sites include Beach Cove and Shadow Cove. (Adopted January 2023)
(3) Amend R-3 (Chapter 17.18) and R-4 (Chapter 17.20) for consistency with General Plan minimum and maximum densities. (Adopted January 2023)
(4) Rezone Commercial Housing Opportunity Site to Allow Mixed-Use.

Concurrent with adoption of this Housing Element, rezone the Housing Opportunity Site currently developed with commercial uses to allow either commercial or mixed-use of commercial and residential. This includes the 1010 Metro Center Boulevard site.
(5) Mixed-Use Densities. The City will amend the Zoning regulations for the C-2 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.
(6) Rezone Foster’s Landing from R-3/PD to CM/PD and amend General Plan from Apartment Residential to Civic Center Mixed Use. Concurrent with adoption of this Housing Element, rezone this site to allow higher density housing/mixed use.
(7) Eaves from R-3 to R-4/PD. The City will amend the zoning for this centrally located site to facilitate redevelopment.
(8) Rezone 1601 Beach Park Boulevard from PF to R-2 and amend General Plan from Public/Semi-Public to Two-Family Residential. Concurrent with adoption of this Housing Element, rezone this site to allow residential use.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: General Plan and Zoning in place prior to or upon Housing Element Adoption
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-2 Encourage Housing as Part of New Development Projects. As opportunities for the development or redevelopment of property occur, whether financed with public funds or not, evaluate whether the subject site and project could and/or should include multifamily housing units as a part of the overall project, including apartments, condominiums, townhouses, or a mix of housing types.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 968

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-93
H-D-2-a Potential Re-Use of Commercial Sites. The City will reevaluate the land use designations for the City's neighborhood shopping centers or other commercial sites biannually beginning in 2026 or 1) if approvals of a development trigger the “no net loss” requirements; 2) if the owner initiates redevelopment of a commercial site, or 3) any of the commercial activities become not viable. If residential or mixed-use developments are considered, criteria for determining the appropriate housing types include:
(1) The type of street (major, collector, etc.) which would provide access to the site and levels of service on the street in the morning and afternoon peak hours.
(2) Availability of public services and facilities such as infrastructure (water, sewer, etc.), school capacity, parks and open space.
(3) The ability of the project to provide landscaping for parking areas, facade modulation and orientation of buildings which would ensure privacy for, and minimize impacts on, any adjacent single-family homes, and reduce the perception of density in a multi-family project.
(4) Potential to provide housing for employees.
(5) The ability of the project to provide neighborhood serving commercial uses. (6) Potential to provide waterfront amenities and/or waterfront commercial uses.
(7) Maintaining a Sites Inventory that can accommodate the RHNA.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Rezone 1010 Metro Center Boulevard by December 2023; Biannual review and report to Planning Commission and City Council with first report and adoption of accompanying general plan amendments and/or zoning actions by July 2026, or sooner if circumstances require as outlined above.

Performance Metric(s): Change zoning designation on 1010 Metro Center Boulevard to allow redevelopment with mixed use to achieve at least minimum capacity of 111 units by December 2023. Proactively reach out to at least two commercial site owners per year to discuss options to add or redevelop with housing
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices adjacent to single-family areas.

H-D-3 Planned Development Process. Encourage the use of the planned development process to achieve a diversity of housing types and tenure and to provide greater choice for residents and workers in Foster City.

H-D-3-a Update Planned Development Process. Amend the zoning regulations for the Planned Development Combining District, Chapter 17.36, to align with requirements for objective standards and retain the ability to provide flexibility and incentives including but not limited to address special housing needs and a diversity of housing choices.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 969

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-94 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2026
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Citywide
H-D-4 Accessory Dwelling Units. The City will continue to encourage Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) (including Junior Accessory Dwelling Units [JADUs]), and multi-family ADUs, subject to specific development standards and requirements.

H-D-4-a ADUs. Continue implementation of Chapter 17.78, Accessory Dwelling Units.

Update the City’s ADU ordinance to comply with State laws by December 2023 and subsequently update the City’s regulations to comply with new state laws within six months of being effective.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Update Chapter 17.78 to comply with 2023 State laws by December 2023 and update the City’s regulations to comply with subsequent new State laws within 6 months of being effective.

Quantifiable Objectives: 24 ADUs by 2031
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-b ADU/JADU Financial Incentive Program. Provide or partner with another organization to provide a financial incentive program for single-family homeowners to construct an ADU/JADU that is restricted for lower-income households for 10-15 years, with an additional incentive amount for units subject to a preference for identified categories of special needs people who would benefit from coordinated onsite services, including but not limited to people with developmental disabilities.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Quantifiable Objectives: 8 income-restricted ADU units to be financed by 2031 (included in 24 in H-D-4-a)
Performance Metric(s): Number of restricted units produced; amount of incentives offered
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund and/or grant funds Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-c Preapproved ADU/JADU Designs and Expedited Review. Adopt preapproved ADU/JADU designs/plans to streamline the review process, facilitate reduced applicant cost and expedited review for ADUs/JADUs. Work with homeowners’ associations to incorporate their input on preapproved designs that are appropriate for their development and encourage them to adopt prototypical designs for ADUs/JADUs. Ensure preapproved designs/plans provide choices and diversity in size to accommodate a variety of household sizes and types.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Number of preapproved ADU/JADU designs/plans

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 970

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-95
adopted
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-d Improved Public Information on ADUs. Promote information and tools available to facilitate ADU construction and encourage desirable features such as energy conservation and universal design for accessibility. Provide easily accessible information on the City’s website and at the public counter.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Improve website and counter information by December 2023 Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-e Amnesty Program for Existing Unapproved ADUs. Develop a program to provide property owners with the opportunity to formally legalize existing unpermitted ADUs of any size.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2025
Performance Metric(s): Number of unpermitted ADUs formally legalized Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-f Objective Design Standards for ADUs. Develop and adopt objective design standards for ADUs.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Adopt standards by December 2024
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-4-g Multi-Family ADUs. The City will develop incentives to encourage multifamily ADUs in accordance with Chapter 17.78 of the Municipal Code and applicable State laws including but not limited to such measures as financial assistance, reduced fees, and/or expedited processing. The City will conduct outreach to owners of multi-family housing to explore opportunities to convert underutilized spaces including carports, garages, laundry rooms, etc.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Develop incentive program by December 2024; Conduct outreach to at least two properties per year.

Quantified Objective: 70 multi-family ADUs by 2031
Performance Metric(s): Number of multi-family ADUs
Funding Source: General Fund
H-D-4-h ADU Monitoring. The City shall track new ADUs (at single-family and multifamily sites) and collect information on the use and affordability of these units in each Annual Progress Report. Biannually through the projection period (beginning in 2025), if determined that at least 50% units are not meeting a lower-income housing need at the mid-cycle review in 2027, the City shall adopt additional incentives to facilitate ADUs and/or ensure other housing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 971

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-96 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
sites are available to accommodate the unmet portion of the lower-income RHNA. Examples of incentives include:
 Fee waivers and reductions
 Annual exploration and pursuit of funding related to ADUs  Increased financial incentives in addition to incentives in H-D-4-b  Increased promotion of ADU resources in addition to promotion in H-D-4-d
 Priority processing and over the counter technical assistance Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Annual monitoring by April 1 as part of Annual Progress Report; determination biannually beginning in 2025
Performance Metric(s): Percentage of ADUs meeting lower-income need targeted at 30% very low-income and 30% low-income
Funding Source: General Fund
H-D-4-i Provide New Housing Choices and Affordability in High Opportunity Areas through Additional ADUs in R-1 Zoned Areas. The City will amend Chapter

17.78 Accessory Dwelling Units to allow up to three ADUs per single-family lot. As ADUs are naturally more affordable by design given their size, this program will help affirmatively further fair housing by helping to provide new housing choices and affordability in high opportunity areas of the City that are largely unaffordable to many people.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend Chapter 17.78 by December 2023
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-D-4-j ADUs and JADUs in Religious and Institutional Uses and School Sites.

Amend zoning regulations allowing religious and institutional uses and school sites to construct up to four (4) ADUs and JADUs on-site when an affordable housing development may not be feasible and conduct an outreach and education campaign to subject property owners.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend zoning regulations by December 2024, Conduct outreach to at least two properties per year.

Quantified objective: 12 ADUs in religious and institutional uses and 12 ADUs in school sites by 2031
Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices adjacent to single-family areas.

H-D-5 Institution-Owned Sites. Facilitate the addition of residential uses on public and private institution-owned sites.

H-D-5-a School Sites. Pursue opportunities with the public school district and private schools, including but not limited to General Plan and PF zoning amendments, to incorporate on-site residential uses for faculty and staff along with educational facilities to increase the supply of school employee

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 972

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-97
housing.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Adopt General Plan and PF zoning amendments and meet with San Mateo-Foster City School District and at least one private school by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Adoption of zoning amendments; Coordinate with the school district to implement and promote development of housing in conformance with AB 2295 by December 2024; A minimum of two meetings held with public school districts and private schools by December 2027.

Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices adjacent to single-family areas.

H-D-5-b Religious and Nonprofit-Owned Sites. Pursue opportunities for provision of housing on sites owned by religious or non-profit organizations, including the special parking provisions of California Government Code Section 65913.6.

Collaborate with religious and non-profit officials on amendments to zoning regulations.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend zoning regulations by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Rezone 1601 Beach Park Boulevard from PF Public Facility to R-2 Two-Family Residential to provide a minimum capacity of 16 units by December 2023. Adoption of zoning amendments by December 2024; A minimum of two meetings held with owners of religious and nonprofitowned sites to implement and promote development of housing in conformance with SB 4 by December 2027.

Funding Source: General Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices adjacent to single-family areas.

H-D-6 Reduce Regulatory Constraints. Reduce governmental and regulatory constraints to the production of housing, especially affordable housing.

H-D-6-a Minimize Governmental Constraints. The City will review the entire development process and remove any governmental and regulatory constraints to the production of affordable housing, including streamlining the preliminary review process and to allow more types of projects to be approved at the staff level. The City will: 1) engage with affordable housing developers to identify governmental constraints, 2) continue to evaluate and improve the streamlined processing system to facilitate residential development, and 3) streamline 100% affordable housing with a priority staff-level planning entitlement process.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Engage with affordable housing developers by December 2024, amend zoning code to streamline processing system by December 2025; repeat in 2028
Performance Metric(s): Number of zoning requirements, fees, processing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 973

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-98 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
timelines and review procedures removed related to affordable housing Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-6-b Minimize Zoning Constraints. Evaluate zoning regulations that discourage the development of diverse housing types, including smaller, more affordable units and two- and three-bedroom units suitable for families and children.

Amend City codes, including rescinding minimum floor areas in Chapter 17.56, provide that manufactured homes are permitted in single-family districts, and other amendments to encourage diverse housing types.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Rescinded minimum floor areas in Chapter 17.56 and provided for manufactured homes by January 2023 (see Appendix H); amend zoning regulations to further encourage diverse housing types by December 2024 Performance Metric(s): Number of City codes amended
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-6-c Amend Parking Requirements. Amend parking requirements for multi-family housing as necessary, including but not limited to setting a maximum of two stalls per unit and reducing guest parking requirements by 50%, to allow General Plan densities and to reduce housing costs and provide appropriate parking requirements for elderly, developmentally disabled, or other special needs populations.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Report with recommendations to Planning Commission and City Council by December 2024
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-6-d Development Impact Fee Waivers. Provide a 75% reduction in development impact fees for very low and low income units, provided that at least 20% of the units in the project are designated as affordable, and a 100% fee reduction for very low and low income units if at least 25% of the units in the project are designated as affordable pursuant to Resolution No. 2022-75 adopted on June 20, 2022.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeframe: Ongoing as applications are submitted
Performance Metric(s): Number of fee waivers granted
Funding Source: General Fund
H-D-6-e Multi-Family Objective Design Standards. Amend the Zoning regulations, including but not limited to R-3 and R-4, to include objective design standards and objective approval findings for new and redeveloped multi-family or mixed-use developments to address building design as well as provision of open space and recreational amenities, including amendments to reduce lot size, increase building coverage, revise setbacks, decrease open green area and other requirements to ensure the densities allowed by the General Plan can be achieved in compliance with the Housing Accountability Act.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 974

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-99
Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Adopt objective design standards and amend zoning regulations by December 2023
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-6-f SB9 Objective Design Standards. Amend the Zoning and Subdivision regulations to include objective design standards in compliance with SB9 to allow additional housing units on single-family parcels.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Amend zoning regulations by December 2024
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-D-6-g Employee Housing Act. Implement Zoning regulations amended in January 2023 for consistency with the Employee Housing Act. Responsible Agency:

Community Development Department
Timeframe: Ongoing
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-E Address Affordable Housing Needs
Meet the City's "fair share" of very low-, low-, and moderate-income housing need and the needs of special groups, including the elderly, disabled, small and large families, extremely low-income households and persons, single parents, and local workers.

H-E-1 Create More and Retain Existing Affordable Housing. Utilize a variety of methods to increase and retain the supply of affordable housing, including the following programs:

H-E-1-a Existing Unit Purchase Program-Opportunities for Supportive Housing.

Implement the tenant preferences adopted in January 2023 for the Existing Unit Purchase Program (City-owned units) so that when vacancies occur, housing providers have an opportunity to propose renting the unit to provide supportive housing for people with disabilities and if no acceptable proposals are received, then continue to maintain the existing units owned by the City as rentals for large very low- and low-income families.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeframe: As vacancies occur
Quantified Objectives: One (1) unit converted to supportive housing by 2031 Performance Metric(s): Number of units converted to supportive housing Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-E-1-b New Units for City-Owned Affordable Housing Program. If funds are available, purchase existing older single-family or duplex units or other units to provide affordable rental housing for larger families dispersed throughout the community, targeting units that need rehabilitation and thereby improving the neighborhood(s) in which they are located.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: as funds are available
Performance Metric(s): Number of units purchased and made affordable under

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 975

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-100 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
the program
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-E-1-c First-Time Homebuyer Program. Continue to monitor the three remaining First Time Homebuyer loans for compliance with their requirements, including owner-occupancy. Deposit any payoffs into the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. Continue to promote the HEART First-Time Homebuyer Loan program through the City’s website, social media, and other means.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program at least quarterly on the City’s website, social media, and/or other means.

Quantified Objectives: Two (2) loans every four (4) years.

Performance Metric(s): Number of loans granted
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-E-2 Private Development of Affordable Housing – Inclusionary Requirement. Require the provision of affordable housing by the private sector through an inclusionary requirement.

H-E-2-a Inclusionary 20% Requirement. Implement the City’s 20% inclusionary requirement as contained in Chapter 17.90.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Performance Metric(s): Ensure inclusionary units are provided consistent with ordinance requirements
Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-2-b Affordable Housing Overlay Inclusionary 15% Requirement Including Extremely Low-Income. Implement the City’s Affordable Housing Overlay 15% inclusionary requirement which includes a requirement for extremely lowincome rental units, as contained in Chapter 17.92.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Performance Metric(s): Ensure inclusionary units are provided consistent with ordinance requirements
Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-3 Incentives for Affordable Housing. The City shall offer development incentives to developers of multifamily housing projects which meet the City’s housing needs, in exchange for an agreement that more than twenty percent (20%) of the total number of units constructed (or another percent, depending upon the project) shall be affordable to very low as defined by State Health and Safety Code Section 50105, low- and moderate-income persons and families as defined by Section 50093 of the State of California Health and Safety Code for a minimum period of 99 years for rentals and 45 years for ownership (restarting with each sale). Incentives to be considered include the following:
 Density bonuses, as allowed by State law and Chapter 17.86.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 976

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-101
 Reduced or waived fees for lower income units per Program H-D-6-d.  Assistance and support in securing public financing, such as bonds or tax credits.

H-E-3-a Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing Projects Consistent with State Density Bonus Law. The City will offer density bonuses consistent with the State Density Bonus Law and Chapter 17.86. The City will update its regulations as necessary to comply with State law.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend City regulations by December 2023 if necessary to conform to State law
Performance Metric(s): Number of projects utilizing density bonus regulations Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-E-3-b Financing and Subsidy Programs. Create a dedicated webpage to be updated quarterly with links to resources for federal, state and local funding sources that offer subsidies for affordable housing.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Create webpage by December 2023; update quarterly Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-3-c Cooperative Ventures. Encourage cooperative and joint ventures between owners, developers, non-profit groups, and/or the City in the provision of BMR housing through targeted outreach methods.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Biannual with first outreach meeting by June 2024.

Performance Metric(s): Number of cooperative ventures under the program Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-4 Resale Controls on Owner-Occupied BMR Units. Require resale controls on owneroccupied BMR units to ensure that affordable units provided through public assistance or public action are retained for a minimum of 45 years (with a new 45-year time period starting with each resale) as affordable housing stock pursuant to Chapter 17.90 of the Municipal Code.

H-E-4-a Maintain Existing Owner-Occupied BMR Units. Monitor the agreements for the ownership BMR units to ensure the continued affordability of these units for the terms of their agreements.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Annual Monitoring to be reported in General Plan Annual Report Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-E-5 Rent and Income Restrictions on Rental BMR Units. Require rent and income restrictions on rental BMR units to ensure that affordable units provided through public assistance or public action are retained for 99 years or more as affordable housing stock pursuant to Chapter 17.90 of the Municipal Code, except that pursuant to Chapter 17.90, the City may accept a shorter period of affordability of no less than fifty-five years, if the applicable residential development project provides substantial evidence that a shorterterm restriction is necessary and required in order to obtain financing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 977

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-102 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
H-E-5-a New Agreements for Affordability of Existing Rental Units. If a source of funding can be identified, work with owners of existing market rate rental units to include affordability agreements. Monitor availability of County, State, and Federal funding opportunities annually.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Meet with at least one market rate rental owner each year to identify interest; pursue grant funding opportunities annually and report in General Plan Annual Report
Performance Metric(s): Number of existing units subject to new affordability agreements
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund, Grants
H-E-6 House Sharing. Encourage and facilitate house sharing in appropriate locations where it would provide housing for lower- and moderate-income residents and not significantly impact the neighborhood (parking, access, etc.).

H-E-6-a Home Sharing Program. Continue to fund the HIP Housing Home Sharing Program. Work with similar non-profits to expand the existing outreach for the Homeshare Program for both rental and ownership housing, including outreach to extremely low- and very low-income persons.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, HIP Housing Timeframe: Continue to implement program
Quantified Objectives: At least 5 new matches annually
Performance Metric(s): Number of matches annually
Funding Source: General Fund, Affordable Housing Fund
Geographic Targeting: Promote programs to expand housing choices in singlefamily areas.

H-E-7 Workforce Housing. Given the amount of commercial and retail development expected through build-out of the City, encourage an adequate supply and variety of rental and ownership workforce housing as part of new commercial development.

H-E-7-a Housing Provisions in Development Agreements. Include provisions to add to the housing supply in new or extended development agreements whenever legally possible for commercial development.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Ongoing as development agreements are considered Performance Metric(s): Number of units produced
Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-8 BMR Eligibility Priorities. In order to meet a portion of the City’s local housing need, consistent with Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Housing Needs Determination, and as means to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), the City will, to the extent consistent with applicable policy, establish eligibility priorities for the BMR units in a project for City employees and people working in the City of Foster City.

H-E-8-a BMR Eligibility Guidelines. Implement BMR selection guidelines based on the BMR Eligibility Priorities in Policy H-E-8, including City Resolution 2000-123 and as amended that give priority to people who are at risk of displacement

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 978

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-103
due to expiring covenants, who live and work in the community, teachers and local government and public safety employees.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department and City Attorney Timeframe: Ongoing
Funding Source: General Fund
H-E-9 Variety of Housing Types. Encourage a variety of housing types and configurations to address needs of large and small and extremely low-income households.

H-E-9-a Family Friendly Housing. Promote housing designs and unit mix to attract multigenerational households by encouraging developers to include housing features and more bedrooms (including three-bedroom units), as well as other on-site amenities, such as usable outdoor open space for multigenerational use, and multipurpose rooms that can be used for after-school homework clubs, computers, arts, or other resident activities. To address potential displacement of households with three or more persons, the City will research options to expand regulatory incentives to encourage the development of larger units.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Report to City Council by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Facilitate ten (10) rental units of 3 or more bedrooms by 2031
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-E-9-b Small Housing Units. Amend the Zoning regulations to specifically allow housing targeted for extremely low-income households, including single room occupancy (SROs) and group homes for these income groups in the CM/PD, C2, and PF zoning districts and establish or modify development standards to facilitate the development of SROs, amend regulations to provide expedited review for these housing types, explore funding sources for SROs, and conduct outreach to neighborhood groups, stakeholders, and local businesses regarding the advantages of providing opportunities for new construction and preservation of SROs.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend zoning regulations by December 2024; conduct outreach at least annually with news articles and through roundtable meetings.

Performance Metric(s): Facilitate ten (10) rental units with less than 500 square feet by 2031
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-E-10 Housing Mobility and Housing Choices. The City will utilize a group of actions to improve housing mobility and promote housing choices and affordability throughout the City in addition to designating sites in the Sites Inventory in a wide geographic area.

H-E-10-a Improve Housing Mobility and Increase Missing Middle Housing Choices.

The City will implement a suite of programs targeted to include more housing choices with the goal of expanding housing opportunities affordable to extremely low, very low, low and moderate income households as well as

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 979

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-104 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
missing middle housing (duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes). Actions and strategies include:
 Accessory Dwelling Units: Ten programs under H-D-4 Accessory Dwelling Units will be utilized to encourage and promote accessory dwelling units, including promotion and public information, financial incentives, preapproved designs, amnesty, objective design standards, allow up to three ADUs per single-family lot, and monitoring with a total target of four new ADUs or JADUs on single-family properties per year; 70 multifamily ADUs; 12 ADUs in religious and institutional uses; and 12 ADUs in school sites. See Programs H-D-4-a through H-D-4-i.
 Home Sharing Program: The City will encourage and facilitate house sharing through the HIP Housing Home Sharing Program with a goal of at least five new matches annually. See Program H-E-6-a.
 Institution-Owned Sites. The City will pursue opportunities for provision of housing on sites owned by religious or non-profit organizations and schools. See Programs H-D-5-a and H-D-5-b.
 Supportive Housing. The City will implement the tenant preferences adopted in January 2023 for the Existing Unit Purchase Program so that when vacancies occur, housing providers have an opportunity to rent the properties to provide supportive housing with the goal of one unit converted to supportive housing by 2031. See Program H-E-1-a.  Lower Income Homeowner Rehabilitation. The City will encourage rehabilitation of housing for lower income homeowners through a rehabilitation loan program with a goal of 18 new loans by 2031, half of which are very low income and half of which are low income. See Program H-B-2-a.
 Rental Housing Assistance Information. The City will encourage the use of rental assistance programs such as Section 8, Housing Vouchers and other available rental programs through providing information and proactive public outreach with a goal to increase the number of voucher holders by two per year, half of which would be in single-family areas. See Program H-C-4-a.
 Amend Zoning Regulations to Facilitate Missing Middle Housing. As part of the adoption of objective design and development standards, amend zoning regulations for R-2, R-T, R-3, and R-4 to facilitate additional housing development by adjustments to minimum lot sizes, lot width, setbacks, coverage, open green area, parking, and other requirements.

See Program H-D-6-e.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Adopt amendments to municipal code to allow up to three (3) ADUs per single family lot by December 2023. Annually review overall progress and effectiveness in April and provide information in annual report to HCD. If, at the mid-cycle review in 2027, the City is not on track to meet its 97 unit goal for the 8-year RHNA cycle, then the City will make necessary zoning text or map amendments or other land use documents to facilitate a variety of housing choices, including but not limited to, strategies that encourage missing middle housing, lot splits/additional housing units, adaptive reuse, and facilitating additional ADUs and/or JAUDs within six months if sufficient

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 980

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-105
progress toward this quantified objective is not being met.

Quantified Objectives:

H-E-10-A: SUBSET OF QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES BY PROGRAM TO IMPROVE HOUSING MOBILITY (2023-2031)
Program
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate Total
New Construction
H-D-4-a ADUs (includes other
programs under H-D-4) 7 7 7 3 24
H-D-4-g Multi-Family ADUs 21 21 21 7 70
H-D-4-j Religious/Institutional and
School Sites 7 7 7 3 24
Rehabilitation
H-B-2-a: Lower-Income Homeowner
Rehabilitation Loans 9 9 18
Conservation
H-B-2-b: Facilitate Nonprofit
Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance 6 6
H-C-4-a: Rental Housing Assistance
Information 8 8
H-E-1-a: Existing Unit Purchase
Program – Opportunities for
Supportive Housing
1 1
H-E-6-a: House Sharing Program 20 20 40
Total 79 64 35 13 191
Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

Funding Source: City Affordable Housing Fund
H-F Address Housing for Special Needs Populations
H-F-1 Special Needs. Encourage a mix of housing units throughout the City including those for lower-income seniors, veterans, families with children, single parents, young families, victims of domestic violence, farmworkers, and the disabled.

H-F-1-a Facilities and Services for Special Needs. Support housing that incorporates facilities and services to meet the health care, transit or social service needs of households with special needs, including seniors, extremely low-income households and persons, farmworkers, people with developmental disabilities, and persons with disabilities through an expedited permit review process.

Proactively contact non-profit service providers and developers for persons with disabilities and other special needs groups on annual basis to inquire about their needs and notify them about funding opportunities, as they become available.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Establish expedited permit review process and begin annual proactive outreach by December 2023
Performance Metric(s): Facilitate development of at least one (1) new facility

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 981

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-106 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
serving special needs population during the planning period Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-F-1-b Assistance to Victims of Domestic Violence. Assist victims of domestic violence by coordinating with and providing referrals to existing service agencies providing legal assistance, hotline, and emergency housing and prevention services to victims of domestic violence. Continue to coordinate with existing service providers, determine any other actions the City can take to assist persons in Foster City.

Responsible Agency: Police Department
Timeframe: Ongoing
Performance Metric(s): Number of referrals provided
Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-1-c Adaptable/Accessible Units for the Disabled. The City will ensure that new multi-family housing includes units are accessible and adaptable for use by disabled persons in conformance with the California Building Code and that developers are required to implement an affirmative marketing plan as required by Chapter 17.90 and the City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines for physically accessible affordable units that provides disability-serving organizations adequate prior notice of the availability of the accessible and adaptable units and a process for supporting people with qualifying disabilities to apply.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement requirements for affirmative marketing by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Ensure accessible and adaptable units are provided consistent with the California Building Code and that affirmative marketing is included consistent with Chapter 17.90 and the City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines.

Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-1-d Reasonable Accommodation. Utilize the adopted Chapter 17.84, containing a review process to provide individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices, and procedures that may be necessary to ensure equal access to housing. The purpose of these procedures and an ordinance is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. Review Chapter 17.84 for conformance with State Law and amend if necessary by December 2023. Update the City’s website to make information on how to submit a request more accessible by December 2023.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend Chapter 17.84 by December 2023. Update City’s website by December 2023, implement as requests are made
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-F-1-e Home Sharing for Special Needs Population. Support the HIP Housing Home Sharing Program as part of a collection of policies programs and

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 982

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-107
practices for addressing special housing needs, including seniors, those living with disabilities, those at risk of homelessness and female householders.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council Timeframe: Include in Annual Budget.

Performance Metric(s): At least 50% of home share matches assist someone with special needs.

Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-F-1-f Support Services for Special Needs Population. Continue to work with service providers such as Foster City Village, Second Harvest Food Bank, and others to facilitate the provision of support services to enable people to receive services in their homes, including persons at risk of homelessness, seniors, persons with mental or physical disabilities, substance abuse problems, HIV/AIDS, physical and developmental disabilities, multiple diagnoses, veterans and victims of domestic violence.

Responsible Agency: Parks and Recreation Department
Timeframe: Host a roundtable meeting with service providers annually starting prior to December 2024; implement the plan developed by December 2025
Performance Metric(s): Roundtable at least annually
Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-1-g Extremely Low-Income Units for Special Needs. The City will ensure that for the new extremely low-income units, including those required by Chapter

17.92, developers are required to implement an affirmative marketing plan for special needs groups prior notice of the availability of the units and a process for supporting qualified households to apply.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Include requirements in the City’s BMR Administrative Guidelines for developers to submit an Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing marketing plan for their affordable units by December 2024
Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-1-h Age Friendly Initiative. Continue the work begun in 2020 with the Center for Age Friendly Excellence (CAFÉ) and the Foster City Age-Friendly Community (AFC) Task Force to develop and implement an action plan including programs to address needs of seniors.

Responsible Agency: City Manager Department, Parks and Recreation Department
Timeframe: Begin program implementation by December 2024 Performance Metric(s): Adoption of Age-Friendly Action Plan by December 2024 Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-1-i Community Care Facilities. Amend the City’s zoning regulations to expand the zoning districts that allow community care facilities to simplify and clarify definitions, permitted uses, and processing procedures for residential care facilities and group homes in all residential districts for conformance with State law, including but not limited to eliminating spacing requirements for persons with disabilities, allowing group homes objectively to facilitate

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 983

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-108 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
approval certainty similar to other residential uses, and allow group homes in all residential zones.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: Amend Municipal Code by December 2024
Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-F-1-j Public Investment in Accessibility. Include accessibility improvements to City streets, parks, and other facilities through implementation of the ADA Transition Plan.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, Public Works Department, Parks and Recreation Department, Human Resources Department, Planning Commission, City Council
Timeframe: The ADA Transition Plan is planned for completion in early 2024, to be implemented beginning in 2024
Performance Metric(s): Number of capital improvement projects identified in the CIP budget each year that include accessibility improvements Funding Source: Capital Improvement Program Budget
Geographic Targeting: Increased preference for census tracts with high percentage of persons with disabilities, 6083 and 6080.25.

H-F-2 Housing for the Homeless. The City of Foster City recognizes the need for emergency shelter housing for the homeless and has adopted Chapter 17.82 to allow emergency shelters as a permitted use in areas zoned Neighborhood Business (C-1), Central Business (C-2), and at churches/synagogues in the Public Facilities (PF) Zoning District.

H-F-2-a Emergency Housing Assistance. To the extent funds are available, participate and allocate funds, as appropriate, for County and non-profit programs providing emergency shelter and related counseling services.

Responsible Agency: City Council
Timeframe: Annual basis
Performance Metric(s): Amount of funding allocated under the program Funding Source: Community Benefits Fund
H-F-2-b Emergency Shelter Uses. To the extent funds are available, the City will contribute to non-profit agencies involved in providing housing for the homeless in San Mateo County. The City will also review proposals for emergency shelter uses based on the policies in the General Plan and other City development standards and requirements. Responsible Agency:

Community Development Department
Timeframe: Annual basis
Performance Metric(s): Number of proposals reviewed; amount of contributions made
Funding Source: Community Benefits Fund
H-F-2-c Multi-Jurisdictional Emergency Shelter. Pursuant to State law requirements, and as the opportunity arises, the City will consider participation in a multi-jurisdictional emergency shelter, should one be proposed in the future.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department, City Council

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 984

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-109
Timeframe: As opportunities arise
Performance Metric(s): Number of emergency shelters opportunities pursued by the City
Funding Source: General Fund, Affordable Housing Fund
H-F-2-d Emergency Shelter Zoning. The City will allow emergency shelters as provided in Chapter 17.82 that allows a year-round emergency shelter as a permitted use in Neighborhood Business (C-1), General Business (C-2), and at churches/synagogues in the Public Facilities (PF) Zoning District. The City will amend Chapter 17.82 as necessary to comply with State law including AB 2339, including amending the definition of emergency shelters, zoning, development standards as applicable to allow residential uses and ensure sufficient capacity to meet the needs for emergency shelters, including proximity to amenities, transportation, and services, and eliminating the limits on maximum length of stay.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend Chapter 17.82 by May 2024.

Performance Metric(s): Number of emergency shelters allowed Funding Source: General Plan Maintenance Fund
H-F-2-e Low Barrier Navigation Centers. In addition to the amendments included in Ordinance 657 to allow LBNCs in C-1 and PF Districts, amend the Zoning regulations to allow low-barrier navigation centers (low-barrier, serviceenriched shelters focused on moving people into permanent housing that provide temporary living facilities) by right in the R-T, R-3, R-4, C-2, and CM/PD zoning district(s), consistent with AB 101 (2019).

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: by December 2023
Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-3 Transitional and Supportive Housing. Treat transitional and supportive housing as a residential use that will be subject only to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses in the same zoning district.

H-F-3-a Transitional and Supportive Housing Zoning. Enforce the existing zoning regulations as amended in January 2023 by Ordinance 657 that allow transitional and supportive Housing, as required by State law, so they are treated as a residential use that will be subject only to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Ongoing
Funding Source: General Fund
H-F-3-b Supportive Housing. Review and revise the Zoning regulations as amended in January 2023 for consistency with AB 2162, effective January 1, 2019, requiring supportive housing by-right in certain zoning districts.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend regulations by December 2023
Funding Source: General Fund

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 985

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-110 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
H-G Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
H-G-1 Equal Housing Opportunity. The City will ensure provision of housing opportunities for all people and will take appropriate actions when necessary to ensure that the sale, rental, or financing of housing is not denied to any individual on the basis of race, ethnicity, sex, national origin, religion, age or other factors.

H-G-1-a Non-Discrimination. To ensure that the sale, rental, or financing of housing is not denied to any individual on the basis of race, sex, national origin, religion, age, marital status, disability, or other factors, Foster City will ensure that state and federal laws are adhered to regarding fair housing. The City, through its Community Development Department, will refer discrimination complaints to the appropriate legal service, county, or state agency. The City will provide public information and education services in a variety of locations, including but not limited to the City’s website, City Hall, public library, Recreation Center and Senior Center.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Update website by December 2023; At least one (1) informational session for tenants and landlords annually beginning in 2024 Performance Metric(s): Number of informational sessions held annually Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-2 Improved Access to Fair Housing Information.

H-G-2-a Anti-Discrimination Regulations. Provide information to tenants and landlords on the City’s website, City Hall, and the public library advising them of the State and City regulations that prohibit landlords from refusing to rent to someone, or otherwise discriminate against them, because they have a housing subsidy, such as a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher, that helps them to afford their rent.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2023; provide updated information annually
Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-2-b Fair Housing Training for Landlords and Tenants. Partner with an organization to perform fair housing training for landlords and tenants.

Target: At least one fair housing training per year beginning in 2024 Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by the end of 2024
Performance Metric(s): Conduct at least one fair housing training for tenants and landlords annually, beginning in 2024
Funding Source: Affordable Housing Fund
H-G-2-c Information Specific to Fair Housing. Provide information on the City’s housing webpage and in ways that reach tenants without internet access to include resources for residents who believe they have been discriminated against, including how to file a fair housing complaint.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2023; update annually

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 986

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-111
Performance Metric(s): Number of physical locations the resources are made available without requiring internet access
Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-2-d Multi-Lingual Tenant Resources. Collaborate and cooperate with local and regional agencies who provide multilingual fair housing education services.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Implement program by December 2024
Performance Metric(s): Collaboration for provision of multilingual fair housing services
Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-2-e Rental Registry. Unless a requirement for a State rental registry is adopted, explore a rental registry that tracks information such as rents, utilities, accessibility for disabled persons, tenant occupancy dates, and landlord contact information in order to improve the information available to landlords, tenants, and decision makers.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Report to City Council by December 2024
Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-3 Reduce Commuting Burden. Reduce commute times and commute costs by encouraging Transit Oriented Design (TOD).

H-G-3-a Commuter Shuttles. Continue to work with Commute.org and local employers to facilitate commuter shuttles.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Continue to implement program.

Funding Source: General Fund
H-G-3-b Expand Bus Service. Require developers to submit a transportation demand management plan with their application and work with SamTrans and/or Commute.org to implement suggestions for new bus stops and routes.

Responsible Agency: Community Development Department
Timeframe: Amend application submittal requirements by December 2024.

Funding Source: General Fund

FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
Below is a breakdown of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for Foster City for the current Housing Element planning period (2023-2031) (see Table 8-1). Approximately 43 percent of the housing need is required to be affordable to low-and very low-income households (“lower-income” households).

