PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
REGULAR MEETING AND STUDY SESSION
OF THE FOSTER CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Council Chambers – 620 Foster City Boulevard – Foster City
M I N U T E S
March 6, 2025
1. CALL TO ORDER
At 7:00 p.m. by Chair Haddad
All votes shall be by roll call due to Commissioner Kenkre participating remotely pursuant to AB 2449, the j ust cause circumstance, as Commissioner Kenkre was traveling on official government business.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Jagtiani, Kenkre, Pedro, Stoveland and Chair Haddad
Staff Present: Sofia Mangalam, Community Development Director; Nori Jabba, Housing Coordinator; Helen Telfer, Senior Planner; Kevin McGill, Assistant Planner; Denise Bazzano, Assistant City Attorney
3. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
1. None
4. CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Regular Meeting Minutes from February 20, 2025
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Stoveland, seconded by Commissioner Pedro to approve the Minutes of February 20, 2025 passed by roll call 5-0-0-0.
5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
1. None
6. NEW PUBLIC HEARING
1. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.90, “BELOW MARKET RATE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM,” WITHIN TITLE 17, “ZONING,” SECTION 17.90.020, “DEFINITIONS,” AND TO ADD NEW SECTIONS
17.90.130, “JUST CAUSE EVICTIONS” AND 17.90.140, “TENANT RELOCATION ASSISTANCE”; AND 17.90.150, “REGISTRY OF BELOW MARKET RATE UNITS,” TO IMPLEMENT HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAMS H -C-3-B, ANTI -DISPLACEMENT STRATEGY AND H-G-2-E, RENTAL REGISTRY, AND FINDING ORDINANCE EXEMPT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE SECTION 15061(B)(3).
Planning Commissioners had the following questions:
Commissioner Pedro analyzed that Below Market Rate (BMR) recommendations go further than AB 1482 and asked why it reaches beyond the State guidelines.
Housing Coordinator Jabba stated that AB 1482 is one month of rent and City Council recommends three months of the HUD fair market rent, which is equivalent to low to moderate income. She explained that HUD fair market rent would be more equivalent to month of market rent to protect tenants.
Commissioner Pedro added that another area that goes further than AB 1482 would be the five percent restriction on rental increases.
Housing Coordinator Jabba confirmed that the five percent is not in the ordinance but would be handled in the BMR guidelines. She explained further that City Council mirrored the industry standard for BMR rentals of five percent without Consumer Price Index (CPI).
Commissioner Pedro asked if Planning Commission can amend the recommendation or asked if it has to be accepted as is.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano stated that the Planning Commission can take the staff’s recommendation and either approve or deny the recommendation. She added that if the Planning Commission approves the recommendation, they are welcome to add comments or recommendations to the City Council for further consideration.
Commissioner Pedro clarified that it’s either a yes or no on the recommendation. He understood that if they say yes to the recommendation, there would be no guarantee that the City Council will make the recommended changes.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano confirmed and added that the Planning Commission can also recommend that the City Council consider making a change or adding language to the ordinance.
Commissioner Pedro asked what the next steps of the process would be if the Planning Commission decides not to make the recommendation.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano stated that the item can still go to the City Council for their consideration but would have to consider that the Planning Commission did not make the recommendation.
Commissioner Kenkre cited an example that was given regarding the $2,800 in tenant rent. He asked if the tenant is evicted, what is the liability for the landlord, is it $2,800 or will it be the cost of the new unit.
Housing Coordinator Jabba clarified that it is in regard to relocation. She stated that the liability for the landlord is three months at the HUD Fair Market Rent. She added that the landlord is liable for paying for a relocation consultant.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Commissioner Kenkre asked prior to the meeting if the proposed anti -displacement strategy was only limited to renters or owner-occupied units. He received a response that owner-occupied units will be settled between the lending institution and the homeowner.
Housing Coordinator Jabba added that the anti-displacement strategy only covers the BMR rental units.
Commissioner Jagtiani referred to the rental registry and asked if the property owner or the BMR unit renter will pay for the admin cost in order to provide information on a regular basis to the City.
Housing Coordinator Jabba stated that the property owners are already required to pay for the cost and the time for their staff to input the information as part of their regulatory agreement.
Community Development Director Mangalam noted that we don’t have an agreement in place for the new software as of today as that will be part of the City Council action.
Commissioner Jagtiani asked how many other cities in the Peninsula have a rental registry.
