Menlo Park City Council
December 6, 2022

35 Root Policy Research (2022)
Page H-1.196
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-78
Prioritization of Contributing Factors
Housing Element law requires identifying and prioritizing contributing factors to fair housing issues based on the Assessment of Fair Housing above and within Appendix 4-

2. This identification and prioritization must give the highest priority to factors that limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity or that negatively impact fair housing or civil rights.

Geographic analysis, community outreach, and discussions with service and housing providers in the City and County revealed that the two major factors that impact fair housing in Menlo Park include:
 Displacement risks in communities prioritized under Environmental Justice analysis
 Affordable housing near amenities in the city
The highest priority contributing factors that the City can take meaningful action on through the implementation of the Housing Element are ranked below, listed in the summarized form of Key Issues 1 through 4:

1. Disproportionate Housing Needs

2. Displacement

3. Housing Costs

4. Disproportionate Transportation Issues
Although disproportionate transportation issues were ranked in fourth place, the community has expressed strong concern about transportation issues as part of environmental justice-focused outreach.

While addressing all four contributing factors (key issues) is critical to meeting the housing needs in the city, disproportionate housing needs and displacement are issues that the City has the greatest capacity to address. Through housing programs and zoning changes, the City can strategically direct new affordable housing development in high opportunity areas close to services. Additionally, the City can adopt renter protections and other programs to protect existing residents from being displaced.

The City has limited capacity for providing financial assistance to renters and homeowners. The market also drives housing costs, and the City is constrained in its Page H-1.197
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-79
ability to reduce housing costs citywide. The primary strategy for addressing housing costs is through zoning tools and incentives to encourage affordable housing production. The 2023-2031 Housing Element includes programs that will amend the inclusionary housing requirement and provide density bonuses to encourage the development of affordable housing and housing that can accommodate special needs populations.

The suburban street pattern and density of much of the city can create transportation barriers for residents who do not have access to personal automobiles. While the Circulation Element of the Menlo Park General Plan largely addresses transportation infrastructure improvements, the Housing Element includes programs to focus new housing in the Downtown where residents will have the greatest access to public transit.

Additionally, the Environmental Justice Element includes a discussion of transportation funding efforts in District 1, which has historically seen underinvestment.

In Menlo Park, segregation and disproportionate impacts occurring in Belle Haven and northern neighborhoods in District 1 are the major contributing factors impeding fair housing choice and access to opportunity in the city. To address these fair housing issues, appropriate “place-based” strategies should be prioritized to direct resources into improving conditions for those in affected neighborhoods, while also protecting existing residents from displacement. Community members expressed the need for protection from evictions, especially unjust evictions. This concern was not explicitly addressed in this Housing Element because the City already has just cause eviction regulations that is compliant with state law. Strategies to address these issues include:
 Tenant protections and anti-displacement policies (H2.7, H2.E, H5.4, H5.D, H5.E)
 Programs to preserve existing affordable housing (H2.4, H2.A, H2.B, H2.C, H4.9)  Targeted transportation improvements to help residents access opportunity (e.g., jobs, schools, other services) in other nearby areas (H6.E, H6.F, H6.G)  "Mobility" strategies to ensure that existing residents in northern neighborhoods can have housing choices in other more balanced neighborhoods within the city (H3.D, H3.H, H3.L, H4.1, H4.2, H4.3, H4.8, H4.14, H4.A, H4.B, H4.E, H4.G, H4.I, H4.J, H4.L, H4.O)
Page H-1.198
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-80

HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMSFAIR

HOUSING ISSUES, CONTRIBUTING FACTORS, AND CITY

ACTIONS
The 2023-2031 Housing Element goals, policies, and programs were developed and refined based on community priorities and concerns. Based on community input and an analysis of City capacity, the project team developed policy themes that would be addressed in the Housing Element and presented these themes and potential programs in a community workshop and other outreach forums. Feedback and suggestions from the Menlo Park community and stakeholders were used to further refine policies and programs. Table 4-17 identifies fair housing issues and associated implementing programs that will address these issues.a table of fair housing issues, their contributing factors, a priority level for the fair housing issues, and City actions to remediate the issue.

The fair housing issues identified are:

A. Fair Housing outreach (Medium Priority)
B. Need for affordable housing options throughout Menlo Park to promote mobility (High Priority)
C. Need for community conservation and revitalization in low and moderate resource neighborhoods located northeast of Highway 101 (Council District 1) (High Priority)
Page H-1.199
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-81
Table 4-24: Fair Housing Issue, Contributing Factors, and City Actions Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
A. Fair Housing
Outreach (Housing Mobility)

1. Lack of outreach to seniors due to
digital divide/unaware of available resources

2. Section will be further updated with
tenant/landlord complaints data.

3. More education needed by the public
sector for residents to become familiar with available resources Medium City Action: By the end of 2023, have additional multilingual fair housing information posted at the Family Recreation Center on their digital platforms. Starting in 2024, hold an informational workshop at the Center once every two years. Community Development Dept City Action: In 2024, with the support of Project Sentinel, conduct a fair housing information session for the City Council. Invite local nonprofits (including Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto, and Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County to attend. Community Development Dept City Action: At least twice during this Housing Element Cycle (2025 and 2028) work with Project Sentinel to contact rental property owners and managers of multifamily complexes to provide fair housing information and assistance. This outreach will include promoting the Section 8 voucher program to landlords that have not previously participated in the program and should include multi-lingual materials.Community Development Dept Page H-1.200
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-82
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
City Action: Publish Fair Housing information, including any community meetings, on non-traditional media such as Facebook or Instagram, and conduct targeted outreach to tenants and other lower income populations. Community Development Dept Action Outcomes: Through the above steps, the City’s goal will be to increase the distribution of fair housing materials by at least 10 percent and to increase awareness of fair housing options among residents, including special needs groups and low income residents. Throughout the informational workshops and Council workshops, develop a comprehensive list of interested nonprofits, property owners and community members that can be utilized for future outreach.

B. Need for Affordable Housing Options Throughout Menlo Park to Promote Mobility (Housing Mobility/ New Opportunities)

1. High Levels of Overpayment

2. Availability of affordable
housing options throughout the City, including those where rents and sales prices have become exclusive 3. Community concern about housing densities and equitable distribution of High City Action: In 2023, adopt the Housing Element, El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan, and updated mixed use and commercial zoning standards to provide geographically dispersed sites for over 1,500 lower income units, fostering a more diverse community. Create objective design and development standards (2025) to help streamline the development review process. Community Development Dept Page H-1.201
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-83
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
higher density development City Action: Support the dispersion of affordable housing throughout High Resource areas in Menlo Park through the City’s BMR Inclusionary Housing Regulations (HE Program H4.A), Affordable Housing Overlay (HE Program H4.D), and housing on City-owned parking lots (HE Program H4.G), providing sites for 1,953 lower and 952 moderate income units. Community Development Dept City Action: Initiate a marketing program for homeowners on the benefits of ADUs and the availability of funds to support development (2024) through the City's Newsletter and posting of the ADU application checklist on the City website, thereby expanding housing opportunities in areas that have traditionally only had single-family ownership housing. Work with a design professional to develop a tool with ADU designs (2024). Seek to produce at least 85 ADUs between 2023-2031, including 51 affordable to lower income households (HE Program H4.F) Community Development Dept City Action: Implement the City’s SB 9 Ordinance to expand Page H-1.202
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-84
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
the housing supply in High Resource single-family zones by allowing for lot splits and duplexes. In coordination with research being conducted at the State level, evaluate opportunities to incentivize and provide funding assistance for homeowners to provide affordable units under SB 9 (2024). Seek to integrate at least five units annually in high resource single-family districts.

Community Development Dept City Action: In conjunction with the Community Outreach and Development Strategy to be completed in 2025, conduct outreach to property owners about opportunities for development under an SB 10 overlay. Adopt an SB 10 Ordinance and Overlay (2026) to allow up to 10 units to be developed on smaller residential parcels throughout the City, particularly in transit-rich areas. Community Development Dept City Action: Proactively market first-time homebuyer assistance available through the HEART program as a means of expanding homeownership opportunities among modest income residents. Add information on the HEART homeownership program to the City’s website, and coordinate with HEART on additional opportunities to promote the program (Program H5.F) Add Page H-1.203
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-85
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
quantified objective on # households to be assisted based on past levels upon receipt of information. Community Development City Action: Work with the San Mateo County Department of Housing to implement the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program and, utilizing the best available City data for multi-family property owners, conduct outreach to property owners in high resource neighborhoods to encourage their participation in the rental assistance program (2024 and 2027). Community Development City Action: Require affordable developers receiving public funds to prepare an affirmative marketing plan, and encourage private developers with affordable units in their projects to prepare an affirmative marketing plan. The affirmative marketing plan shall ensure marketing materials for new developments are designed to attract renters and buyers of diverse demographics, including persons of any race, ethnicity, sex, handicap, and familial status.

Community Development Dept
Page H-1.204
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-86
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
Action Outcomes: Through implementation of the BMR Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Affordable Housing Overlay, development on City-owned parcels, promotion of ADUs, allowance for lots splits and duplexes in single-family zones, and adoption of an ordinance to allow development up to 10 units on small lots, provide increased housing options throughout Menlo Park’s high resource neighborhoods to foster a more inclusive community. Provide adequate sites for over 1,500 lower income households, over 640 moderate income households, and over 1,650 above moderate income households, exceeding the City’s RHNA requirements. Community Development Dept C. Need for community conservation and revitalization in low and moderate resource neighborhoods located east of Hwy 101 (Council District 1) (Place based
Strategies,

1. Need for community revitalization
strategies in targeted neighborhoods

2. Need for public investment in
specific neighborhoods, including services and amenities

3. Challenges for housing/property
upkeep due to financial/physical constraints.

4. High levels of overpayment create
High City Actions: Undertake public/private partnerships in support community investments in Council District 1, including the new Menlo Park Community Campus Project in Belle Haven being built by Meta to incorporate the former community center, senior programs, youth center (child care), pool and branch library. Complete project in 2023. City Action: Leverage private investment in District 1 to expand community amenities in the area through the use of community amenity funds from bonus level development in the Bayfront Area.

Page H-1.205
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-87
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
Displacement) displacement risk
City Action: Fund Habitat for Humanity’s Homeownership Preservation Program in the Belle Haven neighborhood, with a goal of assisting 20 very low-income homeowners to complete major rehabilitation improvements to their homes. To identify and engage homeowners in Belle Haven at greatest risk of displacement or harm due to the conditions of their homes, Habitat will employ an outreach specialist and work closely with public and private agencies and organizations that serve the neighborhood and its residents. Initiate Homeownership Preservation Program in 2023 and complete within three years. Community Development Dept City Action: Implement programs to protect tenants from displacement including: the Rental Increase Dispute Resolution Ordinance and Rent Mediation Program; limits on rent increases and prohibiting evictions without just cause for tenants that have resided in their units for more than 12 months; offering tenant/landlord conflict resolution through Project Sentinel; providing relocation assistance where public funds are utilized; offering existing displaced households an opportunity to return to the new development; and enforcing replacement requirements when affordable units are removed on Housing Element sites (Government Code Sec. 65583.2(g)(3)). Develop Page H-1.206
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-88
Fair Housing
Issue Contributing Factors Priority Level City Action
an information sheet on tenant protections and post on the City’s website and in the City newsletter (2024). Community Development Dept Action Outcomes: Increased public and private investment in areas of Menlo Park that have been identified as low and moderate resource.

Page H-1.207
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-89
Table 4-1725: Identified Fair Housing Issues and Potential Strategies Identified Fair Housing Issue Contributing Factor Priority (high, medium, low) Policies and Implementing Programs Housing that supports aging in place
Disproportionate housing needs
High  H2.C Assist in Implementing
Housing Rehabilitation Programs
 H2.E Anti-Displacement Strategy  H3.D Develop Incentives for Special Needs Housing
 H3.I Accessible ADUs
The need for increased services/resources to connect people with disabilities with employment opportunities Disproportionate housing needs
High  H3.2 Health and Human Services
Programs Linkages
 H3.K Employment Services
The need for a citywide housing availability inventory
Disproportionate housing needs
Low36  H1.H Transparency on Progress
towards RHNA
Financial assistance for renters Housing costs Medium  H1.3 Local Funding for Affordable Housing
36 Housing availability is heavily dependent on market conditions. The level of staff time required to create and maintain an up-to-date housing inventory is not proportional to the value of this resource. Additionally third-party housing aggregators, such as Craigslist, Zillow, and Apartments.com, serve a similar function. The City will increase transparency on new affordable housing being built to supplement online information on housing availability.

Page H-1.208
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-90
 H2.E Anti-Displacement Strategy
Financial assistance for firsttime homebuyers Housing costs Medium  H5.7 Opportunities for Homeownership  H5.F First-Time Homebuyer
Program
Renters’ rights education and protection services
Displacement High  H5.4 Renter Protections
 H5.C Provide Multilingual
Information on Housing Programs
 H5.D Address Rent Conflicts  H5.E Publicize Fair Housing Laws and Respond to Discrimination Complaints
Housing near High Resource areas
Disproportionate housing needs
High  H4.1 Housing Opportunity Sites
 H4.J Increase Residential Density  H4.L Modify El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan
Overcrowding Housing costs High  H4.3 Variety of Housing Choices  H4.A Amend the Below Market
Rate Inclusionary Housing Regulations
Page H-1.209
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-91
 Program H3.L Large Units
Housing Affordability (people of color experience the most cost burden) Housing costs High  H4.9 Long-Term Housing
Affordability Controls
 H4.B Modify BMR Guidelines
Regarding Allocations
 H4.D Modify the Affordable
Housing Overlay (AHO)
The imbalance between housing built and jobs created (disproportionate housing needs in lower-income and lower-access to opportunity neighborhoods) Disproportionate housing needs
High  H4.7 Infill Housing Adjacent to
Downtown
 H4.16 Neighborhood
Responsibilities within Menlo Park
 H4.G Consider City-Owned Land
for Housing (Downtown Parking Lots)
 H4.I Create New Opportunities for
Mixed Use Development
 H4.L Modify El Camino
Real/Downtown Specific Plan
Shortage of accessible and affordable housing for residents with disabilities or Housing costs High  H3.A Continue to Implement
Procedures for Reasonable Accommodation
Page H-1.210
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing | Page 4-92
other special housing needs  H3.B Encourage Rental Housing Assistance Programs
 H3.C Assist in Providing Housing
for Persons Living with Disabilities
 H3.D Develop Incentives for
Special Needs Housing
 H3.H Inclusionary Accessible Units  H3.I Accessible ADUs  H3.J Marketing for Accessible Units Transportation-related issues potentially limit access to opportunities such as employment, resident services and educational opportunities Disproportionate transportation issues
Medium  H6.E Explore Multi-Modal
Improvements
 H6.F Transit Incentives  H6.G Neighborhood Connectivity Page H-1.211
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-1
Actual and Potential Constraints
to Housing
This section of the Housing Element evaluates actual and potential constraints to new housing development in the city. Constraints that can pose a barrier to the construction of new housing can be grouped into two categories. Governmental constraints are barriers imposed through government policies and procedures, such as development standards, application processing times, and development fees (Government Code § 65583, subdivisions (a)(5), (a)(4), (c)(1), and § 65583.2, subdivision (c)). Non-governmental constraints are development barriers that are outside of the control of local jurisdictions; for example, construction costs, land costs, and financing costs (Government Code § 65583, subdivision (a)(6)). Local governments can adopt policies and procedures to address these constraints and increase the ease of developing new housing.

There is an important connection in the Housing Element between the available land inventory and the analysis of actual and potential governmental constraints so the City can most effectively meet its housing goals. The connection recognizes that there are limitations to the amount of available land resources in Menlo Park and that the intent of the Housing Element is to use the remaining available land resources as efficiently as possible in addressing local housing needs and meeting the City’s share of its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Governmental constraints are constraints that are under the control of the City of Menlo Park. Governmental constraints can include the topics listed below and are discussed in this chapter, followed by a discussion of non-governmental constraints at the end of the chapter:
 General Plan Policies
 Land Use Controls
 Zoning Standards
 Fees and/or Exactions
 Development Processing Time
 Codes and Enforcement, On and Off Site Improvement Standards Page H-1.212
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-2
 Constraints for People with Disabilities
 Inclusionary Zoning

REVIEW OF CHANGES OF GOVERNMENTAL
CONSTRAINTS IN THE 5TH CYCLE
During the 2015-2023 housing cycle, the City undertook a number of actions to remove actual and potential governmental constraints to housing. By linking the available land supply with environmental review and the examination of City regulations and processes in a comprehensive manner, the City was able to identify actions to facilitate the development of needed housing in a way that effectively blends new housing into the Menlo Park community.

By combining the discussion of housing and land use, the City has also been able to develop a multi-pronged approach to provide a variety of housing types, choices, and affordability levels. Specific strategies include:
 Accessory dwelling units;
 Infill housing around the Downtown;
 Implementation of the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan;  Inclusionary housing requirements for market-rate developments;  Assistance and incentives for affordable housing development; and  Development of new housing at higher densities, with incentives provided through higher density and Affordable Housing Overlay zoning. Programs to address development standards and
processes for these strategies and to remove any impediments to successful implementation were included in the 2015-2023 Housing Element.

In addition to modifications to development standards and processes, the City prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) after the draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to address the overall impacts of the 2015-2023 Housing Element and to establish a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for future development. In addition, the affordable Affordable housing Housing overlay Overlay studied in the EA (which includes SP-ECR-D and R-4-S zoned areas) reduced potential barriers to development. The discussion below describes in more detail the actions the City has undertaken to remove actual Page H-1.213
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-3
and potential governmental constraints within the context of its comprehensive housing strategies.

ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CITY IN THE 2015-2023

HOUSING ELEMENT TO REMOVE ACTUAL AND

POTENTIAL GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
1) Amendments to C-2-B (Neighborhood Mixed Use District, Restrictive) zoning district. Consistent with Housing Element Program H4.N, the City adopted zoning amendments to the C-2-B zoning district to expand housing in commercial zones. The amendments allow residential mixeduse opportunities in key areas along the Willow Road corridor. A number of properties that were previously zoned for commercial and industrial uses were rezoned with the new C-2-B regulations and can support higher density housing and mixed-use developments.
2) Accessory Dwelling Units. Consistent with Housing Element Program H4.E, the City modified the Accessory Dwelling Unit (formerly known as secondary dwelling unit) requirements pertaining to single-family and multifamily residential lots throughout the city. The intent of the ordinance change was to bring the ordinance into compliance with State law and to encourage the creation of more accessory units, which are ancillary to the main dwelling. Consistent with Program H4.F, the City also adopted an ordinance in 2020 to provide a pathway for converting existing accessory buildings into accessory dwelling units, consistent with State law. 3) Implementation of Special Needs Housing Changes. Consistent with Program H3.A Zone for Emergency Shelter for the Homeless, Program H3.B Zone for Transitional and Supportive Housing, and Program H3.C Adopt Procedures for Reasonable Accommodation in the 2015-2023 Housing Element, the City has amended the Zoning Ordinance (Ordinance 1002) to remove governmental constraints for special needs housing on April 29, 2014. This Ordinance included the following:
 Identified the location of the overlay to allow an emergency shelter for the homeless for up to 16 beds as a use by right and includes standards consistent with State law as established in SB2.  Updated the definitions of transitional and supportive housing to be consistent with State law and adds transitional, supportive housing and small (six or fewer persons) residential care facilities as part of the definition of a “dwelling” in the Zoning Ordinance, so these uses Page H-1.214
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-4
are treated the same way as other residential uses as required by State law under SB 2.
 Established procedures, criteria, and findings for enabling individuals with disabilities to make improvements and overcome barriers to their housing.

The City also completed Program H1.L, which is to Adopt Priority Procedures for Providing Water and Sewer Service to Affordable Housing Developments in 2014.
4) Modifications to BMR Guidelines. Consistent with Housing Element Program H4.C, the City revised the Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program guidelines in 2018. The City also adopted a resolution to establish a process for determining the in-lieu fee for rental housing on a case-by-case basis to be consistent with the BMR fee nexus study. In 2022, the City adopted revisions to the BMR Guidelines that outlined 1) purchase and rental interest list eligibility criteria, and 2) general programming-related descriptions.
5) R-MU (Residential Mixed Use) Zoning District. The new R-MU zoning district was adopted as part of the General Plan and M-2 Area Zoning Update. This new zoning district implements Housing Element Program H4.I, which directed the City to create multifamily and residential mixed use design guidelines, and is intended to provide high-density housing and mixed-uses near employment opportunities. Design standards that apply to the R-MU zoning district include a number of provisions addressing building modulation, height variation, site design, and open space requirements.

SUMMARY OF THE ASSESSMENT OF ACTUAL AND

POTENTIAL GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS AND

RECOMMENDED PROGRAM ACTIONS
The Housing Element provides an opportunity to comprehensively assess actual and potential governmental constraints to housing and to identify implementing programs to address those constraints. Following an assessment of the 2015- 2023 Housing Element, the following programs have been carried over into the 2023-2031 Housing Element to address actual and potential governmental constraints, with appropriate amendments to reflect current housing needs and maintain consistency with State law. Program numbering reflects the 2015-2023 Housing Element.

Page H-1.215
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-5
H1.A Establish City Staff Work Priorities for Implementing Housing Element Programs.

H1.B Review the Housing Element Annually.

H3.C Investigate Possible Multi-Jurisdictional Emergency Shelter.

H3.G Develop Incentives for Special Needs Housing.

H4.C Modify BMR Guidelines.

H4.E Modify Second Dwelling Unit Standards and Permit Process.

H4.K Work with the Fire District.

H4.L Coordinate with School Districts to Link Housing with School District Planning Activities.

H4.M Review the Subdivision Ordinance.

H4.N Create New Opportunities for Mixed Use Development.

H4.P Update Parking Stall and Driveway Design Guidelines.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS – GENERAL

PLAN POLICIES
The following General Plan policies and programs pose actual and potential constraints to the development of new housing. Responses to these potential constraints are provided for reach program.

Program LU-1.F Assessment Districts and Impact Fees. Pursue the creation of assessment districts and/or the adoption of development impact fees to address infrastructure and service needs in the community.

Development impact fees may be a barrier to the construction of affordable housing units.

Response to Constraints: These fees are also vital to fund housing programs in Menlo Park. Program H3.I includes waiving fees for providing deed-restricted ADUs affordable to low-income households.

Policy LU-2.1 Neighborhood Compatibility. Ensure that new residential development possesses high-quality design that is compatible with the scale, look, and feel of the surrounding neighborhood and that respects the city’s residential character.

Page H-1.216
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-6
Neighborhood compatibility requirements may discourage the development of higher-density residential development in traditionally single-family neighborhoods.

Response to Constraints: Updated and new objective design standards can serve to allow higher-density residential development that is still compatible with surrounding neighborhoods, and could also allow for ministerial review in many situations. Programs to remove this constraint include:
 H4.M: Update Parking Requirements and Design Standards  H7.A: Create Residential Design Standards
 H7.B: Develop and Adopt Standards for SB 9 Projects
Policy LU-6.11 Baylands Preservation. Allow development near the Bay only in already developed areas.

Requiring new development near the Bay to be infill development will limit possible housing sites, but is a necessary protection to ensure the preservation of natural resources and reduce flooding risk to new housing.

Response to Constraint: None required. Additionally, the area near the Bay is in Council District 1, and the Housing Element has an overall goal of dispersing housing development away from Council District 1.

Policy CIRC-7.1 Parking and New Development. Ensure new development provides appropriate parking ratios, including application of appropriate minimum and/or maximum ratios, unbundling, shared parking, electric car charging, car sharing, and Green Trip Certified strategies to accommodate residents, employees, customers and visitors.

Minimum parking ratios could decrease the feasibility of affordable housing.

Response to Constraint: New state law, AB 2097, removes parking minimums in parcels a half-mile from major transit stops. In addition, updated parking standards and parking demand management are included in the following programs:
 H3.D: Develop Incentives for Special Needs Housing
Page H-1.217
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-7
 H4.F: Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Development Standards and Permit Process
 H4.K: Modify El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan
 H4.M: Update Parking Requirements and Design Standards  H6.F: Transit Incentives
Policy S1.1 Location of Future Development. Permit development only in those areas where potential danger to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the community can be adequately mitigated.

Potential sites near the Bay might not be suitable for housing due to increased risk of flooding and sea level rise as the impacts of climate change become more apparent.

Response to Constraint: None required. Additionally, the area near the Bay is in Council District 1, and the Housing Element has an overall goal of dispersing housing development away from Council District 1.

Policy S1.17 Potential Exposure of New Residential Development to Hazardous Materials. Minimize risk associated with hazardous materials by assessing exposure to hazardous materials of new residential development and sensitive populations near existing industrial and manufacturing areas. Minimize risk associated with hazardous materials.

There are several hazardous material sites in Menlo Park that are at varying stages of remediation cleanup. Exposure to these hazardous materials will need to be minimized and could constrain new housing.

Response to Constraint: None required.

Policy LU-7.9 Support sustainability and green building best practices through the orientation, design, and placement of buildings and facilities to optimize their energy efficiency in preparation of State zero-net energy requirements for residential construction in 2020 and commercial construction in 2030.

Green building design may add to the cost of development. Many agencies; however, have similar policies.

Page H-1.218
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-8
Response to Constraint: Green building is consistent with many policies in the Housing Element, particularly Policy H2.5: Maintenance and Management of Quality Housing and Neighborhoods.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS – LAND

USE CONTROLS
Menlo Park uses development controls that are typical for other cities in the county and the region. The City has various land use controls that pose constraints on the development of affordable housing. The 2023-2031 Housing Element contains programs that direct Zoning Ordinance amendments to reduce land use and zoning constraints on the development of housing. This includes the following housing programs:
 Program H3.D Develop Incentives for Special Needs Housing  Program H3.G Low Barrier Navigation Centers
 Program H4.I Create New Opportunities for Mixed-Use
Development
 Program H4.J Increase Residential Density
 Program H4.K Maximize Development Proposals
 Program H4.L Modify El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan  Program H4.M Update Parking Requirements and Design
Standards
 Program H4.O Identifying SB 10 Sites
 Program H7.B Develop and Adopt Standards for SB 9 Projects The following table summarizes what land use approvals are currently needed for different housing types in the residential and mixed-use zoning districts.