The quantified objectives in the Foster City Housing Element are intended, in part, to make sure the City addresses its RHNA for new units.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 987

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-112 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
TABLE 8-1: CITY OF FOSTER CITY REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA) FOR 2023-2031 PLANNING PERIOD
Income Level Units Percentage
Very Low 520 27%
Low 299 16%
Moderate 300 16%
Above Moderate 777 41%
Total 1,896 100%
Source: ABAG, Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-20331, December 2021.

Quantified objectives establish the targets for units to be constructed, rehabilitated, or conserved by income level during the planning period. These objectives are not minimum or maximum requirements, but rather targets based on needs, resources, and constraints. Foster City’s quantified objectives are shown in Table 8-2.
 The construction objective provides the target for the number of new units that potentially may be constructed over the course of the Housing Element planning period.  The rehabilitation objective refers to the number of units expected to be rehabilitated during the Housing Element planning period.
 The conservation objective refers to the number of existing deed restricted below market rate rental housing units to be preserved and lower income units assisted to provide stability throughout the Housing Element planning period. These are included in Table 8-3 below.

TABLE 8-2: SUMMARY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES BY INCOME CATEGORY (2023-2031)
Income Category New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation Very Low (Extremely Lowb) 520 21 411
Low 299 243
Moderate 300 168
Above Moderate 777 228
Total 1,896 21 1,050
a Conservation includes preservation of existing affordable housing stock per Government Code Section 65583(c)(4). Units to be conserved include existing rental affordable housing stock (not including Foster’s Landing units due to expire on 12/31/2023). b Extremely Low-Income is a subset of the Very Low-Income. Housing opportunities such as emergency shelters, supportive housing, shared housing and Section 8 vouchers can provide opportunities to address Extremely Low-Income housing needs. In addition, the Affordable Housing Overlay Combining District requires a certain percentage of extremely low-income units.

Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 988

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-113
TABLE 8-3: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES BY PROGRAM (2023-2031) Program
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate Total
New Construction
Various programs to achieve RHNA (including ADUs) 520 299 300 777 1,896 Rehabilitation
H-B-2-a: Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans 9 9 18 Conservation
H-B-2-b: Facilitate Nonprofit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance 6 6 H-B-3-a: Encourage Energy Conservation in Housing 600
H-C-2-a: Monitor Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreements 247 103 68 8 426 H-C-4-a: Rental Housing Assistance Information 16 16
H-E-1-a: Existing Unit Purchase Program – Opportunities for Supportive Housing 1 1
H-E-6-a: House Sharing Program 20 20 40
Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

NEW CONSTRUCTION OBJECTIVES/SITES INVENTORY
The New Construction Objectives are the RHNA targets, including the targets for each income category.

The Sites Inventory identifies sufficient sites and their realistic capacity to meet the new construction objectives/RHNA targets for the 2023-2031 planning period. A buffer of excess capacity is required, especially at the lower and moderate-income levels, so that the Sites Inventory can demonstrate sufficient capacity throughout the entire planning period, even if individual housing projects are approved at lower densities than projected (see Table 8-4).

TABLE 8-4: SITES INVENTORY (2023-2031)
Site Name
Extremely
Low
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Total
Capacityb
Pipeline Projects
Laguna Vista Condominiums 48 48
Workforce Apartments 5 12 5 22
ADUs Under Construction 2 1 1 4
Proposed Projects
Lantern Covea 14 14 25 303 356
Schooner Bay 26 26 45 549 646
Eaves Apartments MF ADUs 7 7 7 1 22
Accessory Dwelling Units
ADUs 7 7 7 3 24
RHNA5 Sites
Franciscan Apartments 21 14 14 32 81
Sand Cove Apartments 29 19 19 45 112
The Lagoons Apartments 33 22 22 51 128

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 989

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-114 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Site Name
Extremely
Low
Very
Low Low Moderate
Above
Moderate
Total
Capacityb
Beach Cove Apartments 46 29 29 69 173
Shadow Cove Apartments 23 14 14 34 85
Harbor Cove Apartments 25 15 15 36 91
Other Residential Sites
Eaves Apartments 16 10 10 23 59
Foster’s Landing Apartments 236 154 154 363 907
Commercial Site to Allow Mixed Use
1010 Metro Center Boulevard 30 18 18 45 111
Non-Residential Site to Rezone to Residential
1601 Beach Park Boulevard 3 13 16
Total 560 392 322 1,611 2,885
RHNA 520 299 300 777 1,896
Total with EL, VL, L = Lower 952 322 1,611 2,885
RHNA 819 300 777 1,896
Remaining Need (Surplus) 133 22 834 989
Percent of Surplus 16% 7% 107% 52%
a Numbers of units per project application including City’s inclusionary requirements per Chapter 17.90 and if in AHO, 17.92. b Realistic Capacity based on analysis provided in Appendix D.

Source: Foster City Community Development Department.

Table 8-5 summarizes the Identified Fair Housing Issues, contributing factors and actions included in the Housing Element.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 990

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-115
TABLE 8-5: POLICY/PROGRAM MATRIX
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-A Reinforce the City’s Commitment to Meeting Housing Needs H-A-1 City Leadership
H-A-1-a Annual Tracking of Housing Activity
Annually by April 1st
in Annual Progress
Report (APR)
H-A-1-b No Net Loss/Development Pipeline Monitoring
Annually by April 1st in
APR; 2027 mid-term
evaluation
H-A-1-c Future Housing Element Update January 2031
H-A-1-d Evaluate General Plan Amendments for Consistency with Housing Element. Ongoing
H-A-2 Community Engagement
H-A-2-a Community Outreach 2023 Updates at least
twice/year
H-A-3 Cooperation with Other Agencies
H-A-3-a Technical Assistance to Non-Profits 2023 Annual meetings and/or trainings
H-A-4 Adequate Water Supply and Sewer Capacity for New Housing Development
H-A-4-a Adequate Water Supply
Prior to or
concurrent with
adoption
H-A-4-b Housing Element Transmittal to EMID Within 5 days of adoption 2023
H-A-4-c Update Urban Water Management Plan 2025
H-A-4-d Water Conservation 2023
H-A-5 Funding for Housing Programs
H-A5-a Commercial Linkage Fee
2028; Updated every
five-to-seven years
thereafter
H-A-5-b Local, State and Federal Funding for Affordable Housing Annual H-A-5-c Expand Sources of Funds for City Affordable Housing Fund 2023

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 991

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-116 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-A-5-d Budgeting for Housing Programs Annual $
H-A-5-e NOFAs for Affordable Housing Biannual Biannual $ H-A-6 Encourage Local Hiring
H-A-6-a Local Labor Program List 2023 Bi-Annual Update
H-B Protect Existing Housing, Waterfront Character and Resources H-B-1 Encourage Maintenance of Existing Housing
H-B-1-a Continue Code Enforcement Ongoing
H-B-2 Encourage Rehabilitation of Existing Housing
H-B-2-a Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans 2024 $ H-B-2-b Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance 2024 $ H-B-3 Encourage Energy Conservation in Housing
H-B-3-a Encourage Energy Conservation 15 EVC; 50 PV permits per year
H-B-3-b Expedited Energy Conservation Permits
80% of expedited
permits in 10 bus.
days
H-B-3-c Increase Awareness Regarding Energy Conservation 2023 H-B-3-d Climate Action Plan 2024
H-B-4 Housing Design
H-B-4-a Update Architectural and Solar Guidelines for Single Family Homes 2025 H-B-5 Review Potential Environmental Impacts of New Housing H-B-5-a Air Quality Impacts Ongoing
H-B-5-b Geotechnical Studies Ongoing
H-B-5-c Seismic Hazards Ongoing
H-B-5-d Environmental Site Assessment Ongoing
H-B-5-e NPDES Requirements Ongoing
H-B-5-f Noise Studies Ongoing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 992

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-117
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-B-5-g Traffic Impacts Ongoing
H-B-5-h Water Supply Assessment Ongoing
H-C Protect the Supply and Affordability of Rental Housing H-C-1 Regulation of Conversions
H-C-1-a Condominium Conversion Regulation Ongoing
H-C-1-b Amend Percentage of BMR Units in Conversions 2024 H-C-2 Protection of the Rental Housing Stock
H-C-2-a Monitor Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreements 2024 $ H-C-2-b Continue to Monitor Expiration of Affordability Covenants Include in APR at least
10 years prior to
expiration; Notify
owners at least 5
years prior to
expiration
$
H-C-2-c Replacement Unit Requirements 2023
H-C-3 Tenant Protections
H-C-3-a Anti-Displacement Plan for Redevelopment of Existing Multifamily Developments 2023
H-C-3-b Anti-Displacement Strategy 2024
H-C-3-c Facilitate Resolution of Rental Disputes 2023
H-C-3-d Facilitate Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (AB 1482) 2023 Provide at least 1 info
session per year
H-C-4 Rental Assistance Programs
H-C-4-a Rental Housing Assistance Information 2023 Updated annually after 2023
H-D Pursue Public and Private Redevelopment Opportunities to Increase the Supply of Housing
H-D-1 Housing Opportunity Areas
H-D-1-a Selection of Housing Opportunity Areas 2026 As opportunities arise H-D-1-b General Plan and Zoning Amendments to Facilitate Housing on Housing Opportunity Sites in the Sites Inventory
Prior to or upon
Adoption

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 993

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-118 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-D-2 Encourage Housing as Part of New Development Projects H-D-2-a Potential Re-Use of Commercial Sites 2023 2026
Biannually beginning
in 2026; Reach out to
at least 2 owners/year
H-D-3 Planned Development Process
H-D-3-a Update Planned Development Process 2026
H-D-4 Accessory Dwelling Units
H-D-4-a ADUs 2023 24 units by 2031
H-D-4-b ADU/JADU Financial Incentive Program 2024 8 units by 2031 $ H-D-4-c Preapproved ADU/JADU Designs and Expedited Review 2024 $ H-D-4-d Improved Public Information on ADUs 2023
H-D-4-e Amnesty Program for Existing Unapproved ADUs 2025 H-D-4-f Objective Design Standards for ADUs 2024
H-D-4-g Multi-Family ADUs 2024 70 units by 2031
H-D-4-h ADU Monitoring APR by
April 1;
Biannually beginning
2025; mid-cycle
review in 2027
H-D-4-i Provide New Housing Choices and Affordability in High Opportunity Areas through Additional ADUs in R-1 Zoned Areas 2023
H-D-4-j ADUs and JADUs in Religious and Institutional Uses and School Sites 2024 12 units in
religious/institutional
uses by 2031; and
12 units in school sites
by 2031
H-D-5 Institution-Owned sites
H-D-5-a School Sites 2024
Minimum of 2
meetings by
December 2027
H-D-5-b Religious and Nonprofit-Owned Sites 2023 2024
At least 2 meetings
with owners by
December 2027

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 994

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-119
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-D-6 Reduce Regulatory Constraints
H-D-6-a Minimize Governmental Constraints 2024 2025 Repeat in 2028 H-D-6-b Minimize Zoning Constraints Rescind 17.65
prior to adoption
Amend
others by
2024
H-D-6-c Amend Parking Requirements 2024
H-D-6-d Development Impact Fee Waivers Ongoing
H-D-6-e Multi-Family Objective Design Standards 2023
H-D-6-f SB9 Objective Design Standards 2024
H-D-6-g Employee Housing Act Prior to adoption Ongoing
H-E Address Affordable Housing Needs
H-E-1 Create More and Retain Existing Affordable Housing H-E-1-a Existing Unit Purchase Program-Opportunities for Supportive Housing As vacancies occur; 1
unit converted by
2031
$
H-E-1-b New Units for City-Owned Affordable Housing Program As funds are available $ H-E-1-c First-Time Homebuyer Program
Promote at least
quarterly; 2 loans
every 4 years
$
H-E-2 Private Development of Affordable Housing – Inclusionary Requirement
H-E-2-a Inclusionary 20% Requirement Ongoing
H-E-2-b Affordable Housing Overlay Inclusionary 15% Requirement Including Extremely Low-Income Ongoing
H-E-3 Incentives for Affordable Housing
H-E-3-a Density Bonus for Affordable Housing Projects Consistent with State Density Bonus Law 2023 Ongoing
H-E-3-b Financing and Subsidy Programs 2023 Quarterly updates H-E-3-c Cooperative Ventures 2024 Biannual after 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 995

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-120 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-E-4 Resale Controls on Owner Occupied BMR units
H-E-4-a Maintain Existing Owner-Occupied BMR Units
Annual Monitoring to
be reported in
General Plan Annual
Report
$
H-E-5 Rent and Income Restrictions on Rental BMR Units
H-E-5-a New Agreements for Affordability of Existing Rental Units Meet with at least 1
owner per year;
report in APR
$
H-E-6 House Sharing
H-E-6-a Home Sharing Program Ongoing; At least 5
new matches per year
$
H-E-7 Workforce Housing
H-E-7-a Housing Provisions in Development Agreements Ongoing H-E-8 BMR Eligibility Priorities
H-E-8-a BMR Eligibility Guidelines Ongoing
H-E-9 Variety of Housing Types
H-E-9-a Family-Friendly Housing 2024
Facilitate 10 rental
units of 3+ bedrooms
by 2031
H-E-9-b Small Housing Units 2024
Conduct outreach at
least annually;
Facilitate 10 rental
units of less than 500
SF by 2031
H-E-10 Housing Mobility and Housing Choices
H-E-10-a Improve Housing Mobility and Increase Missing Middle Housing Choices 2023 Annual Monitoring to
be reported in
General Plan Annual
Report; mid-cycle
review in 2027
$

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 996

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 HE-121
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-F Address Housing for Special Needs Populations
H-F-1 Special Needs
H-F-1-a Facilities and Services for Special Needs 2023 Annual proactive outreach
H-F-1-b Assistance to Victims of Domestic Abuse Ongoing H-F-1-c Adaptable/Accessible Units for the Disabled 2024 Ongoing H-F-1-d Reasonable Accommodation 2023 Implemented as
requests are made
H-F-1-e Home Sharing for Special Needs Population
Include in Annual
Budget; at least 50%
of matches assist
special needs
$
H-F-1-f Support Services for Special Needs Population 2024 Ongoing H-F-1-g Extremely Low-Income Units for Special Needs. 2024 Annual H-F-1-h Age Friendly Initiative 2024
H-F-1-i Community Care Facilities 2024
H-F-1-j Public Investment in Accessibility 2024
Annual; target tracts
with higher %
disabilities
H-F-2 Housing for the Homeless
H-F-2-a Emergency Housing Assistance Annual $
H-F-2-b Emergency Shelter Uses Annual $
H-F-2-c Multi-Jurisdictional Emergency Shelter Based on opportunity $ H-F-2-d Emergency Shelter Zoning May 2024 Ongoing
H-F-2-e Low Barrier Navigation Centers 2023 Ongoing
H-F-3 Transitional and Supportive Housing
H-F-3-a Transitional and Supportive Housing Zoning Ongoing H-F-3-b Supportive Housing 2023 Ongoing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 997

8.HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
HE-122 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
No. Title Upon Adoption 2023 2024 2025 2026 Other
$ AHF
Needed
H-G Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
H-G-1 Equal Housing Opportunity
H-G-1-a Non-Discrimination 2023
Ongoing; Provide at
least 1 info session per
year beginning 2024
$
H-G-2 Improved Access to Fair Housing Information
H-G-2-a Anti-Discrimination Regulations 2023
Information to be
provided annually
H-G-2-b Fair Housing Training for Landlords and Tenants 2024 Provide at least 1 info
session per year
beginning 2024
$
H-G-2-c Information Specific to Fair Housing 2023 Update annually H-G-2-d Multi-Lingual Tenant Resources 2024
Collaborate for
provision of
multilingual fair
housing services
H-G-2-e Rental Registry 2024
H-G-3 Reduce Commuting Burden
H-G-3-a Commuter Shuttles Ongoing
H-G-3-b Expand Bus Service 2024

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 998
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-i
APPENDIX A | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................. 1 2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS ............................................................................................................................. 1

2.1 San Mateo County .............................................................................................................................. 4 3 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS.......................................................................... 12

3.1 Regional Housing Needs Determination ........................................................................................... 12

3.2 Regional Housing Needs Allocation .................................................................................................. 12 4 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................... 13

4.1 Population ........................................................................................................................................ 13

4.2 Age ................................................................................................................................................... 14

4.3 Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................ 16

4.4 Employment Trends ......................................................................................................................... 18

4.5 Income and Extremely Low-Income Households............................................................................... 23

4.6 Tenure .............................................................................................................................................. 32

4.7 Displacement.................................................................................................................................... 35 5 HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS.......................................................................................................... 36

5.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits.............................................................................. 36

5.2 Substandard Housing........................................................................................................................ 38

5.3 Home and Rent Values...................................................................................................................... 40

5.4 Overpayment and Overcrowding...................................................................................................... 43 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS........................................................................................................................... 53

6.1 Large Households ............................................................................................................................. 53

6.2 Female-Headed Households ............................................................................................................. 54

6.3 Seniors.............................................................................................................................................. 56

6.4 People With Disabilities .................................................................................................................... 57

6.5 Homelessness ................................................................................................................................... 64

6.6 Farmworkers..................................................................................................................................... 69

6.7 Non-English Speakers........................................................................................................................71 7 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA)....................................................................................71 8 ASSISTED RENTAL HOUSING “AT RISK” OF CONVERSION..........................................................................73

8.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................73

8.2 Inventory of Affordable Rental Housing Units Receiving Government Assistance ..............................73

8.3 Identification of Rental Units At-Risk of Conversion to Market Rate...................................................73

8.4 Preservation or Replacement of Existing At-Risk Affordable Housing Stock...................................... 75

8.5 Entities Interested in Participating in California’s First Right of Refusal Program............................... 76

8.6 Funding Sources ............................................................................................................................... 76

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 999
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-ii CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends..................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019............................................................................................................... 15 Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race .................................................................................................... 15 Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019 ............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 5: Population by Race.................................................................................................................................17 Figure 6: Jobs in a Jurisdiction.............................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 7: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence....................................... 19 Figure 8: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group ..................................................................................................... 20 Figure 9: Jobs-Household Ratio............................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 10: Resident Employment by Industry ....................................................................................................... 22 Figure 11: Unemployment Rate............................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 12: Households by Household Income Level .............................................................................................. 25 Figure 13: Household Income Level by Tenure...................................................................................................... 26 Figure 14: Cost Burden by Income Level............................................................................................................... 27 Figure 15: Poverty Status by Race ........................................................................................................................ 28 Figure 16: Housing Permits Issued by Income Group, Foster City, 2015-2019 ....................................................... 31 Figure 17: Housing Tenure.................................................................................................................................... 32 Figure 18: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder.............................................................................................. 33 Figure 19: Housing Tenure by Age........................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 20: Housing Tenure by Housing Type ........................................................................................................ 34 Figure 21: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure ..................................................................................... 35 Figure 22: Housing Type Trends........................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 23: Housing Units by Year Structure Built...................................................................................................37 Figure 24: Vacant Units by Type........................................................................................................................... 38 Figure 25: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units............................................................................................... 40 Figure 26: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI).......................................................................................................... 41 Figure 27: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units ........................................................................................... 42 Figure 28: Median Contract Rent.......................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 29: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Income Level, 2017............................................................................. 43 Figure 30: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Renter Households by Census Tract, 2019.......................................... 45 Figure 31: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Owner Households by Census Tract, 2019.......................................... 46 Figure 32: Cost Burden by Tenure ........................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 33: Cost Burden by Race ............................................................................................................................ 47 Figure 34: Cost Burden by Household Size ........................................................................................................... 48 Figure 35: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level ............................................................................ 49 Figure 36: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity ................................................................................................. 50 Figure 37: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity........................................................................................ 51 Figure 38: Overcrowding by Race......................................................................................................................... 52 Figure 39: Household Size by Tenure ................................................................................................................... 53 Figure 40: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms............................................................................................... 54 Figure 41: Household Type................................................................................................................................... 55 Figure 42: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status ................................................................................... 55 Figure 43: Senior Households by Income and Tenure ........................................................................................... 56 Figure 44: Disability by Type ................................................................................................................................ 58 Figure 45: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, San Mateo County........................................... 64 Figure 46: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County .................................... 65 Figure 47: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County...............................................66 Figure 48: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, San Mateo County............................. 67 Figure 49: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, San Mateo County ........................................................ 70 Figure 50: Population with Limited English Proficiency .........................................................................................71

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1000
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-iii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Foster City ................................................................................. 13 Table 2: Population Growth Trends...................................................................................................................... 13 Table 3: Housing Permitting................................................................................................................................. 38 Table 4: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age................................................................................ 59 Table 5: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence ...................................................................... 60 Table 6: Changes in Age Distribution of Adult Population in San Mateo County................................................... 61 Table 7: Number of Unsheltered Individuals by San Mateo County Cities ............................................................. 68 Table 8: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness................................................................. 69 Table 9: Migrant Worker Student Population....................................................................................................... 70 Table 10: San Mateo County 2021 Household Income Schedule........................................................................... 72 Table 11: Foster City’s Current and Past RHNA..................................................................................................... 72 Table 12: Assisted Rental Properties in Foster City ............................................................................................... 74 Table 13: Foster’s Landing BMR Tenant Programs ............................................................................................... 75 Table 14: Housing Needs Action Plan................................................................................................................... 78

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1001
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-iv CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1002
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-1
1 INTRODUCTION
The Bay Area continues to see growth in both population and jobs, which means more housing of various types and sizes is needed to ensure that residents across all income levels, ages, and abilities have a place to call home. While the number of people drawn to the region over the past 30 years has steadily increased, housing production has not kept pace, contributing to the housing shortage that communities are experiencing today. In many cities, this has resulted in residents being priced out, increased traffic congestion caused by longer commutes, and fewer people across incomes being able to purchase homes or meet surging rents.

Like the rest of the region, San Mateo County and Foster City are experiencing housing challenges. While developing enough housing to meet the demands of our strong economy and growing workforce remains a key issue, our housing needs are also diverse and changing. Just as our individual housing needs change over the course of our lifetime, the housing needed by our communities change too. Understanding those changes is critical to shaping housing policies and programs that ensure our communities are places where all of us can thrive, regardless of our age, income, and specific circumstances.

To successfully plan for housing needs, the demographic and socioeconomic variables of the community must be assessed. This chapter discusses the components of housing needs, which include population characteristics, household characteristics, and employment and housing stock conditions of both Foster City and the surrounding San Mateo County and Bay Area Region. A summary of the Housing Needs Assessment can be found in Section 2 of the Housing Element. For the Assessment of Fair Housing required under California’s Assembly Bill 686 of 2018, please see Appendix B or a summarized version in Section 3.

The data for this chapter has been collected using the most current available data from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the 2010 U.S. Census and 2015-2019 5-year American Community Survey, the Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), the California Department of Finance, the San Mateo Annual Homeless Point in Time Count Report and other currently available real estate market data. Additionally, County-level data and analysis provided by 21 Elements opens up the chapter.
2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS
 Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of Foster City increased by 14.7% from 2000 to 2020, which is slightly below the growth rate of 14.8% for the Bay Area.
 Age – In 2019, Foster City’s youth population under the age of 18 was 7,455 and senior population 65 and older was 5,710. These age groups represent 21.9% and 16.8%, respectively, of Foster City’s population. The senior population 65 and older had the largest increase between 2000 and 2019 of 97% compared to an 18% increase in the total population.  Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 36.9% of Foster City’s population was White while 2.4% was African American, 47.7% was Asian, and 8.4% was Latinx. People of color in Foster City comprise a greater

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1003
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-2 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
proportion at 63% compared to the overall proportion of 61% in the Bay Area as a whole, although the Asian population in Foster City is significantly larger at 47.7% compared to 26.6% for the Bay Area as a whole. 1 There is significant diversity within the Asian population with the Asian Indian population having the largest growth from 11% in 2010 to 15% in 2019, compared to the growth in the Chinese population over the same time period from 21% to 24%.  Income – Although Foster City has a higher percentage of households with income greater than 100% of Area Median Income (AMI) at 64% than San Mateo County at 49%, there are a significant number of households in the lower income ranges, including 14.6% of owner-occupied households and 17.3% of renter-occupied households in the very low-income category (up to 50% of Area Median Income [AMI]), including 6.6% of owners and 9.6% of renters in the extremely low-income category.

In Foster City, American Indian or Alaska Native (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty at 26.5%, followed by Black or African American (Hispanic and NonHispanic) residents at 8.3%.  Employment and Jobs/Housing Ratio – Foster City residents most commonly work in the Financial & Professional Services industry. From January 2010 to January 2021, the unemployment rate in Foster City decreased by 4.3 percentage points. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction increased by 2,420 (12.7%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in Foster City has increased from 1.37 in 2002 to 1.76 jobs per household in 2018.  Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in Foster City increased 5.7% from 2010 to 2020, which is above the growth rate for San Mateo County of 3.6% and above the 5.0% growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
 Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all Foster City residents to live and thrive in the community.
o Ownership The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $1M-$1.5M in 2019.

Home prices increased by 111.9% from 2010 to 2020.
o Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in Foster City was $3,060 in 2019.

Rental prices increased by 76.2% from 2009 to 2019. 54% of Foster City renter-occupied units had rents of $3000 or more, compared to 22% in San Mateo County and 13% in the Bay Area. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $122,640 per year. 2
 Housing Type/Tenure – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 35.4% of homes in Foster City were single family detached, 20.0% were single family attached, 7.0% were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 37.5% 1 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity. The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latinx status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or NonHispanic, to clearly link to the data source. 2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1004
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-3
were medium or large multi-family (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of multi-family units increased more than single-family units. Generally, in Foster City, the share of the housing stock that is detached single family homes is below that of other jurisdictions in the region. 57% of housing units are owner occupied and 43% of housing units are renter occupied.  Vacancy Rates - Vacant units make up 5.7% of the overall housing stock in Foster City. The rental vacancy stands at 5.9%, while the ownership vacancy rate is 0.7%.  Cost Burden – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Foster City, 18.0% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 13.3% of households are severely cost burdened and use the majority of their income for housing. The percentages of renters and owners who are cost burdened are very similar: for renters, 18% spend 30-50% of income on housing and 15% spend more than 50% of income on housing; for owners, 20% spend 30-50% of income on housing and 13% spend more than 50% on housing. Cost burden is also an issue for senior households. Of the 525 senior households with incomes less than 30% of AMI, 16% spend between 30-50% on housing and 74% spend more than 50% on housing. Of the 570 senior households with incomes between 31%-50% of AMI, 25% spend 30%-50% on housing and 31% spend more than 50% on housing.  Displacement/Gentrification – According to research from The University of California, Berkeley,

0.0% of households in Foster City live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and 0.0% live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. 100.0% of households in Foster City live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs (except for the limited number of units in affordable housing programs).

Risk of displacement may increase as older housing stock is redeveloped or replaced.  Neighborhood Resources– 100.0% of residents in Foster City live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 0.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors. 3
 Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In Foster City, 7.1% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 6.2% of Foster City households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or 3 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1005
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-4 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
more. 7.9% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.

Note on Data
Many of the tables in this report are sourced from data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey or U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, both of which are samples and as such, are subject to sampling variability. This means that data is an estimate, and that other estimates could be possible if another set of respondents had been reached. We use the five-year release to get a larger data pool to minimize this “margin of error” but particularly for the smaller cities, the data will be based on fewer responses, and the information should be interpreted accordingly.

Additionally, there may be instances where there is no data available for a jurisdiction for particular data point, or where a value is 0 and the automatically generated text cannot perform a calculation. In these cases, the automatically generated text is “NODATA.”

2.1 SAN MATEO COUNTY
To provide context, this section opens up with the demographic and socioeconomic variables of the surrounding County first, then moves on to data specific to Foster City.

San Mateo County makes up 10% of the total Bay Area population, which is the fifth largest metropolitan area in the country. The number of people living here has steadily grown over the past few decades. In 2020, our population was estimated to be 773,244, an increase of 19% since 1990. 4 That trend is expected to continue–despite the impact of the pandemic–because jobs continue to be added.

People are also living longer, with those 65 and over expected to make up nearly 20% of the population by 2026. Equally important is the fact that Millennials recently surpassed the Baby Boomers as our largest 4 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1006
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-5
generation. As Millennials enter their 40s, they will continue to shape countywide housing needs. By 2026, people 25-44 and 45-64 will make up more than 50% of the population. 5 What does this mean for housing needs?
Both seniors and Millennials have shown a preference for more walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods that are close to work, schools, parks, and amenities. The majority of seniors prefer to stay in their homes and communities, known as aging-in-place. Yet many live on fixed incomes and may have mobility issues as they age, which require supportive services.

Simultaneously, Millennials are less likely to own homes and have less savings than previous generations; they are more likely to live alone and delay marriage; and as they start families, may be in greater need of support when purchasing their first home. Coupled with increasing housing prices, it is more difficult for younger generations to rent or purchase a home than it was for current residents.

We must address how to support our seniors as they get older so they can stay in their homes and communities, and make sure young people, new families, and our workers can find housing they can afford that meets their needs.
5 Claritias Population Facts 2021.

Our population is
becoming more
diverse
Asian Latinx Other *
.5%

21.8%

4.6%

29.6%
Black White
*

39.2% 24.4%

2.2%
Race +
Ethnicity
2019

51.5% 22.6%
Race +
Ethnicity
2000

3.5%
*Due to small percentage, Other is grouped as American Indian, Alaska Native, “Other” or Multiple Races

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1007
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-6 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
San Mateo County is a very diverse place to live, even
when compared to the State of California. Countywide,
more than one-third of the population is foreign-born
and almost half speaks a language other than English at home. By contrast, a quarter of all Californians are
foreign-born and less than a quarter speak a language
other than English at home. Over 120 identified
languages are spoken in San Mateo County, with top
languages including Spanish (17%), Chinese (8%) and
Tagalog (6%).

Our population has become increasingly more diverse
over time. In 2000, more than half of people identified as White, which fell to 39% in 2019, and is expected to decrease further to 35% by 2026. However, while the
Asian and Latinx populations increased during that
time, but the Black population decreased by almost
half, from 3.5% to 2.2%. 6
What does this mean for housing needs?
When planning for housing, we need to consider a
variety of housing needs—like larger homes for multigenerational families or those with more children—and how to create opportunities for everyone to access
quality, affordable housing near schools, transit, jobs, and services.

Past exclusionary practices have prevented people of
color from purchasing homes, living in certain neighborhoods, and building wealth over time. As a result, they are more likely to experience poverty, housing insecurity, displacement, and homelessness.And while many of our communities are very diverse,we are still contending with segregation and a lack of equitable opportunities. To help prevent displacement due to gentrification and to create a future where it is possible for everyone to find the housing they need, it will be important to plan for a variety of housing types and affordability options in all neighborhoods.
6 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1008
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-7
Over the past 30 years, new home construction has notkept up with the number of jobs added to the economy. This has led to a housing shortage.

In 2020, there were 265,000 households in San Mateo County. By 2050 we expect that to increase by almost 50%, to 394,000. 7 This growing demand will continue to put pressure on home prices and rents.

Given that nearly 75% of our housing was built before 1980 there will also be a need to upgrade older homes. While upgrades will be essential to make sure housing is of high quality and safe to residents, redevelopment or repair can sometimes result in a loss of affordable housing, especially in older multifamily or apartment buildings.

For every six low-wage jobs ($20/hour) there is one home in the county that is affordable to such a worker (monthly rent of $1,500). 8
What does this mean for housing needs?
Along with planning for more housing, we also need to consider how to best support the development of low- and moderate-income housing options while preserving existing affordable homes. This includes transitional and supportive housing options for the unhoused and universal design to meet accessibility and mobility needs.

Although the majority of housing produced in the pastfew decades has been single-family homes or larger multi-family buildings, some households have become increasingly interested in “missing middle” housing— smaller homes that include duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage clusters, garden apartments, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These smaller homesmay provide more options to a diversity of communitymembers across income, age, and household size. 7 Plan Bay Area 2050 Projected Growth Pattern, U.S. Census, American Community Survey. 8 Association of Bay Area Governments Jobs Housing Fit.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1009
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-8 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The Bay Area is a great place to live, but throughout the region and county there just isn’t enough housing for all income levels, which has caused costs to go up. Home
prices and rents have been steadily increasing the past two decades, but in recent years the jump has been
dramatic. Since 2009, median rent increased 41% to
$2,200, and median home values have more than
doubled to $1,445,000. 9
Overall, many residents are paying too much for
housing, while many others have been priced out
entirely. If a household spends more than 30% of its
monthly income on housing, it is considered costburdened. If it spends more than 50%, it is considered severely cost-burdened. Renters are usually more cost9 San Mateo County Association of Realtors, Zillow.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1010
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-9
burdened than homeowners. While home prices have increased dramatically, homeownersoften benefit from mortgages at fixed rates, whereas renters are subject to ups and downs of the market.

In San Mateo County, 17% of households spendhalf or more of their income on housing, while 19% spend between a one-third to half. However, these rates vary greatly across income and race. Of those who are extremely low-income—making 30% or less of the area median income (AMI)—88% spend more than half of their income on housing. Latino renters and Black homeowners are disproportionately cost burdened and severely cost-burdened. Given that people in this situation have a small amount of income to start with, spending more than half what they make on housing leaves them with very little to meet other costs, such as food and healthcare. Very low-income households paying more than 50% of their income on rent are often at a greater risk of homelessness. 10 As a result, more people are living in overcrowded or unsafe living conditions. They are also making the tough choice to move further away and commute long distances to work or school, which has created moretraffic. Since low-income residents and communities of color are the most cost burdened, they are at the highest risk for eviction, displacement, and homelessness.

What does this mean for housing needs?
Although there are complex supply, demand, and economic factors impacting costs, not having enough housing across all incomes has meant rent and prices are just higher. Programs and policies that can support more homes across all income levels, particularly very low-, low-, and moderate-income, are essential, as are more safe, affordable housing options to address homelessness.

The Bay Area and San Mateo County have had very strong economies for decades. While some communities have more jobs and some have less, we have all been impacted by the imbalance of job growthand housing.
10 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1011
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-10 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Since 2010, we have added over 100,000 jobs but only 10,000 homes. 11 At the same time, our population is growing naturally, meaning more people are living longer while our children are growing up and moving out into homes of their own. All of this impacts housing demand and contributes to the rising cost of homes. We need more housing to create a better balance.

In 2020, there were 416,700 jobs, and by 2050 we expect that to increase 22% to 507,000. 12 While some jobs pay very well, wages for many others haven’t kept up with how costly it is to live here.

What does this mean for housing needs?
As we plan for housing, we need to consider the needs of our workforce—folks who are a part of our communities but often end their day by commuting long distances to a place they can afford. Many have been displaced in recent decades or years, as housing rent and prices soared along with a job-generating economy. The lack of workforce housing affects us all, with teachers, fire fighters, health care professionals, food service providers, and many essential workers being excluded from the communities they contribute to every day. The long-term sustainability of our communities depends on our ability to create more affordable and equitable housing options.
11 U.S. Census American Community Survey, State of CA Employment Development Dept (EDD). 12 Plan Bay Area 2050 Projected Growth Pattern,

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1012
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-11
To be considered low- or moderate-income in the Bay Area means a very different thing than in most parts ofthe country. The income or wage gap—the difference between the highest and lowest wages—is large in our region. Affordable housing here can mean that your favorite hairstylist, your child’s principal, or the friendlymedical assistant at your doctor’s office can qualify for—and often needs—below market rate or subsidizedaffordable housing so they can live close to their work.

The starting point for this calculation is the Area Median Income (AMI)—the middle spot between the lowest and highest incomes earned in San Mateo County. Simply put, half of households make more, and half of households make less. Moderate-income is80 to 120% of the AMI, low-income is 50% to 80% AMI, and very-low-income is 30 to 50% AMI. Below 30% AMI is considered extremely low-income. The rule of thumb is households should expect to pay about a third of their income on housing.