Housing Coordinator Jabba cited that in San Mateo County, Half Moon Bay instituted their rental registry in 2024, and East Palo Alto recently started theirs. She added that outside of San Mateo County, Mountain View and Concord have a rental registry as well.
Commissioner Pedro reiterated that in San Mateo County, there are two cities with a rental registry so far.
Housing Coordinator Jabba confirmed and stated that Half Moon Bay and East Palo Alto are citywide and not only for BMR units.
Commissioner Pedro referenced the HUD value regarding the relocation payment. He indicated that the rent amount determined may be higher than what the tenant is paying.
Housing Coordinator Jabba stated that the HUD number is standard every year. She added that if a tenant had extremely low-income rent, it would likely be less than the HUD Fair Market Rent.
Commissioner Pedro stated the tenant might be receiving several months’ relocation payment.
Housing Coordinator Jabba confirmed that the concept behind that is to make that amount more equivalent to market rate so that they could find housing.
Commissioner Pedro recommended that the City follow with the State Law, AB 1482, as it would keep everything clean. He added that property managers and housing providers are having a hard time with ensuring that they are in compliance with each City.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano noted that the Ordinance that is being presented tonight incorporates the direction received from City Council.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Commissioner Jagtiani asked if State Law AB 1482 does not cover BMR units.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano confirmed.
Commissioner Pedro emphasized that it would be simpler to say BMR units are now included in AB 1482. He further asked if it would be possible to just adopt the State law and keep it simple.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano clarified that the ordinance that is being presented tonight incorporates the direction that staff has received from City Council and is the reason why it has the provisions that it does.
Commissioner Pedro asked if there is a possibility that City Council would reconsider and just adopt the State law and keep it simple.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano stated that if the majority of the Planning Commissioners want to recommend the ordinance to the City Council with additional considerations of revising the ordinance so that it conforms to AB 1482 or other State law, the Planning Commission can add that note to its recommendation.
Commissioner Pedro clarified that if the Planning Commission is recommending the ordinance with a note, it’s not as strong as an amendment.
Assistant City Attorney Bazzano added that they could recommend not approving the ordinance.
Commissioner Pedro stated that he is leaning in that direction.
Chair Haddad asked if City Council discussed that as an option.
Community Development Director Mangalam stated that as part of the study session, they had a robust discussion on AB 1482 and its provisions.
Commissioner Stoveland commented that there are situations where we have taken great lengths to make things easier for developers to be prepared and either develop or redevelop a property. He had questioned whether this would put a developer over the edge but concluded that the greater good is served by not disincentivizing the developer and to produce more BMR units. He referenced that City Council arrived at a three- month relocation assistance and asked if there are any municipalities in the area that have done greater than three months.
Community Development Director Mangalam referred to the City Council study session and stated that Redwood City has a Relocation Assistance Ordinance of three to four months of fair market rent. She added that Menlo Park has a Tenant Relocation Assistance Ordinance that requires any landlords that causes permanent displacement of residential households provide eligible residential households with relocation assistance of three months of rent and four months for certain circumstances.
Commissioner Stoveland clarified that we are referring to BMR units being on the rental registry. He inquired that if the City Council approves the new software, the landlords wouldn’t be required to provide the information until the software is in place.
Housing Coordinator Jabba confirmed.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Commissioner Stoveland asked if there would be a timeline for implementation.
Community Development Director Mangalam noted that there is a target date of next fiscal year. She added that there is no current agreement in place and the action has not been taken to the City Council yet.
Commissioner Stoveland asked if we have gone to a Request for Proposal (RFP) to identify the software.
Community Development Director Mangalam confirmed that it was done last year.
Commissioner Pedro asked if staff has conducted research regarding FDIC and other federal bank regulators, and if so, what are their comments regarding rent-controlled assets with the loss of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and First Republic Bank. He noted that FDIC identified rent-controlled assets as ‘toxic’ after reviewing the balance sheet of the financial institutions. He raised his concern that if this is the Federal Government’s stance, banks will have fewer of these assets in their portfolio on their balance sheet and will lead to significant impact on the lender’s ability to finance these projects. He continued that if rent controls and restrictions on properties persist, there will be no one to buy it or provide financing.
Housing Coordinator Jabba explained that BMR units are already rent controlled and are regulated in what the rent can be each year, by way of maximum rent. She added that with the City Council’s direction of a maximum of five percent restriction in rent increase, it makes it more consistent and helps when pro formas are done.
