CITY OF FOSTER CITY
LAND USE SUBCOMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2024, 3:00 PM
SPECIAL MEETING
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 pm.
2. ROLL CALL
Senior Management Analyst Becki Hanan
PRESENT: Committee Member Jon Froomin and Committee Member Sam Hindi
ABSENT: None
STAFF: Sofia Mangalam, Community Development Director; Leslie Carmichael, Consultant Planner; Monica Ly, Planning
Manager
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
4.1 May 9, 2024 Land Use Subcommittee Meeting Minutes
4.2 July 11, 2024 Land Use Subcommittee Meeting Minutes
5. REPORTS
None
6. OLD BUSINESS
1. HOUSING ELEMENT 2023-201 IMPLEMENTATION FOR THE YEAR 2024.
Director Mangalam provided background for Housing Element Implementation Consultant Planner Carmichael discussed the first code amendment:
H-C-1-b Amend Percentage of BMR Units in Conversions.
Committee Members had the following comments:
Consultant Planner Carmichael advised the program in the housing element aims to review the percentage of inclusionary housing, which is currently set at 10% for low and moderate-income households or 1% of gross sales contributed to the city.
Consultant Planner Carmichael suggested referencing the Inclusionary Chapter for apartment-to-condominium conversions, requiring 15% inclusionary housing for moderate-income units while keeping other administrative details unchanged.
Committee member Froomin asked if the current for-sale unit is 20%.
Consultant Planner Carmichael confirmed that 20% applies to moderate units.
Consultant Planner Carmichael noted the goal of clarifying subjective language, such as the director's ranking of applications based on subjective factors when multiple applications are received.
Committee member Froomin questioned why rent items are listed when converting to for-sale units but acknowledged that conditions might change at the time of application.
Committee member Froomin inquired about time limits for the process, expressing concerns over whether it might take more than a year.
Consultant Planner Carmichael clarified that tenants would need 180 days' notice before termination, though additional time may be needed for reporting on building conditions for potential buyers.
Committee member Froomin noted the potential loss of rental income during the conversion period.
Consultant Planner Carmichael responded that tenants would continue paying rent, though rent increases would not be allowed during this time.
Committee member Froomin raised concerns about offering lifetime leases when units are being converted.
Consultant Planner Carmichael explained that while developers retain ownership or sell the units, tenants could maintain lifetime leases.
Director Mangalam mentioned that the provisions for lifetime leases are being reviewed with the city attorney.
Committee members Froomin and Hindi asked about relocation options for tenants with lifetime leases.
Committee member Hindi also questioned how the process would proceed if a developer had to retain more than half of the lifetime lease tenants.
Committee member Froomin suggested increasing relocation assistance, particularly for older tenants with limited income.
Consultant Planner Carmichael responded that tenants could choose between accepting a lifetime lease or relocation assistance.
Consultant Planner Carmichael noted a provision allowing CPI-based increases for lifetime leases.
Committee member Froomin suggested researching relocation assistance, even if it’s not mandated state law, because otherwise, it would be unrealistic.
Committee member Hindi supported further research to ensure that the timeframe for relocation is based on realistic data rather than an arbitrary number of months.
Committee member Froomin emphasized that older tenants (62 and above) or those with disabilities might require more time and have higher moving expenses than younger tenants.
Committee member Hindi questioned whether the age threshold of 62 was appropriate, suggesting that it might be more about income than age.
Director Mangalam agreed that more research is needed before finalizing language for age-based provisions, noting that adjustments could lead to better protections.
Committee member Froomin proposed creating separate categories for tenants based on financial ability and handicap status rather than age.
Director Mangalam highlighted that, due to the aging population being a key factor, staff recognized the importance of including additional protections.
Committee member Froomin suggested that we should find a way to add it in an objective manner, possibly by basing it on income range.
H-D-4-f Objective Design Standards for ADUs.
Consultant Planner Carmichael discussed objective design standards for ADUs, such as adjusting window placement to avoid privacy issues.
Committee member Froomin asked whether ADUs should match the appearance of the primary house and expressed concern about provisions related to window frames.
Director Mangalam replied that the roof, exterior walls, and colors would need to match the primary house, not getting into the other details.
Director Mangalam responded that the focus is on matching the roof, exterior walls, and colors of the ADU with the primary house without addressing details like window frames.
Committee member Froomin questioned the need for concerns about glazing and sill height, noting that many existing homes don’t meet these requirements.
He suggested that a six-foot fence would likely block the view of first-floor windows, making the requirement unnecessary.
Director Mangalam agreed and confirmed that the first-floor requirement could be removed, but the obscured glazing requirement would remain for second-story windows.
Committee member Froomin agreed that a balcony should not be included in ADUs due to privacy.
H-D-6-c Amend Parking Requirements.
Director Mangalam noted that the current parking requirement for senior housing is 0.5 spaces per bedroom, not per unit, and 0.5 spaces per unit for guest parking.
Committee member Froomin suggested adding a requirement for designated passenger/loading or delivery parking spaces.
Committee member Hindi reminded the committee that some senior housing facilities also provide shuttle bus services.
H-D-6-b Minimize Zoning Constraints and H-E-9-a Family Friendly Housing.
Committee member Froomin suggested creating a program that offers more credits for multi-family housing, noting that without incentive, adding space can become more costly and more of a hindrance.
Committee member Hindi added that offering amenities could be seen as a positive feature, as many people value having access to them.
Committee member Froomin proposed that awarding points for adding amenities could encourage developers to include them, making it less of a financial burden or impediment.
H-F-2-e Low Barrier Navigation Centers.
Committee member Froomin asked staff whether there is currently supportive housing in these zones and if there is a requirement to add more zones.
Director Mangalam confirmed that supportive housing has been included in some districts previously, and now they are adding it to the R-T, R-3, R-4, C-2, and CM/PD districts.
7. NEW BUSINESS
None
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.