In San Mateo County, the AMI is $104,700 for a single person, $119,700 for a household of two and $149,600 for a family of four. When we talk about affordable housing, we mean housing that is moderately priced for low- or moderate-income residents so that new families and the workforce can live in our communities. Affordable housing programs are generally for those who earn 80% or below the AMI, which is $102,450 for a single person, $117,100 for a household of two, and $146,350 a year for a
household of four. 13
What does this mean for housing needs?
Given the price of land in San Mateo County and what
it costs to build new housing, creating affordable
housing is extremely challenging—and often
impossible withoutsome form of subsidy. Sometimes
this is in the form of donated land from a local
government or school district. Sometimes this is in the form of incentives to developers or zoning rules
requiring affordable units to be included. Most
commonly, subsidies happen through special
financing, grants, and tax credits. Often all of these
factors and more are needed to make affordable
housing work. The housing element update process is
an opportunity for each community to look at what is
possible and put in place policies and programs to help make affordability a reality.
13 State of CA Dept of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 2021 Income Limits.

I

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1013
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-12 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
3 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS

3.1 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS DETERMINATION
The Plan Bay Area 2050 14 Final Blueprint forecasts that the nine-county Bay Area will add 1.4 million new households between 2015 and 2050. For the eight-year time frame covered by this Housing Element Update, the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the region’s housing need as 441,176 units. The total number of housing units assigned by HCD is separated into four income categories that cover housing types for all income levels, from very low-income households to market rate housing. 15 This calculation, known as the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND), is based on population projections produced by the California Department of Finance as well as adjustments that incorporate the region’s existing housing need. The adjustments result from recent legislation requiring HCD to apply additional adjustment factors to the baseline growth projection from California Department of Finance, in order for the regions to get closer to healthy housing markets. To this end, adjustments focus on the region’s vacancy rate, level of overcrowding and the share of cost burdened households, and seek to bring the region more in line with comparable ones. 16 These new laws governing the methodology for how HCD calculates the RHND resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles.

3.2 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION
A starting point for the Housing Element Update process for every California jurisdiction is the Regional Housing Needs Allocation or RHNA – the share of the RHND assigned to each jurisdiction by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). State Housing Element Law requires ABAG to develop a methodology that calculates the number of housing units assigned to each city and county and distributes each jurisdiction’s housing unit allocation among four affordability levels. For this RHNA cycle, the RHND increased by 135%, from 187,990 to 441,776. For more information on the RHNA process this cycle, see ABAG’s website: https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/housing/rhna-regional-housing-needsallocation.

Almost all jurisdictions in the Bay Area received a larger RHNA this cycle compared to the last cycle, primarily due to changes in state law that led to a considerably higher RHND compared to previous cycles. For Foster City, the RHNA to be planned for this cycle is 1,896 units, a significant increase from the RHNA of 430 for the last cycle.
14 Plan Bay Area 2050 is a long-range plan charting the course for the future of the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area. It covers four key issues: the economy, the environment, housing and transportation 15 HCD divides the RHND into the following four income categories:

Very Low-income: 0-50% of Area Median Income
Low-income: 50-80% of Area Median Income
Moderate-income: 80-120% of Area Median Income
Above Moderate-income: 120% or more of Area Median Income 16 For more information on HCD’s RHND calculation for the Bay Area, see this letter sent to ABAG from HCD on June 9, 2020:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/docs/abagrhna-final060920(r).pdf

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1014
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-13
Table 1: Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Foster City Income Group
Foster City
Units
San Mateo
County Units
Bay Area
Units
Foster City
%
San Mateo
County
%
Bay Area
%
Very Low-Income
(<50% of AMI) 520 12,196 114,442 27.4% 25.6% 25.9%
Low-Income
(50%-80% of AMI) 299 7,023 65,892 15.8% 14.7% 14.9%
Moderate-Income
(80%-120% of AMI) 300 7,937 72,712 15.8% 16.6% 16.5%
Above Moderate-Income
(>120% of AMI) 777 20,531 188,130 41.0% 43.1% 42.6%
Total 1,896 47,687 441,176 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments Methodology 4 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSEHOLD

CHARACTERISTICS

4.1 POPULATION
The Bay Area is the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the nation and has seen a steady increase in population since 1990, except for a dip during the Great Recession. Many cities in the region have experienced significant growth in jobs and population. While these trends have led to a corresponding increase in demand for housing across the region, the regional production of housing has largely not kept pace with job and population growth. As Figure 1 highlights, the population of Foster City has by 17.2% from 1990 to 2020, which is slightly below the growth rate of 19% for San Mateo County and well below the growth rate of 29% for the region as a whole.

In 2020, the population of Foster City was estimated to be 33,033 (see Table 2). From 1990 to 2000, the population increased by 2.2%, while it increased by 6.1% during the first decade of the 2000s. In the most recent decade, the population increased by 8.1%. The population of Foster City makes up 4.3% of San Mateo County. 17
Table 2: Population Growth Trends
Geography 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Foster City 28,176 29,086 28,803 29,770 30,567 32,518 33,033 San Mateo County 649,623 685,354 707,163 719,844 718,451 761,748 773,244 Bay Area 6,020,147 6,381,961 6,784,348 7,073,912 7,150,739 7,595,694 7,790,537 Universe: Total population
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For more years of data, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01. 17 To compare the rate of growth across various geographic scales, Figure 1 shows population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the year 1990. This means that the data points represent the population growth (i.e., percent change) in each of these geographies relative to their populations in 1990.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1015
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-14 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series Note: The data shown on the graph represents population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the first year shown. The data points represent the relative population growth in each of these geographies relative to their populations in that year.

For some jurisdictions, a break may appear at the end of each decade (1999, 2009) as estimates are compared to census counts.

DOF uses the decennial census to benchmark subsequent population estimates.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01.

4.2 Age
The distribution of age groups in a city shapes what types of housing the community may need in the near future. An increase in the older population may mean there is a developing need for more senior housing options, while higher numbers of children and young families can point to the need for more family housing options and related services. There has also been a move by many to age-in-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multi-family and accessible units are also needed.

In Foster City, the median age in 2000 was 38; by 2019, this figure had increased slightly, landing at around 39 years. More specifically, the population for the various age brackets has increased with the exception of decreases for ages 15-24 and 45-54 (see Figure 2). The senior population 65 and older had the largest increase between 2000 and 2019 of 97% compared to an 18% increase in the total population.

Looking at the senior and youth population by race can add an additional layer of understanding, as families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing.

People of color 18 make up 41.9% of seniors and 63.9% of youth under 18 (see Figure 3). 18 Here, we count all non-White racial groups

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1016
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-15
Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-04.

Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race
Universe: Total population
Notes: In the sources for this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, and an overlapping category of Hispanic / non-Hispanic groups has not been shown to avoid double counting in the stacked bar chart.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-02.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1017
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-16 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.3 RACE AND ETHNICITY
Understanding the racial makeup of a city and region is important for designing and implementing effective housing policies and programs. These patterns are shaped by both market factors and government actions, such as exclusionary zoning, discriminatory lending practices and displacement that has occurred over time and continues to impact communities of color today 19. However, since 2000, the percentage of residents in Foster City identifying as White has decreased – and by the same token the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased – by 21.0 percentage points, with the 2019 White population standing at 12,542 (see Figure 4). In absolute terms, the Asian / API, NonHispanic population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most.

Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-02.

Asian/API, Non-Hispanic residents make up the largest percentage (48%), which is larger than the Asian/API, Non-Hispanic population of both San Mateo County and the larger Bay Area (30% and 27% respectively). White residents (37% of Foster City’s population) and Black or African American residents make up a similar proportion compared to the County and region, while Hispanic or Latinx residents in Foster City (8%) make up a significantly smaller proportion (24% in both the County and region) (see Figure 5).
19 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law : a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1018
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-17
The two largest subgroups of the Asian population in Foster City include Asian Indian (15% of the total population in 2019) and Chinese (24% of the total population in 2019). The Asian Indian population had the largest growth from 11% in 2010 to 15% in 2019, compared to the growth in the Chinese population over the same time period from 21% to 24%.

Figure 5: Population by Race
Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates.

The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002 48%
30% 27%
6%
37%
39% 39%
4%
4% 5%
8%
24% 24%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%
100.0%
Foster City San Mateo County Bay Area
Percent of Population
Hispanic or Latinx
Other Race or Multiple Races, Non-Hispanic
White, Non-Hispanic
Black or African American, Non-Hispanic
Asian / API, Non-Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1019
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-18 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.4 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS

4.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers
A city houses employed residents who either work in the community where they live or work elsewhere in the region. Conversely, a city may have job sites that employ residents from the same city, but more often employ workers commuting from outside of it. Smaller cities typically will have more employed residents than jobs and export workers, while larger cities tend to have a surplus of jobs and import workers. To some extent the regional transportation system is set up for this flow of workers to the region’s core job centers. At the same time, as the housing affordability crisis has illustrated, local imbalances may be severe, where local jobs and worker populations are out of sync at a sub-regional scale.

One measure of this is the relationship between workers and jobs. A city with a surplus of workers “exports” workers to other parts of the region, while a city with a surplus of jobs must conversely “import” them. Between 2002 and 2018, the number of jobs in Foster City increased by 34.9% (see Figure 6).

Figure 6: Jobs in a Jurisdiction
Universe: Jobs from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment
Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are cross-walked to jurisdictions and summarized.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files, 2002-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-11.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1020
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-19
There are 17,347 employed residents, and 20,090 jobs 20 in Foster City - the ratio of jobs to resident workers is 1.16; Foster City is a net importer of workers.

Figure 7 shows the balance when comparing jobs to workers, broken down by different wage groups, offering additional insight into local dynamics. A community may offer employment for relatively lowincome workers but have relatively few housing options for those workers - or conversely, it may house residents who are low wage workers but offer few employment opportunities for them. Such relationships may cast extra light on potentially pent-up demand for housing in particular price categories. A relative surplus of jobs relative to residents in a given wage category suggests the need to import those workers, while conversely, surpluses of workers in a wage group relative to jobs means the community will export those workers to other jurisdictions. Such flows are not inherently bad, though over time, sub-regional imbalances may appear. Foster City has more low-wage jobs than low-wage residents (where low-wage refers to jobs paying less than $25,000). At the other end of the wage spectrum, the City has more high-wage jobs than high-wage residents (where high-wage refers to jobs paying more than $75,000) (see Figure 7). 21
Figure 7: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence
Universe: Workers 16 years and over with earnings
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data 2015-2019, B08119, B08519 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-10. 20 Employed residents in a jurisdiction is counted by place of residence (they may work elsewhere) while jobsin a jurisdiction are counted by place of work (they may live elsewhere). The jobs may differ from those reported in Figure 5 as the source for the time series is from administrative data, while the cross-sectional data is from a survey. 21 The source table is top-coded at $75,000, precluding more fine grained analysis at the higher end of the wage spectrum.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1021
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-20 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
According to Census data, the vast majority (76%) of jobs within Foster City pay over $3,333 per month. 14% pay between $1,251 and $3,333, and 10% pay less than $1,251. Figure 8 shows the balance of a jurisdiction’s resident workers to the jobs located there for different wage groups as a ratio instead - a value of 1 means that a city has the same number of jobs in a wage group as it has resident workers - in principle, a balance. Values above 1 indicate a jurisdiction will need to import workers for jobs in a given wage group. At the regional scale, this ratio is 1.04 jobs for each worker, implying a modest import of workers from outside the region (see Figure 8).

Figure 8: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The ratio compares job counts by wage group from two tabulations of LEHD data: Counts by place of work relative to counts by place of residence. See text for details.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs); Residence Area Characteristics (RAC) files (Employed Residents), 2010-2018 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-14.

Such balances between jobs and workers may directly influence the housing demand in a community.

New jobs may draw new residents, and when there is high demand for housing relative to supply, many workers may be unable to afford to live where they work, particularly where job growth has been in relatively lower wage jobs. This dynamic not only means many workers will need to prepare for long commutes and time spent on the road, but in the aggregate it contributes to traffic congestion and time lost for all road users.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1022
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-21
If there are more jobs than employed residents, it means a city is relatively jobs-rich, typically also with a high jobs-to-household ratio. Thus, bringing housing into the measure, the jobs-household ratio in Foster City has increased from 1.37 in 2002, to 1.76 jobs per household in 2018 (see Figure 9).

Figure 9: Jobs-Household Ratio
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, State and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment; households in a jurisdiction Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized. The ratio compares place of work wage and salary jobs with households, or occupied housing units. A similar measure is the ratio of jobs to housing units. However, this jobs-household ratio serves to compare the number of jobs in a jurisdiction to the number of housing units that are actually occupied. The difference between a jurisdiction’s jobs-housing ratio and jobs-household ratio will be most pronounced in jurisdictions with high vacancy rates, a high rate of units used for seasonal use, or a high rate of units used as short-term rentals.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs), 2002- 2018; California Department of Finance, E-5 (Households) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-13.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1023
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-22 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.4.2 Sector Composition
In terms of sectoral composition, the largest industry in which Foster City residents work is Financial & Professional Services, and the largest sector in which San Mateo residents work is Health & Educational Services(see Figure 10). For the Bay Area as a whole, the Health & Educational Services industry employs the most workers.

Figure 10: Resident Employment by Industry
Universe: Civilian employed population age 16 years and over Notes: The data displayed shows the industries in which jurisdiction residents work, regardless of the location where those residents are employed (whether within the jurisdiction or not). Categories are derived from the following source tables:

Agriculture & Natural Resources: C24030_003E, C24030_030E; Construction: C24030_006E, C24030_033E; Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation: C24030_007E, C24030_034E, C24030_008E, C24030_035E, C24030_010E, C24030_037E; Retail:

C24030_009E, C24030_036E; Information: C24030_013E, C24030_040E; Financial & Professional Services: C24030_014E, C24030_041E, C24030_017E, C24030_044E; Health & Educational Services: C24030_021E, C24030_024E, C24030_048E, C24030_051E; Other: C24030_027E, C24030_054E, C24030_028E, C24030_055E Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table C24030 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-06.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1024
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-23

4.4.3 Unemployment
In Foster City, there was a 4.3 percentage point decrease in the unemployment rate between January 2010 and January 2021. Jurisdictions through the region experienced a sharp rise in unemployment in 2020 due to impacts related to the COVID-19 pandemic, though with a general improvement and recovery in the later months of 2020.

Figure 11: Unemployment Rate
Universe: Civilian noninstitutional population ages 16 and older Notes: Unemployment rates for the jurisdiction level is derived from larger-geography estimates. This method assumes that the rates of change in employment and unemployment are exactly the same in each sub-county area as at the county level. If this assumption is not true for a specific sub-county area, then the estimates for that area may not be representative of the current economic conditions. Since this assumption is untested, caution should be employed when using these data. Only not seasonally adjusted labor force (unemployment rates) data are developed for cities and CDPs.

Source: California Employment Development Department, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Sub-county areas monthly updates, 2010-2021.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-15.

4.5 INCOME AND EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Despite the economic and job growth experienced throughout the region since 1990, the income gap has continued to widen. California is one of the most economically unequal states in the nation, and the Bay Area has the highest income inequality between high- and low-income households in the state. 22 22 Bohn, S.et al. 2020. Income Inequality and Economic Opportunity in California. Public Policy Institute of California.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1025
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-24 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
In Foster City, 63.9% of households make more than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), 23 compared to 7.9% making less than 30% of AMI (1008 households), which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 12).

Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In San Mateo County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $44,000 for a family of four. Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers and healthcare professionals – can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.

HCD’s guidance notes that instead of using U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very lowincome RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, local jurisdictions can presume that 50% of their RHNA for very low-income households qualifies for extremely low-income households. The City assumes that 50% of the very low-income housing need is equal to the extremely low-income housing need. As such, there is a projected need for 260 extremely low-income housing units, or half of 520.

4.5.1 Tenure by Income Level
Throughout the region, there are disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters. Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households.

In Foster City, although the largest proportion of both renters and owners falls in the Greater than 100% of AMI income group, 9.6% of renters earn less than 30% of AMI compared to 6.6% of owners and 28.0% of renters earn less than 80% AMI compared to 25.7% of owners (see Figure 13). Amidst ELI households,

51.1% rent their home compared to 48.9% own their home. ELI and 81 to 100% AMI households are the two income levels with over 50 percent of households renting instead of owning their homes. 23 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. Households making between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI are moderate-income, those making 50 to 80 percent are low-income, those making 30 to 50 percent are very low-income, and those making less than 30 percent are extremely low-income. This is then adjusted for household size.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1026
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-25
Figure 12: Households by Household Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located. Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. As Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers, this document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households. The report portion of the housing data needs packet contains more specific guidance for how local staff can calculate an estimate for projected extremely low-income households once jurisdictions receive their 6th cycle RHNA numbers.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-01.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1027
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-26 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 13: Household Income Level by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-21. 493 515
594 410
825 569
570
649
4,969 3,200
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Households
0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of AMI
51%-80% of AMI 81%-100% of AMI
Greater than 100% of AMI

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1028
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-27

4.5.2 Overpayment by Income Level
Overpayment (cost burden) is a significant housing challenge for lower-income residents. In Foster City,

13.3% of households spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while 18.0% spend 30% to 50%.

However, these rates vary greatly across income categories (see Figure 14). For example, 80.9% of Foster City households making less than 30% of AMI spend the majority of their income on housing. For Foster City residents making more than 100% of AMI, just 0.6% are severely cost-burdened, and 87.7% of those making more than 100% of AMI spend less than 30% of their income on housing.

Figure 14: Cost Burden by Income Level
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-05.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1029
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-28 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. 24 These economic disparities also leave communities of color at higher risk for housing insecurity, displacement or homelessness. In Foster City, American Indian or Alaska Native (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty at 26.5%, followed by Black or African American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents at 8.3% (see Figure 15).

Figure 15: Poverty Status by Race
Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the population for whom poverty status is determined for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the population for whom poverty status is determined.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table ELI-03.

There are disparities in housing cost burden in Foster City by race and ethnicity. Black or African American (58%) and Hispanic households (42%) experience the highest rates of cost burden in the city.

Asian (29%) and non-Hispanic White households (30%) are least likely to be cost burdened. 24 Moore, E., Montojo, N. and Mauri, N., 2019. Roots, Race & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing the San Francisco Bay Area. Hass Institute.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1030
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-29

4.5.3 Strategies to address Housing Needs Related to Income Level Foster City identified the following strategies to address the identified housing needs related to income level and especially needs of extremely low-income households (additional strategies are identified in Chapter 3 and Appendix B to address fair housing needs):
 Increase the supply of affordable housing through a variety of programs.  Provide assistance to lower income homeowners.
 Provide housing that addresses special needs for accessibility and supportive services.  Increase the supply of extremely low-income housing.

One of these strategies that specifically addresses extremely low-income needs is the adoption of the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO). In March, the City Council adopted adjustments to the city’s inclusionary housing policy and Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) program. 25 The city altered their inclusionary housing policy through an ordinance that establishes objective requirements—rather than negotiations—for specific parameters for developments (e.g., income levels and length of restrictions).

The city’s AHO and its related policies—AHO Combining District, application of AHO to specific sites, design guidelines—were also adjusted based on state law changes for density bonuses. Foster City simplified their previously proposed AHO program by requiring some below market rate (BMR) units at extremely low-income levels, reducing the inclusionary percentage from 20% to 15% for the sites with the AHO Combining District. Seven sites were designated for application of the AHO Combining District, allowing the city to obtain more units for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households.

Another strategy to address needs of extremely low-income households is to improve housing voucher utilization rates. Findings from the 21 Elements Resident Survey support data on low voucher utilization and landlord participation rates in voucher programs in Foster City. In fact, 40% of respondents from Foster City reported being denied housing because the landlord did not accept their income and nearly half (47%) of respondents indicated that it was “somewhat difficult” to find a landlord that accepts housing vouchers.

Low voucher utilization rates in Foster City and surrounding jurisdictions indicate a lack of available rental units and potentially exclusionary behavior from landlords. Foster City has taken steps to remedy this challenge: In 2013, City Council passed Ordinance No. 581 to add a “Tenant Anti-Discrimination” chapter to the city’s Municipal Code. 26 The Ordinance committed Foster City to protecting fair housing and addressing the low number of landlords participating in rental assistance programs by prohibiting discrimination on the source of income and the use of rental subsidies—including Section 8 and housing assistance programs for very low- and low-income residents. According to section 5.72.050, however, Foster City is not responsible or liable to enforce the ordinance or seek redress for any discrimination claim. With the adoption of SB 329 in 2019, California State law made it illegal to reject a prospective tenant solely based on the applicant’s use of a Section 8 housing voucher. It is therefore imperative that 25 https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/below-market-rate-housing-inclusionary-requirements-and-affordable-housingoverlay-zone. 26 https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/FosterCity/?FosterCity17/FosterCity1776.html.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1031
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-30 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Foster City coordinate with local fair housing providers to provide education and resources to landlords and tenants to ensure these regulations are followed.

Recent data on voucher rates in the city and lack of enforcement suggests that Ordinance No. 581 is only one part of the solution in addressing challenges to voucher holders finding units in the city. Production of new rental units, particularly those with public subsidies that require units to be rented below market, is critical for raising voucher utilization rates.

The City’s Housing Element for the 2023-2031 planning period adds housing policies and programs to exceed city achievements in the previous period that will address the needs of lower-income households.

Examples include:
 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)—encourage the use and production of ADUs through an ADU Financial Incentive Program, preapproved ADU design and expedited review, and improved public information on ADUs;
 Lower-income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans—provide or partner with a regional program to provide rehabilitation loans including weatherization, solar, and disaster assistance;  Anti-displacement strategies—expand benefits beyond state law requirements for lease terms, required notifications, and expansion of relocation and anti-displacement provisions;  Zoning amendments to facilitate housing on housing opportunity sites; and  Allow residential uses on public and private institution-owned sites including schools, religious, and non-profit sites.
 Improved access to fair housing information, including prohibiting discrimination based on housing vouchers.

Additional programs linked to the various strategies are listed in Table 13, Housing Needs Action Plan, at the end of this Appendix.

4.5.4 Resources
Foster City maintains a website with information about local fair housing ordinances with live links to Project Sentinel, the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, and the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center. 27 The site also lists resources for persons with disabilities seeking services. In 2022 the City created a staff position for a Housing Coordinator to oversee the City’s housing programs. 27 https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/fair-housing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1032
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-31

4.5.5 Gap and Magnitude of Housing Needs for Various Income Levels Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to accommodate growth has largely been priced for above moderate-income households, with 657 units permitted for above moderate-income households compared to 86 for very low-income households, 49 for moderate-income households, and 14 for lowincome households. The vast majority of the city’s homes were built between 1965 and 1979. After this period, housing production slowed significantly, particularly between 2000 and 2009, when only 48 units were built.

Figure 16: Housing Permits Issued by Income Group, Foster City, 2015-2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
However, programs and practices established by Foster City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element have proved successful in recent years. For the 2015-2023 planning period, the city was required to plan for a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 430 units in four income categories. The city satisfied between 18% to 60% of below market rate (BMR) RHNA and issued permits for 885 dwelling units—166 of which were BMR units. Extremely low-income units were produced in the 2015-2023 planning period at the Alma Point Senior Apartments, permitted in 2014 and completed in 2016, including 65 very low-income units, 33 of which are extremely low-income.

See Section 5.5 for additional discussion of overpayment associated with other factors, such as race, age, or household size.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1033
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-32 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.6 TENURE
The number of residents who own their homes compared to those who rent their homes can help identify the level of housing insecurity – ability for individuals to stay in their homes – in a city and region.

Generally, renters may be displaced more quickly if prices increase. In Foster City there are a total of 12,690 housing units, and fewer residents rent than own their homes: 42.9% versus 57.1% (see Figure 17).

By comparison, 39.8% of households in San Mateo County are renters, while 44% of Bay Area households rent their homes.

Figure 17: Housing Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-16.

Homeownership rates often vary considerably across race/ethnicity in the Bay Area and throughout the country. These disparities not only reflect differences in income and wealth but also stem from federal, state, and local policies that limited access to homeownership for communities of color while facilitating homebuying for white residents. While many of these policies, such as redlining, have been formally disbanded, the impacts of race-based policy are still evident across Bay Area communities. 28 In Foster City, 46.6% of Black households owned their homes, while homeownership rates were 62.9% for Asian households, 34.3% for Latinx households, and 54.3% for White households. Notably, recent changes to state law require local jurisdictions to examine these dynamics and other fair housing issues when updating their Housing Elements.
28 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law : a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1034
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-33
Figure 18: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-20.

The age of residents who rent or own their home can also signal the housing challenges a community is experiencing. Younger households tend to rent and may struggle to buy a first home in the Bay Area due to high housing costs. At the same time, senior homeowners seeking to downsize may have limited options in an expensive housing market.

In Foster City, 67.7% of householders between the ages of 25 and 44 are renters, while 18.6% of householders over 65 are (see Figure 19).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1035
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-34 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 19: Housing Tenure by Age
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25007 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-18.

In many cities, homeownership rates for households in single-family homes are substantially higher than the rates for households in multi-family housing. In Foster City, 88.5% of households in detached singlefamily homes are homeowners, while 21.5% of households in multi-family housing are homeowners (see Figure 20). (Note: The 2010 Census reported ten mobile homes. The City believes this to be an error as there are no mobile homes or mobile home parks in Foster City.) Figure 20: Housing Tenure by Housing Type
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25032 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-22.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1036
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-35

4.7 DISPLACEMENT
Because of increasing housing prices, displacement is a major concern in the Bay Area. Displacement has the most severe impacts on low- and moderate-income residents. When individuals or families are forced to leave their homes and communities, they also lose their support network.

The University of California, Berkeley has mapped all neighborhoods in the Bay area, identifying their risk for gentrification. They find that in Foster City, no households (0.0%) live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement and 0.0% live in neighborhoods at risk of or undergoing gentrification.

Equally important, some neighborhoods in the Bay Area do not have housing appropriate for a broad section of the workforce. UC Berkeley estimates that 100.0% of households in Foster City live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely to be excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. 29
Figure 21: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure
Universe: Households
Notes: Displacement data is available at the census tract level. Staff aggregated tracts up to jurisdiction level using census 2010 population weights, assigning a tract to jurisdiction in proportion to block level population weights. Total household count may differ slightly from counts in other tables sourced from jurisdiction level sources. Categories are combined as follows for simplicity: At risk of or Experiencing Exclusion: At Risk of Becoming Exclusive; Becoming Exclusive; Stable/Advanced Exclusive At risk of or Experiencing Gentrification: At Risk of Gentrification; Early/Ongoing Gentrification; Advanced Gentrification Stable Moderate/Mixed Income: Stable Moderate/Mixed Income Susceptible to or Experiencing Displacement: Low-Income/Susceptible to Displacement; Ongoing Displacement Other: High Student Population; Unavailable or Unreliable Data Source: Urban Displacement Project for classification, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003 for tenure.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-25. 29 More information about this gentrification and displacement data is available at the Urban Displacement Project’s webpage:
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/. Specifically, one can learn more about the different gentrification/displacement typologies shown in Figure 18 at this link: https://www.urbandisplacement.org/sites/default/files/typology_sheet_2018_0.png.

Additionally, one can view maps that show which typologies correspond to which parts of a jurisdiction here:
https://www.urbandisplacement.org/san-francisco/sf-bay-area-gentrification-and-displacement

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1037
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-36 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
5 HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS

5.1 HOUSING TYPES,YEAR BUILT,VACANCY, AND PERMITS
In recent years, most housing produced in the region and across the state consisted of single-family homes and larger multi-unit buildings. However, some households are increasingly interested in “missing middle housing” – including duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage clusters and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These housing types may open up more options across incomes and tenure, from young households seeking homeownership options to seniors looking to downsize and age-in-place.

The housing stock of Foster City in 2020 was made up of 35.4% single family detached homes, 20.0% single family attached homes, 7.0% multi-family homes with 2 to 4 units, and 37.5% multi-family homes with 5 or more units (see Figure 22). In Foster City, the housing type that experienced the most growth between 2010 and 2020 was Multi-family Housing: Five-plus Units.

Figure 22: Housing Type Trends
Universe: Housing units
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-01.

Production has not kept up with housing demand for several decades in the Bay Area, as the total number of units built and available has not yet come close to meeting the population and job growth experienced throughout the region. In Foster City, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built 1960 to 1979, with 8,910 units constructed during this period (see Figure 23). Since 2010, 4.9% of the current housing stock was built, which is 655 units. (Note: Although the U.S. Census Bureau data indicates housing units built prior to 1960, the first housing units were built in Foster City in 1964.)

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1038
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-37
Figure 23: Housing Units by Year Structure Built
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25034 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-04.

Vacant units make up 5.7% of the overall housing stock in Foster City. The rental vacancy stands at 5.9%, while the ownership vacancy rate is 0.7%. Of the vacant units, the most common type of vacancy is Other Vacant (see definition below and Figure 24). 30
Throughout the Bay Area, vacancies make up 2.6% of the total housing units, with homes listed for rent; units used for recreational or occasional use, and units not otherwise classified (other vacant) making up the majority of vacancies. The Census Bureau classifies a unit as vacant if no one is occupying it when census interviewers are conducting the American Community Survey or Decennial Census. Vacant units classified as “for recreational or occasional use” are those that are held for short-term periods of use throughout the year. Accordingly, vacation rentals and short-term rentals like AirBnB are likely to fall in this category. The Census Bureau classifies units as “other vacant” if they are vacant due to foreclosure, personal/family reasons, legal proceedings, repairs/renovations, abandonment, preparation for being rented or sold, or vacant for an extended absence for reasons such as a work assignment, military duty, or incarceration. 31 In a region with a thriving economy and housing market like the Bay Area, units being renovated/repaired and prepared for rental or sale are likely to represent a large portion of the “other vacant” category. Additionally, the need for seismic retrofitting in older housing stock could also influence the proportion of “other vacant” units in some jurisdictions. 32 30 The vacancy rates by tenure is for a smaller universe than the total vacancy rate first reported, which in principle includes the full stock (5.7%). The vacancy by tenure counts are rates relative to the rental stock (occupied and vacant) and ownership stock (occupied and vacant) - but exclude a a significant number of vacancy categories, including the numerically significant other vacant. 31 For more information, see pages 3 through 6 of this list of definitions prepared by the Census Bureau: https://www.census.gov/ housing/hvs/definitions.pdf. 32 See Dow, P. (2018). Unpacking the Growth in San Francisco’s Vacant Housing Stock: Client Report for the San Francisco Planning Department. University of California, Berkeley.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1039
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-38 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 24: Vacant Units by Type
Universe: Vacant housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25004 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-03.

Between 2015 and 2019, 806 housing units were
issued permits in Foster City. 81.5% of permits
issued in Foster City were for above moderateincome housing, 1.7% were for moderateincome housing, and 16.7% were for low- or very low-income housing (see Table 3). This
compares to the figures for San Mateo County
of 77.6% of permits issued for above moderateincome housing, 5.7% for moderate-income housing and 16.7% for low- or very low-income
housing.

5.2 SUBSTANDARD HOUSING
Housing costs in the region are among the
highest in the country, which could result in
households, particularly renters, needing to live
in substandard conditions in order to afford
housing. Generally, there is limited data on the
extent of substandard housing issues in a
community. However, the Census Bureau data
included in the graph below gives a sense of
some of the substandard conditions that may be
present in Foster City. For example, 1.1% of
Table 3: Housing Permitting
Income Group Value
Above Moderate-Income Permits 657
Very Low-Income Permits 86
Low-Income Permits 49
Moderate-Income Permits 14
Universe: Housing permits issued between 2015 and 2019
Notes: HCD uses the following definitions for the four income categories: Very Low-Income: units affordable to households making less than 50% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Low-Income: units affordable to households making between 50% and 80% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Moderate-Income: units affordable to households making between 80% and 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located. Above ModerateIncome: units affordable to households making above 120% of the Area Median Income for the county in which the jurisdiction is located.

Source: California Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD), 5th Cycle Annual Progress Report Permit Summary (2020)
This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HSG-11.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1040
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-39
renters in Foster City reported lacking a kitchen and 0.2% of renters lack plumbing, compared to 0.0% of owners who lack a kitchen and 0.0% of owners who lack plumbing. Some of these renters are likely people renting rooms in a shared unit and therefore do not have their own kitchen. The largest number of the renters reporting lack of a kitchen are in tract 6080.25, comprising 38 of the 2,409 occupied renter households, or 1.6% (see Appendix B, Section 5.4). In addition, the City’s Code Enforcement staff estimates that approximately 10 ownership units, comprising 0.08% of the housing stock, need rehabilitation, generally in the older areas of the City, tracts 6081, 6082 and 6083. The City works with non-profit organizations, such as Rebuilding Together, to assist low-income homeowners with repairs.

The age of a community’s housing stock can provide another indicator of overall housing conditions.

Typically, housing over 30 years in age is likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include new plumbing, roof repairs, foundation work, and other repairs. In Foster City, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built 1960 to 1979, with 8,910 units constructed during this period. With the majority of the city’s housing stock built prior to the 30-year benchmark, it is a priority of the City to ensure that housing units are maintained and in compliance with health and safety codes. The City has a Code Enforcement program that works with property owners to ensure the units are maintained in accordance with City standards.

The high water table in Foster City can result in deterioration of metal piping in the ground, especially for older buildings constructed prior to code requirements prohibiting metal piping in the ground. The high water table issues are present throughout the City and not limited to any particular areas.

The City’s 4,617 apartment units are contained in 23 properties ranging in size from 22 to 490 units. The apartments were constructed between 1965 and 2022, with approximately fifty percent constructed between 1965 and 1973 and the other fifty percent between 1985 and 2022. Given the size of the apartment properties, they are generally owned by large real estate investment companies with professional management. There are only six properties with fewer than 50 units and one of those is owned by the City. The Chief Building Official reports that the properties have been well maintained with repairs and renovations with none considered dilapidated. Many have performed renovations to remodel kitchens and include private laundry in the units. Many of the older apartment properties have replaced plumbing under the slabs that was installed prior to code requirements prohibiting metal piping in the ground. Many have also performed seismic retrofits. There are no apartment units in need of rehabilitation or replacement.

The Chief Building Official reports that nearly all of the renovations were made between tenancies in order to not displace any tenants. The exception was the underslab plumbing replacement at the 88-unit Tradewinds Apartments in 2022. A Resident Relocation Plan was required as part of the building permit and included relocation assistance that went beyond State law requirements. Tenants were relocated from a 44-unit building with assistance in the form of 135 days’ notice, two months free rent, last month’s water/sewer/trash bill, $750 moving expense, deposits returned upon move-out, right of first refusal to return, relocation specialist assistance, offering space at sister properties, Community Meeting to answer questions (and make revisions to the plan in response), and residents of the second 44-unit building were offered space in the first 44-unit building upon its completion.

In order to further mitigate potential impacts of displacement that might be caused by building renovations or other reasons, the Housing Element includes two programs to specifically to reduce potential displacement and to minimize adverse impacts when displacement cannot be avoided:

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1041
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-40 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
 H-C-3-a Anti-Displacement Plan for Redevelopment of Existing Multifamily Developments (continued from previous Housing Element with rewording to strengthen it to apply to any application to displace one or more households instead of 25 or more)  H-C-3-b Anti-Displacement Strategy (new)

5.3 HOME AND RENT VALUES
Home prices reflect a complex mix of supply and demand factors, including an area’s demographic profile, labor market, prevailing wages and job outlook, coupled with land and construction costs. In the Bay Area, the costs of housing have long been among the highest in the nation. The typical home value in Foster City was estimated at $1,642,750 by December of 2020, per data from Zillow. 33 The largest proportion of homes were valued between $1M-$1.5M (see Figure 25). By comparison, the typical home value is $1,418,330 in San Mateo County and $1,077,230 the Bay Area, with the largest share of units valued $1m-$1.5m (County) and $500k-$750k (region).

Figure 25: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units
Universe: Owner-occupied units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25075 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-07. 33 Zillow describes the Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI) as a smoothed, seasonally adjusted measure of the typical home value and market changes across a given region and housing type. The ZHVI reflects the typical value for homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. The ZHVI includes all owner-occupied housing units, including both single-family homes and condominiums.

More information on the ZHVI is available from Zillow. The regional estimate is a household-weighted average of county-level ZHVI files, where household counts are yearly estimates from DOF's E-5 series. Source: Zillow, Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI), https://www.zillow.com/research/data/.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1042
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-41
The region’s home values have increased steadily since 2000, besides a decrease during the Great Recession. The rise in home prices has been especially steep since 2012, with the median home value in the Bay Area nearly doubling during this time. Since 2001, the typical home value has increased 161.5% in Foster City from $628,240 to $1,642,750. This change is above the change in San Mateo County, and above the change for the region (see Figure 26).