Page H-1.219
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-9
Table 5-1: Land Use Controls Table
Housing Type Zoning Designation
R-E R-E-S R-1-S
R-1-S
(FG) R-1-U
R-1-ULM R-2 R-3 R-3-A R-4 R-4-S R-L-U C-2-B R-MU
Single-family dwelling

P P P P P P P P P P NP NP NP NP
Duplexes NP** NP** NP** NP** NP** NP** P P P P NP NP NP NP Triplexes NP NP NP NP NP NP P P/C* C C P NP P P Multifamily rental housing NP NP NP NP NP NP P P/C* C C P NP P P Emergency shelters

NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP NP
Manufactured homes

P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Residential care facilities***

P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
ADUs P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Transitional and Supportive Housing

P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
Small Employee Housing

P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
P is a Permitted Use C is a Conditional Use NP is Not a Permitted Use *In the R-3 zoning district, three or more units on lots that are 10,000 square feet or more are a Permitted Use. ** SB 9 allows duplexes under certain circumstances in single family zones. *** Individual zoning district chapters do not mention large or small residential care facilities as permitted or conditionally permitted uses.

Page H-1.220
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-10 State law requires jurisdictions to analyze the zoning and availability for a variety of housing types.

Multifamily Rental Housing
Multifamily rental housing refers to a building or portion of a building that is used as a residence for more than one household living independently of each other.

Multifamily rental housing includes duplexes, triplexes, and apartments/condominiums. The Housing Element includes several programs designed to expand the opportunities for multifamily housing, which are described below.

Multifamily rental housing is permitted in the higher-density residential and mixed-use zoning districts. However, a conditional use permit is required for developments with three or more housing units in the R-4 zoning district and the R-3 zoning district for lots smaller than 10,000 square feet, which may pose a barrier to future housing construction.

In response, implementation of Housing Element Program H4.J will remove this constraint by allowing a base density of 30 units per acre on R-3 zoned lots that are 10,000 square feet or smaller around the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area (“around the Specific Plan Area” is defined in the Zoning Ordinance under § 16.20.030). Program H4.I also directs a zoning ordinance amendment to allow residential development of up to 30 units per acre in certain non-residential zoning districts, including in areas near the Willows neighborhood.

SB 10 was signed into law in 2021. This state law enables jurisdictions to adopt zoning ordinances to permit greater development of single-family zoned properties in transit-rich areas or urban infill sites. In response to state law, Program H4.O directs the development of an overlay zone that would be applied to areas of the city where SB 10 projects could be implemented. Parcels within this overlay will be permitted to develop up to 10 housing units.

Implementation of Program H4.M updates parking requirements and design standards to provide greater flexibility in site planning for multifamily residential housing, including establishing a parking or alternative transportation in-lieu fee.

Parking amendments could involve reducing parking minimums, expanding parking maximums, eliminating parking requirements for affordable housing projects, expanding shared parking, exploring district parking, and exploring other parking recommendations provided by ABAG-MTC.

Page H-1.221
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-11 Lastly, Program H4.L will consider amendments to the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan to include, but are not limited to, eliminating housing caps and increasing the residential base density to a minimum of 30 dwelling units per acre in all subareas under the specific plan. This will facilitate increased densities in areas close to transit and create more opportunities for multifamily developments.

Housing for Agricultural EmployeesSmall Employee Housing California Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5 (Employee Housing Act) requires jurisdictions to permit employee housing for six or fewer employees as a single-family use. Employee housing shall not be included within the zoning definition of a boarding house, rooming house, hotel, dormitory, or other similar term that implies that the employee housing is a business run for-profit or differs in any other way from a family dwelling. Jurisdictions cannot impose a conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance of employee housing that serves six or fewer employees that is not required of a family dwelling of the same type in the same zone. Menlo Park’s Zoning Code does not currently address small employee housing. As such, a program has been included in the Element add a definition and make provisions for small employee housing as a permitted use in all zone districts where single-family is permitted (HR, R-1, R-2, R-3 and MU zones).Agricultural employees are people whose primary incomes are earned through agricultural labor. This population tends to have high rates of poverty, have unstable incomes, live in housing with high rates of overcrowding, and have low rates of homeownership. Strategies to meet their housing needs include the provision of single-room occupancy units or the development of units with larger bedroom counts.

Menlo Park does not have an agricultural zoning designation. Additionally, the city does not have a significant number of agricultural workers or demand for housing specifically intended to accommodate agricultural workers.

Consequently, the zoning code does not include specific housing provisions for this population.

Emergency Shelters
Emergency shelters are defined as “housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that are limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay” (Government Code § 65582).

Page H-1.222
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-12 Menlo Park’s zoning code includes an Emergency Shelter for the Homeless Overlay. This overlay can only be applied to specific parcels identified in Municipal Code § 16.99.020 and ensures that the development of emergency shelters do not adversely impact adjacent parcels or the surrounding neighborhood. The only permitted use under this overlay is a housing facility for the unhoused with a maximum of 16 beds. Facilities with more than 16 beds may be permitted through a conditional use permit. All other uses are regulated by the underlying zoning district.

The Emergency Shelter for the Homeless Overlay (Municipal Code 16.99) consists of 26 parcels zoned R-3 that are near the Menlo Park VA Medical Center. Emergency Shelter for the Homeless Overlay (Municipal Code 16.99) meets AB 139 (2020), as section

16.99.050(1) describes objective off-street parking regulations that provide sufficient parking to accommodate the staff working in the emergency shelter.

Many individuals experiencing homelessness are veterans, and the colocation with the VA Medical Center can support access to the services provided for individuals or families using an emergency shelter. In addition to the allowed uses in the underlying R3 district, the only permitted use in the overlay is a facility housing the homeless with sixteen (16) or fewer beds, which shall serve no more than sixteen (16) homeless persons at one (1) time.

The latest Point-in-Time count, in 2022, identified 56 individuals experiencing homelessness.1
In their review of Menlo Park’s Housing Element, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has identified the City’s standard establishing a maximum 16-bed capacity for shelters as a potential constraint. While SB 2 allows jurisdictions to apply objective development standards to regulate emergency shelters, these standards must be designed to encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to, an emergency shelter. Limitation of a shelter to such a small size may limit service providers’ access to funding and render the shelter economically infeasible to develop. In order to address assess what might be a more reasonable size limitation that doesn’t impact development feasibility, the City reviewed an inventory of existing shelters in San Mateo County. The inventory included numerous shelters that are 30 beds or smaller, including, but not limited to, shelters operated by the following organizations:
 LIFEMOVES
o 110 Locust Street, Redwood City – 9 beds

1 https://www.smcgov.org/media/133851, PDF page 6
Page H-1.223
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-13 o 50 Hillcrest Drive, Daly City – 12 units
o 260 Van Buren Road, Menlo Park – 15 units
 San Bruno Hospitality House – 9 beds
Given that the inventory shows that shelters with up to 30 beds are feasible in San Mateo County, the City will amend its emergency shelter regulations to increase the size limit from 16 to 30 beds.

Low Barrier Navigation Centers
Low Barrier Navigation Centers are a housing-first solution to assist people who are experiencing homelessness. These temporary shelters provide services and are focused on transitioning individuals experiencing homelessness into permanent housing. Under AB 101, State law requires that jurisdictions permit low barrier navigation centers by-right in mixed-use zoning districts and nonresidential zones that permit multifamily uses.

Menlo Park’s zoning code does not currently permit low barrier navigation centers. Through the implementation of Program H3.G, the City will adopt a zoning ordinance to permit low barrier navigation centers as a by-right use in mixed-use and non-residential zoning districts that allow multifamily housing, consistent with state law.

Transitional Housing
Transitional housing refers to rental housing developments that are operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of the assistance (Ord. 1004 § 7, 2014).

Transitional housing is considered a residential use and is allowed in residential areas.

Supportive Housing
Supportive housing is housing that has no limit on the length of stay and is occupied by the target population. This type of housing has onsite and offsite services that assist residents in retaining the housing, improving their health Page H-1.224
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-14 status, and maximizing their ability to live and, when possible, work in the community (Ord. 1004 § 6, 2014).

Supportive housing is considered a residential use and is allowed in residential areas.

Single-Room Occupancy Units (SROs)
Single-room occupancy units (SROs) are small units that are typically between 200 to 350 square feet. They are located in multi-unit buildings and typically include a shared bathroom and kitchen facilities.

SROs are not explicitly allowed in Menlo Park’s zoning code. However, boardinghouses are permitted as a conditional use in the R-2, R-3, R-3-A, R-4, and R-4-S zoning districts. Boardinghouses serve a similar function as SROs and are defined in the City’s zoning code as “a dwelling other than a hotel, where lodging or meals for three or more persons is provided for compensation” (Municipal Code § 16.04.090). SROs typically have shared kitchens and meals are not provided.

Manufactured Homes
Manufactured homes are houses that are factory-built and transported to the housing site. Due to the much lower cost of construction and labor costs needed to build a manufactured home, this housing type can provide an affordable housing solution.

Consistent with state law, the City allows the siting and processing of mobile homes/manufactured homes in the same manner as conventional or stick-built homes. Accessory dwelling units are also permitted to be manufactured homes.

Manufactured homes must comply with the setback, height, and design requirements of the regulating zoning district. New or substantially improved manufactured homes located within zones A1-30, AH, AE, V1-30, V, and VE of the community’s flood insurance rate map are required to be elevated or be securely fastened to an anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement.

Page H-1.225
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-15 Mobile Home Parks
Mobile home parks include any property that has a minimum of two mobile homes, manufactured homes, recreational vehicles, and/or lots that are held for rent or lease.

There are no mobile home parks in Menlo Park. Mobile homes are not explicitly addressed as a permitted use in Menlo Park’s zoning code. As the city is mostly built out, there is limited opportunity for the development of mobile home parks.

Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are attached or detached residential dwelling units that provide complete independent living facilities and are located on lots with proposed or existing primary residences. ADUs are a cost-effective housing type because they do not require new land or major infrastructure improvements.

ADUs tend to be smaller and are thereby more inherently affordable by design.

However, because many ADUs are rented to family and friends of the homeowner, if homeowners are primarily White, then the families and potential friends of the homeowners could be predominantly White. Relying too heavily on ADUs for affordable housing could inadvertently exacerbate patterns of segregation. Additionally, ADUs and other smaller units are generally not compatible for families or households with more than one to two people, but they can still be an effective strategy for increasing the supply of smaller rental housing units in traditionally single-family home neighborhoods.

The City’s zoning code allows ADUs in all residential and residential mixed-use zoning districts. The City has reduced barriers to building ADUs through less restrictive development standards and expediting the application review and approval process. ADUs that comply with the development regulations in the City’s zoning code shall be approved without discretionary review within 60 days of receipt of the completed development application. More information about ADUs is available in the Fees section of this chapter.

The Housing Element contains programs to reduce actual and potential constraints to the development of ADUs. Program H4.F will modify the development standards for ADUs to allow greater flexibility in the parking design.

The City will partner with a third party to develop a series of pre-designed ADU options for consideration by homeowners interested in developing ADUs on their property.

Page H-1.226
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-16 Program H3.I directs the City to adopt incentives to encourage accessible ADUs and rent restricted units. Lastly, Program H2.D will amend the ADU Ordinance to include an amnesty program for unpermitted ADUs. These efforts will encourage the production of ADUs, which by design are more affordable than multifamily units, and preserve existing ADUs created without building permits by providing a non-punitive pathway to legalization.

The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has reviewed the City’s ADU ordinance and has identified several areas which do not comply with State ADU law. HCD will be providing the City with a letter outlining non-compliance issues in the ordinance. The City has included a program in the Housing Element to update its ADU ordinance to bring it into full compliance with current State requirements.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS – ZONING

STANDARDS
Zoning standards, including building site requirements (e.g., lot area, coverage, floor area limit (FAL), floor area ratio (FAR), and landscaping), setbacks, and height limits under Menlo Park zoning are summarized on the next page.

Zoning Fees and Transparency
As a means of providing information and transparency to the public, all zoning and development standards and development fees are posted on the City’s website. Program H5.G directs the City to improve ease of access for the public to find fees, zoning, and development standards.

Conditional Development District
In addition to the zoning districts in Table 5-2, Menlo Park has an X Conditional Development District, which was established for the purpose of combining special regulations with the base zoning district. Under the X Conditional Development District, all uses allowed in the zoning district with which the X district is combined are conditionally allowed; there are no permitted uses in the X district. Development regulations in the X district are as specified in a conditional development permit and densities shall not exceed the regulations set forth in the zoning district with which the X district is combined.

The Conditional Development District (X), also referred to as combining district, is a zoning district specifically established for the purpose of combining special Page H-1.227
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-17 regulations or conditions with one of the zoning districts as set forth in Municipal Code Section 16.08.010. The X district is not delineated by any particular area of the city and can be generally described as a mechanism by which to regulate and plan development through approval of a Conditional Development Permit. A Conditional Development Permit may be issued to allow adjustment of the requirements of the district in order to secure special benefits possible through comprehensive planning of such large development. Further, such adjustment is intended to obtain public benefits; control the commercial component of projects in mixed-use areas; and to encourage more usable open space than would otherwise be provided with standard development. Conditional Development Permits are subject to review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and ultimate action by the City Council. There have been ## approved developments on X district properties in the previous 8 years and ## rejected developments in the X district during that time frame.

The Housing Element Sites Inventory includes 3 sites (Sites #21, #28, #50) which have been previously developed with a Conditional Development Permit.

Development regulations in the X district are as specified in the Conditional Development Permit and in no event does the number of dwelling units, floor area ratio, or floor area limit, exceed the development regulations as set forth in base zoning district with which the X district is combined.

Page H-1.228
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-18 Table 5-2: Summary of City of Menlo Park Zoning Requirements (2021)

ZONING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Zoning District Zoning Abbreviation Minimum Lot Area Minimum Lot Width Minimum Lot Depth
Maximum Building Coverage
Floor Area Limit (FAL) or Floor Area Ratio (FAR)
Density Height
Minimum Landscaping
Required Setbacks
Parking
Front Rear
Side – Interior
Side – Corner
Residential Estate District R-E 20,000 sf 110 ft 130 ft varies depending on lot size and number of stories
varies depending on lot size
1 unit/ 20,000 sf
<20,000 sf lot size: 28 ft ≥20,000 sf lot size: 30 ft n/a 20 ft min 20 ft min 10 ft min on one side; 30 ft total
15 ft min 2 spaces/
unit
Residential Estate Suburban District R-E-S 15,0000 sf 100 ft 100 ft varies depending on lot size and number of stories
varies depending on lot size
1 unit/ 15,000 sf
<20,000 sf lot size: 28 ft ≥20,000 sf lot size: 30 ft n/a 20 ft min 20 ft min 10 ft min on one side; 25 ft total
15 ft min 2 spaces/
unit
Single Family Suburban Residential District R-1-S 10,000 sf 80 ft 100 ft varies depending on lot size and number of stories
varies depending on lot size
1 unit/ 10,000 sf
<20,000 sf lot size: 28 ft ≥20,000 sf lot size: 30 ft n/a 20 ft min 20 ft min 10 ft min 12 ft min 2 spaces/ unit Single Family Suburban Residential District (Felton Gables) R-1-S (FG) 10,000 sf 80 ft 100 ft 35%
2,800 sf + 20% *(lot area – 7,000 sf)
1 unit/ 10,000 sf
<20,000 sf lot size: 28 ft ≥20,000 sf lot size: 30 ft n/a 20 ft min 20 ft min 10 ft min 12 ft min 2 spaces/ unit Single Family Urban Residential District R-1-U 7,000 sf 65 ft 100 ft varies depending on lot size and number of stories
varies depending on lot size
1 unit/ 7,000 sf
<20,000 sf lot size: 28 ft ≥20,000 sf lot size: 30 ft n/a 20 ft min 20 ft min 10% of min lot width but not less than 5 ft and no more than 10 ft 12 ft min 2 spaces/
unit
Single Family Urban Residential District (Lorelei Manor) R-1-U (LM)
Prior to June 1, 2006: 4,900 sf After June 1, 2006: 7,000 sf 40 ft 75 ft
varies depending on lot size and number of stories
varies depending on lot size
1 unit/ 4,900 sf
20 ft max for onestory; 28 ft max for two-story
25% pervious surfaces
20 ft min above ground; 15 ft min below
20 ft min above ground; 15 ft min below
5 ft min 12 ft min
2 spaces/ single-family dwelling
Page H-1.229
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-19 ground ground
Low Density Apartment District R-2 7,000 sf 65 ft 100 ft 35% 40%; FAR of second story ≤15%
1 unit/ 3,500 sf
28 ft 40% 20 ft min 20 ft min
10% of min lot width but not less than 5 ft and no more than 10 ft 12 ft min 2 spaces/
unit
Apartment District (general)
R-3 (general) 7,000 sf
<10,000 sf: 70 ft ≥10,000 sf: 80 ft
100 ft 30% 45%

13.1 units/ac 35 ft 50%
15% of lot width; 20 ft min
15% of lot width; 15 ft min
10 ft min for interior side
15 ft min
2 spaces/ unit; 1 space must be covered and not located in a front or side yard Apartment District (around El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area) R-3 (around El Camino Real/ Downtown Specific Plan Area) 10,000 sf 80 ft 100 ft 40%
Floor area ratio shall decrease on an even gradient from 75% for 30 du/ac to 35% for 13.1 du/ac

13.1-30 units/ac

13.1 du/ac: 35 ft ≥20 du/ac: 40 ft 25% 20 ft min 15 ft min 10 ft min for interior side 15 ft min
≥2 bedrooms: 2 spaces; <2 bedrooms: 1.5 spaces; each unit must have at least 1 space Garden Apartment Residential District R-3-A 10,000 sf 80 ft 100 ft 30% 45% max

13.1-30 units/ac
no max; all setbacks shall increase by 1 ft for every ft over 35 ft n/a 15 ft min 10 ft min
25% of the height of the main building but not less than 5 ft 10 ft min 2 spaces/
unit
Apartment—Office District R-3-C Same as R-3, provided that offices may be permitted High Density Residential District R-4 20,000 sf - 1
ac
100 ft 100 ft 40% 100% max 40 units/
net ac
40 ft max 30% 20 ft 15 ft 10 ft 15 ft min
≥2 bedrooms: 2 spaces; 1
Page H-1.230
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-20 max bedroom:

1.5 spaces; studio: 1 space
High Density Residential District, Special R-4-S 20,000 sf 100 ft 100 ft 40% Increase on an even gradient from 60% for 20 du/ac to 90% for 30 du/ac 20-30 units/ ac 40 ft max 25% 10 ft 10 ft min
10 ft; 5 ft min when abutting a private access easement 10 ft
≥2 bedrooms: 2 spaces; 1 bedroom: 1.5 spaces; studio: 1 space Retirement Living Units District R-L-U 20,000 sf min 100 ft 100 ft 35% 150% max 1 unit/ 800 sf 35 ft max n/a 25 ft min 20 ft min 10 ft min each side; 30 ft total
n/a 1 space/ unit
Neighborhood Mixed Use District, Restrictive
C-2-B none none none 60%
increase on an even gradient up to 90% for 30 du/ac
30 units/ac
30 ft max; 40 ft max for mixed-use
10% 10 ft min none none 10 ft min
1-1.5
spaces/ unit space/unit or 1 space/1,000 square feet
Residential Mixed Use District R-MU 20,000 sf 100 ft 100 ft n/a 60-90% 20-30 units/ ac 35-40 ft 25% 25 ft max from street; 10 ft min from interior property lines 10 ft min 10 ft min
25 ft max
1 space/unit or 1 space/1,000 square feet1-1.5 spaces/ unit Page H-1.231
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-21 Menlo Park’s multifamily zoning standards in the R-3 and R-4 zoning districts were compared to the nearby and/or neighboring cities of Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and the City of San Mateo. Comparative standards for multifamily zoning allowing roughly 18 to 45 units per acre are shown below (Table 5-3).

Table 5-3: Comparison of Menlo Park Multi-Family Zoning Standards with Nearby Cities City Zone
Units/
Acre
FAR
Lot
Coverage
Minimum Open
Space (% of lot) Lots Size Building Height
Menlo
Park R-3 16 0.45 30% 50% 7,000 sf 35 ft
R-4 40 1.0 40% 30% 20,000 sf 40 ft
Palo Alto RM-20 20 0.5 35% 35% 8,500 sf 30 ft
RM-30 30 0.6 40% 30% 8,500 sf 35 ft
RM-40 40 1.0 45% 20% 8,500 sf 40 ft
Mountain
View R3-2 18 1.05 35% 55% 12,000 sf 45 ft
R3-1 33 1.05 35% 55% 12,000 sf 45 ft
R3-D 46 1.05 40% 35% 12,000 sf 45 ft
Sunnyvale R-3 24 None 40% 20% 8,000 sf 35 ft
R-4 36 None 40% 20% 8,000 sf 55 ft
R-5 45 None 40% 20% 8,000 sf 55 ft
San
Mateo
R3 20-35

0.85 by
right; 1.0
with Use
Permit
--
200 sf/ first
bedroom in each
unit; 100 sf/
remaining
bedrooms
4,000 sf --
Page H-1.232
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-22 As shown in Table 5-3, Menlo Park’s FAR for multifamily development is lower than neighboring cities in the R-3 zone (which is more suitable moderate-income housing) but comparable in the R-4 zone (which is suitable for lower-income housing). However, based on this comparison and other factors, the City will adopt more flexible standards that will reduce the minimum lot size for multifamily development on R-3 zoned parcels from 10,000 sq. ft. to 7,000 sq. ft. in the area around the Downtown/El Camino Real Specific Plan Area (Program H4.K) and amend the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) to encourage greater opportunities for affordable housing. Additional standards that are lower than comparable cities include the 30 percent lot coverage in the R-3 zone and a maximum lot size in the R-4 zone of one acre in size. In addition, most comparable cities do not require conditional use permits for multifamily housing in a multifamily zone.

Higher density residential zoning districts, including R-3 (around El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan), R-3-C, R-4, and R-4-S, provide parking requirements based on bedroom count per unit rather than a standard two spaces per unit, which is the typical residential parking ratio in other residential zoning districts. The Retirement Living Units (R-L-U); Neighborhood Mixed Use District, Restrictive (C-2-B); and Residential Mixed Use (R-MU) zoning districts require less parking, ranging from 1 to

1.5 spaces per unit.

As with other cities, Menlo Park’s development standards and requirements are intended to protect the long-term health, safety, and welfare of the community. The Housing Element includes programs that will amend the Zoning Ordinance to reduce barriers to the development of affordable housing by increasing allowed residential densities (Program H4.D, Program H4.J, Program H4.L), providing greater flexibility around parking requirements for developments intended for people with special needs (Program H3.D), and allowing residential uses in commercial-only areas (Program H4.I).

City staff report that particularly on smaller parcels, current development standards may preclude the achievement of maximum zoned densities. The Housing Element includes a program (Program H4.M) to review and update the City’s multi-family development standards, including re-evaluation of parking, setbacks, height and other standards to enable compact, well-designed multi-family product types.

On January 1, 2020, Senate Bill 330 (SB 330) went into effect. The bill is intended to streamline housing projects that are subject to discretionary review under local zoning laws. The bill establishes a two-step process by which an applicant can “lock in” applicable fees and development regulations by submitting a Preliminary Application, then submit a complete development application within 180 days of the submittal of the Page H-1.233
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-23 complete Preliminary Application. The City of Menlo Park complies with SB 330.

Resources such as application checklists and process guidance handouts are available on the City's webpage. As of October 2022, the City has received and processed eight development applications under SB 330.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS – FEES AND/OR

EXACTIONS
Processing fees are required for all property improvement and development applications, pursuant to City Council policy to recover processing costs of development review. Local fees add to the cost of development, but cities typically look to recover processing costs to reduce budgetary impacts. High planning and site development fees can impact property owners’ ability to make improvements or repairs, especially for lower-income households. However, line item fees related to processing, inspections and installation services are limited by California law to the cost to the agencies of performing these services. City zoning, through State Density Bonus Law and the Affordable Housing Overlay zoning, provide various incentives for affordable housing as a way to reduce project costs and address actual and potential constraints that fees and exactions may pose.

The fees for Menlo Park are summarized below in Table 5-4 for three developments: (1) a 2,000-square foot single-family unit valued at $900,000 or greater; (2) a 16,000- square foot, 10-unit for-rent multifamily project valued at $5,000,000 ($500,000 for each unit); and (3) a 750 square foot detached accessory dwelling unit valued at $195,000.

The fees below are shown for the entire 10-unit multifamily project, not on a per-unit basis, except within the fees summary in Table 5-5.