Commissioner Pedro reiterated that if research has been done on how the Federal Regulators will view this in the banking industry and if the financing will be there. He expressed that if we are passing a policy and if there is no accurate data and research behind it, passing the policy may be premature.
Housing Coordinator Jabba responded that research on financial institutions has not been conducted.
Director Mangalam provided examples of Redwood City and Menlo Park displacement requirements.
Commissioner Jagtiani agreed that the city needs more production of housing. He raised concern about adding more costs, such as the rental registry and similar costs will have an impact on financing. He stated that putting a 5% cap on the rent increase will have an impact on production of housing and will ultimately have an impact on the cost of housing.
Commissioner Stoveland confirmed that it will have an impact at the margin. He added that there are plenty of financing vehicles and sources of capital available in the marketplace, particularly for developers of BMR units. He clarified that he is not saying it will be easy but that this is not an unusual tool.
The following people addressed the Planning Commission:
Evan Adams addressed the Planning Commission in person and offered his support of rental registries to provide accurate data to aid in better decision making in the future.
Adams expressed concern about not adhering to Foster City's Housing Element.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Fernando Peña, representing the San Mateo County Association of Realtors, addressed the Planning Commission via teleconference. Peña stated to not go beyond State laws, including AB 1482 and Senate Bill 567. Peña cited Proposition 33, which was defeated on November 5th that addressed numerous rent control type measures. Peña provided an example of a State Legislature rejecting four bills that dealt with rental registries on a statewide basis. Peña additionally expressed concern about increasing taxpayer costs.
Planning Commissioners had the following comments:
Commissioner Pedro acknowledged that although well intended, he believes it will make it hard for the housing providers to stay in compliance with each city’s code. He proposed a simpler route by sticking to AB1482 for the BMR units.
Commissioner Jagtiani concurred and stated that he does not want to add more costs to housing providers at this time. He furthered that the admin costs are going to eventually be passed on to the consumer or that financing will be tougher if the performance doesn’t meet.
Commissioner Kenkre agreed on keeping things simple.
Commissioner Pedro stated that it is more important that the policy is correct. He offered revisiting through more study sessions and discussing with builders, investors, and tenants to have a feel on what people are willing to adapt to.
Commissioner Stoveland clarified that Foster City has 12,000 rental units and 426 BMR units so that is 1/3 of 1% of the entire units in the City. The strategy has been laid out and indicated that the Planning Commission would have to have a sound reason for not supporting and he supported putting forth the resolution as written.
Commissioner Pedro made a motion not to recommend the resolution for the following reasons:
(1) Regarding the findings in number two [The proposed amendments are internally consistent with all other provisions of the General Plan and do not conflict with any of the previously adopted goals, policies or programs of the General Plan], Commissioner Pedro emphasized that he doesn’t think the proposed ordinance is consistent with the goals of the city.
(2) Regarding finding number three [The proposed amendments are necessary to implement the goals and policies of the General Plan through the implementation of the Housing Element] Commissioner Pedro stated he thinks this type of policy will hurt the City’s ability to meet the goals within the Housing Element and within the General Plan.
(3) Regarding finding number four [The proposed amendments will not be detrimental to the public interest, convenience, and general welfare of the City] Commissioner Pedro stated that he believes if we do not get this housing built per the City’s Housing Element, it will be detrimental to the public interest because the State could come in and force build-by-right. He stated he does not think the citizens of Foster City want to lose local control over what’s built, where, and why.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Pedro, seconded by Commissioner Jagtiani, to deny
recommendation of City Council acceptance of the Amendment to Chapter 17.90, Below
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Market Rate Inclusionary Housing Program of the Foster City Municipal Code, passed by roll call 3-2-0-0 (Noes: Stoveland, Chair Haddad).
7. OLD BUSINESS
1. None
8. NEW BUSINESS
1. None
9. STUDY SESSION
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY SESSION IS TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE
INPUT ON A PROPOSED USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW A RECREATIONAL
FACILITY USE INCLUDING TWO AND A HALF HIGH SCHOOL REGULATION- SIZED
BASKETBALL COURTS FOR LOCAL YOUTH CLUB PRACTICES, CAMPS,
TOURNAMENTS, ADULT LEAGUES, AND COMMUNITY EVENTS WITHIN AN EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED AT 391 FOSTER CITY BOULEVARD – APN:
094-012-220
Planning Commissioners had the following discussion:
Commissioner Jagtiani asked if there is an estimated number of occupants at a given time.