Figure 26: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
Universe: Owner-occupied housing units
Notes: Zillow describes the ZHVI as a smoothed, seasonally adjusted measure of the typical home value and market changes across a given region and housing type. The ZHVI reflects the typical value for homes in the 35th to 65th percentile range. The ZHVI includes all owner-occupied housing units, including both single-family homes and condominiums. More information on the ZHVI is available from Zillow. The regional estimate is a household-weighted average of county-level ZHVI files, where household counts are yearly estimates from DOF’s E-5 series For unincorporated areas, the value is a population weighted average of unincorporated communities in the county matched to census-designated population counts.

Source: Zillow, Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-08.

Similar to home values, rents have also increased dramatically across the Bay Area in recent years. Many renters have been priced out, evicted or displaced, particularly communities of color. Residents finding themselves in one of these situations may have had to choose between commuting long distances to their jobs and schools or moving out of the region, and sometimes, out of the state.

In Foster City, the largest proportion of rental units rented in the Rent $3000 or more category, totaling

53.8%, followed by 26.0% of units renting in the Rent $2500-$3000 category (see Figure 27). Looking beyond the City, the largest share of units is in the $3000 or more category (County) compared to the $1500-$2000 category for the region as a whole.

Since 2009, the median rent has increased by 76.2% in Foster City, from $2,000 to $3,060 per month (see Figure 28). In San Mateo County, the median rent has increased 41.1%, from $1,560 to $2,200. The median rent in the region has increased significantly during this time from $1,200 to $1,850, a 54%

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1043
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-42 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
increase. 34 In January 2023, the median rent in Foster City was $3,710. 35 Median rents in surrounding cities at the same time were: $3,395 in Redwood City, $3,737 in San Mateo, and $3,400 in Burlingame.

Figure 27: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25056 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-09.

Figure 28: Median Contract Rent
Universe: Renter-occupied housing units paying cash rent Notes: For unincorporated areas, median is calculated using distribution in B25056.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data releases, starting with 2005-2009 through 2015-2019, B25058, B25056 (for unincorporated areas). County and regional counts are weighted averages of jurisdiction median using B25003 rental unit counts from the relevant year.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-10. 34 While the data on home values shown in Figure 23 comes from Zillow, Zillow does not have data on rent prices available for most Bay Area jurisdictions. To have a more comprehensive dataset on rental data for the region, the rent data in this document comes from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, which may not fully reflect current rents. 35 Available at: https://www.zillow.com/rental-manager/market-trends/foster-city-ca/, accessed January 2, 2023.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1044
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-43

5.4 OVERPAYMENT AND OVERCROWDING
A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” Low-income residents are the most impacted by high housing costs and experience the highest rates of cost burden. Spending such large portions of their income on housing puts low-income households at higher risk of displacement, eviction, or homelessness. (See Section 4.5 for additional discussion related to housing needs by income level.)
Cost burden varies by income level with lower income households having higher rates of cost burden. As shown in Figure 29, 81% (714 households) of the households earning 0-30% of the AMI are extremely cost burdened. Similarly, 44% (440 households) earning 31-50% of AMI and 26% (360 households) earning 51%-80% of AMI are extremely cost burdened. Put together, 1,514 households (46%) of the total 3,292 lower income households are extremely cost burdened. An additional 809 households (25%) are cost burdened.

Figure 29: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Income Level, 2017 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
9%
34% 39%
47%
88%
10%
22%
36%
43%
12%
81%
44%
26%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100% of
AMI
Greater than
100% of AMI
Percent of Households
0%-30% of Income Used for Housing 30%-50% of Income Used for Housing 50%+ of Income Used for Housing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1045
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-44 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Cost burden varies by tenure and by census tract. Renters are often more likely to be cost burdened than owners—however, as shown in Figures 30 and 31, there are more concentrations of cost burdened owners than renters. Cost burden for owners is highest in census tracts 6080.12 (similar to renters), 6083, and 6080.25—all of which indicate 20-40% of owners are cost burdened. There is a notable concentration of cost burdened renters in tract 6080.13 where 41.9% of renters experience cost burden. Figures 30 and 31 also show a prominent gap between cost burdened renters in tracts 6080.13 and 6080.23. In tract 6080.13, 41.9% of renters are cost burdened—the city’s largest concentration—while 10.2% are cost burdened in tract 6080.23, the city’s smallest concentration. Looking at the percentages more closely,

41.90 percent (or 95 households) of renter households in tract 6080.23 pay more than 30% of their income for housing compared to 10.20 percent (or 22 households) in tract 6080.23. In tract 6080.23 there are no apartments and only 147 renter households compared to 717 owner households. The renter households in tract 6080.23 are either renting houses, ADUs, or rooms. In tract 6080.13 there are 544 apartments and 681 renter households compared to 876 owner households. Because of the relatively small size of the renter population in 6080.23, a small number of renter households has a greater impact on the percentage.

Renters are slightly more cost-burdened than owners. While the housing market has resulted in home prices increasing dramatically, homeowners often have mortgages with fixed rates, whereas renters are more likely to be impacted by market increases. When looking at the cost burden across tenure in Foster City, 17.7% of renters spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing compared to 19.6% of those that own (see Figure 32). Additionally, 14.9% of renters spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while

13.3% of owners are severely cost-burdened.

Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to White residents. As a result, they often pay a greater percentage of their income on housing, and in turn, are at a greater risk of housing insecurity.

Black or African American, Non-Hispanic residents are the most cost burdened with 32.7% spending 30% to 50% of their income on housing, and Black or African American, Non-Hispanic residents are the most severely cost burdened with 25.5% spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 33).

Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1046
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-45
Figure 30: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Renter Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1047
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-46 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 31: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Owner Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1048
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-47
Figure 32: Cost Burden by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25070, B25091 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-06.

Figure 33: Cost Burden by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-08.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1049
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-48 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
In Foster City, 12.2% of large family households experience a cost burden of 30%-50%, while 9.0% of households spend more than half of their income on housing. Some 18.4% of all other households have a cost burden of 30%-50%, with 13.5% of households spending more than 50% of their income on housing (see Figure 34).

Figure 34: Cost Burden by Household Size
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-09.

When cost-burdened seniors are no longer able to make house payments or pay rents, displacement from their homes can occur, putting further stress on the local rental market or forcing residents out of the community they call home. Understanding how seniors might be cost-burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors. 74.3% of seniors making less than 30% of AMI are spending the majority of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100% of AMI, 85.6% are not cost-burdened and spend less than 30% of their income on housing (see Figure 35).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1050
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-49
Figure 35: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Cost burden is the ratio of housing costs to household income. For renters, housing cost is gross rent (contract rent plus utilities). For owners, housing cost is “select monthly owner costs”, which includes mortgage payment, utilities, association fees, insurance, and real estate taxes. HUD defines cost-burdened households as those whose monthly housing costs exceed 30% of monthly income, while severely cost-burdened households are those whose monthly housing costs exceed 50% of monthly income. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-03.

Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold. There are several different standards for defining overcrowding, but this report uses the Census Bureau definition, which is more than one occupant per room (not including bathrooms or kitchens). Additionally, the Census Bureau considers units with more than 1.5 occupants per room to be severely overcrowded. Citywide, 5,2% of households are considered overcrowded, including 1.7% that are severely overcrowded.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1051
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-50 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Overcrowding is often related to the cost of housing and can occur when demand in a city or region is high. In many cities, overcrowding is seen more amongst those that are renting, with multiple households sharing a unit to make it possible to stay in their communities. In Foster City, 3.7% of households that rent are severely overcrowded (more than 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 0.1% of households that own (see Figure 36). In Foster City, 5.9% of renters experience moderate overcrowding (1 to 1.5 occupants per room), compared to 1.4% for those own.

Figure 36: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-01.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1052
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-51
Overcrowding often disproportionately impacts low-income households. 3.5% of very low-income households (below 50% AMI) experience severe overcrowding, while 0.9% of households above 100% experience this level of overcrowding (see Figure 37).

Figure 37: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-04.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1053
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-52 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Communities of color are more likely to experience overcrowding similar to how they are more likely to experience poverty, financial instability, and housing insecurity. People of color tend to experience overcrowding at higher rates than White residents. In Foster City, the racial group with the largest overcrowding rate is Asian / API (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) (see Figure 38).

Figure 38: Overcrowding by Race
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: The Census Bureau defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens), and units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the total number of occupied housing units for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the total number of occupied housing units.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25014 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table OVER-03.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1054
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-53
6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS

6.1 LARGE HOUSEHOLDS
Large households often have different housing needs than smaller households. If a city’s rental housing stock does not include larger apartments, large households who rent could end up living in overcrowded conditions. In Foster City, for large households with 5 or more persons, most units (58.3%) are owner occupied (see Figure 39). In 2017, 1.2% of large households were very low-income, earning less than 50% of the area median income (AMI).

Figure 39: Household Size by Tenure
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25009 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-01.

The unit sizes available in a community affect the household sizes that can access that community. Large families are generally served by housing units with 3 or more bedrooms, of which there are 6,778 units in Foster City. Among these large units with 3 or more bedrooms, 17.6% are renter-occupied and 82.4% are owner-occupied (see Figure 40).

The City worked to address this need by requiring that the rental developments permitted include some three-bedroom units. Of the 583 rental units completed during the RHNA 5 Planning Period, 35 are threebedroom units. The City’s 20% inclusionary requirement and requiring that the bedroom mix of the affordable units matches the bedroom mix of the market rate units ensures that larger apartments are provided at a variety of income levels.

The ownership units constructed during the RHNA 5 Planning Period included 65% three- and fourbedroom units.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1055
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-54 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 40: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms
Universe: Housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25042 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HSG-05.

6.2 FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly femaleheaded households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income. In Foster City, the largest proportion of households is Married-couple Family Households at 62.2% of total, while FemaleHeaded Households make up 7.9% of all households.

Female-headed households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging.

In Foster City, 7.8% of female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, while

8.2% of female-headed households without children live in poverty (see Figure 42).

The City worked to address this need by requiring that the rental developments permitted include some two and three-bedroom affordable units. Of the 583 rental units completed during the RHNA 5 Planning Period, 204 are two-bedroom units and 35 are three-bedroom units. The City’s 20% inclusionary requirement and requiring that the bedroom mix of the affordable units matches the bedroom mix of the market rate units ensures that larger apartments are provided at a variety of income levels.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1056
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-55
Figure 41: Household Type
Universe: Households
Notes: For data from the Census Bureau, a “family household” is a household where two or more people are related by birth, marriage, or adoption. “Non-family households” are households of one person living alone, as well as households where none of the people are related to each other.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-23.

Figure 42: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status
Universe: Female Households
Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B17012 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table LGFEM-05.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1057
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-56 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

6.3 SENIORS
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. They often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions and/or reduced mobility.

Seniors who rent may be at even greater risk for housing challenges than those who own, due to income differences between these groups. The largest proportion of senior households who rent make 0%-30% of AMI, while the largest proportion of senior households who are homeowners falls in the income group Greater than 100% of AMI (see Figure 43).

Figure 43: Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Universe: Senior households
Notes: For the purposes of this graph, senior households are those with a householder who is aged 62 or older. Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table SEN-01.

The City worked to address senior housing needs during the RHNA 5 Planning Period primarily with the development of Foster Square. The City contributed funding for the 66-unit Alma Point Senior Apartments completed in 2016 which includes 65 very low-income and extremely low-income units, 5 units for persons with specified health care needs, and 2 units for homeless. The City approved the 131- unit/24 bed Atria Assisted Living facility completed in 2016. Senior market rate condominiums (200 units) at Foster Square were completed. In addition, beyond Foster Square there are 4 licensed Adult Residential care homes and 6 licensed Assisted Living care homes in the City.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1058
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-57
In 2020, Foster City began work on the Age-Friendly Community Initiative (AFC). This work resulted in the formation of an Age-Friendly Community Task Force who would lead the initiative as well as several focus group meetings and one-on-one surveys which culminated in the development project goals.

At the regular City Council meeting on November 16, 2020, the Council passed a resolution (Res. # 2020- 117) supporting Foster City’s initiative in joining the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Age-Friendly Global Network and authorizing the submittal of an application and letter to the Association of Retired Persons (AARP) with the Mayor as the designated signatory on behalf of the City. The application outlined (4) inaugural projects for Foster City’s AFC Initiative in which to pursue over the next 5 years.

These included:
o Project 1: Coordination and support of the Foster City AFC Initiative to ensure continued progress and stability.
o Project 2: A multi-faceted plan to promote existing civic engagement and employment opportunities and develop new ones.
o Project 3: A multi-faceted communication and information plan about services and recreational opportunities for older adults and their families.
o Project 4: A multi-faceted respect and inclusion plan for Foster City’s older adult residents.

Information on the City’s AFC initiative can be found on the City’s website: Foster City Age Friendly Community Initiative. The Foster City AFC initiative is a 5-year commitment with Years 1-2 dedicated to the development of a strategic action plan. Some of this work has been completed, but further work is needed to complete the City’s strategic plan. In Years 3-5, action items identified in the strategic plan are acted upon. At the end of Year 5, a progress evaluation is completed with further planning done for continual improvement.

6.4 PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and are in need of specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care.

When it comes to housing, people with disabilities are not only in need of affordable housing but accessibly designed housing, which offers greater mobility and opportunity for independence.

Unfortunately, the need typically outweighs what is available, particularly in a housing market with such high demand. People with disabilities are at a high risk for housing insecurity, homelessness and institutionalization, particularly when they lose aging caregivers. Figure 44 shows the rates at which different disabilities are present among residents of Foster City. Overall, 7.1% of people in Foster City have a disability of any kind. 36
36 These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability.

These counts should not be summed.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1059
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-58 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 44: Disability by Type
Universe: Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 years and over Notes: These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed. The Census Bureau provides the following definitions for these disability types:

Hearing difficulty: deaf or has serious difficulty hearing. Vision difficulty: blind or has serious difficulty seeing even with glasses.

Cognitive difficulty: has serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions. Ambulatory difficulty: has serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Self-care difficulty: has difficulty dressing or bathing. Independent living difficulty: has difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B18102, Table B18103, Table B18104, Table B18105, Table B18106, Table B18107.

For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table DISAB-01.

State law also requires Housing Elements to examine the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities. Developmental disabilities are defined as severe, chronic, and attributed to a mental or physical impairment that begins before a person turns 18 years old. Developmental disabilities include intellectual disability, autism, Down syndrome, epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and other disabling conditions similar in their functional impact to an intellectual disability. Some people with developmental disabilities are unable to work, rely on Supplemental Security Income, and live with family members. In

3.32%

2.62%

2.14%

1.77%

1.52%

0.94%

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%
With an
ambulatory
difficulty
With an
independent
living difficulty
With a
hearing
difficulty
With a
cognitive
difficulty
With a selfcare difficultyWith a vision
difficulty
Proportion of Adult Population Reporting Disability
Type

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1060
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-59
addition to their specific housing needs, they are at increased risk of housing insecurity after an aging parent or family member is no longer able to care for them. 37 Under California’s Developmental Disabilities Services Act and the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in Olmstead v. L.C., people with developmental disabilities are entitled to receive community-based services that allow them to live in the least restrictive community setting. This shift to deinstitutionalization has led to the closure of the most restrictive segregated settings and to the requirement that local jurisdictions in their Housing Elements assess and plan specifically for the housing needs of people with developmental disabilities who receive services from the Regional Center in order to live in their home community.

Faster Growth than the General Population. Foster City is home to 169 people with developmental disabilities of whom 94 are adults and 75 are under age 18. This represents a 13% increase over the 149 people with developmental disabilities living in Foster City reported in the 2015-2023 Housing Element and shows faster growth as compared to a 10% increase in the general population of Foster City during that same time period. Growth in the population of adults with developmental disabilities has significant implications for the Housing Element because many of the adults will need housing outside the family home in the coming years.

Table 4: Population with Developmental
Disabilities by Age
Age 2014 2021 % Change
Under age 18 70 75 7%
18 and older 79 94 19%
Total 149 169 13%
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Note: The 2014 data were submitted by Golden Gate Regional Center for inclusion in the Foster City Housing Element 2015 to 2023. To calculate the number under age 18 in 2014, the number of people 15, 16, and 17 years of age was estimated to be a pro rata share of the group reported in 2014 to be between ages 15 and 29. This adjustment was necessary in order to compare the 2014 data that is specific to Foster City to the currently available data published in June 2021 at the zip code level for zip code 94404 by the California Department of Developmental Services.

Living Arrangement of Foster City Adults. The family home is the most prevalent living arrangement for Foster City’s adults with developmental disabilities, with 64% of adults continuing to live in the family home in 2021, an increase of 12% since last reported in the 2015-2023 Housing Element, when only 52% of Foster City adults with developmental disabilities lived in the family home. Only 2.1% of Foster City adults with developmental disabilities have successfully transitioned to living in their own apartment compared to 11% in San Mateo County. And although the number of adults with developmental disabilities has increased 19% since the 2015-2031 Housing Element, the number living in licensed care facilities has declined. Only 32% of Foster City adults with developmental disabilities were living in licensed care facilities in 2021 as compared to 43% in 2014. As discussed below, opportunities for adults 37 For more information or data on developmental disabilities in your jurisdiction, contact the Golden Gate Regional Center for Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo Counties; the North Bay Regional Center for Napa, Solano and Sonoma Counties; the Regional Center for the East Bay for Alameda and Contra Costa Counties; or the San Andreas Regional Center for Santa Clara County.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1061
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-60 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
to live in a licensed facility are declining in San Mateo County, fueling the need for Foster City to increase opportunities for adults with developmental disabilities to live in affordable housing with supportive services.

Table 5: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence Living Arrangements
2014
Number
2014
Percent
of Total
2021
Number
2021
Percent
of Total
Change in
Percent
of Total
In the family home 41 52% 60 64% 12%
Own apartment with supportive services 2 2.5% 2 2.1% -0.4% Licensed Facilities 34 43% 30 32% -11%
Other (including homeless) 2 2.5% 2 2.1% -0.4%
Total 79 94
Universe: Population with developmental disabilities
Notes: The California Department of Developmental Services is responsible for overseeing the coordination and delivery of services to more than 330,000 Californians with developmental disabilities including cerebral palsy, intellectual disability, Down syndrome, autism, epilepsy, and related conditions. The California Department of Developmental Services provides ZIP code level counts. To get jurisdiction-level estimates, ZIP code counts were cross-walked to jurisdictions using census block population counts from Census 2010 SF1 to determine the share of a ZIP code to assign to a given jurisdiction.

Source: California Department of Developmental Services, Consumer Count by California ZIP Code and Residence Type (2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table DISAB-05.

Decline in Licensed Care Facilities. The California Department of Developmental Services reports that between September 2015 and June 2021, San Mateo County lost 5% of its supply of licensed care facilities for people with developmental disabilities (including Community Care Facilities, Intermediate Care Facilities, and Skilled Nursing Facilities), thereby increasing the need for affordable housing options coordinated with supportive services funded by the Regional Center. The countywide loss of supply of licensed care facilities increases the likelihood that Foster City adults with developmental disabilities will become homeless or will be displaced from the county when they lose the security of their family home.

Increase of Autism Diagnosis Reflected in Increase in Adults in their 20s and 30s. Growth in the Foster City adult population with developmental disabilities correlates with a significant annual increase in the diagnosis of autism that began in the mid-1980s and did not level out until after 2015. The cumulative impact of this trend is already seen in the growth in the San Mateo County population age 18 to 41 with developmental disabilities. This trend will continue into the future and is the reason for projecting significant growth in housing needs among Foster City adults during the period of the 2023 to 2031 Housing Element.

Longer Life Spans. Between September 2015 and June 2021, the California Department of Developmental Services reports that the number of San Mateo County residents with developmental disabilities age 62 and older grew by 33% (Table 6). This is not due to migration of senior citizens with developmental disabilities to high-cost San Mateo County, but rather to well-documented gains in life span among people with developmental disabilities. With longer life expectancy, more adults with developmental disabilities will outlive their parents and family members who are the single largest source of housing for adults with developmental disabilities in Foster City. Longer life spans also slow the pace

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1062
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-61
of resident turnover in the county’s limited supply of licensed care facilities, which further reduces opportunities for people with developmental disabilities to secure a space in a licensed care facility.

Table 6: Changes in Age Distribution of Adult
Population in San Mateo County
Age 2015 Number 2021 Number % Change
18 to 31 1,023 1,189 16%
32 to 41 397 457 15%
41 to 52 382 335 -12%
52 to 61 385 348 -10%
62 plus 327 435 33%
Total Adults 2,514 2,764 10%
Source: Department of Developmental Services data reported at the county level in June 2021 and September 2015.

6.4.1 Challenges Faced by Persons with Disabilities
Displacement. The California Department of Developmental Services has documented a 12% decline in the age group 42 to 51 and a 10% decline in the age group 52 to 61 in San Mateo County between September 2015 and June 2021 (Table 6). In light of gains in life expectancy, this loss can reasonably be attributed to displacement from the county because of the lack of residential living options (either licensed facilities or affordable housing) when an elderly family caregiver passes away or becomes unable to house and care for the adult. Displacement takes a particular toll on adults with developmental disabilities who depend on familiarity with transit routes and shopping and services, as well as support from community-based services and informal networks built up over years of living in Foster City.

Higher Rates of Physical Disabilities. People with developmental disabilities are more likely than the general population to have an accompanying physical disability. Twenty-seven percent (27%) of San Mateo County residents with developmental disabilities have limited mobility, and 13% have a vision or hearing impairment. The need for an accessible unit coupled with the need for coordinated supportive services compounds the housing barriers faced by those with co-occurring intellectual and physical disabilities.

Ineligibility for Many Affordable Rental Units. Some adults with developmental disabilities depend on monthly income of around $1,000 from the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, pricing them out of even the limited number of Extremely Low-Income affordable housing units in Foster City. Those with employment tend to work part-time in the lowest paid jobs and also struggle to income-qualify for many of the affordable housing units for rent in Foster City.

Overpayment. Residents of San Mateo County with a disability are more likely to be cost burdened or severely cost burdened than residents without a disability. Extreme cost burden is highest among Black residents with a disability in comparison to other racial and ethnic groups with and without a disability.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1063
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-62 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Disability Bias. Though fair housing complaints and inquiries are rather low in Foster City, four of seven inquiries in the past eight years (2013-2021) were cited as “disability” bias—higher than all other jurisdictions excluding Redwood City (five) and the City of San Mateo (four). Countywide, from 2017 to 2021, 57 fair housing complaints were filed with HUD, although none were from Foster City. 56% of those complaints were cited as disability bias.

Transit-Dependent. Further, most adults with developmental disabilities do not drive or own a car and rely on public transit as a means to integration in the larger community.

6.4.2 Strategies Addressing Needs of Persons with Disabilities Transportation. Nearly 17,000 jobs in Foster City can be accessed via public transportation and 89% of the city’s stations and vehicles are considered ADA-accessible—similar to the county overall (89%).

Affordable Housing. With the development of the City’s 100% affordable senior apartments—including accessible units for persons with disabilities—residents of Foster City will have access to high resource areas, be provided with more affordable housing options, and have the option to age-in-place or live independently.

Adaptable/Accessible Units. The City ensures that new developments meet the requirements for adaptable and accessible units. For the City-owned 22-unit Workforce Apartments completed in late 2022, the City amended the tenant preferences to provide persons with mobility-related disabilities the highest preference for the accessible units.

6.4.3 Resources for Persons with Disabilities
Foster City maintains a website with information about local fair housing ordinances with live links to Project Sentinel, the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, and the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center. 38 The site also lists resources for persons with disabilities seeking services, including:
 Contact Information for Supportive Housing Providers
 A Complete List of Affordable Supportive Housing Developments  Information About Available Housing Authority Programs  Contact Information for an Organization that Modifies Homes to Make Them Accessible

6.4.4 Gaps and Magnitude of Needs of Persons with Disabilities In the resident survey conducted of San Mateo County by Roots Policy Research to support AFFH analysis (further described in Appendix B, Affordable and Fair Housing), most respondents who have a disability (30% of respondents) reported that their homes meet the needs of their disability; 16% said their homes do not. Modifications that are needed include: wider doorways and supportive services. 38 https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/fair-housing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1064
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-63

6.4.5 Proposed Programs Addressing Needs of People with Disabilities  H-B-2-a: Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans
 H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance  H-D-4-b: ADU/JADU Financial Incentive Program
 H-D-6-c: Amend Parking Requirements
 H-E-1-a: Existing Unit Purchase Program-Opportunities for Supportive Housing  H-E-2-b: Affordable Housing Overlay Inclusionary 15% Requirement Including Extremely Low Income
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing Units
 H-F-1-a: Facilities and Services for Special Needs
 H-F-1-c: Adaptable/Accessible Units for the Disabled
 H-F-1-d: Reasonable Accommodation
 H-F-1-e: Home Sharing for Special Needs Population
 H-F-1-f: Support Services for Special Needs Population  H-F-1-g: Extremely Low-Income Units for Special Needs  H-F-1-i: Community Care Facilities
 H-F-1-j: Public Investment in Accessibility
 H-G-1-a: Non-Discrimination
 H-G-2-a: Anti-Discrimination Regulations
 H-G-2-b: Fair Housing Training for Landlords and Tenants  H-G-2-c: Information Specific to Fair Housing
 H-G-2-d: Multilingual Tenant Resources
 H-G-2-e: Rental Registry

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1065
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-64 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

6.5 Homelessness
Homelessness remains an urgent challenge in many communities across the state, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Rising housing costs result in increased risks of community members experiencing homelessness. Far too many residents who have found themselves housing insecure have ended up unhoused or homeless in recent years, either temporarily or longer term.

Addressing the specific housing needs for the unhoused population remains a priority throughout the region, particularly since homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, people with disabilities, those struggling with addiction and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances. In San Mateo County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness is those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 75.5% are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in transitional housing (see Figure 45).

Figure 45: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-01.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1066
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-65
People of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability as a result of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents. Consequently, people of color are often disproportionately impacted by homelessness, particularly Black residents of the Bay Area. In San Mateo County, White (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents represent the largest proportion of residents experiencing homelessness and account for

66.6% of the homeless population, while making up 50.6% of the overall population (see Figure 46).

Figure 46: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. HUD does not disaggregate racial demographic data by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness. Instead, HUD reports data on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for people experiencing homelessness in a separate table.

Accordingly, the racial group data listed here includes both Hispanic/Latinx and non-Hispanic/Latinx individuals.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-02.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1067
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-66 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
In San Mateo, Latinx residents represent 38.1% of the population experiencing homelessness, while Latinx residents comprise 24.7% of the general population (see Figure 47).

Figure 47: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. The data from HUD on Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity for individuals experiencing homelessness does not specify racial group identity. Accordingly, individuals in either ethnic group identity category (Hispanic/Latinx or non-Hispanic/Latinx) could be of any racial background.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019); U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-I) For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-03.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1068
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-67
Many of those experiencing homelessness are dealing with severe issues – including mental illness, substance abuse and domestic violence – that are potentially life threatening and require additional assistance. In San Mateo County, homeless individuals are commonly challenged by severe mental illness, with 305 reporting this condition (see Figure 48). Of those, some 62.0% are unsheltered, further adding to the challenge of handling the issue.

Figure 48: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, San Mateo County
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Notes: This data is based on Point-in-Time (PIT) information provided to HUD by CoCs in the application for CoC Homeless Assistance Programs. The PIT Count provides a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons on a single night during the last ten days in January. Each Bay Area county is its own CoC, and so the data for this table is provided at the county-level. Per HCD’s requirements, jurisdictions will need to supplement this county-level data with local estimates of people experiencing homelessness. These challenges/characteristics are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one challenge/characteristic. These counts should not be summed.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Continuum of Care (CoC) Homeless Populations and Subpopulations Reports (2019)
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table HOMELS-04.

NOTE: San Mateo County conducted the latest Point in Time (PIT) Count from February 24, 2022 through March 3, 2022. Volunteers were deployed to conduct an observational count of those experiencing unsheltered homelessness. Detailed data from the 2022 PIT Count will be available later in 2022 in a report by the County’s Center on Homelessness. In both 2019 and 2022, Foster City had four unsheltered homeless according to the San Mateo County PIT data (34Thttps://www.smcgov.org/hsa/2019-one-dayhomeless-count and https://www.smcgov.org/media/125526/download?inline=)34T. Foster City’s strategy has been to support Countywide efforts and agencies that are better located to be effective (see Figure 12).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1069
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-68 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 7: Number of Unsheltered Individuals by San Mateo County Cities
City 2013 Count 2015 Count 2017 Count 2019 Count 2022 Count Atherton 0 1 0 1 3
Belmont 43 11 3p 7 13
Brisbane 34 21 19 4 6
Burlingame 13 7 21 25 10
Colma 7 3 1 8 1
Daly City 27 32 17 66 49
East Palo Alto 119 95 98 107 169
Foster City 7 0 6 4 4
Half Moon Bay 114 84 43 54 68
Hillsborough 0 0 0 0 0
Menlo Park 16 27 47 27 56
Millbrae 21 8 7 9 9
Pacifica 150 63 112 116 161
Portola Valley 2 0 1 0 0
Redwood City 306 223 94 221 245
San Bruno 98 8 26 12 63
San Carlos 10 20 28 30 14
San Francisco International
Airport 5 1 3 21 14
San Mateo 103 82 48 74 60
South San Francisco 173 55 33 42 42
Unincorporated 46 32 30 73 43
Woodside 6 2 0 0 0
Total 1,299 775 637 901 1,092
Universe: Population experiencing homelessness
Source: San Mateo County: Annual Point in Time Count Report.

In Foster City, there were no reported students experiencing homeless in the 2019-20 school year. By comparison, San Mateo County has seen a 37.5% decrease in the population of students experiencing homelessness since the 2016-17 school year, and the Bay Area population of students experiencing homelessness decreased by 8.5%. During the 2019-2020 school year, there were still some 13,718 students experiencing homelessness throughout the region, adding undue burdens on learning and thriving, with the potential for longer term negative effects.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1070
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-69
Table 8: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing
Homelessness
Academic Year Foster City San Mateo County Bay Area
2016-17 0 1,910 14,990
2017-18 0 1,337 15,142
2018-19 0 1,934 15,427
2019-20 0 1,194 13,718
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The California Department of Education considers students to be homeless if they are unsheltered, living in temporary shelters for people experiencing homelessness, living in hotels/motels, or temporarily doubled up and sharing the housing of other persons due to the loss of housing or economic hardship. The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table HOMELS-05.

6.6 FARMWORKERS
Across the state, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern.

Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the season from one harvest to the next. Farmers and farmworkers are the keystone of the larger food sector, which includes the industries that provide farmers with fertilizer and equipment; farms to produce crops and livestock; and the industries that process, transport, and distribute food to consumers. While overall the Bay Area has shifted away from our historical agricultural economic base, Bay Area counties still preserve strong agricultural roots. And yet, the responsibility for farmworker housing is not just with these counties. In many counties, farmworkers choose to live within incorporated cities due to the diversity and availability of housing, proximity to schools and other employment opportunities for other family members, and overall affordability. Many farmworker households tend to have difficulties securing safe, decent, and affordable housing. Far too often, farmworkers are forced to occupy substandard homes or live in overcrowded situations.

In the Bay Area, about 3.7% of farmworkers, including both seasonal and permanent residents, are in San Mateo County. However, per the USDA, today’s farmworkers can commute up to 75 miles to the workplace. Based on this, the need for housing for agricultural workers is not just the responsibility of Bay Area counties with a robust agricultural economy. In Foster City, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), there are approximately 75 residents employed in the agriculture, forestry and fishing industries.

In Foster City, there were no reported students of migrant workers in the 2019-20 school year. The trend for the region for the past few years has been a decline of 2.4% in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-17 school year. The change at the county level is a 57.1% decrease in the number of migrant worker students since the 2016-17 school year.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1071
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-70 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 9: Migrant Worker Student Population
Academic Year Foster City San Mateo County Bay Area
2016-17 0 657 4,630
2017-18 0 418 4,607
2018-19 0 307 4,075
2019-20 0 282 3,976
Universe: Total number of unduplicated primary and short-term enrollments within the academic year (July 1 to June 30), public schools
Notes: The data used for this table was obtained at the school site level, matched to a file containing school locations, geocoded and assigned to jurisdiction, and finally summarized by geography.

Source: California Department of Education, California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), Cumulative Enrollment Data (Academic Years 2016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) This table is included in the Data Packet Workbook as Table FARM-01.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Census of Farmworkers, the number of permanent farm workers in San Mateo County has decreased since 2002, totaling 978 in 2017, while the number of seasonal farm workers has decreased, totaling 343 in 2017 (see Figure 49).

Figure 49: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, San Mateo County Universe: Hired farm workers (including direct hires and agricultural service workers who are often hired through labor contractors)
Notes: Farm workers are considered seasonal if they work on a farm less than 150 days in a year, while farm workers who work on a farm more than 150 days are considered to be permanent workers for that farm.

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Census of Farmworkers (2002, 2007, 2012, 2017), Table 7: Hired Farm Labor For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table FARM-02.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1072
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-71

6.7 NON-ENGLISH SPEAKERS
California has long been an immigration gateway to the United States, which means that many languages are spoken throughout the Bay Area. Since learning a new language is universally challenging, it is not uncommon for residents who have immigrated to the United States to have limited English proficiency. This limit can lead to additional disparities if there is a disruption in housing, such as an eviction, because residents might not be aware of their rights or they might be wary to engage due to immigration status concerns. In Foster City, 5.8% of residents 5 years and older identify as speaking English not well or not at all, which is below the proportion for San Mateo County. Throughout the region the proportion of residents 5 years and older with limited English proficiency is 8%.

Figure 50: Population with Limited English Proficiency
Universe: Population 5 years and over
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B16005 For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table AFFH-03. 7 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA)
Since 1969, the State of California has required that all local governments adequately plan to meet the housing needs of everyone in their communities. To meet this requirement, each city or county must develop a Housing Element as part of its General Plan (the local government’s long-range blueprint for growth) that shows how it will meet its community’s housing needs. There are many laws that govern this process, and collectively they are known as Housing Element Law.

The Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) process is the part of Housing Element Law used to determine how many new homes, and the affordability of those homes, each local government must plan for in its Housing Element. This process is repeated every eight years, and for this cycle the Bay Area is planning for the period from 2023 to 2031.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1073
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-72 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) identifies the total number of homes for which each region in California must plan in order to meet the housing needs of people at all income levels. The four income categories included in the Regional Housing Needs Determination (RHND) are:
 Very Low-Income: 0-50% of Area Median Income
 Low-Income: 50-80% of Area Median Income
 Moderate-Income: 80-120% of Area Median Income
 Above Moderate-Income: 120% or more of Area Median Income For San Mateo County in 2021, the median income for a family of four is $149,600. Because San Mateo County is considered a high-cost area, HUD and HCD make some adjustments when calculating the income limits, which results in the very low-income and low-income limits actually being higher than 50% and 80% of the median income, respectively. Below is a summary of the very low-, low- and moderateincome levels, based on household size, for San Mateo County.

Table 10: San Mateo County 2021 Household Income Schedule Number of Persons
in Household 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Acutely Low 15,700 17,950 20,200 22,450 24,250 26,050 27,850 29,650 Extremely Low 38,400 43,850 49,350 54,800 59,200 63,600 68,000 72,350 Very Low-Income 63,950 73,100 82,250 91,350 98,700 106,000 113,300 120,600 Low-Income 102,450 117,100 131,750 146,350 158,100 169,800 181,500 193,200 Median Income 104,700 119,700 134,650 149,600 161,550 173,550 185,500 197,450 Moderate-Income 125,650 143,600 161,550 179,500 193,850 208,200 222,600 236,950 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the State Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) determine the number of housing units that should be produced in the region. This determination of need is primarily based on estimated job growth. ABAG then allocated that need for each jurisdiction, based on their share of the region’s households and adjusted for access to high opportunity areas, proximity of jobs to transportation and transit, and an equity adjustment to ensure that each jurisdiction receives an allocation of lower-income units that is at least proportional to its share of the region’s total households in 2020.