Page H-1.234
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-24 Table 5-4: City of Menlo Park Fees (2019)
Fee Single-Family Multi-Family Accessory Dwelling
Unit
Agency Fees Paid To
Comments
PLANNING Use Permit $1,500 (deposit) $1,500 (deposit) Not typical Community Development Department
Architectural Control n/a $2,000 (deposit) n/a
Community Development Department
Environmental Review n/a $5,000 (deposit) + consultant costs n/a Community Development Department
Additional $4000 for Circulation System Assessment
BUILDING Building Permit $3,019 $13,950 $2,619
Community Development Department
Plan Check $3,836 $27,295 $2,590
Community Development Department
Geology Review $25 (admin) $25 (admin) $25 (admin) Community Development
Not charged for attached ADUs outside of Sharon
Page H-1.235
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-25 $1,200 (review) $1,750 (review) $1,200 (review) Department Heights State Strong Motion Fee $117 $650 $25
California Department of Conservation
Valuation amount x 0.00013 = fee amount; minimum fee of $0.50 for any valuation up to $3,850 State CA Green Building Fee $36 $200 $8
California Building Standards Commission
$1 for permits with valuations up to $25,000. Additional $1 for each additional $25,000 Construction Debris Recycling Administrative Fee
$200 $200 $200
Community Development Department
Fire2 $427 $427 $427
Menlo Park Fire Protection District
Includes site review and assumes one resubmittal
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING Public Works Improvement $2,000 $10,000 $1,000 Public Works Department Single family homes and ADUs: $810 (Base) + 5.35% of
2 https://www.menlofire.org/plan-submittal
Page H-1.236
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-26 onsite and offsite civil improvements Multifamily: $4,820 (Base) + 5.35% of onsite and offsite civil improvements Engineering Site Inspection $2,000 $10,000 $1,000
Public Works Department

5.35% of the cost of onsite and offsite civil improvements Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
$410 + 125% of the cost of external review if required
$1,050 + 125% of cost of external review if required
n/a Public Works
Department
UTILITIES Storm drainage connection fees $810 + $450 = $1,260 $810 + $150/ unit = $2,310 n/a Public Works Department Includes Storm Water Operations and Maintenance Agreements and storm drainage connection fees Water Service Connection Charge
Municipal Water: $12,789 O’Connor: $1,000 Palo Alto Mutual Municipal Water: $39,645 O’Connor: $1,000 Palo Alto Park Mutual Connection fees are charged proportionate to the burden of the ADU compared to the primary Menlo Park Municipal Water, California Water Service, O’Connor Tract Connection fee is paid to the property’s water provider Page H-1.237
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-27 Water Company: $2,500 (deposit)
Water Company: $2,500 (deposit)
dwelling. A conservative estimate for a dedicated water meter is provided below. Municipal Water: $12,789 Cooperative Water District, or Palo Alto Mutual Water Company Sewer3
West Bay Sanitary District: $8,501 (connection fee) East Palo Alto: $6,060 (connection fee) + $1,400 (plan check fee, sewer service charge, permit application fee) Fair Oaks: $6,153 (connection fee) + $380 (development West Bay Sanitary District: $8,501 (connection fee) East Palo Alto: $6,060 (connection fee) + $1,400 (plan check fee, sewer service charge, permit application fee) Fair Oaks: $24,612 (connection fee) + $380 (development Connection fees are charged proportionate to the burden of the ADU compared to the primary dwelling. West Bay Sanitary District: $6,376 West Bay Sanitary District, East Palo Alto Sanitary District, or Fair Oaks Sewer Maintenance District Cost varies depending on Sanitary District. Charges for Fair Oaks assumes 1” for single family and 2” for multifamily. 3 https://westbaysanitary.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/CODE-OF-GENERAL-REGULATIONS-revised-07-01-2021.pdf#page=49https://www.epasd.com/home/showpublisheddocument/3232/636930162743300000https://www.fowd.com/rates-fees Page H-1.238
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-28 fee) fee)
GENERAL Tech Surcharge $91 $419 $79
Community Development Department
3% of building permit value
General Surcharge $91 $419 $79
Community Development Department
3% of building permit value
IMPACT FEES Affordable Housing In-Lieu Fee
n/a n/a n/a
Community Development Department
Developments with fewer than four units are exempt. At least 10% of the units shall be affordable in developments that have 5-19 units.

Roads (Building Impact, Public Works)
$5,220 $29,000 $240 Public Works Department 0.58% of building valuation.

Traffic $16,517 $55,669 n/a Public Works Department Recreation Fees (Parks) n/a n/a n/a Public Works Department Recreation in-lieu fee only applies to Page H-1.239
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-29 subdivisions and are an estimated $127,400 for single family homes and $78,400 per unit for for-sale multifamily developments.

School4 $8,160 $65,280 $3,060
Sequoia Union High School District
ADUs 500 square feet or smaller are exempt from school impact fees. 4 https://www.seq.org/Departments/Administrative-Services/Maintenance--Operations/School-Impact--Developer-Fees/index.html Page H-1.240
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-30 Table 5-5: Summary oOf Fees
Fee Category Single Family Multifamily ADU Notes
Planning $1,500 $8,500 --
Building/Fire $8,055 $43,622 $7,069
Public Works/Engineering $4,410 $21,050 $2,000
Utilities $22,977 $50,883 $19,592
Assumes that new
connections are
required and
development is
serviced by Menlo
Park Municipal
Water and West Bay
Sanitary Sewer.

General $182 $838 $158
Impact Fees $29,897 $149,949 $3,300
Total $70,874 $272,024 $12,552
Per Unit Fees $70,874 $27,202 $12,552
Project Valuation
(Estimate) $900,000 $5,000,000 $195,000
Development Fee as % of
Project Valuation

7.9% 5.4% 6.4%
Development fees for multifamily and ADU projects are much lower, as a proportion of the project value, than development fees for single-family developments.

The City’s Master Fee Schedule reflects fees charged by all City departments. It is usually amended annually so that fees reflect current costs to provide services or, in some cases, to add new fees for new City services and/or to eliminate fees for services that are no longer offered.

Page H-1.241
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-31 Compared to other communities in San Mateo County, Menlo Park’s fees for single family homes are on the higher end while the City’s fees for small multi-family developments are on the lower end (Table 5-6). There is a limit to how much development fees can be reduced. Impact fees and fees paid to service providers, such as water, sewage, and school fees, are necessary to ensure that new developments have utility services and that the long-term health and safety of the community are maintained. Fees that are collected by the City will be re-evaluated when the Master Fee Schedule is updated to identify any fees that could be reduced without compromising the overall health and safety of the community.

Table 5-6: Total Fees (includes entitlement, building permits, and impact fees) per Unit Single Family Small Multi-Unit Large Multi-Unit
Atherton $15,941 No Data No Data
Brisbane $24,940 $11,678 No Data
Burlingame $69,425 $30,345 $23,229
Colma $6,760 $167,210 $16,795
Daly City $24,202 $32,558 $12,271
East Palo Alto $104,241 No Data $28,699
Foster City $67,886 $47,179 $11,288
Half Moon Bay $52,569 $16,974 No Data
Hillsborough $71,092 No Data No Data
Millbrae $97,756 $6,824 $55,186
Pacifica $33,725 $40,151 No Data
Portola Valley $52,923 No Data No Data
Redwood City $20,795 $18,537 $62,696
San Bruno $58,209 $72,148 $39,412
San Mateo $99,003 $133,658 $44,907
South San
Francisco $81,366 $76,156 $32,471
Unincorporated
San Mateo $36,429 $27,978 $10,012
Woodside $70,957 $82,764 No Data
Source: 21 Elements Survey, 2022
Page H-1.242
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-32 EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS –

DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING TIME
The City recognizes that the time required to process a development proposal could be a barrier to housing production if it is lengthy. Over the years, the City has streamlined its development review process to make it more efficient, while still providing adequate opportunities for public review and input. Typical development application review procedures are summarized in Table 5-7.

Table 5-7: Single Family and Multifamily Use Permit and Architectural Control Review by Planning CommissionTypical Development Application Review Process Steps in Application Review
Single Family (Ministerial Review)

1. Step One: Submittal of building permit application, architectural, structural, MEP, civil plans, structural calculations, Energy Code calculations and compliance forms, geotechnical investigation, arborist report and FEMA elevation certification if required.

2. Step Two: Pay building plan review fees, geologist review fees, and improvement plan check fees (Engineering Division fee)

3. Step Three: Project is assigned to a City planner, Building Division plan checker (plan checker), and Engineering Division engineer for review and approval or comment. Note: The plan checker does not begin their review until the City planner has reviewed the project and has determined the project is in compliance with the City’s Zoning Ordinance or has very few comments that will then be included in the plan check letter issued by the plan checker.

4. Step Four: Plan check comments are sent within four (4) to six (6) weeks to the architect of record, Civil Engineer, and property owner after reviews are completed. Note: Engineering Division sends plan check comments directly to the civil engineer of record who prepared plans independent of the Building and Planning Division’s comments. Determine if project requires environmental review under CEQA

5. Step Five: Upon re-submittal of revised plans and supporting calculations based on plan check comments, plans and calculations are routed to planner, plan checker, and Engineering Division engineer for review and approval or comment. Continue CEQA process (if necessary).

6. Step Six: After plan approval but prior to issuance of permit, the applicant is notified of remaining outstanding City fees associated with the issuance of the Building permit and activities to be completed prior to issuance such as Fire District approval, documentation of payment of school fees, contractor information and current City Business License or completion of Owner Builder forms as mandated by the state.

7. Step Seven: Issuance of permit after verification of completion of step 6.

8. Step Eight: Certify EIR and public hearing on entitlements.

Page H-1.243
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-33 Single Family Requiring Use Permit Review by Planning Commission

1. Step One: Meeting with Planner to review preliminary design concepts; planner coordination with Building, Engineering, Transportation and/or other internal and external divisions and agencies as may be necessary, potentially through Development Review Team (DRT) meetings; applicants provided with applicable written handouts, application forms and application submittal guidelines (also available on City website).

2. Step Two: Submittal of a formal application and fees at a scheduled appointment with a planner; preliminary review of submittal conducted with applicant to determine if submittal is complete and whether there are any immediately observable issues that will need to be addressed.

3. Step Three: Plans are reviewed by staff planners to identify any key issues and assigned to a project planner within seven (7) days of submittal.

4. Step Four: Within seven (7) days of application submittal, a notice of application including the name of the applicant, address and brief description of the project, copies of the site plan and elevations, and contact information for the project planner are posted on the City’s website. A notice is mailed to all occupants and property owners within 300 feet of the project site advising them of the new application and the information available on the City website.

5. Step Five: Within 30 days of application submittal, project planner completes review and sends notice of whether application is complete or incomplete. If incomplete, needed information is identified. Once submittal is determined complete, project is scheduled for review by the Planning Commission at the next available meeting, typically within 30 days.

6. Step Six: At least 18 days prior to the Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing notice is placed with a local newspaper for publishing at least 12 days before the hearing, posted on the City website, and mailed to all residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project site.

7. Step Seven: Project planner coordinates with other internal and external divisions and agencies to prepare staff report; staff report is provided to Planning Commissioners and project sponsors and placed on the City website a minimum of four (4) days prior to the hearing date.

8. Step Eight: Public hearing is held and decision rendered.

9. Step Nine: Letter of action is prepared and sent to applicant within 5 (five) days.

10. Step Ten: Appeal period runs for 15 days after which the Commission action becomes final. If appealed to the City Council, Steps Six through Ten are repeated with regard to noticing, report preparation and distribution. The Zoning Ordinance states that appeals shall be scheduled insofar as practicable within 45 days of receipt of the appeal, but if not acted upon within 75 days, the Commission’s action is deemed affirmed.

Page H-1.244
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-34 Additional Notes on Use PermitProject t Review by Planning Commission:
 Development for a single-family dwelling (e.g., building a new house or addition to an existing house) may require a Use Permit depending on the lot characteristics (e.g., standard or substandard lot) and the scope of work (e.g., new house or remodel). The applicability of Use Permit review for development on single-family lots is explained on the City's website.5 Multifamily development may also require a Use Permit depending on the lot characteristics (e.g., lot size) or specific zoning district (e.g., R-3 versus R-4).

The purpose of the Use Permit is to allow the proper integration into the community of uses which may be suitable only in specific locations in a zoning district, or if such uses are designed or laid out on the site in a particular manner. The Planning Commission may approve, deny, or conditionally approve an application for a Use Permit.
 The required findings for granting a Use Permit are established by Municipal Code Section 16.82.030. The Planning Commission determines whether or not the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or whether it will be injurious or detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the city. If the Planning Commission finds that the aforementioned conditions will not result from the particular use applied for, it may grant the use permit.

El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Residential Development

1. Step One: Meeting(s) with Planner to review preliminary project concept and applicability of the Specific Plan; applicants provided with applicable written handouts and guidelines (also available on City website). Optional meeting with Development Review Team (DRT) for interdepartmental review/feedback.

2. Step Two: Submittal of a formal application and fees at a scheduled appointment with a planner; preliminary review of submittal conducted with applicant to determine if submittal is complete and whether there are any immediately observable issues that will need to be addressed.

3. Step Three: Preliminary review conducted to determine project consistency with Specific Plan.

4. Step Four: Preliminary environmental review conducted to determine if the project is consistent with the Specific Plan EIR or whether additional environmental review would be required. If additional review is

5 “When is a Use Permit Needed to Build on a Single-Family Lot?” Available at https://beta.menlopark.org/files/sharedassets/public/community-development/documents/building/whenis-a-use-permit-needed-to-build-on-a-single-family-lot__201402101531556162.pdf Page H-1.245
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-35 required, determine and implement the appropriate type of review.

5. Step Five: When project is designated complete, send public meeting/hearing notice for Planning Commission (typically 3 weeks in advance) for architectural and site plan approval.

6. Step Six: Planning Commission action, subject to appeal to the City Council.

The processing times for the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan and Bayfront area zoning districts are the same as for other multifamily developments. The typical multifamily process includes meeting with staff, project submittal, preliminary project review, preliminary environmental review under CEQA, project/application completeness determination, and then action before the Planning Commission.

Typical planning review times for residential-only developments are summarized in Table 5-8 for various types of approvals. Projects with non-residential components would require additional review time. These time estimates are not inclusive of building review times nor time spent by the project sponsors to respond to comments.

Timeframes may also vary depending on the completeness of the initial submittal, the applicant’s responsiveness to comments, neighborhood outreach and feedback, and level of CEQA analysis required. All timeframes assume a Negative Declaration under CEQA. If an EIR is required, which is typical for General Plan Amendments, at least one year would be added to the approval process.

Page H-1.246
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-36 Table 5-8: Typical Application Processing Times (Menlo Park) Typical Processing Times
Permit/Procedure Typical Processing
Time
Ministerial Review 8 to 12 weeks
Ministerial Review (for ADUs) 6 to 9 weeks
Conditional Use Permit 12 to 16 weeks
Rezone 16 to 24 weeks
General Plan/Zoning Ordinance Amendment 20 to 32 weeks
Architectural Control review and El Camino
Real/Downtown Specific Plan
16 to 32 weeks
Tract maps 12 to 16 weeks
Parcel maps 12 to 16 weeks
Initial Study 16 to 24 weeks
EIRs 52 weeks minimum
Source: City of Menlo Park (2022)
Generally, as shown in Table 5-9, typical application processing time in Menlo Park is comparable to other San Mateo County cities.

Table 5-9: Permit Processing Times (other agencies)
ADU Process
(months)
Ministerial
By-Right
(months)
Discretionary
By-Right
(months)
Discretionary
(Hearing
Officer if
Applicable)
(months)
Discretionary
(Planning
Commission)
(months)
Discretionary
(City Council)
(months)
Atherton 1 to 2 1 to 3 2 to 4 N/A 2 to 4 2 to 6
Brisbane 1 to 2 2 to 6 N/A N/A 4 to 12 6 to 14
Burlingame 1 to 2 2 to 3 2 to 3 N/A 3-4
standard
project; 12
major
project
13 Colma 1 to 2 1 to 2 1 to 3 2 to 4 N/A 4 to 8
Daly City 1 to 2 2 to 4 N/A N/A 4 to 8 8 to 12
Page H-1.247
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-37 East Palo Alto 1 to 3 8 to 12 6 to 14 20 to 40 20 to 40 20 to 40 Foster City 1 to 2 1 to 2 1 to 2 3 to 6 6 to 12
Half Moon Bay 1 to 2 2 to 4 3 to 6 4 to 12 6 to 15
Hillsborough - - - - - -
Millbrae 0 to 2 3 to 6 1 to 3 3 to 8 3 to 8 4 to 9
Pacifica 1 to 2 2 to 3 4 to 5 5 to 6 5 to 6 7 to 8
Redwood City 2 to 3 3 to 4 N/A 8 to 10 12 to 18 18 to 24 San Bruno 2 3 to 6 N/A 3 to 6 9 to 24 9 to 24
San Mateo 4 to 8 1 to 2 4 to 7 N/A 9 to 12 9 to 13
South San
Francisco
1 1 2 to 3 2 to 3 3 to 6 6 to 9
Unincorporated
San Mateo
1 to 3 3 to 6 4 to 9 6 to 12 6 to 18 9 to 24
Woodside 1 to 2 1 to 2 N/A N/A 2 to 6 3 to 8
Source: 21 Elements Survey, 2022
Aside from the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan and the design standards and guidelines contained in the R-4-S and R-MU zoning districts, the City has no formal design guidelines to assist in project review. The City plans to adopt objective design standards for each residential zoning district concurrent or subsequent to the adoption of the 2023-2031 Housing Element, which would apply to all ministerially reviewed projects (Program H7.A). Under State law, certain development projects that meet affordability targets are eligible for streamlined ministerial review.

Architectural Control
Projects that are not eligible for ministerial review and require review by the Planning Commission are subject to project compatibility requirements under § 16.68.020, Architectural Control, in the City’s zoning code. Architectural Control review by the Page H-1.248
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-38 Planning Commission6 is generally required for any exterior modifications to an existing building or for new construction, except for single-family, duplex, and accessory buildings. In the M-2 zoning district, the Community Development Director can approve modifications to the buildings that do not increase gross floor area. The Planning Commission or Community Development Director, depending on the permit, must make the following findings: (1) that the general appearance of the structures is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood; (2) that the development will not be detrimental to the harmonious and orderly growth of the city; (3) that the development will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; (4) that the development provides adequate parking as required in all applicable city ordinances and has made adequate provisions for access to such parking; and, (5) that the development is consistent with any applicable specific plan. The decisions by the Planning Commission or Community Development Director should be focused on design of the structure. These findings should allow for inclusion rather than exclusion.

See Policy H5.8.

Subjective design guidelines cannot be used as a means of approving or rejecting a development project that is ministerially reviewed. Applications that are reviewed solely by City staff can only be reviewed for their compliance with the City’s General Plan, any relevant Specific Plan, the Zoning Code, and other objective development standards.

The City’s processing times are not considered a constraint. The City’s ministerial review time for accessory dwelling units is within the timeframe required by State law.

The City is also adopting objective design standards to streamline the review process for eligible projects. All other review times are necessary to ensure that new development is well-designed and will not create negative impacts. Additionally, design review requirements generally provide an opportunity for design issues to be raised early in the review process, thus helping to encourage community acceptance of a project proposal, which can reduce delay due to project appeals and other forms of community objection. The design review process is concurrent with the use permit process. Because it is not a separate process, it is not necessarily a constraint

6 In the M-2 zoning district, the Community Development Director can approve modifications to the buildings that do not increase gross floor area.

Page H-1.249
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-39 Streaminling Provisions
Menlo Park is not currently subject to SB 35.7 Program H4.M requires the development of SB 35 streamlining processes.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS – CODES AND

ENFORCEMENT, ON AND OFF SITE IMPROVEMENT

STANDARDS
In the City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element (adopted November 29, 2016), one of the guiding principles notes that “Menlo Park is a leader in efforts to address climate change, adapt to sea-level rise, protect natural and built resources, conserve energy, manage water, utilize renewable energy, and promote green building.” While building codes are important to protect health and safety, they may also constitute a constraint to new developments. In particular, local amendments to the California Building Standards Code should be carefully analyzed. The City Council adopted the 2019 California Building Standards Code and the California Code of Regulation with an effective date of January 1, 2020. Most notably, the City’s Building Code included extensive amendments to the Energy and Green Building Standards Codes to go beyond the State’s minimum requirements for energy use in building design and construction, requiring electricity as the only fuel source for newly constructed buildings (Municipal Code Chapter 12.16).

Code Enforcement
The Menlo Park Police Department has primary responsibility for enforcing the City's codes and ordinances. Any police officer can take a complaint of unsafe conditions or issue citations for violations. Most complaints are referred to the City's Code Enforcement Unit for follow-up; this is the primary method by which Code Enforcement is conducted. Code Enforcement officers also look for violations, coordinate clean-up or repair; and issue notices, warnings and citations.

Program H2.C directs for the connecting of individuals to housing rehabilitation programs, including Habitat for Humanity’s Homeowner Preservation Program.

7 SB 35 Statewide Determination Summary (HCD: 2022). Available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-06/sb35_statewidedeterminationsummary.pdf Page H-1.250
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-40 On and Off Site Improvements
As part of any development project, the City will evaluate and determine the appropriate on and off-site improvements. The type and extent of the improvements often relate to the type, size, complexity, and location of the project. Although each project is reviewed on a case-by-case basis, the City has procedures for determining when frontage improvements are required, which can help make the process more predictable.

Whenever a discretionary approval is required for a project, the City can require frontage improvements where none already exist. For new residential projects, if no frontage improvements exist, then new frontage improvements are required and they must meet City standards. The frontage improvements should generally match those of adjoining or nearby properties for aesthetic consistency and ease of use and shall include a curb, gutter, sidewalk, street trees, and street lights. A typical vertical curb, gutter and sidewalk would consist of an 18-inch gutter, 6-inch curb, and a minimum 5- foot sidewalk. In some instances, a planter strip or wider sidewalk may be required, depending on the location. The Public Works Director may allow a deferred frontage improvement agreement, including a bond to cover the full cost of the improvements, in order to coordinate with other street improvements at a later date.

In cases where there are already existing frontage improvements, the owner is typically responsible to remove and replace damaged frontage improvements. Generally, off-site improvements occur within existing right-of-way and no additional land dedication or public easements are needed. Therefore, there should be no impacts to development setbacks, density or floor area ratio, which are important factors for making a development work.

On-site improvements consist of internal circulation and landscaping. The City’s Parking and Driveway Design Guidelines provide direction on street width and parking dimensions and the City’s Transportation Manager has the authority to modify the requirements. The City believes there are opportunities to revisit and update the parking requirements for multifamily residential development (Program H4.M) to account for the changing trends in development and more efficient use of land while still achieving health and safety for the site and surrounding area.

New residential developments must also comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, which provides standards and guidelines for ensuring landscape designs are water efficient and prioritize water conservation. The ordinance applies to all new landscaping that is equal to or greater than 500 square feet, rehabilitated landscaping exceeding 1,000 square feet, and any aggregate landscape area of less Page H-1.251
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-41 than 2,500 square feet associated with projects requiring 1) subdivision improvements, 2) grading and drainage improvements, 3) new construction, 4) additions or modifications that require grading and drainage plan approval, or 5) new water service.

The Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance also applies to any projects using on-site greywater or rainwater capture. While additional steps may be required to show compliance, the end product is intended to result in less water usage and more sustainability.

All of these requirements add to the cost of construction. Financial incentives (such as fee waivers) for affordable housing would help reduce costs and allow affordable housing development to be more feasible.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS –

CONSTRAINTS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
Family
State law requires that the definition of family does not distinguish between related and unrelated persons and
does not impose a numerical limit on the number of
people who constitute a family in order to prevent
discrimination of the siting of group homes. Menlo Park uses the following definition of a family, which is
consistent with state law, “A group of individuals living together in a dwelling unit as a single housekeeping unit under a common housekeeping management plan based on an internally structured relationship providing organization and stability.”
In Menlo Park, 8.1 percent of the population have a disability. Of that population, children under the age of 18 account for 50.4 percent of the population with a developmental disability, while adults account for 49.6 percent. Some people with a developmental disability are unable to live independently and/or work and rely on Supplemental Security Income (SSI). This population faces a higher risk of experiencing homelessness because aging parents or family members can no longer take care of them and their specific housing needs. Children with developmental disabilities may not be eligible for SSI and the cost of care is burdensome for families with low incomes. The Page H-1.252
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-42 need for affordable housing is evident, but housing designed for accessibility and that encourages mobility and opportunity for independence can be challenging to secure.

Reasonable Accommodation Procedures
Menlo Park adopted a reasonable accommodation procedure in 2014 (Municipal Code Chapter 16.83). To make housing available to individuals with a disability, a person may request modifications or exceptions to rules or standards regarding siting, development, and use of a housing development. This procedure is intended to ensure that individuals with disabilities have equal opportunities to housing. Through the implementation of Program H3.H (Inclusionary Accessible Units), Program H3.I (Accessible ADUs), Program H3.J (Marketing for Accessible Units), and Program H3.M (Wheelchair Visitability), the City seeks to continually improve housing options available to individuals living with a disability.

Group Homes
The City’s zoning code addresses foster homes, convalescent homes and residential care facilities, which serve similar functions to group homes. Foster homes and convalescent homes are permitted as a conditional use in the R-2, R-3, R-3-A, R-4, and R-4-S zoning districts.

Consistent with state law, small residential care facilities that serve six or fewer persons are permitted by-right in all residential areas.8 Pursuant to State law, there is no distance separation requirement for community care facilities. Zoning Ordinance Chapter 16.04 (Definitions) differentiates between large and small residential care facilities. Program H3.G amends the zoning ordinance to ensure requirements for group homes of more than six persons are consistent with state law and fair housing requirements.

In addition, HCD’s review of Menlo Park’s initial draft has identified the need for the city’s definition of a family to be revised. Program H3.G amends the definition of family in the Code to eliminate the requirement of a common housekeeping management plan based on an internally structured relationship providing organization and stability.

8https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=HSC&sectionNum=1568.0 831
Page H-1.253
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-43 Parking
The City’s zoning code does not have separate parking standards for people with disabilities. A person living with a disability would be able to apply for an exception to parking standards under reasonable accommodation procedures. Through the implementation of Program H4.M, the City will review and modify the parking requirements for multifamily residential housing, particularly for affordable housing developments.

EXISTING GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS –

INCLUSIONARY ZONING
The City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program (Municipal Code Chapter 16.96) applies to residential for-sale and rental projects, and commercial projects. All residential for-sale projects of five (5) or more units are subject to the City’s inclusionary requirements. Residential projects that include 5 to 19 units must provide a minimum of 10 percent of the units at below-market rates to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. For projects with 20 or more units, a minimum of 15 percent of the units must be affordable to low-income households. A whole unit or an in-lieu fee is required for development projects that include a fraction of a unit. The monthly rent of BMR units is prohibited from exceeding 75 percent of comparable market-rate units. Additionally, all BMR units are subject to a minimum deed restriction of 55 years. Commercial developments are required to pay an in-lieu fee to the below-market-rate housing fund.

The City offers one additional market-rate unit for each BMR unit up to a maximum of a 15 percent bonus above the allowable density. The City also offers increased FAR, increased maximum heights, and reduced parking requirements. In addition, there are requirements that the BMR units be comparable to the market-rate units in a development, but they need not be of luxury quality and may contain standard, rather than luxury, appliances. If lower-income units are proposed, they may be a smaller size, duet-style, and/or attached but with an architecturally consistent exterior. The City requires construction of the units on-site, although construction of units off-site or payment of in-lieu fee is allowed, at the City's discretion.

The City’s BMR requirements have not been a constraint to housing development as many projects have been proposed and built under these requirements. BMR Guidelines are targeted to a distinct affordability level and housing tenure (moderateincome for-sale housing) and other development incentives and density bonus allowances are proposed under programs contained in the Housing Element (State Density Bonus Law and Affordable Housing Overlay zoning). Through the Page H-1.254
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-44 implementation of Program H4.A and Program H4.B, the City will continue to improve the inclusionary zoning requirements and the BMR Housing Program. Chapter 16.97 of Menlo Park's Municipal Code lays out local compliance with State Density Bonus Law (California Government Code Sections 659115-95918).