Senior Planner Telfer responded that there is an estimated maximum of 200 children or athletes at any given time with an addition of five staff members. She added that after discussing with the Building Division and Fire Department, maximum capacity will be determined at the plan check review stage, based on the total amount of square footage in the facility space.
Commissioner Jagtiani asked if it will be reflected in the parking analysis.
Senior Planner Telfer confirmed but reiterated that the number will be determined and finalized once the Building Division and Fire Department collaborate on the exact square footage of each type of use on site.
Commissioner Stoveland stated that the plans do not indicate that there are stands for viewing the games and may be a limiter in the amount of people allowed in the building at any one time. He referenced the steel poles that run through the middle of the building and asked if there would be a minimum requirement for safety regarding those.
Senior Planner Telfer mentioned that the Building Division confirmed that there will need to be protection around those poles for safety but ultimately depends on their final scope.
Commissioner Stoveland cited that the applicant is proposing basketball, pickleball , and volleyball and inquired if they will be looking into the clearance heights for these sports.
Senior Planner Telfer had corroborated with the Building Official and confirmed that there are no building code clearance height requirements.
Commissioner Stoveland asked what the existing clearance height is for the building.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Senior Planner Telfer stated that it is twenty-two feet.
Commissioner Stoveland indicated that the flooring is currently concrete and inquired if it would be a major part of the renovation of the property.
Senior Planner Telfer confirmed that the entire warehouse would be renovated.
Commissioner Stoveland clarified that the property has been vacant since August and that the only interested parties have been for uses of this type.
Senior Planner Telfer stated that there have been eight inquiries about youth facilities and sporting clubs according to the listing agent.
Chair Haddad asked if it is known how long the property will be leased for.
The applicant provided that they are still in contract negotiations and are hoping for five to ten years.
Chair Haddad inquired if offsite parking is limited in the adjacent streets and if it will help in the parking analysis.
Senior Planner Telfer responded that the parking analysis will be required for off -street parking and there will be a required number of parking spaces for this privately-owned site. She added that they cannot rely on on-street public parking for this use.
Chair Haddad asked if there would be space for sitting.
The applicant answered that there are plans to have a two to three row metal bleacher and that it will limit spectators. She added that the use will be for practices and do not anticipate a giant need for spectators. She mentioned that if they do run tournaments, there will be signs that will indicate the limited seating available and will follow occupancy rules.
Commissioner Stoveland cited that there are no proposed changes to the outside of the building and confirmed that the building could return to a warehouse in the future.
Community Development Director Mangalam noted that there could be a sign permit for a wall sign and that it is the only exterior change that they are anticipating for that use.
The following people addressed the Planning Commission:
Evan Adams addressed the Planning Commission in person and expressed concern about potential parking and traffic issues. Adams advised the importance of maintaining warehouse space and the effect of removing such businesses may have on the community.
Kaushik Thakkar addressed the Planning Commission via teleconference and offered a suggestion to include Badminton amongst the sports offered by facility.
Summary of staff questions:
Does the Planning Commission believe the proposed use meet the determination criteria for Section 17.42.040?
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
Commissioner Pedro stated that his main concerns will be answered through the parking analysis as well as in regard to capacity and safety.
Commissioner Jagtiani added that once the analysis is done, that would be the right time to deliberate it.
Commissioner Stoveland responded that it fits the definition as presented under Section
17.42.040.
Commissioner Kenkre offered his support of the project.
Chair Haddad concurred.
Are the proposed hours of operation acceptable to the Commission?
Senior Planner Telfer indicated that the proposed hours of operations would be 9 a.m. to 11 p.m. on the weekdays. She provided that adult league organizations would run in the late evenings. She added that the weekend would be determined by what type of events will be held.
Commissioner Stoveland approved of the hours of operations and having the ability to have adult leagues in the evening.
Commissioner Jagtiani confirmed that there are no residential units in the close proximity and agreed on 11 p.m.
Commissioner Pedro stated that he is fine with the proposed hours of operation and is also in support of expanding the hours to have it open later.
Commissioner Kenkre agreed with the hours of operation.
Chair Haddad stated that the area is considered non-residential, and that noise and traffic will not be an issue. He supported the close time of 11 p.m.