Table 11: Foster City’s Current and Past RHNA
Housing Element Cycle Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate Total 2001 – 2006 96 53 166 375 690
2007 – 2014 111 80 94 201 486
2015 – 2022 (5th Cycle) 148 87 76 119 430
2023 – 2031 (6th Cycle) 520 299 300 777 1,896
Source: Foster City Community Development Department

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1074
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-73
As shown above, the amount of housing being required is significantly higher than required for the last Housing Element. Approximately 43% of all new housing is required to be affordable to low- and very low-income households.
8 ASSISTED RENTAL HOUSING “AT RISK” OF CONVERSION

8.1 INTRODUCTION
State law requires the analysis of, and a program for, preserving assisted housing developments and atrisk units that could be lost over the next ten years and adequately planning for preventing or minimizing tenant displacement and reduction in the local affordable housing stock. At-risk units are defined as multi-family, rental housing complexes that receive government assistance under any of the federal, state, and/or local programs or any combination of rental assistance, mortgage insurance, interest reductions, and/or direct loan programs and are eligible to convert to market-rate units due to termination (opt-out) of a rent subsidy contract, mortgage prepayment, or other expiring use restrictions within 10 years of the beginning of the housing-element planning period. The following at-risk analysis covers the 10-year period between 2023 and 2032.

8.2 INVENTORY OF AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING UNITS RECEIVING GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE Table 12 inventories all the government assisted rental properties in the City, not including Section 8 vouchers used for individual unit rental subsidies that are dispersed throughout the City. These properties are subject to affordability agreements with the City (or the former Foster City Community Development Agency, now the City as the Successor Agency). In addition, some properties are subject to other regulatory agreements related to the use of tax credits, bonds, or other funding programs. Other databases often report only properties subject to tax credits, bonds, or other state or federal funding.

The affordability agreements specify the number of units required at each income level and also identify the sections of the California Health and Safety Code to be used to establish the maximum allowable income and rent.

8.3 IDENTIFICATION OF RENTAL UNITS AT-RISK OF CONVERSION TO MARKET RATE Deed restricted affordable rental housing units within Foster City are located in nine properties with an additional six units comprising the City’s Existing Unit Purchase Program (dispersed throughout the City) counted as a tenth property. Four of the ten properties are at low risk of conversion because they are owned by the City or a non-profit housing provider. Two of the remaining properties owned by for-profit companies are secured in perpetuity. The remaining four developments owned by for-profit companies include Foster’s Landing (discussed below) or have restrictions that will expire in 2068-2072. The 10 remaining units at Foster’s Landing that are scheduled to expire on December 31, 2023, are considered to be at high risk for conversion to market rate within the next 10 years.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1075
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-74 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 12: Assisted Rental Properties in Foster City
Name of Project Address Target Group
Funding
Program
Assisted
Units
Total
Units Ownership Expiration Risk
Fosters Landing Bounty Drive Small & Large
Families, Elderly RDA 10* 490 For-Profit 12/31/2023 High Metro Senior
Apartments 101 Town Green Ln & 100 Village Ln Seniors RDA, LIHTC 60 60 Nonprofit 7/25/2050 Low Marlin Cove 1000 Foster City Blvd General RDA, Bonds 84 280 For-Profit Perpetuity Low Miramar 1288 E. Hillsdale Blvd General RDA, LIHTC 48 159 For-Profit Perpetuity Low Triton Plaza One & Three Plaza View Lane General RDA 60 307 For-Profit 8/19/2068 Mediumlong term 100 Grand 100 Grand Lane General Inclusionary 33 166 For-Profit 7/21/2070 Mediumlong term Alma Point Alma Point Lane Seniors
LIHTC, City,
San Mateo
County, HOME
66 66 Nonprofit 7/17/2072 Low
The Triton 55 Triton Park Lane General Inclusionary 48 220 For-Profit 1/27/2072 Mediumlong term Workforce 501 Pilgrim Drive General/Public
Safety City 22 22 City 6/17/2119 Low
Existing Unit Purchase
Program Various Large families RDA 6 6 City 4/11/2066 Low Total 437
* Foster’s Landing originally included 74 deed-restricted units but as of 1/1/2023, there will be 10 restricted units remaining.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1076
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-75
Foster’s Landing originally had 74 restricted units, 64 of which have expiration dates in phases between December 31, 2020, and December 31, 2022. In the absence of sufficient funds to purchase the units or purchase extensions of the affordability covenants and the landlord’s plans to convert the units to market rate, there were no viable options to prevent the conversion of the units. The City has worked extensively with the landlord to develop and implement several programs to assist the tenants, as described in Table 13 below.

Table 13: Foster’s Landing BMR Tenant Programs
Program Description Status
At-risk Tenants
Preference Category
Program
On March 18, 2020, the City Council voted 5-0-0 to adopt Resolution 2020-24, the amendment of Resolution 2000-123 to include tenants atrisk of displacement because of termination of affordability restrictions. The Amendment to Resolution 2000-123 creates an additional preference category (1a) for tenants at-risk of displacement by termination of affordability restrictions consistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan, Program H-E-5-e. Essentially, this means that a Foster’s Landing resident that has resided in a BMR unit for at least 1 year and is set to expire within the next 3 years will be categorized as Tier 1a (top of the list) on a waiting list for the Housing Developments in Foster City.

Approved 3/18/2020
Third Amendment
Agreement (an
amendment to the
existing affordable
housing contract)
The Third Amendment, approved by Resolution 2020-52, allows Foster’s Landing residents in the BMR program to break their lease without penalty and establishes a funding source for the Early Relocation Assistance Program.

Signed 7/14/2020
Effective Date 6/11/2020
Post BMR Expiration
Rent Agreement
This Agreement, approved by Resolution 2020-101, provides that Essex and the City will subsidize the rent difference (difference between the tenant paid rent and market rent) for the Phase I tenants for 1 year (known as the Subsidy Period.)  The City and Essex have allocated up to $800,000 for the program.

Approved by City
Council 9/28/2020
Early Relocation
Assistance Program
The Early Relocation Assistance Program aims to provide the residents of Foster’s Landing Below Market Rate Program, scheduled to expire between December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2023, with financial assistance to off-set the up-front cost associated with relocating and assist the residents in finding replacement housing. This program is being administered by Housing Industry Foundation (HIF).

Approved by City
Council 2/1/2021
Tenant Relocation
Assistance Services
The City was able to obtain a grant of Permanent Local Housing Assistance (PLHA) funds from San Mateo County to provide relocation assistance services and, if relocation is not possible, rental subsidies.

Approved by City
Council 9/20/2021

8.4 PRESERVATION OR REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING AT-RISK AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK California state law requires that housing elements analyze options to preserve at-risk units. The following analysis compares various preservation methods and their costs.

Rental Assistance
State, local, or other funding sources can be used to provide rental subsidies to maintain the affordability of the units. This is being done through the PLHA grant if the tenants are unable to relocate. The total annual subsidy required for the 10 units remaining after January 1, 2023, is $103,444.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1077
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-76 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Transfer of Ownership
If the current owner were willing, transfer of ownership to a nonprofit housing organization is a way to preserve the affordability of units. Using a market value of $350,000 per unit, the estimated market value for the ten units is $3.5 million.

Construction of Replacement Units
The construction of new below market rate housing is a way to replace the at-risk units. Using the construction cost data provided by Century Urban 39 and Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. 40 (referenced in Appendix C, Constraints) of between $786,500 to $847,788 per unit, the cost to replace the ten units would be between $7.8 and $8.5 million.

8.5 ENTITIES INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN CALIFORNIA’S FIRSTRIGHT OF REFUSAL PROGRAM Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65863.11, owners of government-assisted projects cannot terminate subsidy contracts, prepay a federally-assisted mortgage, or discontinue use restrictions without first providing an exclusive Notice of Opportunity to Submit an Offer to Purchase. This Notice is required to be sent to Qualified Entities at least twelve months prior to sale or termination of use restrictions. Qualified Entities are nonprofit or for-profit organizations or individuals that agree to maintain the long-term affordability of projects. HCD maintains a list of Qualified Entities who are interested in purchasing government-subsidized multi-family housing projects. HCD has identified six entities that may be interested in participating in California’s First Right of Refusal Program in San Mateo County: 41
 Affordable Housing Foundation
 Alta Housing (Previously Palo Alto Housing Corp)
 Housing Corporation of America
 Northern California Land trust, Inc.
 Mid-Peninsula Housing Corporation
 ROEM Development Corporation

8.6 FUNDING SOURCES
With the dissolution of redevelopment agencies, a primary source of potential funding for preservation of at-risk units was eliminated. Foster City adopted a commercial linkage fee in 2016 but the first revenue from this fee did not occur until 2020 and was not sufficient to purchase units or extensions of covenants.

In the process of searching for potential funding to preserve the Foster’s Landing units, the City found very little funding that could be used for preservation of these units because: 1) most of the available affordable housing funding targets new construction, 2) preservation funding was targeted at tax credit projects, and 3) many other sources of funding for affordable housing are restricted to or provide 39 Century Urban, Memo “San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Development Cost & San Mateo County Unit Mix Research, April 7, 2022. 40 Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. Draft Report “Rental Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee,” January 20, 2022. 41 California Department of Housing and Community Development website accessed April 30, 2022. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/ policy-research/preserving-existing-affordable-housing/docs/qualified-entities.xlsx.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1078
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-77
preferences for affordable units near high quality transit, which is not available in Foster City. With the assistance of San Mateo County, PLHA funds were able to be utilized to provide relocation assistance and rental subsidies.

For the units with restrictions due to expire in 2068 or later, other sources of funding may become available by that time and the City may have had the opportunity to accumulate funds in the City Affordable Housing Fund from commercial linkage fees and other sources.

Funds that may be available for construction of replacement units include the following types of funding:

Federal Funding:
 HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) Program
 Project-Based Vouchers (Section 8)
 Section 811 Project Rental Assistance
State Funding:
 Golden State Acquisition Fund (GSAF)
 Project Homekey
 Housing for a Healthy California
 Local Housing Trust Fund Program (LHTF)
 Multi-Family Housing Program (MHP)
 National Housing Trust Fund
 Predevelopment Loan Program
Regional, Local, and Nonprofit Funding:
 San Mateo County Affordable Housing Fund
 Foster City Affordable Housing Fund
 HEART Developer Loans
The following program is included in the Housing Element related to at-risk units:

H-C-2-b Continue to Monitor Expiration of Affordability Covenants. Monitor affordable housing developments that area at risk of conversion to market rate. Work with landlords, tenants, and other agencies prior to the expiration of affordability covenants to minimize the impacts of the expiration of affordability covenants through extension of affordability covenants, use of rental vouchers, preference at other affordable housing sites, or other means.

Housing Needs Action Plan
This Appendix has analyzed a wide variety of housing needs in Foster City. Table 14 below identified the links between the housing needs and highlights of the actions proposed to address these needs. Some of these needs and actions overlap with those discussed in Chapter 3 and Appendix B regarding Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1079
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-78 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 14: Housing Needs Action Plan
Housing Need Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines About 32.6% of renters and 32.9% of owners
are cost burdened or severely cost burdened.

Growth in rents and sales prices have
outpaced income growth.

Lack of adequate supply of housing has
increased demand and prices.

Increase the supply of affordable
housing through a variety of
programs:
 H-A-5-b: Local, State and Federal
Funding for Affordable Housing
 Apply for at least one funding
opportunity per year
 H-A-5-e: NOFAs for Affordable
Housing
 Biannually beginning in 2024
 H-C-4-a: Rental Housing Assistance
Informa�on
 December 2023 and then annually
 Increase number of housing vouchers
used in Foster City by 2 per year
 H-D-1-b: General Plan and Zoning
Amendments to Facilitate Housing on
Housing Opportunity Sites in the Sites
Inventory
 Prior to or upon adop�on of Housing
Element
 H-D-4-a: ADUs  24 ADUs by 2031
 H-D-4-b: ADU/JADU Financial
Incen�ve Program
 Implement program by December
2024
 Provide 8 income-restricted ADU units
by 2031
 H-D-4-c: Preapproved ADU/JADU
Designs and Expedited Review
 December 2024
 H-D-4-d: Improved Public Informa�on
on ADUs
 Improve website and counter
informa�on by December 2023
 H-D-4-e: Amnesty Program for
Exis�ng Unapproved ADUs
 Implement program by December
2025
 H-D-4-f: Objec�ve Design Standards
for ADUs
 Adopt standards by December 2024
 H-D-4-g: Mul�-Family ADUs  70 mul�-family ADUs by 2031  H-D-4-i: Provide New Housing Choices
and Affordability in High Opportunity
Areas through Addi�onal ADUs in R-1
Zoned Areas
 Allow up to 3 ADUs per single-family
lot by December 2023
 H-D-4-j ADUs and JADUs in Religious
and Ins�tu�onal Uses and School Sites
 12 units in religious and ins�tu�onal
sites by 2031
 12 units in school sites by 2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1080
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-79
Housing Need Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-E-2-a: Inclusionary 20%
Requirement
 Ensure inclusionary units are provided
consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-2-b: Affordable Housing Overlay
Inclusionary 15% Requirements
Including Extremely Low-Income
 Ensure inclusionary units are provided
consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-6-a: Home Sharing Program  Ongoing: at least 5 new matches per year
 H-E-10-a: Improve Housing Mobility
and Increase Missing Middle Housing
Choices
 Implement a suite of programs with
mid-cycle review in 2027
Increasing senior population results in needs
to age in place, move to multi-family and/or
accessible units.

Many seniors on fixed incomes find it
difficult to keep up with increases in
housing cost.

Increase support for seniors to age in
place or move to appropriate
housing:
 Support Services for Special Needs
Popula�on
 Host roundtable annually beginning
by December 2024
 H-F-1-h: Age Friendly Ini�a�ve  Adop�on of Age-Friendly Ac�on Plan by December 2024
Increase in jobs to household ratio creates
need for more units.

Foster City (and San Mateo County as a
whole) has added more jobs than housing
units in the past 10 years.

Increase the supply of affordable
housing through a variety of programs
(described above).

Home ownership costs are out of reach for
households earning a low or moderate
income.

Growth in sales prices has outpaced
income growth.

Provide assistance to lower income
homeowners:
 H-B-2-a: Lower-Income Homeowners
Rehabilita�on Loans
 18 new loans by 2031, half very low
income and half low-income
 H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit
Rehabilita�on/Maintenance
Assistance
 6 units improved with assistance by
2031 or 1 very low-income owner unit
improved with assistance per year
Persons with disabilities face additional
housing challenges
Difficulties are compounded with low
income, racial discrimination, need for
supportive services, and/or other factors.

Persons with disabilities often need
extremely low-income housing.

Provide housing that addresses special
needs for accessibility and supportive
services:
 H-B-2-a: Lower-Income Homeowners
Rehabilita�on Loans
 18 new loans by 2031, half very low
income and half low-income
 H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit
Rehabilita�on/Maintenance
Assistance
 6 units improved with assistance by
2031 or 1 very low-income owner unit
improved with assistance per year

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1081
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-80 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Housing Need Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-D-4-b: ADU/JADU Financial
Incen�ve Program
 H-D-6-c: Amend Parking
Requirements
 H-E-1-a: Exis�ng Unit Purchase
Program-Opportuni�es for Suppor�ve
Housing
 One (1) unit converted to suppor�ve
housing by 2031
 H-E-2-b: Affordable Housing Overlay
Inclusionary 15% Requirement
 Ensure inclusionary units are provided
consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-9-a: Family Friendly Housing  Facilitate ten (10) rental units of 3 or more bedrooms by 2031.
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing Units  Facilitate ten (10) rental units less than 500 SF by 2031
 H-F-1-a: Facili�es and Services for
Special Needs
 Establish expedited permit review
process and begin annual proac�ve
outreach by December 2023
 Facilitate at least one (1) new facility
serving special needs popula�on
during the planning period
 H-F-1-c: Adaptable/Accessible Units
for the Disabled
 Ensure accessible and adaptable units
are provided consistent with the
California Building Code and that
affirma�ve marke�ng is included
consistent with Chapter 17.90 and the
City’s BMR Administra�ve Guidelines
 H-F-1-d: Reasonable Accommoda�on  Amend Chapter 17.84 by December 2023
 Update City’s website by December
2023
 H-F-1-e: Home Sharing for Special
Needs Popula�on
 At least 50% of home share matches
assist someone with special needs
 H-F-1-f: Support Services for Special
Needs Popula�on
 Host roundtable annually beginning
by December 2024
 H-F-1-g: Extremely Low-Income Units
for Special Needs
 Ensure affirma�ve marke�ng plan is
provided and implemented for ELI
units

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1082
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 A-81
Housing Need Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  H-F-1-h: Age Friendly Ini�a�ve  Adopt Age-Friendly Ac�on Plan by December 2024
 H-F-1-i: Community Care Facili�es  Amend regula�ons by December 2024
 H-F-2-d: Emergency Shelter Zoning  Amend Municipal Code by May 2024.  H-F-3-a: Transi�onal and Suppor�ve
Housing Zoning
 Ensure regula�ons are applied so that
transi�onal and suppor�ve housing is
subject only to the same restric�ons
as other residen�al uses in the same
zone
 H-F-3-b: Suppor�ve Housing  Amend regula�ons by December 2023
 H-F-1-j: Public Investment in
Accessibility
 Target areas with higher disabled
popula�ons – Census Tracts 6083 and
6080.25
 Number of capital improvement
projects iden�fied in the CIP budget
each year that include accessibility
improvements
 H-F-3-a: Transi�onal and Suppor�ve
Housing Zoning
 Ensure regula�ons are applied so that
transi�onal and suppor�ve housing is
subject only to the same restric�ons
as other residen�al uses in the same
zone
 H-F-3-b: Suppor�ve Housing  Amend regula�ons by December 2023
 H-C-3-c: Facilitate Resolu�on of
Rental Disputes
 Ongoing
 H-C-3-d: Facilitate Tenant Protec�on
Act of 2019 (AB 1482)
 Update website by December 2023
 Provide at least one informa�on
session per year
 H-G-1-a: Non-Discrimina�on  Update website by December 2023  Hold at least one (1) informa�onal
sessions for landlords and tenants
annually beginning in 2024
 H-G-2-a: An�-Discrimina�on
Regula�ons
 Implement program by December
2023

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1083
APPENDIX A: HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A-82 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Housing Need Issue Contributing Factors Meaningful Actions Targets and Timelines  Provide updated informa�on annually
 H-G-2-b: Fair Housing Training for
Landlords and Tenants
 Conduct at least one fair housing
training for tenants and landlords
annually, beginning in 2024
 H-G-2-c: Informa�on Specific to Fair
Housing
 Implement program by December
2023
 Number of physical loca�ons the
resources are made available without
requiring internet access
 H-G-2-d: Mul�lingual Tenant
Resources
 Implement program by December
2024
 Collabora�on for provision of
mul�lingual fair housing services
 H-G-2-e: Rental Registry  Research op�ons and report to City Council by December 2024
Very few housing units are available for
extremely low-income households.

Growth in rents and sales prices have
outpaced income growth.

Lack of adequate supply of housing has
increased demand and prices.

Increase the supply of extremely lowincome housing:
 H-E-2-b: Affordable Housing Overlay
Inclusionary 15% Requirements
including Extremely Low-Income
 Ensure inclusionary units are provided
consistent with ordinance
requirements
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing Units  Facilitate ten (10) rental units less than 500 SF by 2031
A variety of housing types in all areas of the
city are needed to provide housing choices
for all types of households.

Growth in rents and sales prices have
outpaced income growth.

Lack of adequate supply of housing has
increased demand and prices.

Provide sites in the Sites Inventory
that expand BMR units geographically
and provide programs that provide a
variety of housing unit types:
 H-D-4-a-h: ADUs  24 ADUs by 2031
 H-E-6-a: Home Sharing Program  Ongoing: at least 5 new matches per year
 H-E-9-a: Family Friendly Housing  Facilitate ten (10) rental units of 3 or more bedrooms by 2031.
 H-E-9-b: Small Housing Units  Facilitate ten (10) rental units less than 500 SF by 2031

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1084
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-i
APPENDIX B | FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING

ASSESSMENT
Table of Contents
REPORT CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION............................................................................................................ 1 I INTRODUCTION AND PRIMARY FINDINGS.................................................................................................... 2

1.1 What is AFFH? .................................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 City of Foster City Housing Element 2023-2031................................................................................... 3

1.3 Foster City Land Use and Zoning History ............................................................................................ 8

1.4 Primary Findings ................................................................................................................................. 9

1.5 Contributing Factors and Fair Housing Action Plan ........................................................................... 15 2 FAIR HOUSING ENFORCEMENT AND OUTREACH CAPACITY......................................................................17

2.1 Fair Housing Complaints and Inquiries ...............................................................................................17

2.2 Foster City Fair Housing Legal Cases................................................................................................. 20

2.3 Outreach and Program Capacity ...................................................................................................... 20

2.4 Compliance with State and Federal Law ........................................................................................... 22

2.5 Local Housing Policies...................................................................................................................... 23 3 INTEGRATION AND SEGREGATION............................................................................................................. 27

3.1 Defining Segregation........................................................................................................................ 27

3.2 Neighborhood Level Racial Segregation (within City of Foster City).................................................. 30

3.3 Regional Racial Segregation (between Foster City and Other Jurisdictions) ...................................... 33

3.4 Local and County-Wide Diversity .......................................................................................................37

3.5 Income Segregation in City of Foster City ......................................................................................... 40

3.6 Disability Status................................................................................................................................ 50

3.7 Familial Status .................................................................................................................................. 53

3.8 Racially or Ethnically Concentrated Areas ......................................................................................... 57

3.9 Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence ......................................................................................... 58 4 ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY ......................................................................................................................... 60

4.1 Education.......................................................................................................................................... 60

4.2 Employment..................................................................................................................................... 68

4.3 Transportation.................................................................................................................................. 76

4.4 Environment..................................................................................................................................... 83

4.5 Disparities in Access to Opportunity ................................................................................................. 87

4.6 Disparities Specific to the Population Living with a Disability............................................................ 89 5 DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS...................................................................................................... 92

5.1 Housing Needs.................................................................................................................................. 92

5.2 Cost Burden and Severe Cost Burden................................................................................................ 94

5.3 Overcrowding ................................................................................................................................... 99

5.4 Substandard Housing...................................................................................................................... 104

5.5 Homelessness ................................................................................................................................. 104

5.6 Displacement.................................................................................................................................. 105

5.7 Access to Mortgage Loans .............................................................................................................. 109 6 SITE INVENTORY ANALYSIS....................................................................................................................... 111 7 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AND FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN................................................................ 119 8 REFERENCES...............................................................................................................................................135

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1085
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-ii CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
List of Figures
Figure 1: Bay Area Demographics .................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: San Mateo County Demographics ..................................................................................................... 6 Figure 3: Foster City Housing Mix: 1974-2022................................................................................................... 9 Figure 4: Major Public and Legal Actions that Influence Fair Access to Housing ............................................. 10 Figure 5: Fair Housing Assistance Organizations, San Mateo County ............................................................. 18 Figure 6: Fair Housing Complaints and Enquiries............................................................................................ 19 Figure 7: Foster City Census Tracts: 2020....................................................................................................... 24 Figure 8: Housing Choice Vouchers by Census Tract....................................................................................... 25 Figure 9: Population by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2000-2019 ............................................................... 29 Figure 10: Poverty Rate by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019 ..................................................................... 30 Figure 11: Racial Dot Map of Foster City and Surrounding Areas (2020)........................................................... 34 Figure 12: Neighborhood Segregation by Census Tract, 2019 ...........................................................................35 Figure 13: Diversity Index by Block Group, 2018............................................................................................... 36 Figure 14: Racial Demographics of Foster City Compared to All Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020) ......................... 38 Figure 15: Comparing the Share of People of Color in Foster City and Vicinity to the Bay Area (2020).............. 39 Figure 16: Income Dot Map of Foster City (2015).............................................................................................. 41 Figure 17: Income Dot Map of Foster City and Surrounding Areas (2015) ......................................................... 44 Figure 18: Income Demographics of Foster City Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015) .................. 45 Figure 19: Median Household Income by Block Group, 2019 ............................................................................ 47 Figure 20: Poverty Status by Census Tract, 2019.............................................................................................. 48 Figure 21: Segregation and Integration............................................................................................................ 49 Figure 22: FHEO Cases by Disability Bias, 2020.................................................................................................51 Figure 23: Percent of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019 ......................................................... 52 Figure 24: Household Type, 2019......................................................................................................................53 Figure 25: Households by Presence of Children, 2019....................................................................................... 54 Figure 26: Age Distribution, Foster City, 2000-2019 ......................................................................................... 55 Figure 27: Household Type by Tenure, Foster City, 2019.................................................................................. 56 Figure 28: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms and Tenure, Foster City, 2019 ............................................ 56 Figure 29: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence by Census Tract, 2015-2019............................................. 59 Figure 30: College-Going Rates, 2014-2015 to 2017-2018................................................................................. 62 Figure 31: College-Going Rates by Race and Ethnicity, 2017-2018.................................................................... 63 Figure 32: College-Going Rates for Students with Disabilities and English Learners, 2017-2018 ....................... 64 Figure 33: Median Annual Earnings by Educational Attainment, 2019.............................................................. 64 Figure 34: Chronic Absenteeism by Race and Ethnicity, 2016-2017 and 2018-2019........................................... 65 Figure 35: Chronic Absenteeism by Race/Ethnicity and District, 2018-2019...................................................... 66 Figure 36: TCAC Opportunity Areas Education Score by Census Tract, 2022.................................................... 67 Figure 37: Jobs by Industry, Foster City, 2002-2018.......................................................................................... 68 Figure 38: Job Holders by Industry, Foster City, 2002-2018 .............................................................................. 69 Figure 39: Jobs to Household Ratio, 2002-2018................................................................................................ 69 Figure 40: Unemployment Rates in Foster City, 2018....................................................................................... 70 Figure 41: TCAC Opportunity Areas Economic Score by Census Tract, 2021 .....................................................71 Figure 42: Jobs Proximity Index by Block Group, 2017 .......................................................................................73 Figure 43: Low- to Moderate-Income Population by Census Tract, 2020.......................................................... 74 Figure 44: Racial Demographics by Block Group, 2018......................................................................................75 Figure 45: Foster City Transit Lines, 2022.......................................................................................................... 77 Figure 46: Foster City Transit Lines, 2022......................................................................................................... 78 Figure 47: Unemployment Percent Point Change, 2010 to 2014....................................................................... 79 Figure 48: Percent Change for Population Living in Poverty by Census Tract, 2000 to 2014.............................. 81 Figure 49: Change in Seniors Aged 65 and Over by Census Tract, 2000 and 2014 ............................................. 82 Figure 50: TCAC Opportunity Areas Environmental Score by Census Tract, 2021............................................. 84 Figure 51: Healthy Places Index by Census Tract, 2021..................................................................................... 85

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1086
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-iii
Figure 52: Population Living in Moderate and High Resource Ares by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019 ................................................................................................................................................ 87 Figure 53: Social Vulnerability Index by Census Tract, 2018.............................................................................. 88 Figure 54: All Races/Ethnicities: Disparities in Rent-Burden among San Mateo County Residents with and without Disabilities ................................................................................................................... 89 Figure 55: Share of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019 ............................................................ 91 Figure 56: Housing Permits Issued by Income Group, Foster City, 2015-2019 ................................................... 93 Figure 57: Distribution of Home Value for Owner Occupied Units, 2019........................................................... 93 Figure 58: Zillow Home Value Index, 2001-2020............................................................................................... 94 Figure 59: Overpayment (Cost Burden), 2019 .................................................................................................. 94 Figure 60: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Income Level, 2017......................................................................... 95 Figure 61: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Tenure, 2019 .................................................................................. 96 Figure 62: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Renter Households by Census Tract, 2019 ..................................... 97 Figure 63: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Owner Households by Census Tract, 2019 ..................................... 98 Figure 64: Overcrowding Severity, 2017........................................................................................................... 99 Figure 65: Occupants per Room by Tenure, Foster City, 2019 .......................................................................... 99 Figure 66: Overcrowding by Renter-Occupied Units and Census Tract, 2020 ................................................. 100 Figure 67: Overcrowding by Owner-Occupied Units, 2020..............................................................................101 Figure 68: Overcrowding by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019 ................................................................. 102 Figure 69: Occupants per Room by AMI, Foster City, 2019 ............................................................................. 102 Figure 70: Overcrowded Households by Census Tract, 2019............................................................................103 Figure 71: Census Tracts Vulnerable to Displacement.................................................................................... 106 Figure 72: Share of Renter Occupied Households by Census Tract, 2019.........................................................107 Figure 73: Mortgage Applications and Acceptance by Race, 2018-2019 ..........................................................110 Figure 74: Foster City Neighborhoods.............................................................................................................112 Figure 75: Sites Inventory Map........................................................................................................................ 115

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1087
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-iv CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
List of Tables
Table 1: Racial Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Foster City .......................................................31 Table 2: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Foster City ................................................ 32 Table 3: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation within Foster City .......................................................33 Table 4: Population by Racial Group, Foster City and the Region .................................................................. 34 Table 5: Population Change by Race/Ethnicity by Census Tract, 2010 to 2020................................................37 Table 6: Income Group Isolation Index Values for Segregation within Foster City ......................................... 41 Table 7: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Foster City.................................... 42 Table 8: Theil’s H Index Values for Income Segregation within Foster City .................................................... 43 Table 9: Population by Income Group, Foster City and the Region ................................................................ 43 Table 10: Regional Income Segregation Measures.......................................................................................... 46 Table 11: Population Change by Household Income by Census Tract, 2010 to 2020........................................ 46 Table 12: Change in Population of Persons with Disabilities by Age by Census Tract, 2012 to 2020................. 50 Table 13: Earnings of Foster City Employed Residents Compared to for Jobs Located in Foster City, San Mateo, and San Mateo County .........................................................................................................72 Table 14: Units with Reported Lack of Complete Plumbing or Complete Kitchen ......................................... 104 Table 15: RHNA Distribution by Census Tract with Socio-Economic Factors .................................................. 113 Table 16: Sites Inventory by Census Tract......................................................................................................114 Table 17: Summary Matrix of Fair Housing Issues and Actions ...................................................................... 120 Table 18: AFFH Meaningful Actions Matrix ....................................................................................................125

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1088
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-1

REPORT CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION
Section I. Introduction and Primary Findings.

Section 2. Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach Capacity reviews lawsuits/enforcement actions/complaints against the jurisdiction; compliance with state fair housing laws and regulations; and jurisdictional capacity to conduct fair housing outreach and education.

Section 3. Integration and Segregation identifies areas of concentrated segregation, degrees of segregation, and the groups that experience the highest levels of segregation, including racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty or affluence.

Section 4. Access to Opportunity examines differences in access to education, transportation, economic development, and healthy environments.

Section 5. Disproportionate Housing Needs identifies which groups have disproportionate housing needs including displacement risk.

Section 6. Site Inventory Analysis analyzes the Sites Inventory to ensure sites for lower-income housing are located equitably with fair access to opportunities and resources.

Section 7. Contributing Factors and Fair Housing Action Plan identifies the primary factors contributing to fair housing challenges and provides the plan for taking meaningful actions to improve access to housing and economic opportunity.

Section 8. References.

Attachment 1: AFFH Appendix-Community Engagement reports the findings from the resident survey conducted of San Mateo County residents by Roots Policy Research to support the AFFH analysis of the Housing Element.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1089
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-2 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

I INTRODUCTION AND PRIMARY FINDINGS

1.1 WHAT IS AFFH?
The State of California’s 2018 Assembly Bill (AB 686) requires that all public agencies in the state affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) beginning January 1, 2019. Public agencies receiving funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are also required to demonstrate their commitment to AFFH. The federal obligation stems from the fair housing component of the federal Civil Rights Act mandating federal fund recipients to take “meaningful actions” to address segregation and related barriers to fair housing choice.

AB 686 requires all public agencies to “administer programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing and take no action inconsistent with this obligation.”1
AB 686 also makes changes to Housing Element Law to incorporate requirements to AFFH as part of the housing element and general plan to include an analysis of fair housing outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and current fair housing practices.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development. (Gov. Code, § 8899.50, subd. (a)(1).)” Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 14. 1 California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 9.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1090
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-3

1.2 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
History of Segregation in the Region
The United States’ oldest cities have a history of mandating segregated living patterns—and Northern California cities are no exception. ABAG, in its recent Fair Housing Equity
Assessment, attributes segregation in the Bay Area to
historically discriminatory practices—highlighting redlining and discriminatory mortgage approvals—as well as
“structural inequities” in society, and “self-segregation” (i.e., preferences to live near similar people).

As noted in Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area by Stephen Menendaian and Samir Gambhir (2018),
segregation is one of our nation’s most enduring and
intractable problems. More than 60 years since the Supreme Court’s landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision
denounced racial segregation in primary and secondary public schools, and 50 years since the enactment of the federal Fair Housing Act, our neighborhoods and schools have yet to
reflect the rich diversity of our nation as a whole. In far too many cases, racial segregation is as severe or worse today than a generation ago. Racially segregated neighborhoods and schools are visible in every part of the United States.

As illustrated in Figure 1 below, in the Bay Area:
 Whites are just under 40 percent of the population of the Bay Area, 184 census tracts (of 1582) are more than 75 percent white, 359 tracts are more than 66 percent white, and 663 tracts are more than 50 percent white.
 Asians are just 26 percent of the population of the Bay Area, they are a majority of the population is 181 census tracts, more than 66 percent in 50 census tracts, and compose 75 percent or more in 18 census tracts.
 Latinos are 24 percent of the population in the Bay Area, but are 50 percent or more of the population 143 census tracts, more than 66 percent of the population in 50 census tracts, and more than 75 percent of the population in 20 census tracts.
 African Americans are just 6 percent of the population of the Bay Area, but are more than 25 percent of the population in 93 census tracts, more than 40 percent of the population in 40 census tracts, and more than 50 percent of the population in 18 census tracts. African Americans are the most racially concentrated group in the Bay Area, with 75 percent of the Bay Area’s Black residents residing in just 26 percent of the region’s census tracts.

These patterns of racial segregation are not “natural,” or simply the result of individual housing preferences, but the by-product of exclusionary policies as well as private housing discrimination.

This history of segregation in
the region is important not
only to understand how
residential settlement patterns
came about—but, more
importantly, to explain
differences in housing
opportunity among residents
today. In sum, not all residents
had the ability to build housing
wealth or achieve economic
opportunity. This historically
unequal playing field in part
determines why residents have
different housing needs today.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1091
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-4 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 1: Bay Area Demographics
Source: Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area, Part 1 by Stephen Menendian and Samir Gambhir, October 30, 2018

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1092
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-5
San Mateo County is one of the most affluent places in America and home to a number of corporate campuses for Fortune 500 and 100 companies. It is also a highly segregated county. Few census tracts reflect the demographics of the county for any racial group. Just 24 percent of its tracts have a similar proportion of white people to the county's population. For Latinos, Asian, and Black people, those percentages are 24 percent, 28 percent, and 2 percent, respectively (Figure 2).

Researcher Richard Rothstein’s 2017 book The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America chronicles how the public sector contributed to the segregation that exists today.

Rothstein highlights several significant developments in the Bay Area region that played a large role in where the region’s non-White residents settled.

Pre-civil rights San Mateo County faced resistance to racial integration, yet it was reportedly less direct than in some Northern California communities, taking the form of “blockbusting” and “steering” or intervention by public officials. These local discriminatory practices were exacerbated by actions of the Federal Housing Administration which excluded low-income neighborhoods, where the majority of people of color lived, from its mortgage loan program.

According to the San Mateo County Historical Association. San Mateo County’s early African Americans worked in a variety of industries, from logging, to agriculture, to restaurants and entertainment.

Expansion of jobs, particularly related to shipbuilding during and after World War II attracted many new residents into the Peninsula, including the first sizable migration of African Americans. Enforcement of racial covenants after the war forced the migration of the county’s African Americans into neighborhoods where they were allowed to occupy housing—housing segregated into less desirable areas, next to highways, and concentrated in public housing and urban renewal developments.