Page H-1.255
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-45

NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS TO HOUSING
State law requires that the Housing
Element include a discussion of the factors
that present barriers to the production of
housing, including government actions and
market forces (non-governmental
constraints). Identification of these
constraints helps the City to implement
measures that address these concerns and
reduce their impacts on the production of
housing. The following sections discuss
actual and potential non-governmental constraints to housing.

Availability and Cost of Financing
Home mortgage financing rates were at historic lows with rates ranging from 2 to 5 percent from 2018-2021 for a 30-year fixed rate loan (Freddie Mac). Low-interest rates dramatically affect housing affordability by decreasing monthly housing costs. For example, a 30-year home loan for $400,000 at five percent interest has monthly payments of $2,147. A similar home loan at seven percent interest has payments of nearly 24 percent more, or $2,661. However, first-time buyers, people with limited credit history, lower incomes or self-employment incomes, or those with unusual circumstances have experienced challenges in qualifying for a loan or were charged higher rates.

San Mateo County qualifies as a high-cost area and has a higher loan limit through the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan program. In 2021, prospective home buyers could receive a loan of up to $822,000 for a single-family home and approximately $1,582,000 for a four-plex through an FHA loan.

Affordable housing developments face additional constraints for financing. Though public funding is available, it is allocated on a highly competitive basis and developments must meet multiple qualifying criteria, often including the requirement to pay prevailing wages. Smaller developments with higher per unit costs are among the hardest to make financially feasible. This is because the higher costs result in a sale price that is above the affordability levels set for many programs. Additionally, smaller projects often require significant time by developers, but because the overall budget is smaller and fees are based on a percentage of total costs, the projects are sometimes not feasible.

Page H-1.256
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-46 Land and Construction Costs
San Mateo County is a desirable place for housing and available land is in short supply, which contributes to high land costs. These costs vary both between and within jurisdictions based on factors like the desirability of the location and the permitted density.

Menlo Park has few vacant lots, which makes
estimating land costs difficult. However, a close
approximation is the cost of property acquisitions. In
2021, the City provided $5 million of the $7.45 million sales price to acquire 6-8 Coleman Place, a
multifamily development that is now managed by
HouseKeys. In 2019, the land for 1345 Willow Road
was acquired for $12.7 million, which was 9 percent of
the total development cost.

Construction costs include both hard costs, such as labor and materials, and soft costs, such as architectural and engineering services, development fees and insurance. City staff reported that construction costs for single-family homes were typically $550 per square foot in 2021. The construction cost for a 140-unit multifamily affordable housing development on 1345 Willow Road was approximately $850,000 per unit or $119.9 million in total.

An analysis of development costs in San Mateo County conducted by Century Urban in 2022 found that total costs, including land and construction costs, were approximately $2,487,000 for a 2,600-square foot single family home and $7,949,000 for a 10-unit multifamily development. Construction costs, including hard and soft costs, for singlefamily homes, ranged from $553 to $672 per square foot depending on the size of the house. A 10-unit multifamily development had an estimated construction cost of $687 per square foot. Average land costs for single-family homes in San Mateo County was $1,030,000 but could range from $210,000 to $2,510,000, while land costs for multifamily developments was an average of $1,000,000 but could range from $400,000 to $1,600,000.9 Complete findings on development costs conducted by Century Urban are contained in Appendix 5-1.

9 Century Urban. “San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Development Cost & San Mateo County Unit Mix Research.” 2022.

Page H-1.257
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-47 Requests to Develop at Densities Below Those Permitted
New State Housing Element law now requires the non-governmental constraints analysis to evaluate developer requests to build at densities below the density identified in the Housing Element sites inventory. As illustrated in Table 5-10, below, the City has approved and the market supports projects at the upper end of the density range, with many recent projects taking advantage of density bonus incentives.

Table 5-10: Comparison of Zoned and Built Densities
Project Zoning # of Units Acreage
Permitted
Density
(du/ac)
Built
Density
(du/ac)
Density
Bonus

WORKING WITH NON-PROFIT HOUSING DEVELOPERS
The key to the success of non-profit developers lies in three areas: (1) their ability to draw upon a diversity of funding sources and mechanisms to make their developments work financially; (2) their commitment to working cooperatively and constructively with the local community; and, (3) their long-term commitment to ensuring excellence in design, construction and management of their developments, creating assets that are valued by the people who live in the developments as well as their neighbors and others.

The City can work with non-profit developers where there are opportunities, either through public ownership of property or key larger sites (over 1 acre in size) where special opportunities exist with minimal constraints, carrying costs, or costs of processing or construction. Since multiple funding sources are typically used for an affordable project, there are additional burdens placed on non-profit developers to track the information required and report on a timely basis.

The City issued three Notices of Funding Availability (NOFA) during the 5th RHNA cycle for BMR housing funds to support the acquisition, rehabilitation or new construction of housing that will provide long-term affordability. The funding is intended to fill the Page H-1.258
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Actual and Potential Constraints to Housing | Page 5-48 financing gap between the projected total development costs and other available funding sources.

Several BMR housing projects were awarded housing funds through the NOFA process since 2018.
 The MidPen Gateway Apartments development was awarded $12.7 million for the demolition of an existing affordable multifamily residential building with 82 units and the construction of 140 new rental units affordable to households making 60 percent AMI or lower.
 MidPen’s development at Willow Court was awarded approximately $635,000 for the preservation of existing affordable units through the rehabilitation of six units affordable to low-income households.
 HIP Housing was awarded $5.5 million for 6-8 Coleman Place. This funded the acquisition and conversion of an existing 14-unit apartment building to affordable rental units for very low- and low-income households. This project was completed in April 2021.
 Habitat for Humanity Greater Bay Area was awarded $1.2 million for the rehabilitation of existing housing owned and occupied by very low-income households in the Belle Haven neighborhood. Habitat for Humanity will complete 20 rehab projects over the next three years with funding approved by the City Council in 2021.

There are a wide variety of resources provided through federal, state, and local programs to support affordable housing development and related programs and services. Specific programs and sources of funding are summarized earlier in the Housing Element. Local government resources, which have historically played a less important role in supporting housing development, now play a fairly significant role by making local developments more competitive for federal and state financing.

There is considerable competition for the program funds that are available, and any one development will need to draw upon multiple resources to be financially feasible. When developments are able to demonstrate a financial commitment and contribution from local sources — especially if coupled with regulatory support through policies such as fast-track processing, fee waivers, and/or density bonuses — they are better positioned to leverage funding from other outside sources.

Page H-1.259
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Energy | Page 6-1
Energy

ENERGY CONSERVATION
Housing Elements are required to
identify opportunities for energy
conservation. Energy costs have
increased significantly over the past
several decades, and climate
change concerns have increased the
need and desire for further energy
conservation and related “green
building” programs. Buildings use
significant energy in their design,
construction, and operation. In
California, approximately 25 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions are attributed to buildings and account for the second largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.1
The use of green building techniques and materials can reduce the resources that go into new construction and can make buildings operate with much greater efficiency. One common definition of green building is:2 “Green building is the practice of creating structures and using processes that are environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building's life-cycle from siting to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation and deconstruction. This practice expands and complements the classical building design concerns of economy, utility, durability, and comfort.

Green building is also known as a sustainable or high performance building.” Menlo Park has taken ambitious steps to simultaneously advance sustainability and housing goals, which will ensure that new housing reduces associated climate change impacts, minimizes energy costs, and creates healthy indoor living environments.

1 California Air Resources Board. (2021). California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory: 2000-2019. 2 US Environmental Protection Agency. “Green Building”
Page H-1.260
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Energy | Page 6-2
Part 6 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations sets forth mandatory energy standards for new development and requires the adoption of an “energy budget.” In turn, the home building industry must comply with these standards, while localities are responsible for enforcing the energy conservation regulations.

In addition to State energy codes, the City adopted Reach Codes (Menlo Park Municipal Code Chapter 12.16) in 2019, which requires new development to use electricity as their only fuel source (not natural gas). The Reach Codes also include solar requirements for new nonresidential and high-rise residential buildings. As of 2022, the City is in the process of exploring updates to the building code to require solar for a wider range of new construction projects, including single family residences.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) provides a variety of energy conservation services for residents. PG&E also participates in several other energy assistance programs for lower-income households, helping qualified homeowners and renters conserve energy and manage electricity costs. These energy assistance programs include, but are not limited to, the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) Program and the Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help (REACH) Program.

The CARE Program provides a 15 percent monthly discount on gas and electric rates to income qualified households, certain non-profits, facilities housing agricultural employees, homeless shelters, hospices and other qualified nonprofit group living facilities.

The REACH Program provides one-time financial assistance to customers who have no other way to pay their energy bill. The intent of REACH is to assist lowincome customers, particularly the elderly, those living with disabilities and/or compromised health conditions, and the unemployed. These are groups that typically experience financial hardships in paying for
required energy needs.

Menlo Park has been successful in implementing Energy
Upgrade California, which provides rebates and incentives for improvements to items such as insulation, air ducts, windows, and furnace and air-conditioning. The City has a robust outreach and marketing approach for the program.

The City’s website also provides resources for transitioning to “all-electric” for new and existing buildings, including rebates for purchasing energy efficient products and
Page H-1.261
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Energy | Page 6-3
incentives through the Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN). Examples of incentives/rebates include programs for multifamily property owners to replace gas appliances and heating systems with electric and energy efficient alternatives.

The City has also joined Peninsula Clean Energy, which is a regional program that delivers greenhouse gas-free and renewable energy at comparable or lower costs than prices offered by PG&E. Peninsula Clean Energy generates electricity for customers in Menlo Park while PG&E is responsible for delivering the electricity and maintaining the energy grid. Existing PG&E residential and business customers in the city have been automatically enrolled in ECOplus, which provides customers with electricity that is 50 percent renewable energy and 100 percent sourced from carbon-free sources. Customers also have the option to upgrade to ECO100, which provides 100 percent renewable energy at a higher rate.

Page H-1.262
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-1
Site Inventory and Analysis

INTRODUCTION
The City is meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) requirements for the 2023-2031 planning period through the identification of 69 housing opportunity sites made up of 83 parcels. These sites are focused in Districts 2 through 5 to disperse affordable housing and housing development in general throughout the City of Menlo Park.

The housing opportunity sites, along with the “pipeline projects” identified in the "RHNA Progress" section of this chapter, provide sufficient site capacity to meet Menlo Park's RHNA with an additional 30 percent buffer, as recommended by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).1 Table 7-1 provides an overview of the City of Menlo Park’s RHNA with an additional 30 percent buffer; the total units needed are 3,830 units, with 2,161 affordable units from the very low, low, and moderate income categories.

Table 7-1: RHNA Allocation2
Very
Low
Income
Category
Low
Income
Category
Moderate
Income
Category
Above
Moderate
Income
Category
Total Units
(All Income
Categories)
Total Affordable
Units (Very Low,
Low, and Moderate
Income Categories)
0-50%
AMI3
51-80%
AMI
81-120%
AMI
>120% AMI
6th Cycle 740 426 496 1,284 2,946 1,662

1 HCD recommends a buffer of at least 15 to 30 percent in order to ensure that sufficient capacity exists in the housing element to accommodate the RHNA throughout the planning period. This buffer is an important component of housing planning in that it allows for case-by-case decision-making on individual projects in certain circumstances and ensures that an adequate supply of sites is provided throughout the entire planning period (2023-2031), especially for lower-income RHNA. The buffer is essential to ensure compliance with the “No Net Loss Law,” which requires that jurisdictions maintain an inventory of sites to accommodate any unmeet portion of the RHNA throughout the planning period (Government Code 65863).
2 The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) approved the final RHNA methodology and draft allocations for jurisdictions within the nine-county Bay Area, which includes Menlo Park, on May 20, 2021. 3 AMI = "Area Median Income", or the median household income for San Mateo County, as determined by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), HCD, and the County of San Mateo. AMI for the county is $149,600 in 2021.

Page H-1.263
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-2
RHNA
30% Buffer 222 128 149 385 884 499
Total Units
Needed 962 554 645 1,669 3,830 2,161
The RHNA requirements will be met with 3,644 645 units in pipeline projects, 85 units in projected Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), and 2,153 906 units in potential housing opportunity sites. Refer to Table 7-11 for a detailed breakdown of projected housing units by affordability level. Table 7-2 provides an overview of the total number of units and the number of affordable units, which are enough to meet RHNA.

Table 7-2: Projected Housing Units
Total Units Affordable Units
Pipeline Units 3,6454 5995984
Accessory Dwelling Units 85 77
Opportunity Sites 2,1532,905 2,9052,108
Other Land Use Strategies 621 0
Total 6,5037,256 3,58122,6893,581
Site Inventory Form Listing
In accordance with State law, the Housing Element must include an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development to meet the locality’s regional housing need allocation (RHNA) by income level. The City’s Site Inventory is provided in Appendix 7-1. A map of these sites is shown in Figure 7-1.

The Site Inventory identifies and analyzes sites that are available and suitable for residential development, and determines Menlo Park's capacity to accommodate residential development that meets the city's RHNA. These sites are considered suitable for residential development if they have appropriate zoning and are available for residential use during the planning period.

Each site is described with a Site Sheet available in Appendix 7-5. The Site Sheets provide general planning information, site-specific HCD Housing Opportunity Site Criteria, and Key Findings for what development is likely to occur on the site. Realistic Site Capacity calculations that determine the number of units allocated for HCD credit at Page H-1.264
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-3
each site, and at what affordability level, are described in the Cover Sheet of the Site Sheets appendix.

Page H-1.265
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-4
Figure 7-1: Map of Sites
Page H-1.266
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-5

SITE INVENTORY ANALYSIS AND METHODOLOGY
The Site Inventory was analyzed at a parcel-by-parcel level to determine if each opportunity site affirmatively furthered fair housing and whether it was suitable for lowerincome housing.

In considering and defining housing affordability by income, there are four income categories: Very Low-Income, Low-Income, Moderate-Income, and Above ModerateIncome. "Affordable Units" include Very Low-, Low-, and Moderate-Income categories. "Lower-Income Units" includes both Very Low- and Low-Income Units. Table 7-3 illustrates these designations.

Table 7-3: Income Definitions
Lower Income
Units Affordable Units Total Units
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI)
Low-Income (51-80% AMI)
Moderate-Income (81-120% AMI)
Above Moderate-Income (>120% AMI)
This section begins with an overview of Pipeline Projects: the housing development that is currently under development and counts towards the 6th Cycle Planning Period. Next, the Site Inventory Analysis examines site capacity: first describing a "Default Density"an approach to meet HCD's baseline of 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac), and then turning to a "Realistic Site Capacity" approach that will examine how sites from the previous 5th Cycle Planning Period ("Reuse Sites"), religious facilities, and other sites with or without capacity for low-income units will all contribute towards the units produced to meet the city’s RHNA for the 6th Cycle Planning Period covered by this Housing Element.

The Site Inventory Analysis concludes by analyzing how the Site Inventory serves to affirmatively further fair housing.

Pipeline Projects
HCD allows housing developments that have already been proposed or received entitlement before the completion of the 5th Cycle (2015-2023), but are not expected to Page H-1.267
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-6
be completed until the beginning of the 6th Cycle (2023-2031), to count as "Pipeline" projects towards the 6th Cycle RHNA. These pipeline projects did not receive credit in the 5th Cycle.

The pipeline of developments underway consists of eight residential projects that make up 3,644 units, of which 594 units are below market rate (BMR). The Pipeline Projects are listed in Table 7-4 and shown in Figure 7-2:

Page H-1.268
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-7
Table 7-4: Pipeline Projects
Label Address
(Name)
Units
Total
Net New
Total
MarketRate
Total
BMR1
Very
Low
Income
BMR
Low
Income
BMR
Moderate
Income
BMR
Status
(as of
November
2022)
A
661-687
Partridge
Avenue
2 1 1 0 0 1
Approved,
Under
Construction
B
111
Independence
Drive
105 87 18 4 9 5
Approved,
Under
Construction
C
141 Jefferson
Drive (Menlo
Uptown)
483 410 73 7 23 43
Approved,
Under
Construction
D
115
Independence
Drive (Menlo
Portal)
335 287 48 3 14 31
Approved,
Under
Construction
E Willow Village
(Meta)
1,7291,7
30 1,4211,418 31208 120119 3876 150119 Proposed2
F
123
Independence
Drive
(Sobrato)
432 3667 6665 0 6566 0 Proposed3
G
165 Jefferson
Drive (Menlo
Flats)
158 137 21 0 21 0 Approved4
H 333 400 340 60 0 60 0 Proposed5

1 The below market rate units are determined through approved or proposed Below Market Rate Housing Agreements between the City and applicant.
2 As of November 2022, the project is undergoing the entitlement review process. The City Council will conduct their review of the project in November/December, 2022. 3 As of November 2022, the project is undergoing required environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is anticipated for release in winter 2022/2023. Other projects that have completed environmental review in the vicinity have typically begun construction within less than one year from approval of entitlements and environmental review certification.
4 The property owner/developer has two other similar projects in the vicinity (Menlo Uptown and Menlo Portal) and those projects began construction within one-year of approval of entitlements and environmental review certification. It is anticipated that the Menlo Flats project will similarly begin construction during the planning period.

Page H-1.269
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-8
Ravenswood
Avenue (SRI
Master Plan)
Total 3,6454 3,0463,047
50 5994 1334 26926830
23019919
7 5 As of November 2022, the project is beginning environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and it is anticipated that the City’s consideration of requested entitlements and environmental review will be completed within one year. Other projects that have completed environmental review in the vicinity have typically begun construction within less than one year from approval of entitlements and environmental review certification.

Page H-1.270
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-9
Figure 7-2: Pipeline Projects
Default Density
As a metropolitan jurisdiction, Menlo Park's "default density” that can be assumed to accommodate lower-income households is at least 30 dwelling units per acre (du/ac).9 The following land use designations currently allow at least 30 du/ac within Menlo Park:
 Medium Density Residential
 High Density Residential
 Retail/Commercial
 Mixed Use Residential

9 https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/housing-elementmemos/docs/default_2010census_update.pdf Page H-1.271
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-10
 El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan10
Although not every site in the Site Inventory currently falls under one of the above land use designations, every site in the Site Inventory that is covered by the Affordable Housing Overlay, which allows for a minimum of 30 du/ac,. Because the Affordable Housing Overlay meets the jurisdiction's "default density.," Therefore, no additional rezoning is required.

The Site Inventory includes 83 parcels (69 sites) totaling 72.6 acres of developable land in the city. Most of these parcels are zoned at or greater than the default minimum density of 30 du/ac for metropolitan jurisdictions. This default density approach, unlike the Realistic site cCapacity approach used for the Housing Element, allows for 2,1782,441 affordable units, which would be more than sufficient, in conjunction with projected ADUs (85 units) and pipeline projects (3,644 units), to meet Menlo Park's RHNA with a 30 percent buffer (3,830 units) when considered in totality.

Realistic Site Capacity
Early in the outreach process for the 2023-2031 Housing Element, the City Council expressed interest in going beyond the theoretical approach provided by the HCDpermitted default density calculationsapproach using the default density as a baseline for unit capacity, and instead identified an approach to meeting the RHNA that would be closer to “realistic capacity” for Housing Element implementation that incentivized the production of affordable housing (i.e., units suitable to households at the extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income categories).

Under the realistic capacitythis approach, the Site Inventory has an increased capacity for 2,153 906 units, including 2,018 affordable units and 135 market-rate units (i.e., units suitable to households in the above moderate-income category).all of which are affordable.

The City undertook a parcel-by-parcel capacity analysis that determined the likely potential capacity of each site. This parcel-by-parcel analysis was developed according to methodology laid out by HCD, where the maximum unit capacity (developable acreage X maximum density) is modified by several adjustment factors (zoning, affordability level, infrastructure, environment, and nonvacant/nonresidential

10 Concurrent with Housing Element Adoption, the areas of the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan that currently do not have 30 du/ac allowances will be upzoned to meet the "default" density. See program H4.L: Modify El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan.

Page H-1.272
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-11
adjustments). A full description of this methodology is available in Appendix 7-5, along with individual site sheets describing how unit capacity and affordability allocation was determined, as well as key findings for the sites.

Parcels were analyzed for their capacity for lower-income units. Parcels that could hold a higher number of lower-income units tended to be located in central Menlo Park, a transit-rich area containing many amenities such as grocery stores and parks that would support fair housing goals for lower-income populations. Moderate and above-moderate housing tended to be located in other areas of the city.

Additional site capacity analysis is provided for the following types of sites:
 Reuse Sites (identified in previous Housing Elements)  Religious Facilities
 City-Owned Properties
 Sites with Non-Residential Uses
 Small and Large Sites
Note that there is overlap between some of these typologies, as there are small sites that are religious facilities, for example, and reuse sites with non-residential uses. In addition, Ssome of the sites consist of contiguous parcels under common ownership.

The total capacity of the Site Inventory is determined by organizing all sites into three categories:

Adjustment Factors for Site CapacityReligious Facilities As part of its site capacity approach to the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Menlo Park uses the HCD recommendation of five adjustment factors to calculate the projected residential development capacity of the sites in the Site Inventory that can realistically be achieved.Sites with Capacity for Lower Income Housing The five adjustment factors used are:Sites without Capacity for Lower Income Housing  Land Use Controls
Page H-1.273
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-12
Based on an analysis of the current zoning code and anticipated development standards in the specific plans, there is no cumulative impact on the maximum development potential of the opportunity sites. However, the capacity factor was adjusted to 95 percent to account for sidewalks and easements.  Realistic Capacity
Of the 51 recent developments in Menlo Park (Appendix 7-3), 30 have a residential component and 21 do not. The developments outside of the ECR/Downtown Specific Plan Area have much higher proportions of residential to mixed use than those in the ECR/Downtown Specific Plan Area. Therefore, the Realistic Capacity factor for areas outside the ECR/Downtown Specific Plan Area are set at 90 percent, but areas inside the specific plan area are set at 80 percent.
 Typical Densities
Densities are typically built above allowed densities at the Lower and Moderate income levels in San Mateo County. According to data collected by ABAG/MTC on San Mateo County, 14 lower-income projects were built on average at 107% of maximum allowable density. 19 moderate-income projects were built at an average of 125% of maximum allowable density. A "Typical Densities" factor of 95 percent can be considered conservative. For areas within the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan, which tend to be smaller parcels that have historically had difficulty developing at maximum density, a factor of 90 percent is provided.
 Infrastructure Availability
There were no identified constraints on infrastructure availability.  Environmental Constraints
There were no identified constraints based on environmental factors.

Sites are therefore given a total adjustment based on whether or not they fall within the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area.

Table 7-5: Adjustment Factors
Geography Land Use Realistic Typical Infra. Enviro. Total Page H-1.274
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-13
Controls Capacity Densities Availability Constraints
Specific
Plan Area 0.95 0.8 0.9 1 1 0.684
Elsewhere
in City 0.95 0.9 0.95 1 1 0.812
Page H-1.275
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-14
Figure 7-3: Sites by Category
Page H-1.276
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-15
Reasonable development assumptions and constraints are analyzed for each of the four categories, where the sites are listed and potential findings for City Council consideration described.

After site selection, discussed in the following sections, the City undertook a parcel-byparcel capacity analysis that determined the likely potential capacity of each site. This parcel-by-parcel analysis was developed according to the Realistic Capacity methodology laid out by HCD, where the maximum unit capacity (developable acreage X maximum density) is modified by several adjustment factors (zoning, affordability level, infrastructure, environment, and nonvacant/nonresidential adjustments). A full description of this methodology is available in Appendix 7-5, along with individual site sheets describing how realistic unit capacity and affordability allocation was determined, as well as key findings for the sites.

Parcels were analyzed for their capacity for lower-income units. Parcels that could hold a higher number of lower-income units tended to be located in central Menlo Park, a transit-rich area containing many amenities such as grocery stores and parks that would support fair housing goals for lower-income populations. Moderate and above-moderate housing tended to be located in other areas of the city.

These site-by-site calculations were then summarized by category. The inclusion of reuse sites is also explained in detail. However, reuse sites are distributed into Sites with Capacity for Lower Income Housing and Sites without Capacity for Lower Income Housing.

Reuse Sites
 Overview: The Site Inventory includes 13 reuse sites. Reuse sites are sites that were previously included within the Site Inventory of a prior Housing Element planning period but have not yet been developed with housing.  Description: HCD permits jurisdictions to reuse sites from prior planning periods only if the Housing Element includes a program requiring rezoning within three years of the beginning of the planning period to allow residential use by-right at a minimum of 30 du/ac for housing developments and in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households. These sites would be reused if 1) nonvacant sites were only included in only the 5th Cycle, or 2) vacant sites were included in both the 4th Cycle and 5th Cycles.

Page H-1.277
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-16
The 13 reuse sites in the Site Inventory have different affordability capacities. Of the sites, seven meet HCD requirements for lower-income units and have their units allocated towards very low income RHNA due to their high AFFH scores (see Appendix 7-5 for more information on how Lower Income distribution into Very Low and Low Income categories). The other six sites are too small to meet HCD requirements and have their unit allocations distributed into the Moderate Income category.

Table 7-5: RHNA Allocation and Reuse Sites
Site
Number
Developable
Area
(Acres)
Existing
Density
(du/ac)
Proposed
Density
(du/ac)
Zoning
District
Unit
Allocation
Allocation
Category
2(R) 0.57 20 30 SP-ECR-D 13 Very Low
5(R) 1.06 50 60 SP-ECR-D 51 Very Low
43(R) 0.54 50 60 SP-ECR-D 26 Very Low
44(R) 0.69 25 40 SP-ECR-D 228 Very Low
46(R) 0.63 30 30 R3 6 Very Low
48(R) 1.00 40 60 SP-ECR-D 32 Very Low
53(R) 0.12 50 60 SP-ECR-D 6 Moderate
54(R) 0.22 25 40 SP-ECR-D 8 Moderate
55(R) 0.13 50 60 SP-ECR-D 7 Moderate
56(R) 0.17 50 60 SP-ECR-D 9 Moderate
59(R) 0.33 25 40 SP-ECR-D 12 Moderate
61(R) 0.32 50 60 SP-ECR-D 12 Moderate
62(R) 0.42 50 60 SP-ECR-D 20 Very Low
Total 7.21 224
Religious Facilities
Overview: The Site Inventory includes three religious facilities sites. In September 2020, Assembly Bill 1851 (Wicks) provided faith organizations an opportunity to develop housing on existing parking spaces on their property. This bill allows housing development to utilize up to fifty percent of religious-use parking spaces, without a requirement to replace the parking spaces. AB 1851 has no restrictions on the type of housing that could be developed and the City of Menlo Park does not propose any restrictions that would hinder this allowance.

