1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair Ali-Sullivan. The Planning Commission held a hybrid meeting in the Council Chambers and virtually via Zoom.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
Present: COMMISSIONERS: Bonilla Jr., Goldstein, Lowe, Roche CHAIRPERSON: Ali-Sullivan
Absent: COMMISSIONER: Stevens
CHAIRPERSON: Oquenda
Staff Members Present: Madhukansh, Morales, Ochinero, Schmidt, Tabari, Thompson, Vigilia
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were none.
WORK SESSION
1. Proposal Bonus Update: Review and Discuss Updates to the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance for Compliance with State Density Bonus Laws (WS 22-035)
Senior Planner Thompson provided a synopsis of the staff report.
Commissioner Goldstein asked staff if 55 per cent for very low-income was the proposed Hayward maximum density and if special groups were also to be targeted. He also asked if a developer was allowed a 60 percent density bonus for a ten-unit project, then they would be permitted to build an additional six units. Senior Planner Thom pson confirmed t his was correct.
Commissioner Goldstein commented that the proposed recommendations were very generous compared to the State’s incentives. He wanted to understand if staff received any feedback on the proposal from developers. Ms. Thompson mentioned a survey and interviews w ere conducted with developers sharing three developers participated in this process.
Commissioner Goldstein indicated that in previous conversation s with develope rs, some responses received were that developers could build higher projects, but this would not come to fruition due to increased costs. Senior Planner Thompson sha red that developers provided feedback on methods to incenti vize greater production of affordable housing
2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
units within the city , including providing feedback f or the proposed ordinance which comprises of incentives, concessions, and greater density bonus.
With regards to financial incentives, fee waivers, and fee deferrals, Commissioner Goldstein encouraged staff to consult with the Hayward Area Recreation and Park District (HARD) Board on the proposed reduction of the park in-lieu fees due to the potential impact it may have. He commented that many times developers proposed to dedicate space to be used for a park , however these typically did not have a maintenance fund and that this should be considered. Mr. Goldstein noted that the city was struggling to modernize its existing infrastructure and suggested that staff consider what neighborhoods were being developed and whether a utility fee deferral would be feasible.
Commissioner Roche appreciated staf f’s recommendation with streamlining the process as this will guid e developers . She agreed with Commissioner Goldstein ’s comment s on p ark in-lieu fees and consulting with HARD, and underscored the importance of providing green space for p eople to enjoy the outdoors when building high density projects. Ms. Roche shared that many residents were concerned about traffic impacts result ing from construction al ong Mission Boulevard and emphasized the need for resources to he lp manage traffic as additional housing projects are constructed.
Commissioner Lowe asked what policies and provisions were in place to ensure equity when the City considers waiving a fee or issuing a deferral . Ms. Thompson stated that equity provisions were a policy consideration and staff would forward that question to the City Council for consideration.
Commissioner Lowe asked what problems and concerns were experienced by other cities when administering fee waivers or deferrals. Housing Division Manager Morales stated standard criteria would be established for individual projects rather than who was requesting thereby setting specific terms. In order to ensure compliance, Ms. Morales shared the fees would be memorialized in agreements that would be recorded to the title of the property. In terms of deferr als, the fee payments would differ until the units were placed in service and would be short -term deferrals. With regards to the park in-lieu fees, Ms. Morales clarified that the ability to waive the fees for 100 percent affordable housing projects already existed under the ordinance. Ms. Morales added that staff worked with HARD to allow specified reductions in park fees for units that comply w ith on -site affordable housing to incentivize developers.
Commissioner Lowe noted that when develo pers were asked to complete the survey, the response was that mixed -use was difficult due to ch allenges with the size and get ting financing of commercial spaces . She asked staff if the City’s requirements for mixed-use developments were similar to other cities of the same size. She wanted to ensure that an
3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
updated ordinance would allow Hayward to be competitive in th e development of affordable housing.
Senior Planner Hittleman with Rincon Consultants shared that other cities that have gone beyond State law have helped incentivize more affordable housing growth in their communities, commenting that both mixed -use and residential developments have been successful.