The private sector contributed to segregation through activities that discouraged (blockbusting) or prohibited (restrictive covenants) integrated neighborhoods. In the City of San Mateo, for example, builders of the Hillsdale neighborhood in the mid-1900s recorded deeds that specified that only “members of the Caucasian or White race shall be permitted” to occupy sold homes—the exception being “domestics in the employ[ment] on the premises.”2 This developer went on to develop many racerestricted neighborhoods in the Bay Area, became president of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), became national president of the Urban Land Institute (ULI), and was inducted into California’s Homebuilding Foundation Hall of Fame.

Developer Joseph Eichler took a different path, building and selling homes for residents of all races and religions. He resigned from the NAHB in 1958 because they refused to support a nondiscrimination policy.3 Eichler built many homes in what was comparably affordable Foster City; these homes are interspersed in several neighborhoods in the city.
2 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/14/opinion/sunday/blm-residential-segregation.html. 3 Lempert, Sue, “The reckoning: San Mateo then and now”, San Mateo Daily Journal, August 24, 2020.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1093
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-6 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 2: San Mateo County Demographics
Source: Racial Segregation in the San Francisco Bay Area, Part 1 by Stephen Menendian and Samir Gambhir, October 30, 2018

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1094
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-7
The segregatory effect of blockbusting activities is well-documented in East Palo Alto. In 1954, after a White family in East Palo Alto sold their home to an African American family, the then-president of the California Real Estate Association set up an office in East Palo Alto to scare White families into selling their homes (“for fear of declining property values”) to agents and speculators. These agents then sold these homes at over-inflated prices to African American buyers, some of whom had trouble making their payments. Within six years, East Palo Alto—initially established with “whites only” neighborhoods— became 82% African American. The FHA prevented re-integration by refusing to insure mortgages held by White buyers residing in East Palo Alto.

Throughout the county, neighborhood associations and city leaders attempted to thwart integration of communities. Although some neighborhood residents supported integration, most did not, and it was not unusual for neighborhood associations to require acceptance of all new buyers. Builders with intentions to develop for all types of buyers (regardless of race) found that their development sites were rezoned by planning councils, required very large minimum lot sizes, and\or were denied public infrastructure to support their developments or charged prohibitively high amounts for infrastructure.

In addition to historical discriminatory practices that embedded segregation into living patterns throughout the Bay Area, it’s also necessary to recognize the historical impacts of colonization and genocide on Indigenous populations and how the effects of those atrocities are still being felt today. The original inhabitants of present-day San Mateo County are the Ramaytush Ohlone, who have “…lived on the San Francisco Peninsula for thousands of years and continue to live here as respectful stewards of the land.”4 However, “[d]ue to the devastating policies and practices of a succession of explorers, missionaries, settlers, and various levels of government over the centuries since European expansion, the Ramaytush Ohlone lost the vast majority of their population as well as their land.”5 The lasting influence of these policies and practices have contributed directly to the disparate housing and economic outcomes collectively experienced by Native populations today.6 The timeline of major federal Acts and court decisions related to fair housing choice and zoning and land use (Figure 4) appears on page B-10.

The Federal Fair Housing Act was not enacted until nearly 60 years after the first racial zoning ordinances appeared in U.S. cities. This coincided with a shift away from federal control over low-income housing toward locally-tailored approaches (block grants) and market-oriented choice (Section 8 subsidies)—the latter of which is only effective when adequate affordable rental units are available.

As shown in the timeline, exclusive zoning practices were common in the early 1900s. Courts struck down only the most discriminatory and allowed those that would be considered today to have a “disparate impact” on classes protected by the Fair Housing Act. For example, the 1926 case Village of Euclid v.

Amber Realty Co. (272 U.S. 365) supported the segregation of residential, business, and industrial uses, justifying separation by characterizing apartment buildings as “mere parasite(s)” with the potential to “utterly destroy” the character and desirability of neighborhoods. At that time, multi-family apartments were the only housing options for people of color, including immigrants. 4 https://www.smcoe.org/for-communities/indigenous-people-of-san-mateo-county.html. 5 https://www.smcoe.org/for-communities/indigenous-people-of-san-mateo-county.html. 6 https://www.americanprogress.org/article/systemic-inequality-displacement-exclusion-segregation/.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1095
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-8 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

1.3 FOSTER CITY LAND USE AND ZONINGHISTORY
Planning for Foster City began in the 1950s at a time when exclusionary deed restrictions were common.

From the outset, T. Jack Foster was determined to not follow this pattern. As noted in “The Development of Foster City” by T. Jack Foster, Jr., one of the requirements of the builder from the beginning was that “There was to be no racial discrimination."7 He was also intentional in hiring Eichler to build in Foster City, as noted in his book:
“Among the many honors that were bestowed on Eichler Homes, including many design awards, were awards for their well-known policy of totally open housing, meaning that there was no racial discrimination in the neighborhoods which they developed. With one stroke, by bringing Eichler into Foster City, we effectively announced to the world that no one would be denied the opportunity to own a home in Foster City because of race.”8
Foster also includes in his book comments from Ike Tribble, a noted leader in the Black community, that in spite of the Rumford Act there was still widespread discrimination in the communities of the Bay Area, except for one, and that was Foster City.9 There was a Foster City Association of Black Residents formed in 1967 that “served to welcome new Black families into the community and provided a social and civic connection.”10
Foster City has continued to celebrate the various cultures represented in the community. Regular cultural events include the Polynesian Festival, Chinese New Year, Diwali Festival of Lights, Holi Festival of Colors, and others.

From its beginnings, Foster City has provided a variety of housing types. Higher density multi-family development in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts is included in all of the City’s residential and mixed-use neighborhoods. Although homes sales started with single-family homes in 1963, by 1974, the provision of a mix of apartments, townhouses, condominiums, and single-family homes provided housing choices for a wide variety of household sizes and income levels, as indicated in Figure 3 below.

Over time, as increases in rents and sales prices for housing have outpaced wage growth, middle and lower income households have been squeezed out of the housing market. In the Terner Center’s publication, “The Landscape of Middle-Income Housing Affordability in California,” they note “For many occupations that have traditionally been considered middle class, wages have not kept up with rising house prices. This mismatch between housing costs and incomes—especially in the state’s coastal areas—are straining household budgets and putting homeownership increasingly out of reach for middle-income families.” This problem is not unique to Foster City but is a common problem throughout San Mateo County and the Bay Area, resulting in a lack of access to housing choices and affordability. 7 T. Jack Foster, Jr., The Development of Foster City (2012), 64. 8 Ibid, 66. 9 Ibid, 73.
10 Foster City Historical Society, Images of America Foster City (2005), 104.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1096
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-9
Figure 3: Foster City Housing Mix: 1974-2022
Source: Foster City Community Development Department

1.4 PRIMARY FINDINGS
This section summarizes the primary findings from the Fair Housing Assessment for Foster City including the following sections: fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and contributing factors and the city’s fair housing action plan.
 Foster City replicates the County and region overall in terms of household size and household composition but diverges in household income and racial diversity: Foster City has a much higher proportion of households with incomes greater than 100% AMI than the County or region, a much lower proportion of < 50% AMI households, and a much higher share of Asian households. Between 2010 and 2020, the number of lower-income households (<$50,000) in Foster City declined by 22%, either because they left the city or moved to a higher-income bracket. This was offset by an increase in higher-income households ($100,000 or more) (an increase of 36%). Middle-income households ($50,000 up to $100,000) also declined in the city and county, though Foster City’s population declined the greatest at 44% compared to the decline in the County at 27%.  In regards to racial diversity in comparison to the county, Foster City has a much higher share of Asian households (48% in Foster City compared to 30% in San Mateo County). Foster City’s residents have grown more racially diverse since 2000 largely due to the growth of Asian residents, primarily Asian Indian and Chinese. There has also been notable growth in the city’s population of residents identifying as Black/African American (from 282 people in 2010 to 717 people in 2020) and Hispanic/Latino (an increase of 717 people between 2010 and 2020), although these populations have remained small overall (1.4% Black/African American and 7.2% Latinx in 2020) in comparison to White (31.8% in 2020) and Asian (58.8% in 2020) residents. Overall, the city has low to moderate diversity and is less diverse than the City of San Mateo and Redwood City, but somewhat more diverse than other nearby higher income communities.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1974 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2022
Foster City Housing Mix: 1974-2022
Single Family Second Units Apartment Townhouse Condominium Duplex

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1097
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-10 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 4: Major Public and Legal Actions that Influence Fair Access to Housing Source: Roots Policy Research

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1098
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-11
 Where segregation exists in the city, it is for Asian residents. From 2000 to 2020, Asian residents have become increasingly more isolated, while White residents have become less segregated from other racial groups. In comparison to the average Bay Area city, in Foster City, Asian residents are more segregated and White residents are less segregated. There are no concentrations of above moderate income residents in Foster City, and there is less neighborhood level income segregation in Foster City than in the average Bay Area city.
 The share of the population living with at least one disability is 7% in Foster City compared to 8% in San Mateo County and 10% in the Bay Area. Foster City has no Census tracts where the population of persons with disabilities exceeds 10%. Foster City’s population of residents with a disability significantly declined between 2012 and 2020 with 84% of residents under 65 and 94% over 65 leaving the city. This is substantially higher than the county overall where younger populations have minimally decreased (-4%) and older populations increased (28%).  Foster City’s households are mostly made up of 3- to 4-person households (38%) and 2-person households (36%). Compared to the County and Bay area overall, Foster City has slightly fewer 1- person households (20% compared to 22% in the county) and 5-person households (6% v. 11%).  Poverty rates vary modestly across races and ethnicities—except for residents identifying as “other” races or mixed-race. More than one-fourth (26.4%) of residents identifying as “other race or multiple races” live below the poverty line, many of whom are children. Hispanic/Latinx residents also have lower income distribution and higher poverty rates (8.3%). In Foster City, 3.5% of the 2020 population lives below the poverty line, compared to 6.7% in San Mateo County.  Foster City scores well on positive environmental outcomes, with no census tracts in the City scoring poorly. The City also scores high on California Healthy Places Index (HPI)—based on 25 community characteristics in eight categories including economic, social, education, transportation, neighborhood, housing, clean environment, and health care. o The city’s location, on the coast and away from uses that emit pollution, is a major factor that contributes to such positive environmental outcomes. With less congestion and traffic, coastal cities often experienced reduced air pollution, improving livability indexes and both environmental and health outcomes.
o Both Foster City and San Mateo County have also prioritized planning and policy identification for anticipated climate impacts in the Bay Area.
o In order to maintain FEMA accreditation and keep Foster City properties out of the flood zone, Foster City voters approved Measure P in 2018, authorizing the City to issue a $90 million general obligation (GO) bond to improve and strengthen the Foster City levee system. The Levee Improvements Project began construction in 2020 and will continue through 2023.  All of Foster City is considered a high resource area; there are no concentrations of poverty or significant racially segregated housing areas.
 Foster City offers a variety of housing types with most medium or large multi-family (37.5%) and single family detached units (35.4%). Single family attached makes up 20% while 7% are small multifamily units.  Renters are more likely to be living in 1- and 2-bedroom units than owners. Owners are more likely to be occupying 3- to 5-bedroom units. To the extent that larger renter households desire to live in

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1099
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-12 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Foster City, the lack of rental housing stock to accommodate their needs could limit their access to housing in the city.
 There are disparities in housing cost burden in Foster City by race and ethnicity and by tenure (renters/owners). Black or African American (58%) and Hispanic households (42%) experience the highest rates of cost burden in the city. Asian (29%) and non-Hispanic White households (30%) are least likely to be cost burdened. Renters in Foster City are often more likely to be cost-burdened than owners—however, there are more concentrations of cost-burdened owners than renters in the city.

Despite Foster City’s comparably high housing costs, cost burden is on par with the County and Bay Area
 The vast majority of households (95%) in Foster City are not overcrowded—indicated by more than one occupant per room. This slightly better than the percentage of households that are not overcrowded in San Mateo County (92%) and the Bay Area at large (93%). However, renter households are more likely to be overcrowded, with 5.9% of households with more than one occupant per room, compared to 1.4% of owner households. Low rates of overcrowding are associated with low displacement risk in Foster City.
 Barriers to housing choice are largely related to the City’s very high costs of housing and lack of affordable production. Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to accommodate growth has largely been priced for above moderate-income households. Pursuant to the City’s inclusionary requirements, approximately 20% of the new housing units since 2015 are restricted for very low-, low- and moderate-income households, leaving approximately 80% at market rate, which is affordable to moderate or above moderate-income households. Just 9% of the City’s rental units rent for $2,000 and less. The County has four times the proportion of rentals priced under $2,000 than the City.
 Three of the City’s nine census tracts are vulnerable to displacement and most of these are also tracts where the proportion of renters are the highest. Housing vulnerability/instability and risks of displacement in Foster City could be driving lower-income households (<$50,000) to leave the area at higher rates.
 Mortgage denial rates are relatively modest—ranging from 12% to 20%--and similar across races and ethnicities.
 Nearly 17,000 jobs in Foster City can be accessed via public transportation and 89% of the city’s stations and vehicles are considered ADA-accessible—similar to the county overall (89%).

Importantly, however, substantially more jobs can be accessed by personal vehicles—in 2022, an estimated 107,000 jobs are accessible via car. This can present job access challenges for Foster City’s residents as commute times are long (33 minutes on average)—especially compared to the county (27 minutes) and surrounding jurisdictions (e.g., Redwood City has an average commute time of 26 minutes). Yearly household transportation costs could also restrict access to jobs and increase unemployment—in 2021, average transportation costs for Foster City’s residents was $14,595 per year. Combined with high housing costs, lower-income households are more likely to experience disparities in job access.
 Racial and ethnic minority students served by the San Mateo Union High School District, of which Foster City is part, experience lower educational outcomes compared to other students. Many high schoolers in the County met admission standards for a University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) school. However, Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Black students in the San

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1100
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-13
Mateo Union High School district were less likely to meet the admission standards. Although San Mateo Union High School District has relatively low dropout rates—4% of students—compared to other districts in the County, dropout rates among Hispanic (7%), Black (6%), and Pacific Islander students are higher (see the access to education supplement).  Resident-reported housing challenges and discrimination, especially regarding use of Housing Choice vouchers. Nearly 150 residents of Foster City completed a survey about their housing challenges conducted by Root Policy Research for jurisdictions in San Mateo County (see section on AFFH Community Engagement Input). The vast majority of respondents did not report housing concerns, and most were owners. Respondents proportionally represented Black or African American and Hispanic residents in the City; however, more respondents were White and fewer were Asian than in the City overall.

The top needs identified by those with challenges include:
o 80% of vouchers holders said finding a unit that takes vouchers is “somewhat” or “very” difficult. These respondents cited a variety of factors for those difficulties including vouchers not covering rents (38%), not enough time to find units that accept vouchers (38%), landlords not renting to voucher holders (23%), and difficulty finding information about units that accept vouchers (23%);
o 20% of respondents said that public transit does not go to needed locations or operate during times needed, and 14% said they cannot get to transit easily or safely; o 20% said their house or apartment is not large enough for their family; o 15% of respondents said they would like to move from their current housing but cannot afford to; and
o 11% said the HOA in their neighborhood would not let them make desired changes to their house or property.

Some residents reported experiencing housing discrimination:
o Respondents with disabilities said they had been told their rent would cost more because of their service or emotional support animal and/or told they could not have a service or emotional support animal.
o 20% of residents who thought they had been discriminated against in sales transactions said a real estate agent required prequalification before they would show properties; 17% were refused a mortgage loan; 10% said a real estate agent would not make a disability accommodation. o The top reasons for being denied housing were:
− Landlord not accepting the applicants’ source of income such as social security or disability benefits (28% of those denied);
− Lack of a stable housing record (28%);
− Lack of a regular or consistent job or job history (28%); − Income too low (17%);
− Health care or service needs (17%);

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1101
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-14 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
− Foreclosure, children in the household, real or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity, COVID, and/or language spoken (each 11%).
 Though fair housing complaints and inquiries are rather low in Foster City, four of seven inquiries in the past eight years (2013-2021) were cited as “disability” bias—higher than all other jurisdictions excluding Redwood City (five) and the City of San Mateo (four).  The City is aware of two legal cases in Foster City involving fair housing issues. The first case related to the Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Foster City Community Development Agency (Agency) in November 1981 and the Housing Element adopted by the City in May 1981. The Settlement Agreement imposes minimums on the Agency for spending on low- and moderateincome housing and for the quantity of affordable housing by income level. The second case was in 2004 between BRE Properties (former owner of Foster’s Landing), a Foster’s Landing tenant, and Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) resulting in the agreement by BRE Properties to provide training on the duties, responsibilities, obligations, and rights of an owner and/or managing agent.
 The proposed housing sites in the Sites Inventory are well distributed throughout the City. The additional housing site locations in the Sites Inventory will expand deed restricted affordable housing to the southern edge of the City with inclusion of the Lantern Cove and Schooner Bay sites, and farther west to the Harbor Cove site. There are not existing patterns of socio-economic concentrations that could be exacerbated by the inclusion or exclusion of housing sites. Sites are discussed in depth in Chapter 5, Housing Resources and Sites. The AFFH analysis of the Sites Inventory is discussed in detail in Appendix B, Section 6. There are a few tracts with some larger deviations from citywide averages that may be suitable for geographic targeting of programs. Observations on the factors that have more variation from citywide averages include:
o Disability. Census tracts 6083 (Neighborhood 3) and 6080.25 (central Foster City) have the highest percentage of persons with a disability at 9.2% and 9.6%, respectively, compared to the citywide average of 7.1%. Tract 6080.25 includes the City’s two affordable senior apartments and Atria assisted living facility. Geographic targeting of Program H-F-1-j Public Investment in Accessibility could be utilized in these two tracts.
o Renter Cost Burden. Census tract 6080.13 and 6080.23 (Neighborhoods 7 and 8) include the highest renter cost burden at 49.5% compared to the citywide average of 32.6%. The Lantern Cove and Schooner Bay sites in this area will increase the significantly housing options and affordable housing in this neighborhood.
o Owner Cost Burden. Census tracts 6083 (Neighborhood 3) and 6082 (Neighborhood 2) include higher owner cost burden at 41.1% and 38.9%, respectively, compared to the citywide average of 32.9%. Geographic targeting of Program H-B-2-a Lower-Income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans and H-B-2-b: Facilitate Non-Profit Rehabilitation/Maintenance Assistance could help address this.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1102
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-15

1.5 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AND FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN
The disparities in housing choice and access to opportunity discussed above stem from historical actions, socioeconomic factors that limit employment and income growth, broad barriers to open housing choice, and, until recently, very limited resources to respond to needs.

Foster City has historically accommodated a diversity of housing needs by offering a variety of housing types—more so than many jurisdictions in the County. Yet home values and rents are much higher in Foster City than in the County and the Bay Area overall. Foster City’s fair housing actions that are part of the overall Housing Element are intended to address barriers to housing choice by adding affordable housing options and preserving existing housing opportunities.

Fair Housing Issue: Foster City’s high housing costs limit housing choice and have a disproportionate impact on Black or African American and Hispanic households.

Contributing Factors
 Black or African American and Hispanic residents typically work lower wage jobs, stemming from historical employment discrimination and lack of access to quality educational environments. These jobs often do not support the city’s housing costs. As a result, Black or African American and Hispanic residents face very high levels of cost burden (Highest priority).  The lack of housing in Foster City to accommodate larger renter households can disproportionately impact households of color, which tend to be larger (Highest priority).

Fair Housing Issue: Foster City’s low production of affordable housing limits housing choices of Black or African American and Hispanic households who have lower incomes.

Contributing Factors
 Foster City has had limited production of affordable housing. Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to accommodate growth has largely been priced for above moderate-income households. Pursuant to the City’s inclusionary requirements, approximately 20% of the new housing units since 2015 are restricted for very low-, low- and moderate-income households, leaving approximately 80% at market rate, which is affordable to moderate or above moderate-income households. Just 9% of the City’s rental units rent for $2,000 and less. San Mateo County has four times the proportion of rentals priced under $2,000 than the City (High priority).

Fair Housing Issue: Foster City’s multi-family housing is aging and vulnerable to redevelopment and displacement of low- and moderate-income households.

Contributing Factors
 The high watertable in Foster City creates maintenance needs, particularly for multi-family buildings (Medium Priority).
 Aging, low-density apartment developments may have economic incentives to redevelop (High priority).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1103
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-16 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Fair Housing Issue: Residents report experiencing fair housing discrimination in Foster City mostly based on disability and/or being a voucher holder/source of income. Few of those experiencing discrimination file complaints or take action.

Contributing Factors
 Property owners’ lack of knowledge about fair housing laws (High priority).  Property owners violating fair housing laws (High priority).  Tenants fear of retaliation, few options to relocate (High priority).

Fair Housing Issue: Black or African American, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander students are less likely than other students to meet college admission standards and have higher high school dropout rates.

Contributing Factors
 The underlying factors for these differences are unknown and need to be examined as part of AFFH actions (Low priority).

The Fair Housing Action Plan is contained in Table 16, Summary Matrix of Fair Housing Issues and Actions, at the end of this Appendix.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1104
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-17
2 FAIR HOUSING ENFORCEMENT AND OUTREACH CAPACITY
This section discusses fair housing complaints and inquiries, legal actions, fair housing protections and enforcement, and outreach capacity. It begins with a discussion of fair housing complaints and inquiries in San Mateo County to present an overview of the region’s fair housing landscape. It then provides an in-depth analysis of legal actions in Foster City such as lawsuits and settlements and the City’s compliance with state and federal fair housing laws. Organized in this way, this section offers insight on comparative trends and factors impacting fair housing in both Foster City and the region.

2.1 FAIR HOUSING COMPLAINTS AND INQUIRIES
California fair housing law extends beyond the protections in the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA). In addition to the FHA protected classes—race, color, ancestry/national origin, religion, disability, sex, and familial status—California law offers protections for age, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, genetic information, marital status, military or veteran status, and source of income (including federal housing assistance vouchers).

The California Department of Fair Employment in Housing (DFEH) was established in 1980 and is now the largest civil rights agency in the United States. According to their website, the DFEH’s mission is, “to protect the people of California from unlawful discrimination in employment, housing, and public accommodations (businesses) and from hate violence and human trafficking in accordance with the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Unruh Civil Rights Act, Disabled Persons Act, and Ralph Civil Rights Act”.11
DFEH receives, evaluates, and investigates fair housing complaints. DFEH plays a particularly significant role in investigating fair housing complaints against protected classes that are not included in federal legislation and therefore not investigated by HUD. DFEH’s website provides detailed instructions for filing a complaint, the complaint process, appealing a decision, and other frequently asked questions.12 Fair housing complaints can also be submitted to HUD for investigation.

Additionally, San Mateo County has a number of local enforcement organizations including Project Sentinel, the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, and Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto.

These organizations receive funding from the County and participating jurisdictions to support fair housing enforcement and outreach and education in the County.

From 2017 to 2021, 57 fair housing complaints in San Mateo County were filed with the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); none were from Foster City. In preparing this AFFH, the San Mateo County jurisdictions participating in 21 Elements, including Foster City, participated in a discussion with the local fair housing organizations Legal Aid of San Mateo County and Project Sentinel to learn about fair housing trends and concerns, as well as to discuss best practices in AFFH(Figure 5). Following this discussion, the consultant team contacted local fair housing organizations to obtain local data on fair housing complaints and lawsuits beyond what was available in HCD and HUD 11 https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/aboutdfeh/. 12 https://www.dfeh.ca.gov/complaintprocess/.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1105
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-18 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
datasets. Consultants also obtained and analyzed data from HUD. These datasets were compared for duplicate cases and analyzed and appear in the graphics and tables in this section.

Most of the County complaints cited disability status as the bias (56%) followed by race (19%), and familial status (14%). No cause determination was found in 27 complaints followed by successful conciliation or settlement with 22 complaints. During roughly the same time period, 2015-2020, Project Sentinel investigated nearly 300 fair housing discrimination cases in San Mateo County, 55% of which were related to disability, followed by familial status (20%), national origin (13%), race (5%), gender (2%), source of income (2%), and other (3%). This would indicate that the HUD figures underestimate the number of Fair Housing complaints made in San Mateo County.

Fair housing inquiries in 2020 were primarily submitted to HCD from the City of San Mateo, Redwood City, Daly City, and Menlo Park. Seven inquiries were from Foster City residents.

Figure 5: Fair Housing Assistance Organizations, San Mateo County Source: Organization websites
In the resident survey conducted for this study, 17.5% of Foster City respondents—a total of 20— reported being discriminated against when they looked for housing in San Mateo County. Fortyseven percent had that experience more than 5 years ago; 37%, between 2 and 5 years ago; and 16% in the past year. In response to the discrimination, 50% did nothing (10% said that was because of fear of being evicted or harassed); 2% moved; 25% contacted a local government office or agency. Twenty percent contacted the state enforcement agency, 10% contacted a fair housing organization, and 10% contacted a housing authority.

Fair housing complaints filed with HUD by San Mateo County residents have been on a declining trend since 2018, when 18 complaints were filed. In 2019, complaints dropped to 5, increased to 11 in 2020, and had reached 6 by mid-2021.

Name
Project
Sentinel  Northern California
1490 El Camino
Real, Santa Clara,
CA 95050
(800) 339-6043 https://www.housing.org/
Legal Aid
Society of San
Mateo County
San Mateo County
330 Twin Dolphin
Drive, Suite 123,
Redwood City, CA
94065
(650) 558-0915 https://www.legalaidsmc.org/h
ousing-resources
Community
Legal Services
of East Palo
Alto
East Palo Alto,
Menlo Park,
Burlingame,
Mountain View,
Redwood City, and
San Francisco
1861 Bay Road,
East Palo Alto, CA
94303
(650)-326-6440 https://clsepa.org/services/#ho
using
Service Area Address Phone Website

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1106
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-19
Figure 6: Fair Housing Complaints and Enquiries
Source: HUD and California Department of Housing and Community Development Nationally, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) reported a “negligible” decrease in the number of complaints filed between 2019 and 2020. The primary bases for complaints nationally were nearly identical to San Mateo County’s: disability (55%) and race (17%). Familial status represented 8% of complaints nationally, whereas this basis comprised 14% of cases in the county.

NFHA identifies three significant trends in 2020 that are relevant for San Mateo County:
 First, fair lending cases referred to the Department of Justice from federal banking regulators has been declining, indicating that state and local government entities may want to play a larger role in examining fair lending barriers to homeownership.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1107
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-20 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
 Second, NFHA identified a significant increase in the number of complaints of harassment—1,071 complaints in 2020 compared to 761 in 2019.
 Finally, NFHA found that 73% of all fair housing complaints in 2020 were processed by private fair housing organizations, rather than state, local, and federal government agencies—reinforcing the need for local, active fair housing organizations and increased funding for such organizations.13 Though fair housing complaints and inquiries are rather low in Foster City, four of seven inquiries in the past eight years (2013-2021) were cited as “disability” bias—compared to Redwood City (five) and the City of San Mateo (four). The disparities in access to opportunity for people living with a disability is further analyzed in Section 4.6.

2.2 FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING LEGAL CASES
The City is aware of two legal cases in Foster City involving fair housing issues. The first agreement related to the Redevelopment Plan adopted by the Foster City Community Development Agency (Agency) in November 1981 and the Housing Element adopted by the City in May 1981. The agreement included the Housing Coalition of San Mateo, the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, the Community Development Agency of the City of Foster City, and the City of Foster City. The Plaintiffs had filed an action against the Redevelopment Plan. The agreement stipulates that the Agency would spend not less than twenty percent (20%) of taxes received for the purposes of increasing the community’s supply of low- and moderate-income housing. The agreement also stipulated the percentages of affordable housing by income level to be developed within the Project Area, including fifteen percent (15%) if developed by entities other than the Agency, and of the fifteen percent (15%), not less than forty percent (40%) for very low-income households in accordance with the proportion of unmet affordable housing needs identified in the Housing Element for each household type (elderly, families and large families) within this income group.

The second agreement was in 2004 between BRE Properties (former owner of Foster’s Landing), a Foster’s Landing tenant, and DFEH. The Settlement Agreement between the parties does not represent any admission of liability or any admission that the allegations have any validity. BRE Properties agreed to provide training regarding the duties, responsibilities, obligations and rights of an owner and/or managing agent under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. BRE Properties also paid a settlement to the Complainant.

2.3 OUTREACH AND PROGRAM CAPACITY
Foster City maintains a website with information about local fair housing ordinances with live links to Project Sentinel, the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County, and the Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center.14 The site also lists resources for persons with disabilities seeking services.

As part of its efforts to address Fair Housing Issues, Foster City has improved the site by fixing broken links to the Department of Consumer Affairs and the County’s Assessment of Fair Housing. The website will also be reviewed and modified to be more transparent in describing relevant information on filing 13 https://nationalfairhousing.org/2021/07/29/annual-fair-housing-report-shows-increase-in-housing-harassment/. 14 https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/fair-housing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1108
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-21
complaint for residents who have faced housing discrimination (e.g., link to HUD’s and State of California fair housing pages). Foster City will look to local fair housing service providers’ best practices in making those changes.

Programs and practices established by Foster City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element have proved successful in recent years. For the 2015-2023 planning period, the city was required to plan for a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 430 units in four income categories. The city satisfied between 31.5% to

61.5% of below market rate (BMR) RHNA and issued permits for 885 dwelling units—166 of which were BMR units. In the same period, the city facilitated mixed-use developments—Pilgrim Triton and Foster Square—which designated 20% of units as affordable housing and 22-units for workforce housing. City Council adopted preference categories for these developments to house first responders and disaster service workers to retain and improve its emergency response capacity.

Foster City’s 2015-2023 Housing Element noted an increase in the number of government-assisted rental units at risk of conversion—four of six developments that house seniors, families, and low-income households are “at risk” of transitioning from affordable to market rate. Since its adoption in February 2015, however, the City has implemented numerous programs to minimize the impacts of expiring affordable covenants. In the case of Foster Landing, for instance, the city worked with Essex Properties to assist BMR tenants at risk of displacement from expiring affordable covenants. In 2021, Foster City approved an Early Relocation Assistance program to provide financial assistance to offset relocation costs and obtained a Permanent Local Housing Assistance (PLHA) grant from San Mateo County to provide rental subsidies. The Housing Industry Foundation (HIF) was also established and hired to administer these programs to at risk tenants. The city’s Housing Element for the 2023-2031 planning period is adding numerous housing goals and strategies to exceed city achievements in the previous period. Examples include:
 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)—encourage the use and production of ADUs through an ADU Financial Incentive Program, preapproved ADU design and expedited review, and improved public information on ADUs;
 Lower-income Homeowner Rehabilitation Loans—provide or partner with a regional program to provide rehabilitation loans including weatherization, solar, and disaster assistance;  Anti-displacement strategies—expand benefits beyond state law requirements for lease terms, required notifications, and expansion of relocation and anti-displacement provisions;  Zoning amendments to facilitate housing on housing opportunity sites; and  Allow residential uses on public and private institution-owned sites including schools, religious, and non-profit sites.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1109
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-22 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

2.4 COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND FEDERAL LAW
Foster City is compliant with the following state laws that promote fair and affordable housing. The City has not been alleged or found in violation of the following:
 Housing Accountability Act (Gov. Code. Section 65589.5) requiring adoption of a Housing Element and compliance with RHNA allocations;
 No Net Loss Law (Gov. Code Section 65863) requiring that adequate sites be maintained to accommodate unmet RHNA allocations;
 Least Cost Zoning Law (Gov. Code. Section 65913.1);
 Excessive Subdivision Standards Law (Gov. Code. Section 65913.2);  Limits on Growth Controls Law (Gov. Code. Section 65589.5);  Supportive Housing Streamlined Approval (AB 2162), requiring supportive housing by-right in certain zoning districts;
 California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency Act (Senate Bill 9), requiring city development standards to allow for two units on existing lots and accelerated processes for multi-family zoning and residential density.

In March, City Council released a report outlining adjustments to the city’s inclusionary housing policy and Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) program based on changes to the state’s density bonus law. 15 According to the document, the city altered their inclusionary housing policy through an ordinance that establishes objective requirements—rather than negotiations—for specific parameters for developments (e.g., income levels and length of restrictions). The city’s AHO and its related policies—AHO Combining District, application of AHO to specific sites, design guidelines—was also adjusted based on state law changes for density bonuses. Foster City simplified their proposed AHO program by requiring more BMR units at extremely low-, very low- and low-income levels, reducing the inclusionary percentage from 20% to 15%, and required developers to provide more BMR units at lower income levels in exchange for reduced total inclusionary requirements. Seven sites were designated for application of the AHO Combining District, allowing the City to obtain more units for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households.

Foster City is compliant with the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and commits itself to protecting against discrimination in housing on the basis of all protected characteristics—race, sex, ethnicity, familial status, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability, and religion. 15 https://www.fostercity.org/commdev/page/below-market-rate-housing-inclusionary-requirements-and-affordable-housingoverlay-zone.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1110
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-23

2.5 LOCAL HOUSING POLICIES
Foster City identified the following local policies that contribute to the regulatory environment for affordable housing development in the city.

Local policies in place to encourage housing
development.
 Density bonus ordinance—conforms to State
Density Bonus Law
 Condominium conversion regulations
 Linkage fee on commercial development
 Inclusionary zoning
 Streamlined processing of ADUs
 Housing Overlay
Local barriers to affordable housing
development.
 Lack of land zoned for multi-family housing
Local policies in place to mitigate or prevent
displacement of low-income households.
 Condominium conversion regulations
 Housing Element Policy H-E-2-a to phase
redevelopment to minimize displacement
 Chapter 5.72 prohibiting discrimination against
use of Section 8 or any other rent subsidy
Local policies that are NOT in place but have
potential Council interest for further exploration.
 Living wage employment ordinance
Foster City adopted numerous measures in 2022 to further affordable housing development. In March, the city adopted Ordinance 606 to update an affordable housing commercial linkage fee created in 2016 under chapter 17.88. The ordinance established a mechanism for commercial development to pay fees to offset the development impacts of affordable housing development—the first revenue of $360,580 occurred in FY 2021-2022.

In 1986, Ordinance 327 was adopted to add Chapter 17.37 (Senior Housing Overlay District) to the Municipal Code. The chapter was passed to ensure that housing developments include units that meet the needs of specific populations and accommodate persons with disabilities. Target populations are residents 62 years and older and meeting the state definition of very low-, low-, or moderate-income levels. Currently, Foster City has no legal protections for LGBTQIA+ for housing discrimination.

As shown in Figure 8, half of the city’s census tracts have low (less than 5%) Housing Choice Voucher usage. Surrounding jurisdictions also have low voucher utilization rates.

Foster City owns six housing units scattered throughout the city that are rented to very low- and lowincome households as part of the Existing Unit Purchase Program. In addition, Foster City acquired a 22- unit apartment building in the Pilgrim Triton neighborhood in August 2022 that includes affordable and workforce housing.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1111
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-24 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 7: Foster City Census Tracts: 2020
Note: For data using 2010 Census Tracts, 6080.24 and 6080.25 were previously combined in 6080.04.

Source: US Census Bureau, 2022

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1112
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-25
Figure 8: Housing Choice Vouchers by Census Tract
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1113
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-26 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Findings from the 21 Elements Resident Survey support data on low voucher utilization and landlord participation rates in voucher programs in Foster City. In fact, 40% of respondents from Foster City reported being denied housing because the landlord did not accept their income and nearly half (47%) of respondents indicated that it was “somewhat difficult” to find a landlord that accepts housing vouchers.

These trends are prominent throughout the county as well—overall, eight in ten voucher holders find it “difficult” or “very difficult” to find landlords accepting vouchers. Redwood City had the largest proportion of respondents being denied housing for holding a voucher at 18%.

Low voucher utilization rates in Foster City and surrounding jurisdictions indicate a lack of available rental units and potentially exclusionary behavior from landlords. Foster City has taken steps to remedy this challenge: In 2013, City Council passed Ordinance no. 581 to add a “Tenant Anti-discrimination” chapter to the city’s Municipal Code.16 The Ordinance committed Foster City to protecting fair housing and addressing the low number of landlords participating in rental assistance programs by prohibiting discrimination on the source of income and the use of rental subsidies—including Section 8 and housing assistance programs for very low- and low-income residents. According to Section 5.72.050, however, Foster City is not responsible or liable to enforce the ordinance or seek redress for any discrimination claim. It is therefore imperative that Foster City coordinate with local fair housing providers to enforce the ordinance.