Page H-1.278
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-17
 Description: While AB 1851 applies to all religious facilities in Menlo Park, the analysis undertaken for the Site Inventory identified three churches with particularly large and underutilized parking lots that would be ideally suited to the provisions of this state law. These three sites had their allocations distributed to extremely low income units based on the likelihood that religious facilities would work with a mission-driven housing developer focused on supportive/affordable housing.

The three sites are:
o Site #13(C) - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Menlo Park:
1105 Valparaiso Avenue
o Site #39(C) - St. Denis Catholic Church: 2250 Avy Avenue o Site #40(C) - St. Bede's Episcopal Church: 2650 Sand Hill Road The low land costs involved in building on land already owned by a non-profit such as a religious facility would make affordable housing development more financially feasible.

Sites with Capacity for Lower Income Units
 Overview: The Site Inventory includes 43 sites that are considered to have the capacity for low-income units.
 Description: These 43 sites are considered to have low-income capacity as they meet HCD’s density and parcel size guidance for affordable units.11 These sites include Site #12, the USGS site. Based on conversations between City staff and prospective buyers of the USGS site, the purchaser will partner with an affordable housing developer on the housing portion of the site. Of these five acres, there will be a split between a two-acre affordable housing development that will implement the “Lower Income” adjustment factor, and a three-acre market-rate housing development that will implement the “Above Moderate Income” adjustment factor. The market-rate portion will include 15-percent inclusionary lower-income units.

11 For more information, see HCD's June 10, 2020 memo "Housing Element Site Inventory Guidebook Government Code Section 65583.2", available at: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/communitydevelopment/housing-element/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf Page H-1.279
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-18
Sites without Capacity for Lower Income Units
 Overview: The Site Inventory includes 23 sites that are considered to not have the capacity for low-income units.
 Description: The 23 sites that do not meet the low-income capacity determinations have their units counted towards the city's moderate-income RHNA. Menlo Park's above moderate-income RHNA can be met solely with pipeline units.

The public outreach also indicated a strong interest in creating additional housing for moderate income households which include people who work in Menlo Park, particularly essential workers. With a Site Inventory that goes above RHNA requirements, the Housing Element can more effectively serve the community’s housing needs and be more responsive to public comment received during the project development. Table 7-6 provides a summary of units by category in the Site Inventory.

Table 7-6: Units by Category
Category Sites Total Units Market-Rate Units Affordable Units Religious Facilities 3 9 0 9
Sites with Capacity for Lower
Income Housing 43 1,496 135 1,361
Sites without Capacity for Lower
Income Housing 23 648 0 648
Total 69 2,153 135 2,018
Additional Realistic Capacity Analysis
For sites that will be used for lower income housing, HCD requires additional analysis of sites that allow non-residential uses, and small and large sites that are outside the band of 0.5 to 10 acres in size. This section describes the sites that require additional analysis and how these sites can accommodate lower-income housing according to the Realistic Site Capacity Analysis.

Page H-1.280
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-19
Reuse Sites
 Overview: The Site Inventory includes 16 parcels that were previously included within the Site Inventory of a prior Housing Element planning period but have not yet been developed with housing.
 Description: HCD permits jurisdictions to reuse sites from prior planning periods only if the Housing Element includes a program requiring rezoning within three years of the beginning of the planning period to allow residential use by-right at a minimum of 30 du/ac for housing developments and in which at least 20 percent of the units are affordable to lower income households. These sites would be reused if 1) nonvacant sites were only included in only the 5th Cycle, or 2) vacant sites were included in both the 4th Cycle and 5th Cycles.

The 16 parcels reuse sites in the Site Inventory have different affordability capacities. Of the sites, five meet HCD requirements for lower-income units and have their units allocated towards very low income RHNA due to their high AFFH scores (see Appendix 7-5 for more information on how Lower Income distribution into Very Low and Low Income categories). The other nine sites are too small to meet HCD requirements and have their unit allocations distributed into the Moderate Income category.

Table 7-6: RHNA Allocation and Reuse Sites
Site
Number
Developabl
e Area
(Acres)
Existin
g
Density
(du/ac)
Propose
d Density
(du/ac)
AHO
Densit
y
Zoning
District
Unit
Allocatio
n
Allocation
Category
2(R)a* 0.15 20 30 55 SP-ECR-D 6 Moderate
2(R)b* 0.42 20 30 55 SP-ECR-D 16 Moderate
5(R)a* 0.75 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 31 Very Low
5(R)b* 0.31 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 13 Moderate
43(R) 0.54 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 22 Very Low
44(R) 0.69 25 40 55 SP-ECR-D 26 Very Low
46(R) 0.63 30 30 55 R3 28 Very Low
48(R) 2.00 40 60 60 SP-ECR-D 82 Very Low
53(R) 0.12 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 5 Moderate
54(R) 0.22 25 40 55 SP-ECR-D 8 Moderate
55(R) 0.13 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 5 Moderate
56(R) 0.17 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 7 Moderate
Page H-1.281
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-20
59(R) 0.33 25 40 55 SP-ECR-D 12 Moderate
61(R) 0.32 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 13 Moderate
62(R) 0.42 50 60 60 SP-ECR-D 17 Very Low
Total 7.21 291
*=Parcel that was identified in previous element that is part of a larger site.

Religious Facilities
 Overview: The Site Inventory includes three religious facilities sites. In September 2020, Assembly Bill 1851 (Wicks) provided faith organizations an opportunity to develop housing on existing parking spaces on their property. This bill allows housing development to utilize up to fifty percent of religious-use parking spaces, without a requirement to replace the parking spaces. AB 1851 has no restrictions on the type of housing that could be developed and the City of Menlo Park does not propose any restrictions that would hinder this allowance.

These congregations typically have large parking lots which are sized for full occupancy of sanctuaries. Congregations which are not at full capacity likely have unused parking areas. Some also have buildings which are nearing the end of their functional life and are candidates for turnover to other uses. The COVID19 pandemic has also affected these congregations in manners which are not entirely clear at this point, though attendance has generally declined. It is possible that the pandemic will permanently decrease regular attendance at services, as sometimes-tenuous connections with other church members have faded and people make greater use of online services. Within this context, affordable housing development can be an attractive option for congregations to off-load excess land, use proceeds to support existing ministries, and live out their mission to love thy neighbor. Many local and state governments, including California’s, are seeking to promote this type of development, not only for the reasons mentioned above, but because religious-use parking spaces are among the least utilized spaces in urbanized areas being typically used to their maximum capacity only once a week.
 Description: While AB 1851 applies to all religious facilities in Menlo Park, the analysis undertaken for the Site Inventory identified three churches with particularly large and underutilized parking lots that would be ideally suited to the provisions of this state law. These three sites had their allocations distributed to extremely low income units based on the likelihood that religious facilities would work with a mission-driven housing developer focused on supportive/affordable housing.

Page H-1.282
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-21
The three sites are:
o Site #13(C) - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Menlo Park:
1105 Valparaiso Avenue
o Site #39(C) - St. Denis Catholic Church: 2250 Avy Avenue o Site #40(C) - St. Bede's Episcopal Church: 2650 Sand Hill Road The low land costs involved in building on land already owned by a non-profit such as a religious facility would make affordable housing development more financially feasible.

Although relatively few units are claimed for Site Inventory credit on the three church sites, this is because of the conservative estimates required. It is likely that interested religious facilities would take advantage of State density bonus as well as other opportunities befitting a motivated and mission-driven property owner.

City Owned Properties
The City of Menlo Park owns a variety of properties. The range of property types include:
 Downtown Parking Lots
 Office Building at 1000 El Camino Real
 Civic Center
 Parks
 Pump Stations
 Public Works Corporation Yard
 Community Centers
A list of City-owned properties are provided in Appendix 7-6. The Downtown parking lots have the highest development potential due to the location and because there are no buildings on the parking lots. The City Council decided not to pursue housing development in the parks or the Civic Center site. There are 9 parcels owned by the City and used for parking purposes in the downtown area.

The City will abide by the Surplus Land Act (SLA) (Government Code sections 54220- 54234) through any applicable redevelopment process of City-owned property. The SLA is a “right of first refusal” law that requires all local agencies to offer surplus land for sale Page H-1.283
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-22
or lease to affordable home developers and certain other entities before selling or leasing the land to any other individual or entity. Any time a local agency disposes of land, it must follow the SLA unless the land qualifies as exempt surplus land.

Dispositions include both sales and leases (unless the lease is less than five years or where no demolition or development will occur during the term of the lease). If and when there is City-owned property that is no longer needed for City use, the declaration of surplus land (unless deemed exempt surplus land) and the appropriate noticing and disposition process required by the SLA will be followed.

Throughout the Housing Element Update process, redevelopment of parking lots for affordable housing was generally met with positive feedback and support. Per the SLA, if a proposed development on surplus land includes a certain percentage of affordable units, the City-owned property could be declared as exempt surplus land, streamlining the process for disposing of City-owned property for affordable housing development.

Non-Residential Uses
Of the 69 sites, 64 sites allow non-residential uses (inclusive of three religious facility sites). The five sites that do not allow non-residential uses (i.e., only residential uses allowed) are:
 Site #21: 350 Sharon Park Drive
 Site #46(R): 796 Live Oak Avenue
 Site #47: 555 Willow Road
 Site #50: 600 Sharon Park Drive
 Site #60: 335 Pierce Road
For the 64 sites that allow non-residential uses, there is a strong likelihood of residential development as demonstrated by the residential projects in the Bayfront Area and in the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area. See Appendix 7-3 for a list of recent or planned projects in Menlo Park. In addition, there are several residential projects in adjoining jurisdictions that are developed in mixed-use areas (areas that allow a combination of residential and non-residential uses), fitting a similar profile to the projected developments in Menlo Park's Site Inventory.

Small and Large Sites
In order to achieve financial feasibility, HCD recommends sites between 0.5 acres and 10 acres in size as suitable for developing lower-income housing. Of the 83 parcels in Page H-1.284
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-23
the Site Inventory, 32 are less than 0.5 acres in size and 4 are larger than 10 acres. A “carveout” strategy is used for several sites in the Site Inventory, including the 4 sites larger than 10 acres, as described in the “Carveouts and Large Sites” subsection.

Small Sites
The 32 parcels less than 0.5 acres include several that can be consolidated into larger sites made up of contiguous parcels with common ownership. Chapter 15.30 of Menlo Park’s municipal code describes lot mergers. An application requires a fee and ministerial review from the city engineer. Appeals may be filed to the Planning Commission.

Parcel consolidation has not been a demonstrated constraint in Menlo Park’s recent residential development history. Of the 8 pipeline projects that are part of the Housing Element update, 6 include consolidated parcels. In a conservative measure, none of the parcels that are less than a half-acre in size are credited for lower-income housing in the 6th Cycle Housing Element.

Carveouts and Large Sites
To support the development of lower income housing on some of the larger sites in Menlo Park, the Housing Element recommends a strategy of using "carveouts" of one or two acres that would allow residential development in mixed-use areas. These carveouts are intended to make land costs more manageable for residential developers, particularly lower income housing developers, and to complement the existing uses that may likely remain intact with new development. There are 10 carveout sites in the Site Inventory, four of which are on sites larger than 10 acres in size:
 Site #12 – 345 Middlefield Road (USGS Site)
 Site #21 – 350 Sharon Park Drive (Sharon Green Apartments)  Site #49 – 2722 Sand Hill Road
 Site #64 – 795 Willow Road (Menlo Park VA Hospital)
Sites #12 and #64 are being used for lower-income housing:
 Site #12, 345 Middlefield Road, is the United States Geological Survey (USGS) campus owned by the General Services Administration (GSA). As of November 2022, the approximately 17-acre site is for sale by the GSA as the USGS team Page H-1.285
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-24
has been gradually relocating from Menlo Park to Mountain View.12 As of November 2022, the City has received eight redevelopment interest inquiries from private developers, with the majority of the developers interested in partnering with a affordable housing-specialized developer for any redevelopment project. No unit ranges have yet been determined.

The Housing Element Update is taking credit for 2 acres of affordable housing as a conservative estimate, based on these conversations with interested developers. Potentially, greater amount of housing – including market-rate housing – could be developed on the site based on zoning regulations.  Site #64, 795 Willow Road, is technically on the 90-acre parcel of the Menlo Park VA Medical Center. The approximately 90-acre campus provides primary care and specialty health services and the landowner (VA) has strong interest to redevelop the southeastern portion of the site fronting Willow Road with affordable housing. As the project site is located on federal, VA-owned land, the VA has its own multi-step federal disposition process in which the VA must demonstrate that excess VA-owned land is no longer needed for VA operations.

The US Dept. of Veterans Affairs is entering into an Enhanced Use Lease agreement with MidPen to develop a 61-unit building on approximately 2 acres in the southeast quadrant of the Menlo Park VA Campus along Willow Road. As of October 2022, the VA and MidPen Housing have engaged with the City to submit preliminary project plans for courtesy review. Since the VA, a federal agency, is the land owner, the site and proposed affordable housing project are not subject to City review and permitting, however, both the VA and MidPen Housing have voluntarily elected to communicate and engage with the City, including the City's Planning Commission, with the intent of realizing a strong affordable housing project serving Menlo Park and the greater region during the Housing Element planning period. In 2015, the VA used a portion of the hospital campus for Willow Housing, a 61-unit 100% affordable housing development for veterans.13  Of the 69 sites in the Site Inventory, 17 sites are less than 0.5 acres, 48 sites are between 0.5 acres and 10 acres, and 4 sites are larger than 10 acres.

12 See https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/real-estate-services/real-property-utilization-disposal/propertysales/rockaway-grove 13 See http://www.willowhousingmenlopark.com/
Page H-1.286
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-25
Development on 13 sites smaller than 0.4 acres will not be counted towards the lower income portion of RHNA.

Some sites include consolidation of adjacent parcels under common ownership (i.e., sites are owned by the same property owner) in order to qualify as a "suitable size" site for developing lower-income housing.

Sites 0.4 to 0.5 Acres
Due to the high land costs in Menlo Park and the substantial demand for assisted-living, projects serving persons in lower income categories and with specific needs, such as senior housing or housing for persons living with disabilities, both of which tend to have smaller unit sizes, may be more feasible on lots with certain parameters. The Site Inventory includes sites between 0.4 acres and 0.5 acres in size within this suitability range. There are four sites in this range:
 Site #7 – 728 Willow Road
 Site #29 – 445 Burgess Road
 Site #47 - 555 Willow Road
 Site #62(R) - 550 Ravenswood Avenue
Sites Larger than 10 Acres
To support the development of lower income housing on some of the larger sites in Menlo Park, the Housing Element recommends a strategy of using "carveouts" of one or two acres that would allow residential development in mixed-use areas. These carveouts are intended to make land costs more manageable for residential developers, particularly lower income housing developers, and to complement the existing uses that may likely remain intact with new development. There are 10 carveout sites in the Site Inventory, four of which are on sites larger than 10 acres in size:

Site #12 – 345 Middlefield Road (USGS Site)
 Site #21 – 350 Sharon Park Drive (Sharon Green Apartments)  Site #49 – 2722 Sand Hill Road
Page H-1.287
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-26
Site #64 – 795 Willow Road (Menlo Park VA Hospital)
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
A new requirement for this 6th Cycle Housing Element is for the Site Inventory to be consistent with a jurisdiction's duty forto Aaffirmatively Ffurthering Ffair Hhousing (AFFH).
14 HCD recommends the Site Inventory address:
 Improved Conditions
 Exacerbated Conditions
 Isolation of the RHNA
 Local Data and Knowledge
 Other Relevant Factors
In addition to the Site Inventory-specific analysis below, further information on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is available in Chapter 4 of the Housing Element.

AFFH Site Inventory Analysis
Menlo Park affirmatively furthered fair housing by integrating new affordable housing in high-resource areas of the city and developing market rate housing in lower-resource areas of the city while being mindful of displacement and connectivity issues. The RHNA is distributed throughout Menlo Park, focusing on amenity-rich areas in downtown, near the Veterans' Affairs Hospital, and near I-280. The Site Inventory allocation of affordable units has been refined based on likelihood of development.

Extensive local outreach was used to refine this AFFH approach. In addition, the Housing Element is mindful of recent development patterns and deep historical trends.

Currently from the data and population makeup of Menlo Park’s population, the majority of non-white and lower income populations are located primarily to the east of US State Route 101 in the Belle haven and Bayfront neighborhoods. As a result, these residents usually do not have the same access and benefits when it comes to clean air, health, and municipal amenities such as public transportation or schools. As a result, in order to not only increase the housing supply in the City of Menlo Park, but also promote fair

14 For more information, see HCD's April 27, 2021 document on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/affh/docs/affh_document_final_4-27- 2021.pdf
Page H-1.288
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-27
housing; there should be sites in the richer areas of the city that are to be used for housing that can be used for fair housing.

For the City owned sites in the City of Menlo Park (see appendix 7-6), sites located near the downtown core are best utilized as more housing on underutilized land will not disrupt the character of other residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, using City owned sites in Downtown Menlo Park can help reinvigorate the downtown core. Furthermore, areas around the downtown core have better amenities such as better public transportation with Caltrain and SamTrans, better accessible shops and grocery stores, and more open space for residents.

Menlo Park has chosen to distribute its housing opportunity sites mostly throughout Council Districts 2 through 5, the portions of the city south west of US-101. This site distribution strategy was chosen for two primary reasons. First, the vast majority of Menlo Park's pipeline projects, consisting of higher-density market-rate housing, have been proposed Council District 1 (north east of US-101). Second, Council Districts 2 through 5 are higher-opportunity areas of the city that are better connected to amenities such as transit, jobs, schools, and open space.

Page H-1.289
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-28
Figure 7-3: Sites by Council District
Page H-1.290
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-29
The housing in Council District 1 (north east of US-101) is almost entirely comprised of pipeline projects, many of which are still pending. These pipeline projects account for the majority of Menlo Park's above market-rate housing allocation. The one exception is Site #60 at 335 Pierce Road, that was identified by MidPen Housing as a potential affordable housing project during the Housing Element Update process.

The Site Inventory strategy strives to balance an increase in market-rate housing north east of US-101 (District 1) with an increase in affordable housing south west of US-101 (Districts 2 through 5). The strategy used walkshed maps to identify potential sites that had access to Menlo Park's social resources and amenities. This potential site list was narrowed by applying HCD's size requirements for sites that can support lower-income housing, and was further refined based on likelihood of development.

The majority of the sites in the Site Inventory offer affordable housing opportunities in high or highest resource areas that are within a 15-minute walk of:
 Parks
 Groceries and Markets
 Public Transit
 Employment Centers
 Schools
Detailed maps of these amenities can be found in Appendix 7-2. A full assessment of fair housing is provided in Chapter 4 and in Appendix 4-2.

Site Inventory and Existing Social Patterns
A complete analysis of the Site Inventory must analyze how the identified sites contribute to or mitigate fair housing issues.

The three fair housing issues identified in Chapter 4 were:

A. Fair Housing outreach
B. Need for affordable housing options throughout Menlo Park to promote mobility C. Need for community conservation and revitalization in low and moderate resource neighborhoods located east of US-101 (Council District 1) The sites in the 6th Cycle Site Inventory wholly consist of parcels allocated towards the City’s lower income or moderate income RHNA. This is because Pipeline Projects, which are disproportionately in Council District 1, are sufficient to provide the city’s above moderate income RHNA. The affordable allocations in the Site Inventory are Page H-1.291
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-30
largely located in Council Districts 2-5, which are areas of high or highest opportunity according to TCAC mapping. This strategy of allocating affordable units in highresource areas and market-rate units in lower-resource areas improves integration, alleviates access to opportunity, and supports the disproportionate housing needs of special needs populations.

The focus on developing low-income housing in high-resource areas is supported by input given by affordable housing developers. The draft Site Inventory was refined after conversations where these developers described ideal sites for affordable housing, which included emphases on tax credit scoring and proximity to transit.

The Housing Element's overall fair housing strategy is to increase integration by incentivizing the development of 100 percent affordable housing in high-resource areas while using the pipeline projects to provide above-market-rate units in low and moderate resource areas. This will also provide more access to opportunities by bringing more affordable units into high-opportunity areas. Finally, this strategy will ease displacement risks by increasing the opportunities for high-density housing in areas of the city outside of Council District 1.

Integration and Segregation
The Site Inventory improves integration and mitigates segregation by giving lowerincome residents the opportunity to live in areas of the city that have historically been exclusive. These areas, west of US-101, have higher-performing school districts and more green space than areas east of US-101. By providing affordable housing options throughout Menlo Park, this addresses a fair housing issue.

This improved integration is balanced by mitigation of historic segregation. The development of large numbers of market-rate units in Council District 1 brings a whiter and higher-income cohort to an area of Menlo Park that has historically consisted of lower-income communities of color. Care must be taken to address fair housing issues and conserve community while revitalizing the low and moderate resource areas. City Actions in the Fair Housing Issues table, as well as Housing Element programs such as Program H.2E (Anti-Displacement Strategy) will be vital in remediating displacement while improving integration.

Disparities in Access to Opportunity
Sites are prioritized for low-income housing tax credits by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee if they fall within "High" or "Highest" Resource Areas. All of the sites with the exception of the Marsh Road and Bohannon Drive cluster and Site #60 at 355 Pierce are within the High or Highest Resource Areas of the city. A map of Resource and Page H-1.292
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-31
Opportunity Sites in Menlo Park is provided in Chapter 4: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, Figure 4-3.

In the Site Inventory, the site selection process incentivized sites for affordable housing that were located within a 15-minute walk of amenities such as grocery stores, schools, and parks. In addition, all of the sites designated for affordable housing besides Site #60 and Site #38 (Ravenswood School Site) are located in high-performing school districts. Many sites are also located near the Menlo Park VA Medical Center, which is crucial infrastructure for veterans – particularly veterans with special housing and/or health needs.

Disproportionate Housing Needs
Due to the site selection process that prioritized sites within a close walking distance of crucial amenities, the sites allocated for affordable housing in the Site Inventory are well-suited to accommodate households with unique and disproportionate housing needs. Many of these sites are located close to health facilities and grocery stores, easing access for households with low mobility. In addition, the El Camino Real/Downtown area is home to nearly half of the sites, as well as the vast majority of the City’s commercial areas, its lone Caltrain station, and several Caltrans bus routes.

Site Inventory Special Cases
There are three exceptions, where sites that would meet lower-income housing qualifications set forth by HCD will instead be used to accommodate moderate-income housing due to AFFH limitations. These are:

1. The sites at Marsh Road and Bohannon Drive, in the northwest area of Menlo Park. These sites prioritize moderate-income housing, with no lower-income units located in this area. This is because the sites are not as connected to amenities and support services as the rest of the city, with entrances only off of Marsh Road.

2. The sites on the Middlefield Road corridor. These sites, along a commercial corridor, are better suited to moderate-income workforce housing.

3. The Ravenswood School District site at the former Flood School will be rezoned to a maximum density of 20 du/ac, which is lower than the 30 du/ac required to accommodate lower-income units. However, it will be available to accommodate Page H-1.293
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-32
moderate-income units. As of July 2022, the Ravenswood School District is collecting proposals from housing developers for the site.15 Sites are prioritized for low-income housing tax credits by the Tax Credit Allocation Committee if they fall within "High" or "Highest" Resource Areas. All of the sites with the exception of the Marsh Road and Bohannon Drive cluster and Site #60 at 355 Pierce are within the High or Highest Resource Areas of the city. A map of Resource and Opportunity Sites in Menlo Park is provided in Chapter 4: Fair Housing, Figure 4-3.

Another balance struck in order to affirmatively further fair housing was to limit the Site Inventory largely to sites of a size that could support low-income housing: 0.5 to 10 acres in area. The concept of "carveouts", would allow housing to be placed adjacent to other existing uses on the same parcel. This concept is discussed in detail in the "NonVacant Sites Analysis" section below.

In addition, there were 13 sites less than 0.5 acres in size retained as part of the final Site Inventory that did not include lower-income housing in their site capacity calculation. These sites were included in order to provide more small-scale moderateincome and market-rate housing downtown. These sites serve as workforce housing or transit-oriented housing that could support the city's vibrancy goals for downtown.

These units also serve to avoid over-concentration of the low-income units downtown, described in the Site Inventory.

The focus on developing low-income housing in high-resource areas is supported by input given by affordable housing developers. The draft Site Inventory was refined after conversations where these developers described ideal sites for affordable housing, which included emphases on tax credit scoring and proximity to transit.

The Housing Element's overall fair housing strategy is to increase integration by incentivizing the development of 100 percent affordable housing in high-resource areas while using the pipeline projects to provide above-market-rate units in low and moderate resource areas. This will also provide more access to opportunities by bringing more affordable units into high-opportunity areas. Finally, this strategy will ease displacement risks by increasing the opportunities for high-density housing in areas of the city outside of Council District 1.

15 See “Former Flood School Site” at http://www.ravenswoodschools.org/AboutRavenswood/Facilities/Facilities-Planning/Additional-Information-About-the-Former-Flood-School-Site- /index.html
Page H-1.294
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-33
City Owned Properties
The City of Menlo Park owns a variety of properties. The range of property types include:
 Downtown Parking Lots
 Office Building at 1000 El Camino Real
 Civic Center
 Parks
 Pump Stations
 Public Works Corporation Yard
 Community Centers
A list of City-owned properties are provided in Appendix 7-6. The Downtown parking lots have the highest development potential due to the location and because there are no buildings on the parking lots. The City Council decided not to pursue housing development in the parks or the Civic Center site.

MEETING LOWER-INCOME RHNA ON NON-VACANT SITES
Non-vacant Sites Analysis
The California Department of Housing and Development (HCD) notes that jurisdictions with limited vacant land may rely on the potential for new residential development on non-vacant sites – sites with existing uses. HCD requires the Housing Element to describe the realistic potential of each site and the extent that the existing uses impede additional residential development; the jurisdiction's past experience converting existing uses to higher-density residential development; region-wide market trends and conditions; and regulatory or other incentives or standards that encourage additional housing development on nonvacant sites.

Pursuant to Government Code 65583.2(g)(3), the Housing Element must include a program requiring the replacement of units affordable to the same or lower income level as a condition of any development on a nonvacant site consistent with those requirements set forth in Density Bonus Law (Government Code 65915(c)(3).