Commissioner Lowe stressed that updates to the ordinance should ensure that Hayward remain competitive with surrounding cities. Ms. Morales stated the proposed changes exceeded State law requirements and that this made the city more competitive than surrounding jur isdictions. She noted that the Affordable Housing Ordinance would be brought to the Planning Commission at a future meeting and that this would include comparisons of how much affor dable housing has been developed in comp arable jurisdictions, emphasizing that Hay ward has done well in developing affordable h ousing.
She stated that t his would provide incentives , additional tools and resources in making affordable housing more feasible. Mr. Hittleman adde d that the city would be drafting a user guide once the ordinance was adopted and that would be very beneficial to developers.
Chair Ali-Sullivan stated that it would be helpful to have comparisons with adjacent cities to benchmark what was proposed for Hayward compared to neighboring jurisdictions.
Commissioner Bonilla Jr. expressed that he was proud as he found the proposal to be very responsive to the comments made by the Planning Commission underscoring th at the proposed plan incentivized affordable housing in the city. He mentioned that Hayward was being recognized across the Alameda County as a leader in affordable housing production.
Mr. Bonilla Jr. stated there had been a lot of previous discussion about incentives the city should provide to build more affordable housing and the proposed changes reflected these incentives. He wanted to understand how the city planned to ensure that onsite affordable housing would be built, but he understood that information would come at a later time. He appreciated the flexib ility proposed in the ordinance and the ability to adjust to the community’s needs, speaking favorably of the targeted special populations component of the plan. Mr. Bonilla Jr. found the plan to be very responsive to the regional needs for housing and emphasized that it prov ided a plan to ensure equitable housing. He appreciated Commissioner Lowe’s comments with respect to equitability and staff’s response to establish criteria.
Chair Ali-Sullivan echoed Commissioner Bonilla Jr.’s comments about the proposed changes being responsive to the Planning Commission’s comments about affordable housing. He asked what the current State maximum density was and how it compared to the proposal. Senior
4 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
Planner Thompson explained that currently the city was operating at the Stat e's maximum density of 50 percent for very -low-income, low -income and moder ate-income; however, the proposal was to exceed the State’s maximum and increase it to 55 percent.
Chair Ali-Sullivan asked staff what would happen if a developer wanted all the concessions in the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance. Ms. Thompson responded that if a project was eligible for a Density Bonus, that project was eligible for the maximum density and specified number of concessions with unlimited waivers if the developer chose to pursue it.
Chair Ali-Sullivan commented that there was no in centive for a developer to provide very low-income units when they would receive the same Density Bonus for moderate income units. He noted there was a need in the community for more very -low-income units.
Housing Division Man ager Morales responded that based on the high percentage of moderate-income units required relative to the number of very-low-income units required, staff observations for lower -tier density bonus w ere that d evelopers were choosing to provide fewer units of very-low-income units rather than to try to get a higher number of on-site inclusionary for moderate income units in order to receive the first ince ntive. Staff shifted the focus to get developers to get to the second incentive and to provide m ore on- site affordable housing. She exemplified that if the mar ket rate price for a unit was $1 million, then the restricted resell price would be approximately $500,000 , which was a large price differential for developers to se ll 44% of units at the moderate -income level price versus having 15% of very low-income units. Ms. Morales stated that it also depended on the economics of the project, but there are evident cases of very low-income units being incentivized and that staff was pleased to see that it was a priority of the Planning Commission to target this population as there was a need for more units at this price level.
With regards to Regional Housing Needs Assess ment ( RHNA) numbers, Commissioner Lowe inquired if this was the reason why the city was lacking in moderate-income units.
Housing Division Manager Morales noted that th ere were two mechanisms to create moderate-income units which were t he on -site inc lusionary agreement and the second mechanism was being able to count accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that are deve loped, noting these were naturally occurring moderate-income units. For low and ver y low - income-units, she indicated that 100 percent affordable housing projects can be included and subsidized with Housing In clusionary Funds. This enables the creation of un its faster than having a small er incremental percent of un its being proposed under the Inclusionary Ordinance. She added that there was not a lot of public financing available to subsidize moderate-income ownership units which made it challenging for developers t o create these units.
Commissioner Bonilla Jr . understood the way the city would increase units in specific categories was to adjust th e proposed plan accordingly and Ms. Morales agreed. She
5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
explained the reason mixed -income was general was to encourage a more mixed -income community.