Recent data on voucher rates in the city and lack of enforcement suggests that Ordinance no. 581 is only one part of the solution in addressing challenges to voucher holders finding units in the city. Production of new rental units, particularly those with public subsidies that require units to be rented below market, is critical for raising voucher utilization rates.
16 https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/FosterCity/?FosterCity17/FosterCity1776.html.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1114
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-27
3 INTEGRATION AND SEGREGATION
This section discusses integration and segregation of the population by protected classes including race and ethnicity, disability status, familial status, and income status. The section concludes with an analysis of racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty and affluence. This section draws from several reports provided by Contra Costa County Collaborative (C4) as well as Segregation Reports prepared by a collaboration between the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and UC Merced. Some of these reports use parenthetical citations. A source list is provided at the end of this appendix.

3.1 DEFINING SEGREGATION
Segregation is the separation of different demographic groups into different geographic locations or communities, meaning that groups are unevenly distributed across geographic space.

Integration and Segregation
“Integration generally means a condition in which there is not a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a particular type of disability when compared to a broader geographic area.

Segregation generally means a condition in which there is a high concentration of persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or having a disability or a type of disability in a particular geographic area when compared to a broader geographic area.”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 31.

This report examines two spatial forms of segregation: neighborhood level segregation within a local jurisdiction and city level segregation between jurisdictions in the Bay Area.

Segregation Forms
Neighborhood level segregation (within a jurisdiction, or intra-city): Segregation of race and income groups can occur from neighborhood to neighborhood within a city. For example, if a local jurisdiction has a population that is 20% Latinx, but some neighborhoods are 80% Latinx while others have nearly no Latinx residents, that jurisdiction would have segregated neighborhoods.

City level segregation (between jurisdictions in a region, or inter-city): Race and income divides also occur between jurisdictions in a region. A region could be very diverse with equal numbers of white, Asian, Black, and Latinx residents, but the region could also be highly segregated with each city comprised solely of one racial group.

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 31.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1115
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-28 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
There are many factors that have contributed to the generation and maintenance of segregation.

Historically, racial segregation stemmed from explicit discrimination against people of color, such as restrictive covenants, redlining, and discrimination in mortgage lending. This history includes many overtly discriminatory policies made by federal, state, and local governments (Rothstein 2017).

Segregation patterns are also affected by policies that appear race-neutral, such as land use decisions and the regulation of housing development.

Segregation has resulted in vastly unequal access to public goods such as quality schools, neighborhood services and amenities, parks and playgrounds, clean air and water, and public safety (Trounstine 2015).

This generational lack of access for many communities, particularly people of color and lower income residents, has often resulted in poor life outcomes, including lower educational attainment, higher morbidity rates, and higher mortality rates (Chetty and Hendren 2018, Ananat 2011, Burch 2014, Cutler and Glaeser 1997, Sampson 2012, Sharkey 2013).

Segregation Patterns in the Bay Area
Across the San Francisco Bay Area, white residents and above moderate-income residents are significantly more segregated from other racial and income groups (see Appendix 2). The highest levels of racial segregation occur between the Black and white populations. The analysis completed for this report indicates that the amount of racial segregation both within Bay Area cities and acrossjurisdictions in the region has decreased since the year 2000. This finding is consistent with recent research from the Othering and Belonging Institute at UC Berkeley, which concluded that “[a]lthough 7 of the 9 Bay Area counties were more segregated in 2020 than they were in either 1980 or 1990, racial residential segregation in the region appears to have peaked around the year 2000 and has generally declined since.”17 However, compared to cities in other parts of California, Bay Area jurisdictions have more neighborhood level segregation between residents from different racial groups. Additionally, there is also more racial segregation between Bay Area cities compared to other regions in the state.

Segregation and Land Use
It is difficult to address segregation patterns without an analysis of both historical and existing land use policies that impact segregation patterns. Land use regulations influence what kind of housing is built in a city or neighborhood (Lens and Monkkonen 2016, Pendall 2000). These land use regulations in turn impact demographics: they can be used to affect the number of houses in a community, the number of people who live in the community, the wealth of the people who live in the community, and where within the community they reside (Trounstine 2018). Given disparities in wealth by race and ethnicity, the ability to afford housing in different neighborhoods, as influenced by land use regulations, is highly differentiated across racial and ethnic groups (Bayer, McMillan, and Reuben 2004).18 ABAG/MTC plans to issue a separate report detailing the existing land use policies that influence segregation patterns in the Bay Area.
17 For more information, see https://belonging.berkeley.edu/most-segregated-cities-bay-area-2020. 18 Using a household-weighted median of Bay Area county median household incomes, regional values were $61,050 for Black residents, $122,174 for Asian/Pacific Islander residents, $121,794 for white residents, and $76,306 for Latinx residents. For the source data, see U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B19013B, Table B19013D, B19013H, and B19013I.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1116
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-29
Racial Segregation in Foster City
Foster City differs from the County and Bay area overall for its relatively high proportion of residents identifying as Asian (48% in Foster City compared to 30% in San Mateo County) and small Hispanic population (8% in Foster City and 24% in the county). Foster City’s proportion of Black/African American, non-Hispanic White, and Other and mixed-race residents is similar to the county.19 Foster City’s residents have grown more racially diverse since 2000 largely due to the growth of Asian residents (Figure 9). The two largest subgroups of the Asian population in Foster City include Asian Indian (15% of the total population in 2019) and Chinese (24% of the total population in 2019). The Asian Indian population had the largest growth from 11% in 2010 to 15% in 2019, compared to the growth in the Chinese population over the same time period from 21% to 24%.

Older residents are less racially diverse than other age groups, with 58% of the population older than 65 years identifying as White compared to 42% of those aged 18 to 24 and 36% of children less than 18 years old. Fourteen percent of the City’s children are other or mixed-race compared to just 2% of older adults—a sign that the City could continue to grow more diverse in the future if families with children remain in the City.

Figure 9: Population by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2000-2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Poverty rates vary modestly across races and ethnicities—except for residents identifying as “other” races or mixed-race. More than one-fourth (26.4%) of residents identifying as “other race or multiple races” live below the poverty line (Figure 10), and a relatively high proportion of the City’s other and mixed-race residents are children. Hispanic/Latinx residents also have lower income distribution and higher poverty rates (8.3%). In Foster City, 3.5% of the 2020 population lives below the poverty line, compared to 6.7% in San Mateo County.
19 The share of the population that identifies as American Indian or Alaska Native is less than 1%.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1117
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-30 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 10: Poverty Rate by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

3.2 NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL RACIAL SEGREGATION (WITHIN CITY OF FOSTER CITY) There are many ways to quantitatively measure segregation. Each measure captures a different aspect of the ways in which groups are divided within a community. One way to measure segregation is by using an isolation index:
 The isolation index compares each neighborhood’s composition to the jurisdiction’s demographics as a whole.
 This index ranges from 0 to 1. Higher values indicate that a particular group is more isolated from other groups.
 Isolation indices indicate the potential for contact between different groups. The index can be interpreted as the experience of the average member of that group. For example, if the isolation index is 0.65 for Latinx residents in a city, then the average Latinx resident in that city lives in a neighborhood that is 65% Latinx.

Within Foster City the most isolated racial group is Asian residents (although there is significant diversity within the Asian population). Foster City’s isolation index of 0.538 for Asian residents means that the average Asian resident lives in a neighborhood that is 53.8% Asian. Other racial groups are less isolated, meaning they may be more likely to encounter other racial groups in their neighborhoods. The isolation index values for all racial groups in Foster City for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 1 below. Among all racial groups in this jurisdiction, the White population’s isolation index has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other racial groups between 2000 and 2020.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1118
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-31
Table 1: Racial Isolation Index Values for Segregation
within Foster City
Race
Foster City Bay Area
Average
2020 2000 2010 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 0.335 0.456 0.538 0.245
Black/African American 0.022 0.019 0.015 0.053
Latinx 0.055 0.067 0.073 0.251
White 0.562 0.423 0.320 0.491
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average isolation index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different racial groups in 2020. The data in this column can be used as a comparison to provide context for the levels of segregation experienced by racial groups in this jurisdiction. For example, Table 1 indicates the average isolation index value for White residents across all Bay Area jurisdictions is 0.491, meaning that in the average Bay Area jurisdiction a White resident lives in a neighborhood that is 49.1% white.20
Another way to measure segregation is by using a dissimilarity index:
 This index measures how evenly any two groups are distributed across neighborhoods relative to their representation in a city overall. The dissimilarity index at the jurisdiction level can be interpreted as the share of one group that would have to move neighborhoods to create perfect integration for these two groups.
 The dissimilarity index ranges from 0 to 1. Higher values indicate that groups are more unevenly distributed (e.g., they tend to live in different neighborhoods).  Dissimilarity index values are unreliable for a population group if that group represents approximately less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s total population. ABAG/MTC recommends that when cities have population groups that are less than 5% of the jurisdiction’s population, the isolation index or Thiel’s H-Index can provide a more accurate understanding of their jurisdiction’s neighborhoodlevel segregation patterns (intra-city segregation). In Foster City, the Black/African American group is 1.4 percent of the population - so dissimilarity index values involving this group are not reliable. 20 This average only includes the 104 jurisdictions that have more than one census tract, which is true for all comparisons of Bay Area jurisdictions’ segregation measures in this report. The segregation measures in this report are calculated by comparing the demographics of a jurisdiction’s census tracts to the jurisdiction’s demographics, and such calculations cannot be made for the five jurisdictions with only one census tract (Brisbane, Calistoga, Portola Valley, Rio Vista, and Yountville).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1119
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-32 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 2 below provides the dissimilarity index values indicating the level of segregation in Foster City between White residents and residents who are Black, Latinx, or Asian/Pacific Islander. The table also provides the dissimilarity index between White residents and all residents of color in the jurisdiction, and all dissimilarity index values are shown across three time periods (2000, 2010, and 2020).

Table 2: Racial Dissimilarity Index Values for Segregation within Foster City
Race
Foster City Bay Area
Average
2020 2000 2010 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander vs. White 0.083 0.058 0.053 0.185 Black/African American vs. White 0.103* 0.090* 0.124* 0.244 Latinx vs. White 0.089 0.073 0.096 0.207
People of Color vs. White 0.062 0.053 0.055 0.168
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

Note: If a number is marked with an asterisk (*), it indicates that the index is based on a racial group making up less than 5 percent of the jurisdiction population, leading to unreliable numbers.

In Foster City the highest segregation is between Black and White residents (see Table 2). Foster City’s Black /white dissimilarity index of 0.124 means that 12.4% of Black (or white) residents would need to move to a different neighborhood to create perfect integration between Black residents and White residents. However, this dissimilarity index value is not a reliable data point due to small population size.

The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average dissimilarity index values for these racial group pairings across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2020. The data in this column can be used as a comparison to provide context for the levels of segregation between communities of color are from White residents in this jurisdiction.

For example, Table 2 indicates that the average Latinx/white dissimilarity index for a Bay Area jurisdiction is 0.207, so on average 20.7% of Latinx (or White residents) in a Bay Area jurisdiction would need to move to a different neighborhood within the jurisdiction to create perfect integration between Latinx and White residents in that jurisdiction.

The Theil’s H Index can be used to measure segregation between all groups within a jurisdiction:
 This index measures how diverse each neighborhood is compared to the diversity of the whole city.

Neighborhoods are weighted by their size, so that larger neighborhoods play a more significant role in determining the total measure of segregation.
 The index ranges from 0 to 1. A Theil’s H Index value of 0 would mean all neighborhoods within a city have the same demographics as the whole city. A value of 1 would mean each group lives exclusively in their own, separate neighborhood.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1120
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-33
 For jurisdictions with a high degree of diversity (multiple racial groups comprise more than 10% of the population), Theil’s H offers the clearest summary of overall segregation.

The Theil’s H Index values for neighborhood racial segregation in Foster City for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 3. The “Bay Area Average” column in the table provides the average Theil’s H Index across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2020. Between 2010 and 2020, the Theil’s H Index for racial segregation in Foster City declined, suggesting that there is now less neighborhood level racial segregation within the jurisdiction. In 2020, the Theil’s H Index for racial segregation in Foster City was lower than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions, indicating that neighborhood level racial segregation in Foster City is less than in the average Bay Area city.

Table 3: Theil’s H Index Values for Racial Segregation
within Foster City
Index
Foster City Bay Area
Average
2000 2010 2020 2020
Theil's H Multi-racial 0.006 0.004 0.003 0.042
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

3.3 REGIONAL RACIAL SEGREGATION (BETWEEN FOSTER CITY AND OTHER JURISDICTIONS) At the regional level, segregation is measured between cities instead of between neighborhoods. Racial dot maps can be used to explore the racial demographic differences between different jurisdictions in the region. Figure 11 below presents a racial dot map showing the spatial distribution of racial groups in Foster City as well as in nearby Bay Area cities. This map demonstrates that Asian households are more concentrated in Foster City and the bordering neighborhoods, whereas White and Latinx households are concentrated in surrounding cities.

To understand how each city contributes to the total segregation of the Bay Area, one can look at the difference in the racial composition of a jurisdiction compared to the racial composition of the region as a whole. The racial demographics in Foster City for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 can be found in Table 4 below. The table also provides the racial composition of the nine-county Bay Area. As of 2020, Foster City has a lower share of White residents at 31.8% than the Bay Area as a whole at 35.8%, a lower share of Latinx residents at 7.2% than the Bay Area as a whole at 24.4%, a lower share of Black residents at

1.4% than the Bay Area as a whole at 5.6%, and a higher share of Asian/Pacific Islander residents at 53.8% compared to the Bay Area as a whole at 28.2%.

Geospatially, the majority of census tracts in the city are segregated with Asian residents (Figure 12).

Overall, the City has low to moderate diversity (Figure 13) and is less diverse than the City of San Mateo and Redwood City, but somewhat more diverse than other nearby higher income communities.21 21 Redlining maps, otherwise known as Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) maps, are not available for San Mateo County.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1121
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-34 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 11: Racial Dot Map of Foster City and Surrounding Areas (2020) Universe: Population.

Note: The plot shows the racial distribution at the census block level for City of Foster City and vicinity. Dots in each census block are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of people.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002
Table 4: Population by Racial Group, Foster City
and the Region
Race
Foster City Bay Area
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander 32.4% 45.4% 53.8% 28.2%
Black/African American 2.1% 1.8% 1.4% 5.6%
Latinx 5.3% 6.5% 7.2% 24.4%
Other or Multiple Races 4.3% 4.3% 5.9% 5.9%
White 55.9% 42.0% 31.8% 35.8%
Universe: Population.

Source: IPUMS National Historical Geographic Information System (NHGIS). U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002. Data from 2010 is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010, Table P4. Data for 2000 is standardized to 2010 census tract geographies and is from U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1122
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-35
Figure 12: Neighborhood Segregation by Census Tract, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1123
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-36 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 13: Diversity Index by Block Group, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1124
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-37

3.4 LOCAL AND COUNTY-WIDE DIVERSITY
As shown in Table 5, Foster City has become increasingly diverse with notable growth in the population of residents identifying as Black/African American (from 282 people in 2010 to 717 people in 2020) and Hispanic/Latino (an increase of 717 people between 2010 and 2020), although these populations have remained small overall (1.4% Black/African American and 7.2% Latinx in 2020) in comparison to White (31.8% in 2020) and Asian (58.8% in 2020) residents. Growth is most prominent in census tracts 6080.02 (744% increase in Black/African American population) and 6081 (454% increase in Hispanic/Latino population). Asian residents grew across all census tracts in Foster City—excluding 6080.01 (13% decrease). Despite comprising the largest portion of the city’s population, since 2010, non-Hispanic White residents have declined throughout the city with an overall decrease of 14%.

Table 5: Population Change by Race/Ethnicity by Census Tract, 2010 to 2020
Race/Ethnicity
CT
6080.01
CT
6080.02
CT
6080.13
CT
6080.23
CT
6081
CT
6082
CT
6083
Foster
City
San
Mateo
County
Non-Hispanic White 28% -9% -32% -26% -42% 22% -39% -14% -4% Black or African American -45% 744% 29% — 454% -71% 87% 53% -14% American Indian or Alaska Native —* -100% — — — — — -56% -26% Asian -13% 7% 2% 18% 52% 5% 37% 31% 31%
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific
Islander -52% — — — 0% -100% — -84% -9%
Hispanic or Latino -41% 36% 174% 467% -57% 57% -3% 38% 7% Note: Census tracts 6080.04 (2010) and 6080.25 (2019) are omitted from Table 10. 6080.04 was not a tract in 2020 and 6080.25 in 2010.
* Cells for census tracts with zero racial/ethnic residents are left empty.

Source: 2010 and 2020 ACS 5-year estimates
Changes in the city’s racial and ethnic composition between 2010 and 2020 do not match that of San Mateo County. The population of Black residents in Foster City, for instance, doubled between 2010 and 2020 while the county’s overall portion decreased. The population of Hispanic or Latino increased in Foster City by 38% while the County had a more modest increase of 7%. The percentage of non-Hispanic White population in Foster City declined by 14% and the county had a more modest decline of 4% in nonHispanic White residents.

These trends are supported by education data in San Mateo County—discussed in Section 4.1—which shows that schools throughout the county have become increasingly diverse since the 2010-2011 school year. Asian students grew the fastest, comprising 17% of the student population in 2020-2021—this represents a five percentage point increase since the 2010-2011 school year. White students throughout the county decreased by three percentage points since 2010-2011, reaching 26% in 2020-2021.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1125
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-38 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 14 below compares the racial demographics in Foster City to those of all 109 Bay Area jurisdictions.22 In this chart, each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each racial group, the spread of dots represents the range of that group’s representation among Bay Area jurisdictions. Additionally, the black line within each racial group notes the percentage of the population of City of Foster City represented by that group and how that percentage ranks among all 109 jurisdictions.

Figure 14: Racial Demographics of Foster City Compared to All Bay Area Jurisdictions (2020)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002.
22 While comparisons of segregation measures are made only using the 104 jurisdictions with more than one census tract, this comparison of jurisdiction level demographic data can be made using all 109 jurisdictions.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1126
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-39
The map in Figure 15 below also illustrates regional racial segregation between Foster City and other jurisdictions. This map demonstrates how the percentage of people of color in Foster City and surrounding jurisdictions compares to the Bay Area as a whole:
 Jurisdictions shaded orange have a share of people of color that is less than the Bay Area as a whole, and the degree of difference is greater than five percentage points.  Jurisdictions shaded White have a share of people of color comparable to the regional percentage of people of color (within five percentage points).
 Jurisdictions shaded grey have a share of people of color that is more than five percentage points greater than the regional percentage of people of color.

Figure 15: Comparing the Share of People of Color in Foster City and Vicinity to the Bay Area (2020)
Universe: Population.

Note: People of color refer to persons not identifying as non-Hispanic white. The nine-county Bay Area is the reference region for this map.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census State Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171) Summary File, 2020 Census of Population and Housing, Table P002

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1127
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-40 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

3.5 INCOME SEGREGATION IN CITY OF FOSTER CITY
Definition of Terms - Income Groups
When analyzing segregation by income, this report uses income group designations consistent with the Regional Housing Needs Allocation and the Housing Element:

Very low-income: individuals earning less than 50% of Area Median Income (AMI) Low-income: individuals earning 50%-80% of AMI
Moderate-income: individuals earning 80%-120% of AMI
Above moderate-income: individuals earning 120% or more of AMI Additionally, this report uses the term “lower-income” to refer to all people who earn less than 80% of AMI, which includes both low-income and very low-income individuals.

The income groups described above are based on U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) calculations for AMI. HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San JoseSunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and VallejoFairfield Metro Area (Solano County).

Neighborhood Level Income Segregation (within Foster City) Income segregation can be measured using similar indices as racial segregation. Income dot maps, similar to racial dot maps, are useful for visualizing segregation between multiple income groups at the same time. The income dot map of Foster City in Figure 16 below offers a visual representation of the spatial distribution of income groups within the jurisdiction. As with the racial dot maps, when the dots show lack of a pattern or clustering as they do in Foster City, income segregation measures tend to be lower, and conversely, when clusters are apparent, the segregation measures may be higher as well.

The isolation index values for all income groups in Foster City for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 6 below.23 Above Moderate-income residents are the most isolated income group in Foster City.

Foster City’s isolation index of 0.531 for these residents means that the average Above Moderate-income resident in Foster City lives in a neighborhood that is 53.1% Above Moderate-income. Among all income groups, the Above Moderate-income population’s isolation index has changed the most over time, becoming less segregated from other income groups between 2010 and 2015.

Similar to the tables presented earlier for neighborhood racial segregation, the “Bay Area Average” column in Table 5 provides the average isolation index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different income groups in 2015. For example, Table 6 indicates the average isolation index value for very lowincome residents across Bay Area jurisdictions is 0.269, meaning that in the average Bay Area jurisdiction a very low-income resident lives in a neighborhood that is 26.9% very low-income. 23 This report presents data for income segregation for the years 2010 and 2015, which is different than the time periods used for racial segregation. This deviation stems from the data source recommended for income segregation calculations in HCD’s AFFH Guidelines. This data source most recently updated with data from the 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5-year estimates. For more information on HCD’s recommendations for calculating income segregation, see page 32 of HCD’s AFFH Guidelines.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1128
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-41
Figure 16: Income Dot Map of Foster City (2015)
Universe: Population.

Note: The plot shows the income group distribution at the census block group level for City of Foster City and vicinity. Dots in each block group are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of individuals.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data
Table 6: Income Group Isolation Index Values for
Segregation within Foster City
Income Group
Foster City
Bay Area
Average
2010 2015 2015
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.147 0.149 0.269
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.146 0.146 0.145
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.187 0.218 0.183
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.576 0.531 0.507
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1129
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-42 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 7 below provides the dissimilarity index values indicating the level of segregation in Foster City between residents who are lower-income (earning less than 80% of AMI) and those who are not lowerincome (earning above 80% of AMI). This data aligns with the requirements described in HCD’s AFFH Guidance Memo for identifying dissimilarity for lower-income households.24 Segregation in Foster City between lower-income residents and residents who are not lower-income decreased between 2010 and 2015. Additionally, Table 7 shows dissimilarity index values for the level of segregation between residents who are very low-income (earning less than 50% of AMI) and those who are above moderate-income (earning above 120% of AMI). This supplementary data point provides additional nuance to an analysis of income segregation, as this index value indicates the extent to which a jurisdiction’s lowest and highest income residents live in separate neighborhoods.

Table 7: Income Group Dissimilarity Index Values
for Segregation within Foster City
Income Group
Foster City
Bay Area
Average
2010 2015 2015
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.132 0.102 0.198
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.174 0.111 0.253
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006- 2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

Similar to other tables in this report, the “Bay Area Average” column shows the average dissimilarity index values for these income group pairings across Bay Area jurisdictions in 2015. For example, Table 6 indicates that the average dissimilarity index between lower-income residents and other residents in a Bay Area jurisdiction is 0.198, so on average 19.8% of lower-income residents in a Bay Area jurisdiction would need to move to a different neighborhood within the jurisdiction to create perfect income group integration in that jurisdiction. In 2015, the income segregation in Foster City between lower-income residents and other residents was lower than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions (see Table 7).

This means that the lower-income residents are less segregated from other residents within Foster City compared to other Jurisdictions in the region.

The Theil’s H Index values for neighborhood income group segregation in Foster City for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 8 below. The “Bay Area Average” column in this table provides the average Theil’s H Index value across Bay Area jurisdictions for different income groups in 2015. By 2015, the Theil’s H Index value for income segregation in Foster City was about the same amount as it had been in 2010. In 2015, the Theil’s H Index value for income group segregation in Foster City was lower than the average value for Bay Area jurisdictions, indicating there is less neighborhood level income segregation in Foster City than in the average Bay Area city.
24 For more information, see page 32 of HCD’s AFFH Guidance Memo.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1130
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-43
Table 8: Theil’s H Index Values for Income
Segregation within Foster City
Index
Foster City
Bay Area
Average
2010 2015 2015
Theil's H Multi-income 0.024 0.017 0.043
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

Regional Income Segregation (between Foster City and Other Jurisdictions) At the regional level, segregation is measured between jurisdictions instead of between neighborhoods.

Income dot maps are not only useful for examining neighborhood income segregation within a jurisdiction, but these maps can also be used to explore income demographic differences between jurisdictions in the region. Figure 17 below presents an income dot map showing the spatial distribution of income groups in Foster City as well as in nearby Bay Area jurisdictions.

When looking at income segregation between jurisdictions in the Bay Area, one can examine how Foster City differs from the region. The income demographics in Foster City for the years 2010 and 2015 can be found in Table 8 below. The table also provides the income composition of the nine-county Bay Area in 2015. As of that year, Foster City had a lower share of very low-income residents than the Bay Area as a whole, a lower share of low-income residents, a higher share of moderate-income residents, and a higher share of above moderate-income residents.

Table 9: Population by Income Group, Foster City
and the Region
Income Group
Foster City Bay Area
2010 2015 2015
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 12.64% 13.99% 28.7%
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 13.63% 12.54% 14.3%
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 17.03% 20.91% 17.6%
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 56.7% 52.55% 39.4%
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from Housing U.S. Department of and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1131
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-44 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 17: Income Dot Map of Foster City and Surrounding Areas (2015) Universe: Population.

Note: The plot shows the income group distribution at the census block group level for City of Foster City and vicinity. Dots in each block group are randomly placed and should not be construed as actual placement of individuals.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Lowand Moderate-Income Summary Data Figure 18 below compares the income demographics in Foster City to other Bay Area jurisdictions.25 Each dot represents a Bay Area jurisdiction. For each income group, the spread of dots represents the range of that group’s representation among Bay Area jurisdictions. The smallest range is among jurisdictions’ moderate-income populations, while Bay Area jurisdictions vary the most in the share of their population that is above moderate-income. Additionally, the black lines within each income group note the percentage of Foster City population represented by that group and how that percentage ranks among other jurisdictions.
25 While comparisons of segregation measures are made only using the 104 jurisdictions with more than one census tract, this comparison of jurisdiction level demographic data can be made using all 109 jurisdictions.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1132
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-45
Figure 18: Income Demographics of Foster City Compared to Other Bay Area Jurisdictions (2015)
Universe: Bay Area Jurisdictions.

Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and ModerateIncome Summary Data Income segregation between jurisdictions in the region can also be analyzed by calculating regional values for the segregation indices discussed previously. Similar to the regional racial segregation measures shown in Table 10, Table 11 presents dissimilarity index, isolation index, and Theil’s H index values for income segregation for the entire nine-county Bay Area in 2010 and 2015. In the previous section of this report focused on neighborhood level income segregation, segregation indices were calculated by comparing the income demographics of the census tracts within a jurisdiction to the demographics of the jurisdiction as a whole. In Table 10, these measures are calculated by comparing the income demographics of local jurisdictions to the region’s income group makeup. For example, looking at 2015 data, Table 10 shows the regional isolation index value for very low-income residents is 0.315 for 2015, meaning that on average very low-income Bay Area residents live in a jurisdiction that is 31.5% very low-income. The regional dissimilarity index for lower-income residents and other residents is 0.194 in 2015, which means that across the region 19.4% of lower-income residents would need to move to a different jurisdiction to create perfect income group integration in the Bay Area as a whole. The regional value for the Theil’s H index measures how diverse each Bay Area jurisdiction is compared to the income group diversity of the whole region. A Theil’s H Index value of 0 would mean all jurisdictions within the Bay Area have the same income demographics as the entire region, while a value of 1 would mean each income group lives exclusively in their own separate jurisdiction. The regional Theil’s H index value for income segregation decreased slightly between 2010 and 2015, meaning that income groups in the Bay Area are now slightly less separated by the borders between jurisdictions.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1133
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-46 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Table 10: Regional Income Segregation Measures
Index Group 2010 2015
Isolation Index Regional Level
Very Low-Income (<50% AMI) 0.277 0.315
Low-Income (50%-80% AMI) 0.157 0.154
Moderate-Income (80%-120% AMI) 0.185 0.180
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI) 0.467 0.435
Dissimilarity Index Regional Level
Below 80% AMI vs. Above 80% AMI 0.186 0.194
Below 50% AMI vs. Above 120% AMI 0.238 0.248
Theil's H Multi-income All Income Groups 0.034 0.032
Universe: Population.

Source: Data for 2015 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2011-2015 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data. Data for 2010 is from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, American Community Survey 5-Year 2006-2010 Low- and Moderate-Income Summary Data Foster City’s households are higher income than the County and Bay area overall: 64% of Foster City households earn more than 100% of the AMI, compared to 49% for the County and 52% for the Bay area (Table 9, and Figure 21). Foster City also has fewer low-income households (earning 80% AMI and less) but the same proportion of moderate-income households (81-100% AMI). Every block group in Foster City has a median household income of $125,000 and more (Figure 19). The City has no concentrations of low-income households (Figure 19) and no areas of concentrated poverty (Figure 20).

Table 11: Population Change by Household Income by Census Tract, 2010 to 2020
Income group
CT
6080.01
CT
6080.02
CT
6080.13
CT
6080.23
CT
6081
CT
6082
CT
6083
Foster
City
San Mateo
County
Less than $50,000 5% 13% -47% -58% -20% 24% -70% -22% -30% $50,000 up to $100,000 -49% -31% -30% -1% -50% -62% -39% -44% -27% $100,000 or more 17% 5% 8% 3% 46% 43% 66% 36% 45%
Note: Census tracts 6080.04 (2010) and 6080.25 (2019) are omitted from Table 10. 6080.04 was not a tract in 2020 and 6080.25 in 2010.

Source: 2010 and 2020 ACS 5-year data
Between 2010 and 2020, the number of lower-income households (<$50,000) in Foster City declined by 22%, either because they left the city or moved to a higher income bracket (Table 11). This was offset by an increase in higher-income households ($100,000 or more) (increase of 36%). Middle-income households ($50,000 up to $100,000) also declined in the city and county, though Foster City’s population declined the greatest at 44% compared to the decline in the county at 27%. High-income households increased throughout the city and county, with the greatest increase in census tract 6083 (an increase of 66%).

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1134
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-47
Figure 19: Median Household Income by Block Group, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1135
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-48 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 20: Poverty Status by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1136
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-49
Figure 21: Segregation and Integration
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Population changes among low-income residents is surprising. Data shows Foster City has more jobs than households—higher than the county and region—and all of the city’s areas have moderately high to high economic opportunity. In fact, HUD job proximity shows the city offers strong proximity to jobs with the majority of block groups scoring over 80 (on a scale of 1-100). Excluding census tract 6081, census tracts that witnessed declines in their population of lower-income residents between 2010 and 2020 were given positive economic opportunity scores of 0.75 or above. Census tract 6080.01 received a score of

0.50-0.75, despite having experienced an increase in population size (5%). Shifts in areas with high economic opportunity scores suggest that <$50,000 households do not have equal access to jobs.

Unequal employment opportunities could be driven by factors including race/ethnicity, poverty rates, and proximity of transportation options. These factors—along with trends displayed in Table 11—are analyzed in Section 4.2. Declines in population, however, could also be due to higher rates of housing vulnerability/instability and risks of displacement as Foster City’s affordable housing sites and BMR units begin to expire (e.g., Foster’s Landing). This is elaborated on in Section 5.6, Displacement.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1137
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-50 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

3.6 DISABILITY STATUS
The share of the population living with at least one disability is 7% in Foster City compared to 8% in San Mateo County and 10% in the Bay Area. Foster City has no Census tracts where the population of persons with disabilities exceeds 10% (Figure 23).

Table 12: Change in Population of Persons with Disabilities by Age by Census Tract, 2012 to 2020
Age Group
CT
6080.01
CT
6080.02
CT
6080.13
CT
6080.23
CT
6081
CT
6082
CT
6083
Foster
City
San Mateo
County
Under 65 years -68% -53% -57% -95% -94% -86% -81% -84% -4% 65 years and older 60% 88% -97% -95% -93% -94% -92% -94% 28% Source: 2012 and 2020 ACS 5-year data
Note: American Community Survey (ACS) data by census tract for persons with disabilities in Foster City are not available prior to 2012. Foster City’s population of residents with a disability significantly declined between 2012 and 2020 with 84% of residents under 65 and 94% over 65 leaving the city. This is substantially higher than the county overall where younger populations have minimally decreased (-4%) and older populations increased (28%). All census tracts in Foster City witnessed a decline its share of younger residents with a disability. This is similar for older residents, though census tracts 6080.01 and 6080.02 increased its population by 60% and 88% respectively.

Prominent changes in populations with a disability could be related to the number of FHEO cases with disability biases (Figure 22). In 2020, over 85% of FHEO chases were cited with a disability bias—similar to San Mateo County overall and the Bay Area region. Because the region and county have not experienced such steep declines, it is possible that other factors are prompting individuals with a disability to leave the area. Census tract 6081—located near Metro Senior Housing which is designated for older residents with lower-incomes—saw a sharp decline in older residents with a disability at 93%.

Areas without such housing saw even greater dips in their population with tract 6080.13 experiencing the steepest decline at 97%.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1138
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-51
Figure 22: FHEO Cases by Disability Bias, 2020
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1139
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-52 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 23: Percent of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1140
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-53

3.7 FAMILIAL STATUS
Familial status can indicate specific housing needs and preferences. A larger number of nonfamily or single person households indicates a higher share of seniors living alone, young adults living alone or with roommates, and unmarried partners. Higher shares of nonfamily households indicate an increased need for 1- and 2-bedroom units.

Foster City’s households are mostly made up of 3- to 4-person households (38%) and 2-person households (36%). Compared to the County and Bay area overall, Foster City has slightly fewer 1-person households at 20% compared to 22% in the county (Figure 24) and 5-person households (6% v. 11%).

Sixty-two percent of households in Foster City are married couple households, compared to 55% in the county, 51% in the Bay Area, and 36% of all households have children under the age of 18, compared to 33% in the county and 32% in the Bay Area (Figure 25).

Figure 24: Household Type, 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11001

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1141
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-54 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 25: Households by Presence of Children, 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B11005

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1142
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-55
The City has fewer adults living alone than in the County and Bay area overall and no concentrations of adults living alone, suggesting that access to in-home services and care for single, older adults is less critical for Foster City than some surrounding communities. However, the City’s age distribution has shifted upwards since 2000 (Figure 26) and these accommodations may grow in demand if older adults in Foster City age in place.

Figure 26: Age Distribution, Foster City, 2000-2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Many of Foster City’s married couples rent housing: of the nearly 8,000 married couple families in the city, 40% rent their homes (Figure 27). Renters are more likely to be living in 1- and 2-bedroom units than owners (Figure 28), and owners are more likely to be occupying 3- to 4- and 5-bedroom units. To the extent that larger renter households desire to live in Foster City, the lack of rental housing stock to accommodate their needs could limit their access to housing in the city.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1143
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-56 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 27: Household Type by Tenure, Foster City, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure 28: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms and Tenure, Foster City, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1144
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-57

3.8 RACIALLY OR ETHNICALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS
Racially Concentrated Area of Poverty or an Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty (R/ECAP) and Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAAs) represent opposing ends of the segregation spectrum from racially or ethnically segregated areas with high poverty rates to affluent predominantly White neighborhoods. Historically, HUD has paid particular attention to R/ECAPs as a focus of policy and obligations to AFFH. Recent research out of the University of Minnesota Humphrey School of Public Affairs argues for the inclusion of RCAAs to acknowledge current and past policies that created and perpetuate these areas of high opportunity and exclusion.26 It is important to note that R/ECAPs and RCAAs are not areas of focus because of racial and ethnic concentrations alone. This study recognizes that racial and ethnic clusters can be a part of fair housing choice if they occur in a non-discriminatory market. Rather, R/ECAPs are meant to identify areas where residents may have historically faced discrimination and continue to be challenged by limited economic opportunity, and conversely, RCAAs are meant to identify areas of particular advantage and exclusion.