Replacement requirements shall be required for sites identified in the inventory that currently have residential uses, or within the last five years have had residential uses that have been vacated or demolished, and were either rent or price restricted, or were occupied by low or very low income households. This requirement is satisfied by Program H2.B.

Page H-1.295
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-34
This section notes the number of non-vacant sites and quantifies the portion of the 2023-2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) to be met with non-vacant sites before reviewing the development context of higher-density housing development on non-vacant sites in Menlo Park and the region. Then, it provides potential findings before concluding with findings determined by the City Council at its ________meeting.

There are 69 sites identified as opportunity sites. Of these, only Site #38, the Ravenswood School District Site at 300 Sheridan Drive, is vacant.

Site #38, 320 Sheridan Drive, is the location of the former James Flood Elementary School and is owned by the Ravenswood City School District (RCSD). RCSD has indicated it is in negotiations with Alliant Strategic Development (potential developer) to build up to 90 affordable housing units with teachers and District staff given first preference. In May 2022, the City held a community meeting to provide an opportunity to learn more about the site and to hear from community members. As of October 2022, the City has not received a formal development application for review.

The 68 non-vacant sites are grouped into six potential redevelopment types to furtherbetter analyze their development potential:
 Religious Facilities
 Parking Lots
 Non-Residential with Carveout
 Non-Residential with Complete Redevelopment
 El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area
 Underutilized Residential
Page H-1.296
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-35
Figure 7-54: Sites by Redevelopment Type
Page H-1.297
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-36
The City is relying on non-vacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of 1,166 units, the RHNA for lower-income households. As the City of Menlo Park is mostly built out, the opportunity sites identified have the highest potential for development. Other sites have been evaluated and eliminated from consideration due to size and existing uses. The proposed policies and programs are critical to incentivize and increase the likelihood of development on these sites. In addition, the reduction of key governmental constraints (particularly zoning limitations) are tools the City has to encourage housing development.

Table 7-7: RHNA Capacity by Typology
Lower-Income
Moderate
Income
Above Moderate
Income
Total New
Housing Units Very
Low Low
6th Cycle RHNA 740 426 496 1,284 2,946
30% Buffer 222 128 149 385 884
Accessory Dwelling Unit
Capacity [RHNA Credit] 26 25 26 8 85
Pipeline Projects
Capacity [RHNA Credit] 134 230 230 3,050 3,644
Site Capacity Needed 802 299 389 0 1,490
Lower income unit capacity of the Site Inventory is shown in Table 7-8. Of the 895 units (1,166 units needed to accommodate RHNA, less lower-income units from ADUs and Pipeline Projects), 100 percent will be allocated to non-vacant sites, as the only nonvacant site (Site #38) is not zoned appropriately for accommodating lower-income units.

Of the 1,516 units (the RHNA capacity inclusive of the 30 percent buffer for lowerincome units), 73 percent will be allocated to non-vacant sites. The remaining 27 percent are covered by the 415 units provided by pipeline projects and accessory dwelling units.

Table 7-8: Lower-Income RHNA Capacity by Typology
Parcels Developable
Acreage
Lower-Income
Site Capacity
Lower-Income
RHNA Capacity
Nonvacant Site
Capacity 68 70.0 100% 73%
Vacant Site Capacity 1 2.6 0% 0%
Page H-1.298
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-37
ADU and Pipeline
Capacity N/A N/A N/A 27%
Non-vacant sites will provide 73 percent of the lower-income RHNA. Because nonvacant sites comprise more than half of Menlo Park’s sites inventory, Government Code Section 65583.2(g)(2) requires that the City analyze the extent to which existing uses may constitute an impediment to additional residential development, past experience in converting existing uses to higher density residential development, market trends and conditions, and regulatory or other incentives to encourage redevelopment.

Furthermore, as part of the resolution adopting the Housing Element, the City Council will make findings based on substantial evidence that the existing use is not an impediment and will likely discontinue during the planning period. These findings will be based on a variety of factors including development trends, property owner interest, structure age, property valuation, and development capacity.

Since more than 50 percent of the lower-income RHNA is met by non-vacant sites, this section will demonstrate per Government Code § 65583.2(g)(2) that existing uses are not impediments to additional development.

This demonstration includes:

1. A description of recent residential development on non-vacant sites in Menlo Park,

2. Recent 100 percent affordable residential development throughout the region (including Menlo Park), and

3. A category-by-category analysis of non-vacant sites that includes potential findings for Menlo Park City Council, as required by HCD.

Residential Development on Nonvacant Sites
Of the 51 developments and development proposals that included multifamily residential or new non-residential uses in Menlo Park during the past five years, 42 (84 percent) have been on or involved use of non-vacant sites. From these same 51 developments, 30 (59 percent) have included residential uses, 22 (43 percent) have introduced new residential (including in mixed-use developments) into a previously non-residential site, and eight (16 percent) have expanded an existing residential use. This strong history of residential development on non-vacant sites demonstrates a market demand for such development that can be expanded with the new policies in this Housing Element.

Page H-1.299
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-38
A list of these 51 developments is provided as Appendix 7-3 in this Housing Element.

Region-Wide Affordable Housing Projects.

There have been many affordable housing projects, including 100 percent affordable projects, built on non-vacant lots in San Mateo County and neighboring Santa Clara County in the past several years. Menlo Park's 2023-2031 Housing Element focuses its policies on the production of affordable housing, particularly 100 percent affordable housing, as a response to community outreach and as a method to produce and affirmatively further fair housing in the city. The incentives for 100 percent affordable housing involve density bonuses as well as certain fee and development review waivers. These incentives were designed as a response to input from city residents, affordable housing residents, and affordable housing developer input.

Appendix 7-4 includes a list of 17 projects in the area, including six in Menlo Park.

These projects range from 37 to 213 du/ac in density and four to eight stories in height.

Potential Findings for Development of Non-Vacant Sites
Parking Lots
The Bay Area has seen the redevelopment of surface parking lots with multifamily housing throughout the past few years, most notably in Redwood City's city-owned parking lots. Another example is The Village at Burlingame where two city-owned parking lots are currently under construction for the development of 100 percent affordable workforce and senior-focused apartments. This is an opportunity for Menlo Park to leverage the value of City-owned land in the downtown core, providing affordable housing as well as increasing the vibrancy of downtown.

There are nine eight surface parking lots suitable for multifamily development. All sites are given by their site number, name (if applicable) and address:
 Site #9 – Parking Lot Near Trader Joe’s Between Chestnut and Curtis  Site #10 - Parking Lot Behind Wells Fargo (between Crane and Chestnut)*  Site #14 - Parking Lot Between El Camino Real and Chestnut on West Side of Santa Cruz
 Site #15 - Parking Lot Between University and Crane on West Side of Santa Cruz
 Site #16 - Parking Lot Between Evelyn and Crane
Page H-1.300
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-39
 Site #17 - Parking Lot between Curtis and Doyle
 Site #18 - Parking Lot Behind Draeger's*
 Site #19 - Parking Lot off Oak Grove
These eight parking lots are owned by the City. Sites #10 and #18, denoted with asterisks, include some portions of privately-owned land used for parking. Parking lots are not considered "vacant" sites because they are used for parking as well as the Menlo Park Farmer's Market, supporting the social and economic fabric of the downtown.

For the City-owned parking lots downtown, a feasibility study may be necessary to ensure that parking easements owned by neighboring businesses are managed appropriately. There may also be potential utility easements that need to be taken into consideration. There are several development possibilities, including reserving one or more parking lots for redevelopment as a parking garage and using other lots for development of 100-percent affordable housing. Alternatively, some parking lots could be retained for surface parking use, or certain portions of the City-owned lots can be developed with affordable housing.

Program H4.G describes the City-led process to promote housing development on underutilized City-owned parking lots in downtown. The City’s goal is to develop 100- percent affordable housing on at least some portion of the eight parking lots, as determined by a feasibility study.

Similar studies have been used to catalyze parking lot redevelopment in nearby cities.

Burlingame is currently constructing a 132-unit affordable workforce and senior apartment on a parcel that previously held a parking lot.16 The development is done in conjunction with a public parking garage nearby. The Burlingame projects provides a blueprint and demonstrates to potential development partners the feasibility of the sort of projects envisioned on the City-owned lots in Menlo Park.

Potential Findings for Parking Lots
The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing use on parking lots is likely to be discontinued:

16 Village at Burlingame (Project Information). Available at https://www.burlingame.org/business_detail_T54_R140.php Page H-1.301
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-40
 The City of Menlo Park owns a majority of the downtown parking lots and can facilitate the use of these parking lots for development of affordable housing.  The value of the land as a residential use and the opportunity for new affordable housing downtown provides a public benefit that exceeds the value as surface parking facilities.

Evidence for these findings includes similar developments in neighboring jurisdictions and a high-level economic analysis as provided in Appendix 7-5.

Religious Facilities
Assembly Bill 1851 (AB 1851) (2020), prohibits local agencies from denying a housing development project that would be built at religious facility properties on the footprint of 50 percent of the existing parking spaces serving a religious facility. The purpose of the law is to streamline development of affordable housing on the underutilized parking lots of existing religious facilities. There are numerous examples of this law working as intended throughout California, including in San Jose at the Cathedral of Faith and in San Diego at the Clairemont Lutheran Church.

There are three facilities that are suitable for AB 1851 development in Menlo Park. The "(C)" in the site identifier denotes a religious facility.  Site #13(C) - The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints Menlo Park: 1105 Valparaiso Avenue
 Site #39(C) - St. Denis Catholic Church: 2250 Avy Avenue  Site #40(C) - St. Bede's Episcopal Church: 2650 Sand Hill Road These sites will be able to utilize Menlo Park's new Affordable Housing Overlay that will promote increased density on these sites. These religious facilities include Menlo Church, St. Bede’s Episcopal Church and the First Church of Christ, Scientist. Other religious facilities may have parking lots that are too small to provide significant housing development.

Potential Findings for Religious Facilities
The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing use in religious facilities is not likely to conflict with residential development.  The controlling entity and its use is not affected, due to new state law.

Page H-1.302
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-41
 Religious facilities are exempt from property tax, but the additional residential allowance provides a potential revenue stream for the religious facilities.  Some churches may provide affordable housing as part of their mission to support the community.

Evidence for these findings includes similar developments in neighboring jurisdictions and stated interest by some of the property owners, as well as the relatively low utilization of these parking lots outside of religious services.

El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area
As part of this Housing Element's goals, policies, and programs, the area in the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan will be "upzoned" – increasing allowable residential density – to a minimum of 30 dwelling units per acre depending on the Specific Plan subarea. The total residential unit cap of the area specified by the Plan would also be removed. These actions will incentivize the development of multifamily housing within the Specific Plan Area. There are 26 sites in the Site Inventory within the Specific Plan Area, not including parking lots discussed separately:

El Camino Real
 Site #1 - El Camino Real Safeway: 525 El Camino Real
Site #1 does not include the entire shopping center anchored by Safeway, but only the parcel underlying the shopping center’s parking lot. Development is envisioned as a residential development over ground-floor parking, without affecting the other uses in the shopping center.
 Site #2(R) - 1620 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
 Site #36 - 1377 El Camino Real
 Site #37 - 855 El Camino Real
 Site #43(R) - Sultana's Mediterranean: 1149 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)  Site #44(R) - Ducky's Car Wash: 1436 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)  Site #48(R) - 700 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
 Site #51 - 949 El Camino Real
 Site #52 - 1246 El Camino Real
Page H-1.303
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-42
 Site #53(R) - 1189 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
 Site #55(R) - 1161 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
 Site #56(R) - 1179 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
 Site #59(R) - 905 El Camino Real (Reuse Site)
Downtown
 Site #5(R) - 1100 Alma Street (Reuse Site)
 Site #6 - Church of Pioneers Foundation Properties: 900 Santa Cruz Avenue  Site #30 - Trader Joe's Downtown: 720 Menlo Avenue
 Site #31 - 800 Oak Grove Avenue
 Site #32 - 930 Santa Cruz
 Site #34 - 707 Menlo Avenue
 Site #35 - 1300 University Avenue
 Site #54(R) - 607 Menlo Avenue (Reuse Site)
 Site #57 - 761 Menlo Avenue
 Site #58 - 751 Menlo Avenue
 Site #61(R) - 610 Santa Cruz Avenue
 Site #62(R) - 550 Ravenswood Avenue
 Site #33 - Draeger's Parking Lot Downtown
The increased housing potential brought to these sites from the upzoning and Affordable Housing Overlay to be implemented as part of this Housing Element will serve to increase multifamily housing opportunities in the El Camino Real/Downtown Area. Also, increased housing potential is supported by the City's vibrancy goals for downtown, as a larger residential population will support dining, entertainment, and retail as well as live/work opportunities.

Page H-1.304
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-43
There are other rezonings in the El Camino Real/Downtown Area but outside of the sites listed in the Site Inventory. These additional rezonings will increase density and are intended to broadly encourage housing within the Specific Plan Area, but the Housing Element does not rely on them to meet RHNA.

Mixed use projects such as 1540 El Camino Real and 1300 El Camino Real are already approved and under construction, respectively, in Menlo Park. Similar projects can be found in Redwood City (1601 El Camino Real) and Palo Alto (2951 El Camino Real and 3150 El Camino Real). Downtown projects in Menlo Park such as 1285 El Camino Real and 506-556 Santa Cruz Avenue demonstrate a market for mixed-use development in Menlo Park that will only strengthen as increased densities are allowed.

Potential Findings for El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing uses in the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area are likely to be discontinued:
 Removal of the housing unit production cap and the addition of other incentives will encourage residential development.
 Increased residential density allowances will increase financial feasibility of housing development.

Evidence for these findings includes similar developments in neighboring jurisdictions as well as the relatively large number of project applications and approvals in the Specific Plan Area. There are also many older buildings on the sites and in the specific plan area as a whole. Although building age data is limited in Menlo Park – only three of the 26 sites in this subsection have their year of construction listed:
 Site #6: 1949
 Site #57: 1968
 Site #59(R): 1946
In the entire/El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area, there are 82 parcels with building age data. The average year of construction is 1974 and the median year of construction is 1948.

Non-Residential Parcels with Carveout
Through individual interviews and focus group discussions with affordable housing developers and advocates, one of the more promising development types on larger Page H-1.305
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-44
sites they mentioned was horizontal mixed use, where affordable housing is adjacent to other uses on the same parcel. This carveout would be limited to the vacant portion of the site, or atop existing surface-level parking.

This typology is represented in the Site Inventory as "Non-Residential with Carveout", where housing is developed on a certain acreage of the entire site. This would be incentivized to be 100 percent affordable housing by the Affordable Housing Overlay.

There are seven sites with non-residential uses that could include housing as a horizontal mixed use:

Table 7-8: Sites with Non-Residential Carveout
Site - Address Map
Site #3 - 2500 Sand
Hill Road
Site #4 - Quadrus:
2480 Sand Hill Road
Page H-1.306
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-45
Site - Address Map
Site #11 - Sharon
Heights Shopping
Center: 325 Sharon
Park Drive
Site #12 - USGS
Site: 345 Middlefield
Road
Site #20 - 272
Middlefield Road
Page H-1.307
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-46
Site - Address Map
Site #49 - 2722 Sand
Hill Road
Site #64 - VA
Medical Center: 795
Willow Road
Of these seven sites with non-residential uses that could include housing as a horizontal mixed use, five sites are privately owned. The USGS Site is being auctioned, and the US Department of Veterans Affairs has stated interest in developing approximately two acres of the Menlo Park VA Medical Center as veterans’ housing.

Site #11 does not include the entire shopping center anchored by Safeway, but only the portion of the parcel underlying the shopping center’s parking lot. Development is envisioned as a residential development over ground-floor parking, without affecting the other uses in the shopping center.

Due to flexible office work policies put in place to support safe work during the Covid-19 pandemic, there may be decreasing demand for the professional service firms that typically rent office space in Menlo Park. This opens up opportunities for land owners to pursue alternative revenue streams in the underutilized parking lots, replacing functionally obsolete office structures or otherwise vacant areas of parcels by contracting with affordable housing developers.

Page H-1.308
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-47
Potential Findings for Non-Residential Parcels with Carveouts The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing uses in these non-residential sites are not likely to conflict with residential development.  The controlling entity and its existing use are not affected.  Adding a new housing use increases the land value of the property.

Evidence for these findings includes similar developments in neighboring jurisdictions and potential interest mentioned by some property owners, as well as the low existing floor area to land area ratio, an indicator of potential underutilization of the site.

Non-Residential Parcels with Complete Redevelopment
The single most common development in Menlo Park in recent years has been multifamily residential on rezoned industrial or commercial property, primarily in the Bayfront area east of US-101. The strength of the housing market relative to other uses is likely to continue in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic, and as demand for housing continues to be strong. Residential uses increase the attractiveness of new development on 19 sites throughout the city:

Half-Mile from Major Transit Stop
 Site #7 - 728 Willow Road
 Site #8 - 906 Willow Road
 Site #25 - 8 Homewood Place
 Site #26 - 401 Burgess Drive
 Site #29 - Stanford Blood Center: 445 Burgess Drive
 Site #41 - 431 Burgess Drive
 Site #42 - 425 Burgess Drive
Further than Half-Mile From Major Transit Stop
 Site #22 - 85 Willow Road
 Site #23 - 200 Middlefield Road
 Site #24 - 250 Middlefield Road
Page H-1.309
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-48
 Site #27 - Menlo Park Surgical Hospital: 570 Willow Road  Site #28 - 2200 Sand Hill Road
 Site #63 - 3875 Bohannon Drive
 Site #67 - 3905 Bohannon Drive
 Site #68 - 3925 Bohannon Drive
 Site #69 - 4005 Bohannon Drive
 Site #70 - 4025 Bohannon Drive
 Site #71 - 4055 Bohannon Drive
 Site #72 - 4060 Campbell Avenue
Redevelopment on these sites could be 100 percent residential or mixed use with both residential and non-residential uses. There have been several such projects in Menlo Park in the Bayfront area, as well as along Middlefield in Mountain View and Redwood City. There are also 100 percent affordable projects in similar sites in Santa Clara and San Jose.

Many of these sites have older buildings that could be demolished and redeveloped.

The building on Site #23, however, was constructed in 2013. This is recent and the building is still well within its useful lifespan, but the building has been vacant for 2 years. Increased incentives to redevelop or retrofit with housing – including the AHO and new state laws such as AB 2011, would help spur residential development on the parcel.

Site #63 is currently in use by the United States Post Office. However, this does not preclude residential development on the site. In neighboring Burlingame, a former post office site was sold in 2014 and a current project for a “community town square” is in planning for the site.17 A similar redevelopment could take place on 3875 Bohannon Drive, particularly as there are many parcels in the Site Inventory in the Marsh/Bohannon area of the city.

17 See “220 Park Road”, available at https://www.burlingame.org/business_detail_T54_R112.php Page H-1.310
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-49
The sites on Bohannon Drive and Campbell Avenue are zoned for Office ("O" Zoning).18 The new residential allowances in the Affordable Housing Overlay will be similar to Connect Menlo's R-MU zoning designation, which allows up to 100 du/ac at the bonus level of development. This is a good indicator that higher-density housing could be developed in this area and that there is a market for such use. Newer commercial spaces along Middlefield Road and near Burgess Park were not selected for the Site Inventory. Similarly, only older or underutilized office-zoned parcels were selected for the Site Inventory in the Marsh/Bohannon area.

Residential Conversion Impacts on City's Tax Base
Menlo Park's major tax base of commercial and office uses will not be significantly affected by the conversion of these 19 sites due to the large amount of commercial space retained in the city. The sites in this category only take up a small percentage of the total office and commercial uses citywide, ranging from six percent of Professional and Administrative Office uses to less than two percent of the Bayfront Innovation Area (within City Council District 2).

Table 7-9: Percentage of Citywide Non-Residential Land Use Designation Affected by Opportunity Site Designation
Land Use Citywide Land
Use Acres
Housing
Opportunity Sites
Housing
Opportunity Sites
(Acres)
Percentage of
Land Use
Bayfront Innovation Area 511 7 8.15 1.5%
Retail Commercial* 42 4 8.83 21.0%
Professional and
Administrative Office 212 13 44.15 20.8%
*Site 8 is a consolidation of sites along Willow under common ownership that includes a single 0.23-acre parcel, APN 062-211-050, zoned R3 under "Medium Density Residential." This parcel is not included in this table because it does not currently allow an office or commercial use.

In addition, mixed-use developments that retain commercial and office use will still be allowed in the sites selected for the Site Inventory.

Potential Findings for Non-Residential Parcels with Complete Redevelopment

18 ConnectMenlo was a planning project that adopted Office, Life Science, and Residential Mixed Use zoning districts in the Bayfront area to envision a live/work/play environment. More information is available at https://beta.menlopark.org/Government/Departments/Community-Development/PlanningDivision/Comprehensive-planning/ConnectMenlo.

Page H-1.311
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-50
The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing uses in these non-residential sites are likely to be discontinued:
 Some controlling landowners are considering a sale, change of use, or change of locations
 Adding a potential new use increases the land value of the property Evidence for these findings includes the large number of recent developments in similar sites in Menlo Park and the surrounding area, as well as the obsolete and/or vacant buildings on the sites. Many sites also have low floor area to land area ratio, an indicator of potential underutilization of the site.

Underutilized Residential
There are five sites in the Sites Inventory that are currently zoned for residential but could support additional housing.

Two sites have existing multifamily housing where more capacity is available on the parcel:

Table 7-710: Sites with Underutilized Residential – More Capacity Available Site - Address Map
Site #21 - Sharon
Green
Apartments: 350
Sharon Park Drive
Page H-1.312
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-51
Site - Address Map
Site #50 - Seven
Oaks Apartments:
600 Sharon Park
Drive
There are also three sites where redevelopment for higher-density multifamily is available:

Table 7-811: Sites with Underutilized Residential Higher-Density Capacity Available Site - Address Map
Page H-1.313
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-52
Site - Address Map
Site #46(R) - 796
Live Oak Avenue
(Reuse Site)
Site #47 - Menlo
BBQ: 555 Willow
Road
Site #60 - 335
Pierce Road
The increased density and Affordable Housing Overlay for these sites incentivizes development beyond the already strong housing market in Menlo Park and the Page H-1.314
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-53
Peninsula. There has been property owner interest in residential development on two sites (Menlo BBQ and 335 Pierce Road), and increased incentives will support more development on the other underutilized sites.

Potential Findings for Underutilized Residential parcels The City can potentially make the following findings to determine that the existing uses in these residential sites are likely to be discontinued:
 Some controlling landowners are considering a sale, change of use, or change of locations
 Increased residential density allowances will increase financial feasibility of housing development
Evidence for these findings includes the redevelopment of low-density or mediumdensity housing in Menlo Park and the surrounding area, and the obsolete buildings and/or underutilized on these sites.

Adopted Findings
On ______________, Menlo Park City Council adopted the 2023-2031 Housing Element and included the findings listed below.

The City Council finds that, as result of the high demand for housing in the city, obsolete buildings, declining uses, low existing floor area ratios, the significant impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and related shifts in the commercial and residential real estate markets and development trends, and as further evidenced by recent site development inquiries, each as further specified on a categorical and site-by-site basis in the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update, the existing uses on each nonvacant site identified for inclusion within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone and zoned to accommodate the City’s lower income housing needs, as noted in the Site Inventory (Appendix 7-1), is not an impediment to additional residential development during the planning period for the 2023-2031 Housing Element.

These findings are supported by appendices 7-2 and 7-4, listing the city's recent residential development on nonvacant sites and region-wide 100 percent affordable housing, as well as the following table that shows the potential findings by development category:

Table 7-129: Potential Findings By Site Category
Potential Parking Religious Non- El Camino Non- Underutilized Page H-1.315
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-54
Finding Lots Facilities Residential
with
Carveout
Real/Downtown
Specific Plan
Area
Residential
with Complete
Redevelopment
Residential
Some
controlling
landowners
are
considering a
sale, change
of use, or
change of
locations
X X X
The value of
the land as
residential
outstrips its
existing use
X X
The
controlling
entity and its
use is not
affected
X X
Adding a
potential new
use
increases the
land value of
the property
X X
Removal of
housing unit
production
cap and
other
incentives
will
encourage
residential
development
X
Increased
density
allowances
will increase
financial
feasibility of
X X
Page H-1.316
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-55
housing
development
Nonvacant Sites that Include Residential Units
None of the 68 nonvacant sites include units that are or were occupied by, or subject to, affordability agreements for lower-income households.

AB 725 (Wicks)
All of the sites in the Sites Inventory are in areas zoned for at least four units of housing per parcel, complying with AB 725. The Affordable Housing Overlay, which covers all of the sites, allows for densities of at least 30 du/ac, which would allow more than four units even in areas where the underlying zoning would not allow it, such as R1U and R1S-zoned parcels.

ALTERNATIVE METHODS TO ACCOMMODATE THE RHNA
Accessory Dwelling Units
Menlo Park makes use of the "safe harbor option" to project future annual Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) production from 2018-2020 for the 6th Cycle planning period in order to determine the number of units projected to be built. With approximately 10.6 ADUs built annually from 2018-2020, there will be a projected 85 ADUs built during the 6th Cycle.

Table 7-1310: ADU Permits
Year ADUs Receiving
Building Permit
2018 15
2019 4
2020 13
Average 10.6
Following ABAG/MTC guidance, these 85 ADUs can be distributed across affordability levels as shown in the Table 7-14 below. ADUs does not always need to be rented to someone outside the family. The purpose of an ADU is to provide housing including housing for the primary family’s children, parents, or relatives. As ADUs will vary in size and shape based on individual lot constraints, it is difficult to predict potential rental Page H-1.317
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-56
income levels. The methodology used in the table below has been provided by ABAG/MTC as sufficient for RHNA credit calculations.

Table 7-114: Projected ADUs
Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate Total
Proportion 30% 30% 30% 10% 100%
ADUs 26 25 26 8 85
Menlo Park's 6th Cycle Housing Element does not use rehabilitated, converted, or preserved existing affordable residential units nor other alternative methods to meet its RHNA obligations.