Does the Planning Commission need further studies and/or additional analysis to be conducted to evaluate the impacts of the proposed use?
Commissioner Stoveland asked if there are requirements if the applicant were to consider holding events or serving food.
Community Development Director Mangalam stated that there is a requirement from the San Mateo Health Department if there is on-site cooking, but no requirements if food will be brought from outside.
Commissioner Jagtiani referenced that the parking analysis and occupancy study would suffice.
Commissioner Kenkre concurred.
Chair Haddad referenced Commissioner Pedro’s request for later hours and mentioned that the applicant can revisit the topic as an option at a later time.
Community Development Director Mangalam noted that the late hours will have to be referred to the Police Department.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
2. THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY SESSION IS TO PROVIDE THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND THE PUBLIC AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW AND PROVIDE
INPUT ON A PROPOSED USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW A HEALTH SCIENCE UNIVERSITY USE WITHIN AN EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING LOCATED AT 989 E.
HILLSDALE BOULEVARD IN THE TOWN CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD – APN:
094-522-170
Planning Commissioners had the following discussion:
Commissioner Jagtiani inquired if the current campus has similar number and size of classrooms.
The applicant responded that they currently have three classrooms in their San Mateo campus. They furthered that the Foster City location would allow them one more skills lab and one more simulation lab.
Commissioner Jagtiani stated that parking is linked to the number of students attending the classes. He asked if the number of students changes over time.
The applicant confirmed that the number of students remains stable and that there are busier times depending on the class schedules and how they fall throughout the semester.
Commissioner Kenkre asked in advanced the types of experiments that w ould be conducted in the lab and if it would create a biohazard waste and was informed that it would not.
Commissioner Jagtiani asked if another parking analysis will be done.
Community Development Director Mangalam stated that they meet the Municipal Code parking regulations. She added that t he Assistant Planner McGill visited the San Mateo campus to gauge the parking scenario, where twenty to thirty parking spaces were occupied. She furthered that the Assistant Planner McGill had viewed the parking scenario on Google Maps over a couple of years and it remained consistent.
Commissioner Jagtiani asked if there will be any occupancy limit.
Community Development Director Mangalam stated that as part of the Building Permit review, both Building and Fire will look into the square footage being used for a specific use and if there is an occupancy limit.
Commissioner Jagtiani stated that it’s a great use of the property and will increase revenues for the City overall.
Community Development Director Mangalam informed that the applicant is keen on moving to a Public Hearing and if there are no further analysis , they will bring the item back to the Planning Commission in the next meeting.
Chair Haddad stated that he’s fine with the item being brought to the next meeting.
Commissioner Jagtiani agreed to expedite it.
10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
1. Community Development Director Mangalam stated that the City embarked on updating two General Plan Elements, Open Space and Parks Element and Conservation Element.
She furthered that the next meeting will be a Joint Study Session with the Parks and Recreation Committee and that there are plans to have two additional study sessions, the first is to introduce the project and discuss the community engagement plan. She added that there is overlap from the Parks Master Plan that will help in our Parks and Open Space Element.
11. STATEMENTS AND REQUESTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS
1. Commissioner Stoveland stated he had no requests.
2. Commissioner Jagtiani informed that the Holi Festival will be on March 2 2nd and hopes to see the community there.
3. Commissioner Kenkre stated that he is at tending the Planning Commissioner Academy and how it is an unbelievably beneficial experience.
4. Commissioner Pedro thanked staff for their time, preparing the reports, and handling all the questions. He stated that he is looking forward to Commissioner Kenkre’s takeaways from the Planning Commissioner Academy and that it’s a valuable experience.
5. Chair Haddad stated that he appreciates all the effort made by the City staff in preparing the reports.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Adjourned at 9:12 p.m. to a Regular Meeting, March 20, 2025, Council Chambers, 620 Foster City Boulevard, Foster City, California.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 6, 2025
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Foster City at a Regular Meeting thereof held on April 3, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES, COMMISSIONERS: Jagtiani, Kenkre, Pedro, Stoveland and Chair Haddad
NOES, COMMISSIONERS:
ABSTAIN, COMMISSIONERS:
ABSENT, COMMISSIONERS:
_____________________________
NICOLAS HADDAD, CHAIR
ATTEST:
____________________________
SOFIA MANGALAM, SECRETARY
Nicolas Haddad (Apr 7, 2025 20:30 PDT)
Nicolas Haddad