R/ECAPs
HCD and HUD’s definition of a Racially/Ethnically Concentrated Area of Poverty is:
 A census tract that has a non-White population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) or, for non-urban areas, 20 percent, AND a poverty rate of 40 percent or more; OR  A census tract that has a non-white population of 50 percent or more (majority-minority) AND the poverty rate is three times the average tract poverty rate for the County, whichever is lower.

Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021.

For this study, the poverty threshold used to qualify a tract as an R/ECAP was three times the average census tract poverty rate countywide—or 19.1%. In addition to R/ECAPs that meet the HUD threshold, this study includes edge or emerging R/ECAPs which hit two thirds of the HUD defined threshold for poverty—emerging R/ECAPs in San Mateo County have two times the average tract poverty rate for the County (12.8%).

In 2010 there were three census tracts that qualify as R/ECAPs (19.4% poverty rate) in the County and 11 that qualify as edge R/ECAPs (13% poverty rate). In 2019 there were two census tracts that qualify as R/ECAPs (19.1% poverty rate) in the County and 14 that qualify as edge R/ECAPs (12.8% poverty rate).

None of the R/ECAPs were located in Foster City in 2010 or 2019. 26 Goetz, E. G., Damiano, A., & Williams, R. A. (2019). Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence: A Preliminary Investigation.

Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 21(1), 99–124

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1145
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-58 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

3.9 RACIALLY CONCENTRATED AREAS OF AFFLUENCE
HCD’s definition of a Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence (RCAA) is:
 A census tract that has a percentage of total White population that is 1.25 times higher than the average percentage of total White population in the given COG region, and a median income that was 2 times higher than the COG AMI.

As shown in Figure 29, Foster City is not a RCAA. Importantly, Foster City’s neighboring jurisdictions— such as Redwood City and San Mateo City—also are not RCAAs. Western and Southwestern jurisdictions (e.g., San Carlos, Half Moon Bay, Woodside, and Porto la Valley), however, are significantly more likely to be RCAAs.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1146
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-59
Figure 29: Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence by Census Tract, 2015-2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1147
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-60 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
4 ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
This section discusses disparities in access to opportunity among protected classes including access to quality education, employment, transportation, and environment.

Access to Opportunity
“Access to opportunity is a concept to approximate place-based characteristics linked to critical life outcomes. Access to opportunity oftentimes means both improving the quality of life for residents of low-income communities, as well as supporting mobility and access to ‘high resource’ neighborhoods. This encompasses education, employment, economic development, safe and decent housing, low rates of violent crime, transportation, and other opportunities, including recreation, food and healthy environment (air, water, safe neighborhood, safety from environmental hazards, social services, and cultural institutions).”
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 34.

The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) in collaboration with HCD developed a series of opportunity maps that help to identify areas of the community with good or poor access to opportunity for residents. These maps were developed to align funding allocations with the goal of improving outcomes for low-income residents—particularly children.

The opportunity maps highlight areas of highest resource, high resource, moderate resource, moderate resource (rapidly changing), low resource and high segregation and poverty. TCAC provides opportunity maps for access to opportunity in quality education, employment, transportation, and environment.

Opportunity scores are presented on a scale from zero to one and the higher the number, the more positive the outcomes.

4.1 EDUCATION
TCAC’s education score is based on math proficiency, reading proficiency, high school graduation rates, and the student poverty rate. According to TCAC’s educational opportunity map, every census tract in Foster City scores higher than 0.75—indicating the highest positive educational outcomes (Figure 36).

Opportunity scores are presented on a scale from zero to one and the higher the number, the more positive the outcomes.

Foster City is served by the San Mateo Union High School District (SMUHSD) and the San Mateo-Foster Elementary School District (SMFCSD). The SMFCSD operates 20 schools serving San Mateo and Foster City, including 14 elementary schools, three middle schools, and three elementary-middle schools. The SMFCSD operates four elementary schools and one middle school in Foster City. The SMUHSD operates six high schools and one continuation high school serving the communities of Burlingame, Foster City, Hillsborough, Millbrae, San Mateo, and San Bruno. There is no high school located in Foster City. The SMUHSD operates three high schools that serve households in Foster City: Aragon High School, Hillsdale High School, and San Mateo High School. SMUHSD increased enrollment by 16% from 2010 to 2020 and

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1148
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-61
the SMFCSD enrollment increased by 1% over the same time. However, both districts lost students during the COVID pandemic.

SMUHSD enrollment by race and ethnicity is similar to the Countywide distribution. However, there is a higher proportion of Asian students in San Mateo Union (23% compared to 17% countywide), a smaller proportion of Filipino students (5% compared to 8% countywide) and Hispanic students (32% compared to 38% countywide).

The SMFCSD has the second highest share of homeless students, with 2% of students experiencing homelessness. The district also has a high share of English learners compared to the countywide proportion (26% compared to 20% countywide). Overall, the elementary district is more diverse than the countywide average.

Many high schoolers in the County met admission standards for a University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) school. Of the high school districts in San Mateo County, Sequoia Union had the highest rate of graduates who met such admission standards at 69% followed by San Mateo Union High with 68%. Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and Black students in the SMUHSD were less likely to meet the admission standards, with rates of 29%, 46%, and 46% respectively. Homeless students in the SMUHSD are less likely to meet UC or CSU admission standards compared to other school districts in the county—only 21% of students experiencing homelessness met admission rates in 2020-2021, on par with Jefferson Union (21%) but significantly lower than Sequoia Union (36%).

San Mateo County’s school districts have high college-going rates at 70% or higher— SMUHSD had the highest college-going rate at 77% and La Honda-Pescadero the lowest at only 32% in 2020-2021).

College-going rates are highest for the county’s Asian student body. This is also true for Foster City— 86% of Asian students attended college after graduation in the 2017-2018 school year, a slightly higher rate than White students (84%). Rates among Black/African American students are highest in the SMUHSD at 82%. Data on college-going rates by school district and race/ethnicity are presented in Figures 30 and 31.

As shown in Figures 31 and 32, gaps in access to postsecondary education are prominent between White and Hispanic students and students with disabilities and those learning English. In every school district, White students had a higher college-going rate than Hispanic students with the largest gap in South San Francisco Unified (91% v. 68%). This suggests that while Hispanic students have access to the city’s high schools, there are disparities in postsecondary education access. Students with disabilities and those learning English in San Mateo County’s school districts are also more likely to face barriers in receiving a college education. SMUHSD, however, had the highest college-going rate for English learners (63%) and second highest for students with disabilities in 2017-2018 (69%). Jefferson Union led the county in college-going rates for students with disabilities during this time with 71% attending college (Figure 32).

Postsecondary education access has implications for long-term financial success and equal access is implicated in financial gaps—this is especially true for San Mateo County where incomes must match high housing costs. As displayed in Figure 33, county residents with a bachelor’s degree earn 115% more than those with a high school diploma. This gap is wider than both California and the nation with gaps in earnings at 100% and 76%, respectively.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1149
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-62 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 30: College-Going Rates, 2014-2015 to 2017-2018
Source: California Department of Education and Root Policy Research Barriers to positive education outcomes and access to high performing schools in the city involve various factors—absenteeism, extenuating circumstances, and drop out and discipline (e.g., suspension) rates.

In Foster City, Pacific Islander students experience chronic absenteeism at a disproportionately higher rate than other students—32% of students identifying as Pacific Islander were considered chronically absent in the 2020-2021 school year. This represents a 26 percentage point gap between rates for the overall student body (6%). Chronic absenteeism for the county overall are similar—Pacific Islander (26%), Black/African American (18%), and Hispanic (15%) students had the highest rates compared to the county’s student body (10%). Students with disabilities are also more likely to be chronically absent— Bayshore Elementary was the only school district to have lower rates of chronic absenteeism for students with disabilities than all students in the district. Absenteeism among San Mateo County’s students are presented in Figures 34 and 35.

Although SMUHSD has relatively low dropout rates—4% of students—compared to other districts in the county, dropout rates among Hispanic (7%), Black (6%), and Pacific Islander students are higher.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1150
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-63
Figure 31: College-Going Rates by Race and Ethnicity, 2017-2018 Note: Cabrillo Unified and La Honda-Pescadero Unified are not included here because they do not report the data, likely due to small sample sizes.

Source: California Department of Education and Root Policy Research

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1151
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-64 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 32: College-Going Rates for Students with Disabilities and English Learners, 2017-2018
Note: Cabrillo Unified and La Honda- Pescadero Unified are not included here because they do not report the data, likely due to small sample sizes.

Source: California Department of Education and Root Policy Research Figure 33: Median Annual Earnings by Educational Attainment, 2019 Source: 2019 ACS 5-year data

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1152
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-65
Figure 34: Chronic Absenteeism by Race and Ethnicity, 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 Source: California Department of Education and Root Policy Research

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1153
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-66 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 35: Chronic Absenteeism by Race/Ethnicity and District, 2018-2019 Source: California Department of Education and Root Policy Research

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1154
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-67
Figure 36: TCAC Opportunity Areas Education Score by Census Tract, 2022 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1155
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-68 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.2 EMPLOYMENT
The Professional & Managerial Services industry dominates jobs in Foster City. Jobs in this industry have grown substantially since 2002 (Figure 37). In 2002, fewer than 4,000 jobs were in the Professional & Managerial Services industry; this was about the same number as Manufacturing and Finance. Jobs in the Professional & Managerial Services industry reached 9,000 in 2018—twice as many as the next highest industry of Finance. No other employment industry posted this volume of job growth.

Figure 37: Jobs by Industry, Foster City, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Foster City has more jobs than households, meaning that workers must commute into the City for work— particularly for essential positions that cannot be performed remotely. Most job holders in Foster City work in professional and managerial jobs and health care and education (Figure 38)—with the latter being moderate wage positions. Foster City has a higher jobs-to-household ratio at 1.76 in 2018 than the County at 1.59 and Bay area overall at 1.47 (Figure 39) and a lower unemployment rate of 4.1% as of January 2021 compared to the County at 6.6% and the Bay Area as a whole at 5.9%. 27 All census tracts in
Foster City had unemployment rates less than 8.08% as of January 2018 (Figure 40).

TCAC’s economic opportunity score is comprised of poverty, adult educational attainment, employment, job proximity, and median home value and is shown in Figure 41. All areas of Foster City have moderately high to high economic opportunity.
27 California Employment Development Department, Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS), Sub-county areas monthly updates, 2010-2021.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1156
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-69
Figure 38: Job Holders by Industry, Foster City, 2002-2018 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure 39: Jobs to Household Ratio, 2002-2018
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1157
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-70 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 40: Unemployment Rates in Foster City, 2018
Source: HUD Community Planning and Development Maps

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1158
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-71
Figure 41: TCAC Opportunity Areas Economic Score by Census Tract, 2021 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1159
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-72 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
HUD’s job proximity index shows that Foster City offers strong proximity to jobs. On a scale from zero to 100 where 100 is the closest proximity to jobs the majority of block groups in the city score above 80.

Job proximity by census block group and the proportion of each tract’s low- to moderate-income population is presented in Figures 42 and 43, respectively. Excluding census tracts 6083 and 6080.02 (in part), tracts with higher populations of low- and moderate-income residents (25-50%) have higher job proximity scores of 80 or above. These areas, however, have lower economic opportunity scores between

0.50 and 0.75—census tracts 6080.01 and 6081 have similar opportunity scores with lower-income populations comprising less than 25% of the area’s overall population. Importantly, however, tract 6081 has the lowest household median income compared to other areas throughout Foster City at only $110,000 and according to HUD data, added relatively few jobs between 2010 and 2014—in four years, only 84 jobs were added compared to 1,185 jobs in census tract 6080.25. While economic status may be an indicator of economic opportunity and equal access to jobs, 2018 racial demographics by block group (Figure 44) do not indicate unequal job opportunities by race/ethnicity, though many non-White populations live in areas with lower job proximity indexes.

According to Census data provided in Census on the Map as shown in Table 13, Foster City has a higher proportion of higher paying jobs than the county or the City of San Mateo. When compared to the earnings of employed residents in Foster City, the percentages of jobs in each income category vary only up to 1.5%. This close alignment provides access to jobs for all economic segments, although there are 234 fewer jobs in Foster City in the lowest income category, requiring some of these workers to work outside Foster City. As noted below in Section 4.3, Transportation, transportation costs can restrict access to jobs for lower-income households.

Table 13: Earnings of Foster City Employed Residents Compared to for Jobs Located in Foster City, San Mateo, and San
Mateo County
Earnings
Earnings by Residence Earnings by Job Location
Foster City Foster City City of San Mateo San Mateo County Count % Count % Count % Count %
$1250/month or less 2290 12.4% 2056 11.1% 6123 12.4% 63,328 15.8% $1251 to $3333/month 2144 11.6% 2125 11.5% 7324 14.9% 65,821 16.4% More than $3333/month 13,997 75.9% 14,354 77.4% 35,796 72.7% 272,670 67.9% Source: U.S.Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) TCAC/HCD categorized census tracts into five categories, from highest resource to low resource areas based on a composite score of economic, educational, and environmental factors that can perpetuate poverty and segregation, such as school proficiency, median income, and median housing prices.

According to the TCAC Opportunity Areas Economic Scores (Figure 41), all of Foster City falls in the two highest resource categories. Foster City compares favorably to nearby cities, which include tracts with lower economic opportunity scores. Thus, Foster City provides the residents of all economic segments access to highest resource areas including access to jobs.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1160
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-73
Figure 42: Jobs Proximity Index by Block Group, 2017
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1161
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-74 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 43: Low- to Moderate-Income Population by Census Tract, 2020 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1162
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-75
Figure 44: Racial Demographics by Block Group, 2018
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1163
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-76 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

4.3 TRANSPORTATION
This section provides a summary of the transportation system that serves the broader region including emerging trends and data relevant to transportation access in the city, beginning with resident input on transit access.

In the survey conducted to support this AFFH, residents were asked about their satisfaction with transit access. Key findings include:
 Foster City residents use a variety of means to access work, services, and recreation including driving a personal vehicle (87%), walking (41%), biking/riding a scooter (17%), carpooling (16%), and taking public transit (13%).28
 Overall, most residents are satisfied with their transportation options with 20% “somewhat” unsatisfied and 9% “not at all satisfied.”
 20% of respondents said that public transit does not go to needed locations or operate during times needed, and 14% said they cannot get to transit easily or safely.

In 2022, the AARP Public Policy Institute (PPI) released transportation data and metrics for its overall Livability Index—transportation received a score 56 out of 100 which is higher than San Mateo County’s transportation score of 52. Foster City’s comparatively high score could be attributed to the number of jobs accessible by transit and the city’s ADA-accessible stations and vehicles. According to 2022 data from Data USA, nearly 17,000 jobs in the city can be accessed via public transportation and 89% of the city’s stations and vehicles are considered ADA-accessible—similar to the county overall (89%).

Importantly, however, substantially more jobs can be accessed by personal vehicles—in 2022, an estimated 107,000 jobs are accessible via car. This can present job access challenges for Foster City’s residents as commute times are long (33 minutes on average)—especially compared to the county (27 minutes) and surrounding jurisdictions (e.g., Redwood City has an average commute time of 26 minutes).

Yearly household transportation costs could also restrict access to jobs and increase unemployment—in 2021, average transportation costs for Foster’s residents was $14,595 per year.29 Combined with high housing costs, lower-income households are more likely to experience disparities in job access.

Foster City has made efforts in reducing transportation costs through free shuttles (Figure 45). Free shuttle service was achieved by the city between 2003 and 2012 when the C/CAG funding and grants were provided to shuttle services. Such funding made in-town shuttles cost-free and provided additional transit options for residents and workers to access local businesses throughout the city.

The San Mateo County Transit District acts as the administrative body for transit and transportation programs in the County including SamTrans and the Caltrain commuter rail. SamTrans provides bus services in San Mateo County, including Redi-Wheels paratransit service. Figures 45 and 46 present the transit options available to Foster City residents. (Note that the AC Transit Line M has been temporarily suspended in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.)
28 Residents could pick more than one type. 29 https://datausa.io/profile/geo/foster-city-ca/.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1164
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-77
Figure 45: Foster City Transit Lines, 2022
Source: Foster City website

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1165
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-78 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 46: Foster City Transit Lines, 2022
Source: Foster City website

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1166
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-79
Transit lines, bus stops, and shuttle service areas all impact residents’ ability to access jobs and can contribute to poverty (Figure 17) and unemployment concentrations (Figure 40). Foster City’s shuttle services—North Foster City, Lincoln Centre, and Mariners Island—service relatively similar routes in the city with all shuttles servicing Chess Drive and Lakeside. These same areas received the highest job proximity index by block group in 2018 with a score of 80 (scale of 1-100) (Figure 42). Foster City’s transit lines—AC transit and Samtrans transit—are more widespread with stops in various areas of employment such as shopping areas. Census tracts that do not have shuttle service options received a lower job proximity index of 60-80 and between 2000 and 2014 reduced poverty levels at a lower rate than areas with shuttle access. As shown in Figure 48, during this time period, areas located near and in census tracts 6080.23 and 6080.13 reduced by poverty rates by 10-50% while areas with access to shuttles reduced rates by over 75%.

Figure 47: Unemployment Percent Point Change, 2010 to 2014 Source: HUD Community Planning and Development Maps
There are no prominent pockets of unemployment in Foster City—all census tracts have an unemployment rate of 0% to 8%. As discussed in Section 4.2 and illustrated in Figure 41, the city’s unemployment rate is relatively low and is lower than both the Bay area region and county overall.

Changes in unemployment rates, however, are most notable in areas without access to the city’s shuttle services. Between 2010 and 2014, for instance, HUD reported unemployment growth in census tracts 6080.23 and 6080.02—areas with lower shuttle access—at a rate of 6-10%. Tracts with higher access grew by 3-6% with census tract 6081 increasing the lowest at 0-3%.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1167
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-80 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
It is also important to note that many jobs available to Foster City residents are not remote and most jobholders work in industries requiring in-person work (e.g., health care and education). Given shuttle lines and the locations of Foster City’s elementary schools—which received a job proximity index score of 60-80—educators are least likely to use city transportation options.

In 2018, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), which covers the entire Bay Area, adopted a coordinated public transit and human services transportation plan. Maps from the plan are presented in Figures 48 and 49. While developing the coordinated plan, the MTC conducted extensive community outreach about transportation within the area. That plan—which was developed by assessing the effectiveness of how well seniors, persons with disabilities, veterans, and people with low incomes are served—was reviewed to determine gaps in services in San Mateo and the County overall. Primary gaps within the County include:
“San Mateo’s [Paratransit Coordinating Council] PCC and County Health System, as well as the Peninsula Family Service Agency provided feedback. The most common themes expressed had to do with pedestrian and bicycle needs at specific locations throughout the county, though some covered more general comments such as parked cars blocking sidewalk right-of-way and a desire for bike lanes to accommodate motorized scooters and wheelchairs. Transportation information, emerging mobility providers, and transit fares were other common themes.

While some comments related to the use of car share, transportation network companies (TNCs), or autonomous vehicles as potential solutions, other comments called for the increased accessibility and affordability of these services in the meantime.”30 A partnership between the World Institute on Disability and the MTC created the research and community engagement project TRACS (Transportation Resilience, Accessibility & Climate Sustainability). The project’s overall goal is to, “stimulate connection and communication between the community of seniors and people with disabilities together with the transportation system– the agencies in the region local to the San Francisco Bay, served by MTC.”31 As part of the TRACS outreach process, respondents were asked to share their compliments or good experiences with MTC transit. One respondent who had used multiple services said, “it is my sense that SamTrans is the best Bay Area transit provider in terms of overall disability accommodation.” 30 https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/MTC_Coordinated_Plan.pdf. 31 https://wid.org/transportation-accessibility/.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1168
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-81
Figure 48: Percent Change for Population Living in Poverty by Census Tract, 2000 to 2014
Source: Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plan, February 2018

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1169
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-82 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 49: Change in Seniors Aged 65 and Over by Census Tract, 2000 and 2014 Source: Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plan, February 2018

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1170
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-83
The San Mateo County Transit District updated their Mobility Plan for Older Adults and People with Disabilities in 2018. According to the district, the county’s senior population is expected to grow more than 70% over the next 20 years and the district is experiencing unprecedented increases in paratransit ridership. The plan is targeted at developing effective mobility programs for residents with disabilities and older adults including viable alternatives to paratransit, partnerships, and leveraging funding sources.32 Foster City is noted in the plan for being a site of a Volunteer Driver Program, located at the Peninsula Jewish Community Center. The Volunteer Driver Program is a network of volunteers who provide one-way, round-trip, and multi-stop rides free of charge to residents who need transportation assistance.

MTC also launched Clipper START—an 18-month pilot project—in 2020 which provides fare discounts on single transit rides for riders whose household income is no more than double the federal poverty level.33

4.4 ENVIRONMENT
TCAC’s opportunity areas environmental scores are based on the CalEnviroScreen 3.0 indicators, which identify areas disproportionately vulnerable to pollution sources such as ozone, PM2.5, diesel PM, pesticides, toxic release, traffic, cleanup sites, groundwater threats, hazardous waste, impaired water bodies, and solid waste sites. Foster City scores well on positive environmental outcomes, with no census tracts in the City scoring poorly (Figure 50). The City also scores high on California Healthy Places Index (HPI)—based on 25 community characteristics in eight categories including economic, social, education, transportation, neighborhood, housing, clean environment, and health care34— developed by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California (PHASC) (Figure 51). Though Foster City scores high based on CalEnviroScreen 3.0 indicators and HPI characteristics, data provided by the AARP Public Policy Institute (PPI) shows that both air and drinking water quality in the city declined between 2015 and 2022. In 2015, Foster City residents experienced one unhealthy air quality day per year—by 2022, however, this rate increased to 7.3 days per year. During the same time period, exposures to drinking water violations increased from 0% per year (2015) to 0.04% (2022).35 32 https://www.samtrans.com/Planning/Planning_and_Research/Mobility_Plan_for_Older_Adults_and_People_ with_Disabilities.html. 33 https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/transportation/access-equity-mobility/clipperr-startsm. 34 https://healthyplacesindex.org/about/. 35 https://livabilityindex.aarp.org/FosterCity,California,UnitedStates.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1171
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-84 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 50: TCAC Opportunity Areas Environmental Score by Census Tract, 2021 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1172
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-85
Figure 51: Healthy Places Index by Census Tract, 2021
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1173
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-86 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The city’s location, on the coast and away from uses that emit pollution, is also a major factor. With less congestion and traffic, coastal cities often experience reduced air pollution, improving livability indexes and both environmental and health outcomes. The AARP PPI—which provides Livability Indexes for cities and counties across the United States—adds factors such as hazard mitigation plans and local planning for climate change. Foster City’s positive environmental scores—across varying metrics—is likely attributed to effective long-term planning and robust policies and programs. Foster City, for instance, developed and adopted a local multi-hazard mitigation plan—approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—to reduce the effects of potential disasters.

Both Foster City and San Mateo County have also prioritized planning and policy identification for anticipated climate impacts in the Bay Area. In 2009, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) published a report on climate risks for Bay area residents—it found that by 2050 $36 billion of property and nearly 270,000 Bay residents would at an increased flood risk. San Mateo County is particularly vulnerable to sea level rise and flood-related infrastructure damage—a 2012 report conducted by researchers at the California Environmental Commission (CEC) and Pacific Institute found that 110,000 residents in San Mateo County are vulnerable to a flood event of a maximum 4.5 feet. This would have devastating effects on Foster City’s infrastructure including roadways, water treatment plants, and hazardous material sites. The City has taken various steps to address climate threats and implemented strong programs to prepare itself, most notably the Levee Improvements Project.

In order to maintain FEMA accreditation and keep Foster City properties out of the flood zone, Foster City voters approved Measure P in 2018 with nearly 81% support, authorizing the City to issue a $90 million general obligation (GO) bond to improve and strengthen the Foster City levee system. The Levee Improvements Project began construction in 2020 and will continue through 2023.

Other actions to address climate threats include adoption of the Sustainable Foster City Plan—a sustainable economic development strategy plan that incorporates environmental sustainability as a core component of sustainable economic growth—and a Climate Actions Plan in 2015. An update of the Climate Action Plan is underway in 2022-2023. Between 2003 and 2012, the city dedicated funding and grants from C/CAG for the Connections Shuttle—a free in-town shuttle connecting workers and residents to local businesses—to promote the use of public transportation and implemented a conservation-based tiered water rate structure with advanced rebate and education programs to improve water conservation. This effort led to a 17% reduction in Foster City’s overall water consumption between 2009 and 2013.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1174
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-87

4.5 DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY
Because Foster City offers high opportunity neighborhoods throughout, all residents live in highly resourced areas, regardless of race or ethnicity (Figure 52). Burlingame and Hillsborough are the two other cities in close proximity that are entirely high opportunity cities.

Figure 52: Population Living in Moderate and High Resource Ares by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) provided by the Center for Disease Control (CDC)—ranks census tracts based on their ability to respond to a disaster—includes four themes of socioeconomic status, household composition, race or ethnicity, and housing and transportation. Foster City scores well on the SVI; no neighborhoods are ill equipped to respond to disasters (see Figure 53). The census tract shown in Figure 53 with higher vulnerability than the rest of the City includes two senior apartment developments of extremely low- and very low-income households which contributes to the scoring. Although this census tract includes the area north of Highway 92, there are no housing units in that area.

Foster City does not have any disadvantaged communities as defined under SB 535 as, “the top 25% scoring areas from CalEnviroScreen along with other areas with high amounts of pollution and low populations.”36
36 https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1175
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-88 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 53: Social Vulnerability Index by Census Tract, 2018 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1176
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-89

4.6 DISPARITIES SPECIFIC TO THE POPULATION LIVING WITH A DISABILITY Seven percent of the population in Foster City is living with at least one disability, compared to 8% in the county. The most common disabilities in the City are ambulatory (3.3%), independent living (2.6%), and cognitive (2.1%). For the population 65 and over, the share of the population with an ambulatory or independent living difficulty increases to 14.9%.

Disability
“Disability types include hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty.” Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 36.

Unemployment is higher for residents living with a disability – 6%, compared with 3% for residents without a disability. Countywide, the unemployment rate for residents with a disability is 4%, compared to 3% for residents without a disability. High unemployment rates among this population points to a need for increased services and resources to connect this population with employment opportunities.

There are compounding effects when persons with disabilities are also subject to discrimination based on race or other characteristics. Figure 54 below shows the disparities in rent burden for people with and without disabilities by race/ethnicity.

Figure 54: All Races/Ethnicities: Disparities in Rent-Burden among San Mateo County Residents with and without Disabilities
Source: Housing Choices, 2022

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1177
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-90 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Most respondents to the resident survey who have a disability (30% of respondents) reported that their homes meet the needs of their disability; 16% said their homes do not. Modifications that are needed include: wider doorways and supportive services.

No areas of Foster City have concentrations of persons with disabilities as shown in Figure 55.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1178
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-91
Figure 55: Share of Population with a Disability by Census Tract, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1179
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-92 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
5 DISPROPORTIONATE HOUSING NEEDS
This section discusses disparate housing needs for protected classes including cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, substandard housing conditions, homelessness, displacement, and other considerations.

Disproportionate Housing Needs
“Disproportionate housing needs generally refers to a condition in which there are significant disparities in the proportion of members of a protected class experiencing a category of housing need when compared to the proportion of members of any other relevant groups, or the total population experiencing that category of housing need in the applicable geographic area. For purposes of this definition, categories of housing need are based on such factors as cost burden and severe cost burden, overcrowding, homelessness, and substandard housing conditions.” Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development Guidance, 2021, page 39.

5.1 HOUSING NEEDS
Population growth in Foster City has generally kept up with the pace of growth Countywide. Foster City lost population in the early 2000s, and growth has been positive since then until 2020, likely due to the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Spring of 2020. Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to accommodate growth has largely been priced for above moderate-income households, with 657 units permitted for above moderate-income households compared to 86 for very low income households, 49 for moderate income households, and 14 for low income households (Figure 56). The vast majority of the City’s homes were built between 1965 and 1979. After this period, housing production slowed significantly, particularly between 2000 and 2009, when only 48 units were built.

Foster City offers a variety of housing types with most medium or large multi-family (37.5%) and single family detached units (35.4%). One-fifth are single family attached and 7% are small multi-family units.37 Ownership in Foster City is challenging for households who cannot afford homes priced at $1 million and more: 71% of homes are valued at $1 million and more. This compares to 56% for the County and 35% for the Bay area overall (Figure 57).
37 Housing Needs Data Report: San Mateo, ABAG/MTC Staff and Baird + Driskell Community Planning, 2021.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1180
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-93
Figure 56: Housing Permits Issued by Income Group, Foster City, 2015-2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
Figure 57: Distribution of Home Value for Owner Occupied Units, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
According to the Zillow Home Value Index, Foster City is more expensive than the County and much pricier than the Bay area overall (Figure 58).

Rents are very high in Foster City, with 54% of units renting for $3,000 per month and more. This is considerably higher than in the County (22%) and Bay area overall (13%). Just 9% of the city’s rental units rent for $2,000 and less. The County has four times the proportion of rentals priced under $2,000 than the city.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1181
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-94 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 58: Zillow Home Value Index, 2001-2020
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

5.2 COST BURDEN AND SEVERE COST BURDEN
Despite Foster City’s comparably high housing costs, cost burden—which occurs when households spend more than 30% of their gross income on housing costs—occurs at slightly lower rates of cost burden (33%) than the County (37%)and Bay Area (37%) (Figure 59). Households are considered extremely cost burdened when they spend more than 50% of their income on housing. In Foster City, 14% of households are extremely cost burdened, compared to 17% in San Mateo County and 17% in the Bay Area as shown in Figure 59.

Figure 59: Overpayment (Cost Burden), 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1182
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-95
Cost burden varies by income level with lower income households having higher rates of cost burden. As shown in Figure 60, 81% (714 households) of the households earning 0-30% of the AMI are extremely cost burdened. Similarly, 44% (440 households) earning 31-50% of AMI and 26% (360 households) earning 51%-80% of AMI are extremely cost burdened. Put together, 1,514 households (46%) of the total 3,292 lower income households are extremely cost burdened. An additional 809 households (25%) are cost burdened.

Figure 60: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Income Level, 2017 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
Cost burden varies by tenure (renter or owner) and by census tract. Renters are often more likely to be cost burdened than owners. While the housing market has resulted in home prices increasing dramatically, homeowners often have mortgages with fixed rates, whereas renters are more likely to be impacted by market increases. When looking at the cost burden across tenure in Foster City, 17.7% of renters spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing compared to 19.6% of those that own (see Figure 61). Additionally, 14.9% of renters spend 50% or more of their income on housing, while 13.3% of owners are severely cost-burdened (Figure 61).
9%
34% 39%
47%
88%
10%
22%
36%
43%
12%
81%
44%
26%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100% of
AMI
Greater than
100% of AMI
Percent of Households
0%-30% of Income Used for Housing 30%-50% of Income Used for Housing 50%+ of Income Used for Housing

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1183
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-96 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

Figure 61: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Tenure, 2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019) As shown in Figures 62 and 63, there are more concentrations of cost burdened owners than renters. Cost burden for owners is highest in census tracts 6080.13 (similar to renters), 6083, and 6080.04—all of which indicate 40-60% of owners are cost burdened. Looking more closely at the data, the reported rates of owner cost burden are 40.6% in tract 6080.04, 44.1% in tract 6083, and 46.5% in tract 6080.13, just over the threshold to be reported in the 40-60% category. The other census tracts report owner cost burden rates of 22% to 37.7%.

There is a notable concentration of cost burdened renters in tract 6080.13 where 41.9% of renters experience cost burden. Figures 62 and 63 also show a prominent gap between cost burdened renters in tracts 6080.13 and 6080.23—in tract 6080.13, 41.9% of renters are cost burdened—the city’s largest concentration—while 10.2% are cost burdened in tract 6080.23, the city’s smallest concentration.

Affordable housing sites are largely concentrated in the census tract 6080.25 where owners are more likely to be cost burdened than renters. No existing affordable housing sites are located in census tract 6080.13 where 41.9% of renters are cost burdened, though Schooner Bay Apartments and Lantern Cove Apartments are located in this area and will include affordable housing when they are redeveloped. See Section 6, Site Inventory Analysis, for further discussion of the geographic distribution of sites in the Sites Inventory.

There are disparities in housing cost burden in Foster City by race and ethnicity. Black or African American (58%) and Hispanic households (42%) experience the highest rates of cost burden in the city.

Asian (29%) and non-Hispanic White households (30%) are least likely to be cost burdened.

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1184
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-97
Figure 62: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Renter Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1185
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-98 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
Figure 63: Overpayment (Cost Burden) for Owner Households by Census Tract, 2019
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1186
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-99

5.3 Overcrowding
The vast majority of households (95%) in Foster City are not overcrowded—indicated by more than one occupant per room. This is slightly better than the percentage of households that are not overcrowded in San Mateo County (92%) and the Bay Area at large (93%). However, renter households are more likely to be overcrowded, with 5.9% of households with more than one occupant per room, compared to 1.4% of owner households (Figures 64 and 65).

Figure 64: Overcrowding Severity, 2017
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release
Figure 65: Occupants per Room by Tenure, Foster City, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
95% 92% 93%
3% 5% 4% 3%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%
100.0%
Foster City San Mateo County Bay Area
Percent of Households

1.00 occupants per room or less 1.01 to 1.50 occupants per room

1.50 occupants per room or more

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1187
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-100 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The geographic extent of overcrowding of renter-occupied households in Foster City is closely aligned with the location of renter households (see Figure 66). As indicated in Figure 66, the largest number of overcrowded renter-occupied units is in Tract 6080.25, which also has the larger number (2063) and percentage (85.64%) of renter occupied units. The second highest number of overcrowded renteroccupied units is in Tract 6080.01, which is the second highest percentage of renter-occupied units (58.12%).

Figure 66: Overcrowding by Renter-Occupied Units and Census Tract, 2020 Source: 2016-2020 ACS data

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1188
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-101
Figure 67: Overcrowding by Owner-Occupied Units, 2020
Source: 2016-2020 5-year ACS data

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1189
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-102 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031
The geographic extent of overcrowding of owner-occupied units appears to be somewhat aligned with the census tracts with larger proportions of Asian population, such as in Tracts 6081 (50.4%), 6083 (61.5%), and 6080.24 (60.1%). This is consistent with the data provided in Figure 68 showing the highest percentage of overcrowding by race and ethnicity is for Asian households.

Figure 68: Overcrowding by Race and Ethnicity, Foster City, 2019 Note: Overcrowding is indicated by more than 1 person per room.

Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook
The types of households most likely to experience overcrowding include Asian households (8.2% are overcrowded) and other or multiple race households (6.7%) (Figure 68). The City’s moderate-income households (80% to 100% AMI) are just as likely to be overcrowded as the lowest income households (<30% AMI) (Figure 69).

Figure 69: Occupants per Room by AMI, Foster City, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1190
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031 B-103
Although there are some census tracts with slightly higher concentrations of overcrowded renter or owner-occupied households, there are no significant geographic concentrations of overcrowded households in Foster City as shown in Figure 70.

Figure 70: Overcrowded Households by Census Tract, 2019 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development AFFH Data Viewer

4.1 Attachment 4 - Exhibit B Housing Element dated 1.11.2024 (clean) 1191
APPENDIX B: FOSTER CITY FAIR HOUSING ASSESSMENT
B-104 CITY OF FOSTER CITY HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-2031

5.4 SUBSTANDARD HOUSING
Data on housing condition is very limited, with the most consistent data available across jurisdictions found in the American Community Survey (ACS)—which captures units in substandard condition as selfreported in Census surveys. No owner households in Foster City report living in substandard housing.

About 1% of renter households are lacking complete kitchens and .2% lack complete plumbing. Some of these renters are likely people renting rooms in a shared unit and therefore do not have their own kitchen.

The Census data corroborates the local knowledge ascertained from the City’s building inspectors that there are very few, if any, substandard units. The geographic extent of units reporting a lack of a complete kitchen or complete plumbing is included in Table 14. The largest number of the renters reporting lack of a kitchen are in tract 6080.25, with 38 of the 2,409 occupied renter households, or 1.6%.