Other Land Use Strategies
In addition to the residential capacity discussed in the Site Inventory, Accessory Dwelling Units, and Pipeline Projects, the City is pursuing Zoning Ordinance modifications to produce more housing outside of the Site Inventory. Menlo Park is modifying the Zoning Ordinance to produce an additional 621 market-rate units by pursuing the following:
 Modifying the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan
o Remove residential development cap
o Increase the maximum base level density to at least 30 du/ac across all subareas
o Increase the maximum bonus level density in certain subareas to maintain a spread between the base and bonus level densities
o Establish a minimum density of 20 du/ac to all subareas, upon the addition of residential uses on a site
o Review development standards such as height and parking ratios to reduce potential constraints on development
 Rezoning Commercial-Only Sites
o Allow residential uses with a maximum base density of at least 30 du/ac Page H-1.318
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-57
o Maintain some level of neighborhood-serving commercial use such as in the Sharon Heights shopping center
 Modify R-3 Zoning Around Downtown
o Remove lot size requirement in R-3 Zoning District that only allowed 30 du/ac densities on lots 10,000 square feet or greater around Downtown.

These modifications are broadly applied across zoning designations. While they may bolster development on specific sites in the Site Inventory, they are also expected to lead to additional units for above moderate income households. These 621 additional units are included as "Other Land Use Strategies" in Table 7-15.

AB 1233: 5th Cycle Shortfall Review
Menlo Park had adequate sites available in its previous Housing Element cycle and is not required to accommodate any unaccommodated need. There is no rezoning necessary as per Government Code § 65584.09.

SUMMARY OF QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
Many programs and policies reduce barriers and create opportunities for a balanced community. These goals are essential to meeting the City’s housing needs, but are more qualitative in general. Menlo Park reasonably expects that a total of 6,404 units will be constructed, as described by the tables below:

Table 7-15: Projected Housing Summary
Category
6th Cycle
Opportunity
Sites
Accessory
Dwelling
Units
Pipeline
Projects
Other
Land Use
Strategies
Rehabilitation Conservation/
Preservation
Very Low
Income 876 26 134 0 0 0
Low
Income 494 25 230 0 0 0
Moderate
Income 648 26 230 0 0 0
Above
Moderate
Income
135 8 3,050 621 0 0
Sub-Totals 2,135 85 3,644 621 0 0
Total 6,503 units
Page H-1.319
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-58
Table 7-16: New Housing Units by Affordability
Type of Unit Number of Units
New Affordable Units 2,689
New Market Rate Units 3,814
Total Units 6,503

INFRASTRUCTURE
The Water, Sewer, Dry Utilities, and Environmental Constraints review is taken from the Draft EIR, which was published on November 4, 2022.19

19 Available at https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2015062054/4.

Page H-1.320
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-59
Water
Water systems would have capacity and/or be adequate to serve cumulative development, including development allowed under the Housing Element Update.

Therefore, the HEU, in combination with past, present, existing, approved, pending, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on water systems, and this cumulative impact would be less than significant.

While water supply shortfalls are projected in single dry and multiple dry years with implementation of the Bay-Delta Plan Amendment, these projected shortfalls could be overcome through the SFPUC’s various projects, programs and plans and further addressed through implementation of the WSCPs. In addition, development under the Housing Element Update would be required to adhere to all applicable regulations that promote water conservation and water use efficiencies. While results of the projects, programs and plans and demand reductions cannot be quantified, it is reasonable to expect that many of the projects, programs and plans would be successful and additional water supplies and demand reductions can be obtained. For these reasons, implementation of the Housing Element Update would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal years. In single dry and multiple dry years, DMMs and implementation of the WSCPs by all water suppliers would further reduce demand to meet the water supply shortage. This finding is consistent with that found in the ConnectMenlo EIR. The HEU’s impact with respect to water supply would therefore be less than significant.

Sewer
Development allowed under the Housing Element Update, in combination with cumulative development within the San Francisquito Creek watershed would increase the amount of impervious surface in the watershed, and thus would increase the amount of stormwater runoff. However, similar to development allowed under the Housing Element Update, cumulative development would be required to adhere to State and local standards that would ensure that post-development runoff rates do not exceed pre-development rates and durations and that LID measures be implemented.

Stormwater systems would have capacity and/or be adequate to serve cumulative development, including development allowed under the Housing Element Update.

Therefore, the Housing Element Update, in combination with past, present, existing, approved, pending, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on stormwater systems, Page H-1.321
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-60
Dry Utilities
Development allowed under the Housing Element Update, in combination with cumulative development within the PG&E’s service area would increase demand for electricity and natural gas. However, development projects would be required to comply with applicable state and local regulations pertaining to energy conservation.

Furthermore, as noted in the ConnectMenlo EIR, PG&E routinely updates its long-range plans to incorporate potential growth in its service area (City of Menlo Park, 2016b).

Therefore, the electrical and natural gas infrastructure would be sufficient to serve cumulative development, including development allowed under the Housing Element Update.

Electricity and natural gas systems would have capacity and/or be adequate to serve cumulative development, including development allowed under the Housing Element Update. Therefore, the Housing Element Update, in combination with past, present, existing, approved, pending, and reasonably foreseeable future projects in the vicinity, would not contribute considerably to cumulative impacts on electricity and natural gas systems, and this cumulative impact would be less than significant.

The geographic context with respect to telecommunication service is the service areas for the telecommunication providers that serve the city. Development allowed under the Housing Element Update, in combination with cumulative development within the service areas for the telecommunication providers that serve the city would increase demand for telecommunication service. However, similar to the development provided for under the Housing Element Update, cumulative development of underground conduits and overhead cables to facilitate telecommunications services would be required to comply with applicable federal, state, and local standards pertaining to underground and overhead utility infrastructure.

Environmental Constraints
The geographic scope of analysis for cumulative hazardous materials impacts encompasses and is limited to the potential housing opportunity and land use strategy sites and their immediately adjacent area. This is because impacts relative to hazardous materials are generally site-specific and depend on the nature and extent of the hazardous materials release, and existing and future soil and groundwater conditions.

For example, hazardous materials incidents tend to be limited to a smaller and more localized area surrounding the immediate spill location and extent of the release, and could only be cumulative if two or more hazardous materials releases spatially overlapped.

Page H-1.322
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-61
The timeframe during which the project could contribute to cumulative hazards and hazardous materials effects includes the construction and operations phases. For the potential housing opportunity and land use strategy sites, the operations phase is permanent. However, similar to the geographic limitations discussed above, it should be noted that impacts relative to hazardous materials are generally time-specific.

Hazardous materials events could only be cumulative if two or more hazardous materials releases occurred at the same time, as well as overlapping at the same location.Water: To completed with environmental analysis Sewer: To completed with environmental analysis
Dry Utilities: To completed with environmental analysis Environmental Constraints
To completed with environmental analysis

SUMMARY OF QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
The following table summarizes Menlo Park’s quantified objectives for the 2023-2031 Housing Element planning period. The objectives include the City’s new construction objectives to meet its regional housing needs (RHNA) and conservation objectives which reflect preservation of Crane Place, which is at moderate risk for conversion to market-rate prices.

The City will fund Habitat for Humanity’s Homeownership Preservation Program in the Belle Have neighborhood, with a goal of assisting 20 very low-income homeowners to complete major rehabilitation improvements to their homes.

Table 7-12: Quantified Objectives
Income Level New Construction
Objectives
Rehabilitation
Objectives1
Conservation
Objectives
Extremely Low
(0% - 30% AMI)
449
20 93 (Crane Place) Very Low
(31% - 50% AMI)
696
Low
(51% - 80% AMI) 1,260 0 --
Moderate 1,175 0 --
Page H-1.323
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Site Inventory and Analysis | Page 7-62
(81% - 120% AMI)
Above Moderate
(>120% AMI) 3,676 0
Totals 7,256 20 93
Page H-1.324
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-1
Goals, Policies and Programs
FAIR HOUSING – POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Menlo Park's approach to affirmatively furthering fair housing is integrated into the goals, policies, and programs of the Housing Element. Chapter 4: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, identifies four overarching issues contributing to housing issues in the city:
 Disproportionate Housing Needs
 Displacement
 Housing Costs
 Disproportionate Transportation Issues
Policy responses to these contributing factors are contained in this chapter and identified in Table 4-17 within Chapter 4. In addition, the City took a site allocation approach that considered countervailing forces to the large number of market-rate units developed (or projected to develop) in Council District 1, north of US-101, particularly the Belle Haven neighborhood, and the impacts of these units on disadvantaged communities. The Affordable Housing Overlay and related policies and programs consider strategies to develop more affordable housing, particularly 100 percent affordable housing, in Council Districts 2 through 5, south of US-101. The approach described in the policies and programs would encourage more affordable housing in high-resource areas throughout the city. The policies and programs reinforce and promote the development of affordable housing while encouraging equitable dispersion of affordable housing throughout the city and avoiding further concentration of opportunity and poverty.

The housing policies and programs were also developed based on an extensive community outreach process. Some of the policies and programs were directly adapted from outreach suggestions on policy updates. The community identified strategies for addressing the needs of special needs populations and emphasized the importance of expanding opportunities for affordable housing. A full summary of the findings from the community outreach is discussed in Chapter 4. The policies and programs contained in this chapter reinforce housing equity by responding to the concerns and priorities identified by the community.

Page H-1.325
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-2
This Housing Element contains seven housing goals that provide overarching housing objectives for the City to strive towards. Within each goal are policies that describe the approach or behavior that will move the City towards the respective goal. These policies and goals will be realized through housing programs, which detail actionable implementation steps that the City will take throughout the planning period. Each housing program includes the responsible party for implementation, funding source, measurable objective, and timeframe for implementing the program.

The overarching intent of the Housing Element is to:

Address community housing needs by providing a range of housing choices that blend new development into the community consistent with environmental, infrastructure and service needs.

The City has the following seven housing goals for the 2023-2031 Housing Element, which are described in more detail within the table below, bolstered by policies and programs:

1. Implementation responsibilities. Continue to build local government institutional capacity and monitor accomplishments to effectively respond to housing needs.

2. Existing housing and neighborhoods. Equitably maintain, protect and enhance existing housing and neighborhoods, while also supporting quality schools, city services, and infrastructure.

3. Specialized housing needs. Provide housing for special needs populations that is coordinated with support services.

4. Affordable housing. Support the development of a diversity of housing types for people at all income levels, particularly for extremely low-, very low-, and lowincome households.

5. Equity. Ensure equitable access to housing.

6. Sustainable housing. Implement sustainable and resilient housing development practices.

7. Design of housing. Ensure new housing is well-designed and addresses the housing needs of the city.

Page H-1.326
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Public Review Draft:

Fair Housing – Policy and Program Development | Page 8-3 Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs
REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM Goal H1 IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES.

Continue to build local government institutional capacity and monitor accomplishments to effectively respond to housing needs.

Policy H1.1 Local Government Leadership.

Recognize affordable housing as an important City priority. The City will take a proactive leadership role in working with community groups, other jurisdictions and agencies, non-profit housing sponsors and the building and real estate industry in following through on identified Housing Element implementation actions in a timely manner.

Policy H1.2 Inter-Jurisdictional Strategic Action Plan for Housing.

Coordinate housing strategies with other jurisdictions in San Mateo County, as appropriate, to meet the City's housing needs.

Policy H1.3 Local Funding for Affordable Housing.

Seek ways to reduce housing costs for lower-income workers and people with special needs by developing ongoing local funding sources and continuing to utilize other local, state and federal assistance to the fullest extent possible. Funding should also be sought for the development and support of transitional housing. The City will also maintain the Below Market Rate (BMR) housing program requirements for residential and non-residential developments.

Policy H1.4 Organizational Effectiveness.

Seek ways to organize and allocate staffing and community resources effectively and efficiently to implement the programs of the Housing Element. In recognition that there are limited resources available to the City to achieve housing goals in implementing this policy, the City will, to the extent practical:
a. Provide technical and administrative support and assist in finding outside funding to agencies and private sponsors in developing and/or rehabilitating housing to accommodate special housing needs. b. Provide representation on committees, task forces, or other forums addressing housing issues at a local, regional, or state level.
c. Evaluate staff capacity and additional resources to monitor and implement affordable housing policies and projects.

Policy H1.5 Housing Element Monitoring, Evaluation and Revisions.

Establish a regular monitoring and update process to assess housing needs and achievements and provide a process for modifying policies, programs, and resource allocations in response to changing conditions.

Program H1.A Establish City Staff Work Priorities for Implementing Housing Element Programs.

As part of the annual review of the Housing Element (see Program H1.B), establish work priorities to implement the Housing Element related to community outreach, awareness and input on housing concerns. Strive to ensure that all City publications, including the City's Activity Guide, include information on housing programs. City staff work priorities specific to Page H-1.327
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-4

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Housing Element implementing programs include, but are not limited to:
a. Conduct the annual review of the Housing Element (Program H1.B). b. Review options for funding housing affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households. (Program H1.I)
c. Make recommendations to City Commissions on strategies for housing opportunity sites and funding (Policy H4.1). d. Provide follow-up on housing opportunity sites and funding based on directions provided by the City Council, including working with the community and implementing Housing Element programs (Program H1.E, H5.B) e. Conduct community outreach and provide community information materials through an open and non-advocacy process (Program H5.B).
f. Engage property owners in identifying opportunities to construct housing affordable to extremely low-, very low-, lowand moderate-income households (Program H5.B). g. Pursue opportunities where the City can participate in constructing affordable housing on City-owned sites (Program H4.G).
h. Develop ongoing and annual outreach and coordination with non-profit housing developers and affordable housing advocates (Program H1.E).
i. Continue to participate in ongoing regional housing-related activities, including participation in ongoing efforts as part of the Countywide 21 Elements effort (Program H1.C, H1.D). j. Work with affordable housing developers on creating informational resources and opportunities that would help them evaluate and craft affordable housing proposals.

Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Establish staff priorities for implementing Housing Element programs Timeframe: Participate in ongoing regional planning activities throughout the Housing Element planning period and develop a work program as part of the annual review of the Housing Element (see Program H1.B)
Program H1.B Review the Housing Element Annually.

As required by state law, review the status of Housing Element programs by April of each year, beginning April 2023. As required by statute, the annual review will cover:
a. Consistency between the Housing Element and the other General Plan Elements. As portions of the General Plan are amended, this Housing Element will be reviewed to maintain internal consistency. In addition, a consistency review will be implemented as part of the annual general plan implementation report required under Government Page H-1.328
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-5

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Code § 65400.
b. Statistical summary of residential building activity tied to various types of housing, household need, income, and Housing Element program targets.

Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Review and monitor Housing Element implementation; conduct public review with the Housing Commission, Planning Commission and City Council, and submit Annual Report to HCD Timeframe: April 2023 and annually thereafter
Program H1.C Work with the San Mateo County Department of Housing.

Continue to coordinate with the San Mateo County Department of Housing (DOH) to manage the affordable housing stock to ensure permanent affordability; implement resale and rental regulations for very low-, low-, and moderate-income units; and ensure that these units remain at an affordable price level. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager Financing: General Fund Objectives: Meet with the County twice a year and coordinate with County efforts to maintain and support affordable housing
Timeframe: Every 6 months
Program H1.D Regional Coordination.

Continue participating in regional housing efforts and collaborations, including San Mateo County's 21 Elements.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Work with other San Mateo County jurisdictions to address regional housing needs and attend 21 Elements coordination activities
Timeframe: Ongoing
Program H1.E Work with Non-Profits on Housing.

Continue to work with non-profits to assist in achieving the City's housing goals and implementing programs. Coordination should occur on an ongoing basis, and as special opportunities arise as the Housing Element is implemented. Non-profits should have an advisory role when implementing housing programs to help understand the community's needs and opportunities for non-profit housing development. The City currently works with and refers households in need to Samaritan House San Mateo, Human Investment Project (HIP Housing), and the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust (HEART). The City will continue to implement the bi-annual notice of funding availability (NOFA), which allows non-profits to apply for Page H-1.329
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-6

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
funding to promote the preservation and production of affordable housing. Responsibility: Housing Division; Planning Division; City Manager Financing: General Fund Objectives: Continue NOFA implementation and maintain a working relationship with non-profit housing sponsors
Timeframe: Engage with non-profits at least twice a year Program H1.F Update the Housing Element.

In coordination with other jurisdictions in San Mateo County, update the Menlo Park Housing Element to be consistent with State law requirements and address the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) every eight years. Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Assure consistency with SB 375 and Housing Element law Timeframe: Update the Housing Element by January 2023 Program H1.G Update Priority Procedures for Providing Water Service to Affordable Housing Developments.

At least once every five years, update written policies and procedures that grant priority for service allocations to proposed developments that include housing units affordable to lower-income households consistent with SB 1087 (Government Code § 65589.7). Responsibility: Planning Division; Department of Public Works (Menlo Park Municipal Water); City Manager; City Council
Financing: Water Fund Objectives: Comply with Government Code § 65589.7 Timeframe: When the Urban Water Management Plan is updated (anticipated 2025 and 2030) Program H1.H Transparency on Progress towards RHNA.

Publish information regarding below market rate development pipeline projects, including the anticipated number of units and affordability, on the City's housing website in coordination with the Housing Element's annual progress report.

Responsibility: Planning Division: Housing Division Financing: General Fund Objectives: Increase accessibility and transparency of affordable housing development in the city Timeframe: Ongoing; website shall be updated at least once a year Program H1.I Utilize the City's Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Fund.

Page H-1.330
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-7

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Administer and no less frequently than every two years advertise the availability of funds in the Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Fund as it applies to residential, commercial and industrial development projects through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA). Consider providing additional preference point for projects that include extremely low-income units and/or units set aside for special needs populations needing on-site supportive services. The first NOFA of the planning period will be released in early 2023 for approximately $2 million. Responsibility: City Commissions; Housing Division; Planning Division; City Attorney; City Manager; City Council Financing: Below Market Rate Housing Fund and General Fund Objectives: Accumulate and distribute funds for housing affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households
Timeframe: Advertise the availability of funds in the BMR Housing Fund at least every two years Goal H2 EXISTING HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS.

Equitably maintain, protect and enhance existing housing and neighborhoods, while also supporting quality schools, city services and infrastructure.

Policy H2.1 Maintenance, Improvement, and Rehabilitation of Existing Housing.

Encourage the maintenance, improvement, and rehabilitation of the City's existing housing stock; the preservation of the City's affordable housing stock; and the enhancement of community stability to maintain and improve the character of Menlo Park's existing residential neighborhoods while providing for the development of a variety of housing types. The provision of open space and/or quality gathering and outdoor spaces will also be encouraged.

Policy H2.2 Preservation of Residential Units.

Limit the conversion of residential units to other uses and regulate the conversion of rental developments to non-residential uses unless a clear public benefit or equivalent housing can be provided to ensure the protection and conservation of the City's housing stock to the extent permitted by law.

Policy H2.3 Condominium Conversions.

Assure that any conversion of rental housing to owner-occupied housing accommodates the units' existing tenants, consistent with requirements to maintain public health, safety, and welfare. The City will also encourage limited equity cooperatives and other innovative housing proposals that are affordable to lower-income households.

Policy H2.4 Protection of Existing Affordable Housing.

Strive to ensure that affordable housing provided through government incentives, subsidies, funding, and deed restrictions remains affordable over time. The City will intervene when possible to help preserve such housing.

Policy H2.5 Maintenance and Management of Quality Housing and Neighborhoods.

Encourage good management practices, rehabilitation of viable older housing, and long-term maintenance and improvement of neighborhoods.

Policy H2.6 School District and City Service Maintenance.

Work with the school districts and child care providers (pre-K and out-of-school time) to maintain quality service as demand Page H-1.331
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-8

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
increases.

Policy H2.7 Develop and Enforce Anti-Displacement Strategy.

Work with neighborhood and community groups, particularly in neighborhoods that have historically been adversely impacted by past discriminatory redlining practices, to reduce displacement.

Program H2.A Preservation of Assisted Housing.Adopt Ordinance for "At-Risk" Units.

Prepare an ordinance requiring an 18-month notice to residents, the City, and the San Mateo County Department of Housing of all proposed conversions of subsidized housing units to market-rate rents. In addition, the City will initiate discussions with property establish regular contact with the owners of potential "at-risk" units at least 3 years prior to expiration to monitor tenant noticing requirements. to assure long-term coordination. If the units appear to be in danger of conversion or being lost as affordable housing, the City will establish contact with public and non-profit agencies interested in managing or purchasing the units to inform them of the project's status and inform tenants of any assistance available. In working with other agencies, the City will ensure that funding sources are identified and timelines for action are executed. Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund; Preservation funding as necessary (BMR funds, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program, HCD Portfolio Reinvestment Program, etc) Objectives: Adopt an ordinance for at-risk units. Preserve 92 low income units in Crane Place Apartments atrisk of conversion in 2028.Timeframe: Adopt ordinance within one year of Housing Element adoption. The City will also cContact owners of Crane Place Apartments no later than 2025 to ensure compliance with state preservation notice law.potential at-risk units every two years.

Program H2.B Amend the Zoning Ordinance to Protect Existing Housing.

Consistent with state law, amend the Zoning Ordinance to reflect the Housing Element policy that limits the loss of existing residential units or the conversion of existing residential units to non-residential uses (see Policy H2.2). Zoning Ordinance changes and City activities should address residential displacement impacts, including the following:
a. Avoid contradicting the Ellis Act. b. Consider regulations used in other communities. c. Consider a modified replacement fee on a per unit basis or replacement of a portion of the units, relocation assistance, etc., to the extent consistent with the Ellis Act. d. Collaborate with the San Mateo County Department of Housing, HIP Housing, Mid-Pen Housing Corporation, and others to protect affordable units in Menlo Park.
e. Consider rezoning of properties for consistency to match and protect their existing residential uses.

In addition, the City will require replacement of any units proposed for removal on Housing Element sites occupied by lower Page H-1.332
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-9

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
income households within the last 5 years consistent with those requirements set forth in density bonus law (Government Code 65915(c)(3). Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Protect existing rental housing as part of infill implementation and other Zoning Ordinance changes Timeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption Program H2.C Assist in Implementing Housing Rehabilitation Programs.

Concentrate housing rehabilitation outreach and funding in the Belle Haven neighborhood to prevent existing housing units, both single-family houses and apartments, from deteriorating; significantly reduce the number of seriously deteriorated units.

Emphasis will be placed on the rehabilitation of multifamily developments. As city infrastructure ages, rehabilitation efforts may be expanded more broadly throughout the city. City activities include the following:
a. Fund Habitat for Humanity’s Homeownership Preservation Program in the Belle Have Neighborhood, providing housing rehabilitations valued at $40,000-$75,000 per home, with a goal of assisting 20 very low-income homeowners. To identify and engage homeowners in Belle Haven at greatest risk of displacement or harm due to the conditions of their homes, Habitat will employ an outreach specialist and work closely with public and private agencies and organizations that serve the neighborhood and its residents. a. Continue to work with and refer people to the San Mateo County Department of Housing programs, including the Single-Family Ownership Rehabilitation Program and the Multi-Family Rental Rehabilitation Program. b. Encourage private sponsors to develop and maintain housing units using state and federal housing assistance programs for emergencies and other repairs.
c. Work with San Mateo County to compete for Community Development Block Grant funds to ensure the continuation of the Single-Family Ownership Rehabilitation Program for low- and very low-income families in the community. d.b. Investigate possible use of housing rehabilitation loans to assist homeowners in bringing unpermitted implementing the City's accessory dwelling units (ADUs) up to health and safety codes.programs.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Building Division; Housing Division Financing: Outside subsidyBMR fundsObjectives: Utilize the City's BMR funds to rehabilitate very low- and low- income housing. Assist at least 20 very low income homeowners
Timeframe: Ongoing with annual progress monitoring Initiate Homeownership Preservation Program in 2023 and complete within three years.

Program H2.D Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Amnesty Program.

Page H-1.333
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-10

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Amend the ADU Ordinance to include an amnesty program for ADUs that do not comply with building codes or planning development standards if the violation is not necessary to protect health and safety. Utilize the City Newsletter, website and other social media outlets to initiate a marketing program for homeowners on the benefits of ADUs and of legalizing unpermitted units, and the availability of funds to support conversion of unpermitted development (refer to Program H4.F)Responsibility: Planning Division; Building Division Financing: General Fund; BMR fundsObjectives: Bring unpermitted ADUs up to code to improve their health and safety for occupants and integrate within the City’s official housing stockCount ADUs towards the City’s total housing inventory Timeframe: Homeowners outreach and incorporation of amnesty provisions in the Zoning Ordinance shall be completed by the end of 2024Within three years of Housing Element adoption Program H2.E Anti-Displacement Strategy.

Conduct outreach and Mmeet with residentsindividuals and organizations primarily in the Belle Haven historically segregated neighborhood s to develop an anti-displacement strategy that the City Council can adopt after review from the Housing Commission and Planning Commission. This strategy should reflect community engagement, potentially including research and tools such as community meetings, surveys and field visits in collaboration with local community organizations. It will and local research and include policies that could:
a. Increase housing quality while preventing evictions b. Consider neighborhood tenant preference for affordable housing c. Identify new sources of funding for anti-displacement efforts d. Develop localized anti-displacement programs that could accompany large-scale developments e. Provide deposit assistance, particularly for veterans f. Provide robust tenant education to cConnect tenants to housing supportive programs and ensure that tenants are aware of their rights by posting resources on the City's housing website and other media g. Inform tenants of opportunities for rental assistance, such as revolving loan funds or external funding sources. h. Consider continuation of funding beyond 2024 for the Menlo Park hHousing aAssistance Program to provide emergency financial assistance to lower income tenants and homeowners facing displacement for reasons not addressed by the tenant relocation assistance ordinance or rental assistance related to impacts of COVID-19 h. Expand Just Cause Eviction provisions beyond current law to include tenants of any tenure i. Increase the time of rent relocation assistance j. Create an eviction monitoring and data collection program Page H-1.334
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-11

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council; City Attorney
Financing: General Fund; commercial linkage fees; BMR funds; outside funding Objectives: Mitigate displacement in historically segregated areas of the city and provide financial assistance to tenants
Timeframe: Develop an anti-displacement strategy for the City, particularly the Belle Haven neighborhood, by December 2026, and begin program implementation in 2027and tenant support programs within three years of Housing Element adoption Program H2.F Childcare Allowances
Update the Zoning Ordinance to allow large family day care by-right in all residential areas in conformance with California Health and Safety Code, Division 2 Licensing Provisions, Chapter 3.6 Family Day Care Homes, Section 1597.45. As part of this update the City will also consider the following:
1) Reducing parking requirements for small and large family day care 2) Ways to encourage development of childcare facilities in multifamily development 3) Potential incentives for development of childcare facilities Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council; City Attorney
Financing: General Fund Objectives: Support families with children, large families generally, and single-parent households Timeframe: Update zoning code within 1 year of housing element adoption.