Commissioner Bonilla Jr. stated that the way to deeply incentivize specific income -based units was to pro vide more incentives for those units. Ms. Morales concurred that was correct and responded that staff would ensure the ordinance was and that mixed income meant a mixture of market rate and affordable units.
Commissioner Goldstein mentioned the city ha d not established a formula on how to measure parking for new developments and that placed the city at a disadvantage relative to State law. Principal Planner Schmidt stated t he city had existing off -street parking regulations and pointed out that the state density bonus superseded the city’s regulations.
She noted that d ensity bonus projects were subject to different parking standards already outlined in State law. In response to Commis sioner Goldstein ’s question about o bjective parking stand ards, Ms. Sc hmidt stated that future discussions on the City ’s Objecti ve Parking Standards would be considered in ea rly 2023 and that th is would be f or projects not seeking a density bonus.
Chair Ali-Sullivan opened the public hearing at 7:57 p.m.
Mr. Gabriel Altamirano with South Hayward Now/Ahora, participated via Zoom, stated the objective of the organization was to have a voice for environmental justice. He expressed that the City was known f or issuing Mitigated Negative Declaration for projects that cause extreme effects on traffic and that his organization would monitor this . As projects come before the city, the group will focus its efforts on reducing tr affic and advocate for proper California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review for parking. He encouraged the Planning Commission to continue to focus on low and very-low-income housing.
Ms. Ro Aguilar , Zoom participant, acknowledged the City’s effort s to build more affordable housing in Hayward ; however, she wanted the focus to remain on inclusionary affordable housing. She stated the control and responsib ility to build inclusionary affordable housing was still in the hands of the developer with the propo sed ordinance revisions. She commented whether exceeding the state requirements was necessary and mentioned that the city had not tried requiring developers to build inclusionary affordable housing. Ms.
Aguilar stated no matter how many incentives, waivers , or concessions the city offered, the voluntary approval may not work due to neighborhood political opposition or due to business desired profit margins. She emphasized th at action be taken demonst rating that the city was serious about inclusionary a ffordable housing and work towards repairing damage done by discriminatory housing codes.
Chair Ali-Sullivan closed the public hearing at 8:04 p.m.
6 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
2. Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of October 27, 2022
A motion was made by Commissioner Lowe, seconded by Commissioner Goldstein, to approve the meeting minutes of October 27, 2022.
The motion passed with the following roll call votes:
AYES: Chair Ali-Sullivan
Commissioners Bonilla Jr., Goldstein, Lowe, Roche
NOES: None
ABSENT: Chair Oquenda
Commissioner Stevens
ABSTAIN: None
COMMISSION REPORTS
Oral Report on Planning and Zoning Matters
Senior Planner Schmidt congratulated Commissioners Roche and Goldstein, acknowledging that while final votes were still being counted, but in the event that the Commissioners move to new appointments, she shared that a special recruitment would be held to fill the vacant Planning Commission positions. She indicated that the Affordable Housing Ordinance would be discussed a t the Decembe r 8, 2022 , meeting and noted th at the November 24, 2022 , meeting would be canceled due to the Thanksgiving holiday.
Commissioners’ Announcements, Referrals
Commissioner Bonilla Jr. congratulated Commissioners Roche and Goldstein on the election and looked forward to their continued impact on the City of Hayward.
Commissioners Goldstein and Roche thanked staff for their efforts and earlier presentation.
Chair Ali-Sullivan thanked members of the public for attending the meeting. He thanked all candidates who ran for City Council and their commitments and desire to serve Hayward. He commented that while the certification of election of results was pending, it was evident that some Planning Commissioners may be joining the Ci ty C ouncil and congratulated Commissioners Roche and Goldstein for their h ard work and desire to serve on the City Council.
7 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
COUNCIL CHAMBERS AND VIRTUAL (ZOOM)
PARTICIPATION
Thursday, November 10, 2022, 7:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Ali-Sullivan adjourned the meeting at 8:09 p.m.
APPROVED:
______________________________________________________
Briggitte Lowe, Secretary
Planning Commission
ATTEST:
___________________________________________________
Avinta Madhukansh-Singh
Interim Planning Commission Secretary
Office of the City Clerk