Goal H3 SPECIALIZED HOUSING NEEDS.

Provide housing for special needs populations that is coordinated with support services.

Policy H3.1 Special Needs Groups.

Encourage non-profit organizations and private developers to build and maintain affordable housing for groups with special needs, including the needs of seniors; people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities; the unhoused; people living with HIV/AIDS and other illnesses; people in need of mental health care; single-parent families; large families; and other persons identified as having special housing needs.

Policy H3.2 Health and Human Services Programs Linkages.

Assist service providers in linking programs serving the needs of special populations to provide the most effective response to homelessness or persons at risk of homelessness, youth needs, seniors, persons with mental and/or physical disabilities, substance abuse problems, HIV/AIDS, physical and developmental disabilities, multiple diagnoses, veterans, victims of Page H-1.335
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-12

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
domestic violence, and other economically challenged or underemployed workers.

Policy H3.3 Incentives for Special Needs Housing.

Use density bonuses and other incentives to meet special housing needs, including housing for lower-income seniors and people living with disabilities.

Policy H3.4 Transitional and Supportive Housing.

Recognize the need for and desirability of transitional and supportive housing and treat transitional and supportive housing as a residential use that will be subject to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same zone.

Policy H3.5 Coordination with Other Agencies in Housing People Experiencing Homelessness.

Engage other jurisdictions in San Mateo County to support long-term solutions for unhoused individuals and families in San Mateo County.

Policy H3.6 Local Approach to Housing for the Homeless.

Support a "housing first" approach to addressing homeless needs, consistent with the Countywide HOPE Plan. "Housing first" is intended to provide unhoused individuals and families with housing quickly and then provide other services as needed, focusing on helping people quickly access and sustain permanent housing. The City recognizes the need for and desirability of emergency shelter housing for people experiencing homelessness and has established Municipal Code Chapter 16.99, Emergency Shelter for the Homeless Overlay, which includes a year-round emergency shelter as a permitted use in specific locations within the city. In addition, the following would apply:
a. In recognition that unhoused veterans are a special need population in San Mateo County, the City will work with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in Menlo Park to identify possible programs and locations for housing and support services for homeless veterans. b. The City will encourage positive relations between neighborhoods and providers of permanent or temporary emergency shelters. Providers or sponsors of emergency shelters, transitional housing programs and community care facilities shall be encouraged to establish outreach programs within their neighborhoods and, when necessary, work with the City or a designated agency to resolve disputes. c. It is recommended that a staff person from the provider agency be designated as a contact person with the community to review questions or comments from the neighborhood. Outreach programs may also designate a member of the local neighborhood to their Board of Directors. Neighbors of emergency shelters shall be encouraged to provide a neighborly and hospitable environment for such facilities and their residents. d. Development standards for emergency shelters for people experiencing homelessness located in Menlo Park will ensure that shelters are developed to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of nearby residents and businesses while providing for the needs of a segment of the population as required by State law. Shelters shall be subject only to development, design review and management standards that apply to residential or commercial development in the same zone, except for the specific written and objective standards as allowed in State law.

Policy H3.7 Adaptable/Accessible Units for People Living with Disabilities.

Ensure that new multifamily housing includes units that are accessible and adaptable for use by people living with Page H-1.336
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-13

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
disabilities, including developmental disabilities, in conformance with the California Building Code. This strategy will include ways to promote housing design that allows seniors to "age-in-place" in their community.

Policy H3.8 Develop and Preserve Accessible Units.

Promote the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing for people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, particularly in neighborhoods accessible to public transit, commercial services, and health and community facilities.

Policy H3.9 Support People Living with Disabilities.

Support options for long-term housing with supportive services accommodating people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, to live independently in a permanent setting.

Policy H3.10 ADUs for People Living with Disabilities.

Encourage the use of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) for accommodating people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, particularly considering incentives to promote accessible ADUs and exploring the feasibility of a financing program or fee waivers for rent-restricted ADUs that are affordable to extremely low-income people living with disabilities who would benefit from coordinated housing support and other services.

Program H3.A Continue to Implement Procedures for Reasonable Accommodation.

Maintain internal review procedures to provide individuals living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, withreasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures to ensure equal access to housing. The purpose of these procedures and/or ordinance is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to request reasonable accommodation with regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. The City will also review its reasonable accommodation procedures to ensure consistency with guidance provided by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Department of Justice (DOJ) on required justification for denial of an accommodation request.1Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Create a public handout and provide a digital copy on the City's website and a physical copy at City Hall and the public libraries.

Timeframe: Review current procedures and amend as necessary for consistency with guidance provided by DOJ and HUD. Publish the handout by the end of 2025. Implementation of reasonable accommodation procedures will be ongoing throughout the planning period.

Program H3.B Encourage Rental Housing Assistance Programs. 1 HUD and DOJ advise that for an accommodation to be denied, the requested accommodation must cause an undue financial and administrative burden, or fundamentally alter the nature of the provider’s operations Page H-1.337
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-14

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Continue to publicize federal, state and local rental housing programs for special needs populations programs on the City's website. Work with the San Mateo County Department of Housing to implement the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program and, utilizing the best-available City data to identify multi-family property owners, conduct outreach to property owners in high resource neighborhoods to encourage their participation in the rental assistance program., aAs appropriate, assist similar non-profit housing sponsor rental assistance programs. Information will be provided through the implementation of Housing Element Program H1.C and H5.C. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; San Mateo County Department of Housing and non-profit housing sponsors; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Financing: Outside subsidy Objectives: Provide assistance at current Section 8 funding levels to assist 230 extremely low and very lowincome households per year (assumes continued funding of program)4 Timeframe: Property owner outreach in 2024 and 2027Ongoing; Update website annually 4Source of data: Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County, from the San Mateo County Department of Housing (Housing Authority)
Program H3.C Assist in Providing Housing for Persons Living with Disabilities.

Continue to partner with Countywide 21 Elements organization to contribute support and engage in programs that develop housing and improve housing opportunities for people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities. Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund; other sources Objectives: Conduct outreach on the availability of funds for non-profit organizations that provide housing and programs for people with disabilities. Promote available funds through the community funding grant program, which provides an allocation of up to 1.7 percent of the collected property tax revenue.

Timeframe: Outreach would be conducted yearly
Program H3.D Develop Incentives for Special Needs Housing.

Initiate a Zoning Ordinance amendment, including review of the R-L-U (Retirement Living Units) Zoning District, to ensure it is consistent with Housing Element policies and fair housing laws, and to develop, for example, density bonuses and other incentives for needed senior housing, senior care facilities and other special needs housing for persons living with disabilities in the community, including people with developmental disabilities. Emphasis will also be placed on ways to facilitate the development of housing for seniors with very low-, low- and moderate-incomes. Below are specifics:
a. The regulations should address the changing needs of seniors over time, including units for independent living and assisted living as well as skilled nursing facilities.

Page H-1.338
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-15

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
b. The City will continue to allow the development and expansion of housing opportunities for seniors and special needs persons through techniques such as smaller unit sizes, parking reduction and common dining facilities when a non-profit organization sponsors units or when they are developed under the Retirement Living Unit (R-L-U) District provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. c. The City will coordinate with the Golden Gate Regional Center to ensure that the needs of the developmentally disabled are considered as part of the program.
d. Provide a density bonus for affordable housing mixed-use projects accessible to people with disabilities and developmental disabilities within a half-mile radius of a public transit stop. e. Amend the Zoning Ordinance to reduce parking requirements for developments that house people with special needs, including affordable housing mixed-use projects accessible to people with disabilities and developmental disabilities and projects within a half-mile radius of a public transit stop. f. Consider developing housing development targets for various special needs populations.

Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; City Manager; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund; other sources Objectives: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to provide opportunities for housing and adequate support services for seniors and people living with disabilities
Timeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption Program H3.E Continue Support for Countywide Homeless Programs.

Support activities intended to address homelessness in San Mateo County. Below are specifics:
a. The City will work with and support the Veteran's Administration and Haven House emergency shelter programs. b. The City will continue to support Human Investment Project (HIP Housing) programs.6 c. Continue to partner with non-profits on conducting outreach to people experiencing homelessness. d. Collaborate with other jurisdictions to house people experiencing homelessness, including the Project Homekey program and multi-jurisdictional navigation centers.
e. Continue to support the County goal of achieving functional zero homelessness, meaning that anyone who desires shelter can access it through an array of County facilities and programs.

Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Council; San Mateo County Housing Department; HIP Housing; Veteran's Administration; Life Moves; HEART (The Housing Endowment and Regional Trust) Financing: General Fund; other sources
Page H-1.339
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-16

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Objectives: Conduct quarterly check-ins with the Menlo Park Homeless Outreach Team, which consists of staff from the Housing Division, Police Department and community-based organizations that provide homeless outreach and support services. Support housing and services for the homeless and at-risk persons and families.

Timeframe: Conduct check-ins with Menlo Park Homeless Outreach Team at least once quarterly 6 HIP Housing programs include home-sharing, rental subsidies and case management for individuals and families. Home Sharing is a living arrangement in which two or more unrelated people share a home or apartment. Each resident has a private room and shares the common living areas. The Self-Sufficiency Program (SSP) provides housing assistance and support services to low-income parents and emancipated foster youth to become financially self-sufficient within 1-5 years. Participants receive subsidized rent or a housing scholarship while completing an education or job training program and finding employment in their field. While in the program, HIP Housing provides monthly case management and life skills workshops to encourage continued progress.

Program H3.F Work with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs on Homeless Issues.

Work with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to identify possible programs and locations for housing and support services for the homeless, including unhoused veterans. Seek to provide 60 supportive homes for very low income veterans and their families who were formerly homeless or at risk of homelessness on the Palo Alto Health Care System Campus in cooperation with MidPen Housing.Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Council; U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
Financing: General Fund and outside Objectives: Contact the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to coordinate in addressing the needs of people experiencing homelessness. Seek to achieve a minimum of 60 new units of affordable housing for veterans.

Timeframe: Meet with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs annually. SecureCoordinate entitlements for MidPen supportive housing project (2023); initiate project construction (2024); project opening (2025) Program H3.G Low Barrier Navigation Centers.

Amend Municipal Code Chapter 16.04, Definitions, to include a "Low Barrier Navigation Center" definition consistent with AB 101. Amend mixed-use and nonresidential zoning districts that allow multifamily housing to permit low barrier navigation centers as a by-right use. Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City CouncilFinancing: General FundObjectives: Provide a pathway to permanent housing for people experiencing homelessness Page H-1.340
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-17

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Timeframe: Within one year of Housing Element adoption
Program H3.G Zoning Text Amendments for Special Needs Housing. As presented under the Governmental Constraints analysis and pursuant to state law, the City will undertake the following revisions to the Municipal Code:
 Amend the Code to explicitly allow transitional and supportive housing as a residential use in all zones allowing residential uses and only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone.  Amend the Code to explicitly allow supportive housing by-right in all zones where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted.

Amend the Code to allow small employee housing (6 or fewer) in all residential zone districts.  Modify Municipal Code 16.99, Emergency Shelter for Homeless Overlay, subsection .030 to increase the number of beds allowed in an emergency shelter for the homeless
 Amend the Code to allow group homes for more than six persons in all residential zone districts consistent with state law and fair housing requirements
 Amend the Code to define and provide for Low Barrier Navigation Centers in mixed-use and nonresidential zoning districts that allow multi-family housing
 Amend the definition of family in the Code to eliminate the requirement of a common housekeeping management plan based on an internally structured relationship providing organization and stability Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City CouncilFinancing: General Fund Objectives: Facilitate housing for Menlo Park’s special needs and extremely low income populations.Timeframe: Amend Zoning Code by 2024.

Program H3.H Inclusionary Accessible Units.

As part of the development review process, encourage increasing the number of accessible units beyond state building code requirements to provide more housing opportunities for individuals living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities. Incorporate incentives for accessible units beyond state requirements in the Affordable Housing Overlay and the City’s updated BMR Inclusionary Housing Regulations.Responsibility: Planning DivisionFinancing: General FundObjectives: Expand housing opportunities for people with disabilities Page H-1.341
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-18

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Timeframe: Ongoing on a project-by-project basis. Incorporate incentives in the AHO (2023) and updated BMR regulations (2025)
Program H3.I Accessible ADUs.

Adopt incentives to encourage the development of accessible ADUs, such as allowing larger ADUs for accessible units and waiving fees in exchange for providing a deed-restricted ADU affordable to low-income households. Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Expand housing opportunities for people with disabilities Timeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption concurrent with Program H3.A Program H3.J Marketing for Accessible Units.

As a condition of the disposition of any City-owned land, land dedicated to affordable housing under the City's inclusionary housing ordinance, the award of City financing, any density bonus concessions, or land use exceptions or waivers for any affordable housing project, the City shall require that a housing developer implement an affirmative marketing plan for physically accessible units which, among other measures, provides disability-serving organizations adequate prior notice of the availability of the accessible units and a process for supporting people with qualifying disabilities to apply.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission Financing: General FundObjectives: Expand housing opportunities for people living with disabilities Timeframe: Ongoing on a project-by-project basis
Program H3.K Employment Services.

Work with area employers and advocacy organizations to develop a program to increase the employment rate of people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities. Responsibility: Economic Development Division Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Host a working meeting or workshop with employers and advocacy groups to develop a strategy for creating jobs for persons with disabilities and boosting the number of workers with disabilities among area employers Timeframe: Meeting will be held by the end of 2026. Program implementation will be ongoing thereafter.

Program H3.L Large Units.

Develop floor area ratio (FAR) bonuses to encourage the development of affordable developments with three or more bedrooms that are suitable for larger families. The City will be preparing a handout for developers to identify the City’s Page H-1.342
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-19

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
various housing requirements and incentives, and will incorporate information on large unit bonuses.Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City CouncilFinancing: General Fund Objectives: Encourage the development of housing for large familiesTimeframe: Adopt large unit bonus within twohree years of Housing Element adoption, and post on City website in conjunction with developer guide
Program H3.M Wheelchair Visitability.

Consider a wheelchair visitability ordinance, supporting healthy social interaction and independence for persons living with a disability and seniors. Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City CouncilFinancing: General Fund Objectives: Allow for people with wheelchairs to have greater visitation access to homes in Menlo ParkTimeframe: Within six years of Housing Element adoption Goal H4 AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

Support the development of a diversity of housing types for people at all income levels, particularly for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households.

Policy H4.1 Housing Opportunity Sites.

Identify housing opportunity areas and sites where a special effort will be made to provide affordable housing consistent with other General Plan policies. Given the diminishing availability of developable land, Housing Opportunity Sites should have the following characteristics:
a. The site has the potential to deliver for-sale or rental units affordable to lower-income households meeting the City’s RHNA need.
b. The site has the potential to meet special housing needs for local workers, single parents, seniors, persons with disabilities, and small or large families.
c. Consider opportunities for developing housing units on City-owned properties. d. The site scores well for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) subsidy or has unique opportunities due to financing and/or financial feasibility.
e. Site development should consider school capacity and the relationship to the types of residential units proposed (i.e., housing seniors, small units, smaller workforce housing, etc. in school capacity impact areas), child care provider capacity, transit, parks, and commercial shopping areas.

Page H-1.343
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-20

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
f. Consider incorporating existing viable commercial uses into the development of housing sites. g. Sites should affirmatively further fair housing goals.

Policy H4.2 Housing to Address Local Housing Needs.

Strive to provide opportunities for new housing development to meet the City's share of its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The City intends to provide an adequate supply and variety of housing opportunities to meet the needs of Menlo Park's workforce and special needs populations; strive to match housing types, affordability, and location with household income; and address the housing needs of extremely low-income persons, lower-income families with children and lower-income seniors.

Policy H4.3 Variety of Housing Choices.

Strive to achieve a mix of housing types, densities, affordability levels and designs distributed throughout the city. Specific items include:
a. The City will work with developers of non-traditional and innovative housing approaches on the financing, design, and construction of different types of housing that meet local housing needs. b. Housing opportunities for families with children should strive to provide necessary facilities nearby or on-site. c. The City will encourage a mix of housing types, including owner and rental housing, single and multiple-family housing, housing close to jobs and transit, mixed-use housing, workforce housing, special needs housing, large units with three or more bedrooms, single-room occupancy (SRO) housing, shared living and cohousing, mobilehomes, manufactured housing, self-help or "sweat-equity" housing, cooperatives and assisted living. d. The City will support the development of affordable, alternative living arrangements such as cohousing and "shared housing" (e.g., the Human Investment Project's — HIP Housing — shared housing program). e. The City will encourage the development of affordable housing intended for people living with disabilities.

Policy H4.4 Mixed-Use Housing.

Encourage well-designed residential mixed-use developments where residential use is appropriate to the setting. Encourage mixed-use development in proximity to transit and services, such as shopping centers, the C-4 district along Willow Road near the Willows neighborhood, properties zoned C-1, C-1-A, C-1-C, C-2 and C-2-A, C-2-B, C-2-S, and P, as well as near the downtown to support downtown businesses (consistent with the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan).

Policy H4.5 Redevelopment of Commercial Shopping Areas and Sites.

Encourage housing development in conjunction with the redevelopment of commercial shopping areas and sites.

Policy H4.6 Retention and Expansion of Multifamily Sites at Medium and Higher Density.

Strive to protect and expand the supply and availability of multifamily and mixed-use infill housing sites for housing, maximizing multifamily uses on properties.

Policy H4.7 Infill Housing Adjacent to Downtown.

Create opportunities for new affordable and accessible housing units in areas adjacent to the El Camino Real/Downtown Page H-1.344
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-21

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Specific Plan area to meet the City's share of its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), support downtown retail activities, and locate new housing near jobs and transit. New housing opportunities will contribute to the vibrancy of downtown without changing the character of the area. Larger properties will be allowed to redevelop at higher densities with design review to assure a fit of new housing with the character of the area and adjacent uses.

Policy H4.8 Incentives for Affordable Housing Development.

Explore incentives for qualified housing developments, such as expanding the ministerial review process, fee waivers or fee reductions, and reduced parking requirements, to help achieve housing goals while ensuring that potential impacts are considered and mitigated.

Policy H4.9 Long-Term Housing Affordability Controls.

Apply resale controls and rent and income restrictions to ensure that affordable housing provided through incentives and as a condition of development approval remains affordable over time to the income group for which it is intended. Inclusionary units shall be deed-restricted to maintain affordability on resale to the maximum extent possible (at least 55 years).

Policy H4.10 Preferences for Affordable and Moderate-Income Housing.

Implement BMR and moderate-income housing preferences for people living or working in Menlo Park to the extent consistent with Fair Housing laws.

Policy H4.11 Inclusionary Housing Approach.

Require residential developments involving five (5) or more units to provide very low-, low- and moderate-income housing units. In-lieu fees are allowed but not encouraged. The units provided through this policy are intended for permanent occupancy and must be deed-restricted, including, but not limited to, single-family housing, multifamily housing, condominiums, townhouses or land subdivisions. In addition, the City will require larger non-residential developments, as job generators, to participate in addressing housing needs in the community through the City's in-lieu fee requirements.

Policy H4.12 Emphasis on Affordable Housing.

To the extent possible, focus housing development on 100 percent affordable housing developments, particularly in areas near existing amenities and in high-opportunity areas of the city. Ministerial review could support this on 100 percent affordable projects within the AHO and in areas under SB10 or citywide.

Policy H4.13 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Encourage the development of well-designed new ADUs (e.g., carriage houses, attached independent living units, small detached living units), the legalization of existing ADUs, or conversion of accessory buildings or structures to safe and habitable ADUs as a critical way to provide affordable housing in combination with primary residential uses on low-density lots.

Policy H4.14 Fair Share Distribution of Housing throughout Menlo Park.

Promote the distribution of new medium- and higher-density residential developments that affirmatively further fair housing throughout the city, considering relationship to surrounding residential uses, particularly near public transit and major transportation corridors in the city. This includes potential new housing in commercial areas along Willow Road, Middlefield Avenue, and Sand Hill Road.

Policy H4.15 Commercial Linkage Fee.

Page H-1.345
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-22

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Require a commercial linkage fee to fund affordable housing.

Policy H4.16 Neighborhood Responsibilities within Menlo Park.

Seek ways specific to each neighborhood to provide additional housing as part of each neighborhood's fair share responsibility and commitment to help achieve community-wide housing goals. This may range from in-lieu fees, accessory dwelling units, higher density housing sites, infill housing, mixed-use, or other new housing construction.

Policy H4.17 Developer Coordination with Schools.

Developers will meet and confer with the affected school districts as part of the development review process to discuss potential effects of their development on school related issues and to consider appropriate analysis, as needed, to address any potential effects.

Program H4.A Amend the Below Market Rate Inclusionary Housing Regulations.

Amend the Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program for Residential Developments. Modifications to be evaluated could include the following:
a. Increase the BMR requirement, and consider implementing a sliding scale requiring increased percentages of BMR units for larger projects.
b. Add a menu of options for achieving affordability, particularly for extremely low-income households. c. Adjust the percentage of units required to be affordable depending on the degree of affordability achieved (moderate-, low-, very low-, and extremely low-income) or provision of housing for residents with disproportionate housing needs (e.g., 3-4 bedroom units for larger families, units for people living with disabilities). d. Provide a density bonus for developments that include housing for people living with disabilities. e. Provide a density bonus for developments with on-site services that include units intended for employees. f. Initiate a study to explore amending affordable housing in-lieu fees for developments of five or more units. g. Assess/develop measures to minimize the number of cost-burdened households (households paying more than 30 percent of income toward housing) in affordable housing developments. h. Assess/develop appropriate performance metrics for the BMR program. i. As part of the BMR amendment process, the City will engage both affordable and market-rate housing developers.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Coordinate with 21 Elements in preparation of a regional nexus study Prepare a nexus study to determine the cost of the in-lieu fee and provide input into amendments to the City’s BMR Program. Implement requirements to assist in providing housing affordable to extremely low-, very low-, lowPage H-1.346 Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-23

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
and moderate-income households in Menlo Park.

Timeframe: Initiate nexus study in 2023. Amend the BMR Inclusionary Housing Regulations and update the inlieu fee Wwithin two years of Housing Element adoption; incorporate into a handout for developers on the City’s housing requirements and incentives for posting on the City’s website.

Program H4.B Modify BMR Guidelines regarding allocations.

Review and amend the Below Market Rate (BMR) Guidelines in order to encourage construction of new BMR units, particularly to be built, and identify ways to construct affordable housing for lower-income households, including family(multi-bedroom) units housing. As part of the BMR program evaluation, the City will establish clear policy and criteria for the allocation of funds from the City's BMR housing fund to prioritize:
a. Development of 100 percent affordable housing developments (with greater preference for deeper affordability). b. Workforce rRental housing affordable to moderate-, low- and very low-income households living or working in Menlo Park.
c. Housing for individuals with disabilities, including developmental disabilities.

The BMR program should support development on sites the City has determined viable for Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) funding by setting aside a substantial portion of the uncommitted BMR fund balance and future BMR fees received for such development. The City will also modify provisions regarding rental housing to be consistent with the Costa-Hawkins Act. In conjunction with Program H3.H: Inclusionary Accessible Units, consider a prioritization for persons with disabilities who require accessibility modifications to housing units.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to require additional affordable units in market-rate developments Timeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption Program H4.C Increase Commercial Linkage Fee.

Evaluate and modify commercial linkage fee based on a nexus study and higher fees adopted by surrounding jurisdictions.

Responsibility: Planning Division, Housing Division; City Council; City Attorney Financing: General FundObjectives: Increase local funding for affordable housing developmentto support production of affordable housing
Timeframe: Complete nexus study in conjunction with inclusionary nexus study (Program H4.A), and adopt linkage fee Wwithin twoone years of Housing Element adoption Program H4.D Modify the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO).

Page H-1.347
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-24

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Update the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) to provide density bonuses and other incentives (particularly for very low- and low-income units) for the development of multifamily housing affordable to extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderateincome households and units that are preferential for people with special needs who will benefit from coordinated on-site services including people with disabilities and developmental disabilities. The AHO will be structured so that state density bonus incentives can be utilized in conjunction with the AHO, providing for densities of up to 100 units/acre.is offered as an alternative to the density bonus described in AB 1763. Consider outlining housing development targets for special needs populations. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Incentivize affordable housing development in the city Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption in 2023. Incorporate AHO provisions into a handout for developers on the City’s housing requirements and incentives for posting on the City’s website.

Program H4.E Ministerial Review of 100 Percent Affordable Housing.

In conjunction with the development and adoption of objective design standards, allow 100 percent affordable housing developments to be eligible for ministerial review.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow ministerial review of 100 percent affordable housing. Adopt objective design standards for residential development.

Timeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption and concurrently with the adoption of objective design standards
Program H4.E Streamlined Project Review.

Undertake the following actions to streamline project review and accelerate housing production:  Solicit input from the development community in the creation and adoption of objective design and development standards that would apply to 100 percent affordable housing projects  Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow ministerial review of 100 percent affordable housing projects  Eliminate the current CUP requirement for multi-family projects in the R-3, R-3A and R-4 zoning districts  Develop written procedures for SB 35 applications so the City is prepared should it be subject to SB 35 streamlining in the future
Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Utilize objective design and development standards to add greater certainty to and streamline the Page H-1.348
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-25

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
development review process
Timeframe: Objective design/development standards and ministerial review for 100% affordable projects (2025); Eliminate CUP for multi-family (2025); SB 35 streamlining (2026, or earlier as needed) Program H4.F Modify Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Development Standards and Permit Process.

Continue to encourage accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and modify the City's regulations to address non-compliance issues identified by HCD including increased flexibility in how parking is provided on-site, and streamlined approval, and increase the City's role in providing guidance for the approval of ADUs. Initiate a marketing program for homeowners on the benefits of ADUs and the availability of funds to support development through the City’s Newsletter and posting of the ADU application checklist on the City website (2024). Request information on projected ADU rents as part of the development application as a means of assessing affordability. The City will coordinate with efforts being undertaken by 21 Elements work with a third party to develop a set of pre-approved tool with a list of potential ADU designs to facilitate a more streamlined review and permitting of ADUs. One or more ADU designs shall be accessibility-focused, particularly for persons living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities. Responsibility: Planning Division; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Zoning Ordinance amendment and accompanying public-facing documentation (i.e., on the City website). Seek to produce at least 85 ADUs between 2023-2031, including 51 affordable to lower income households
Timeframe: Homeowners outreach, Mmodifications to the Zoning Ordinance, and development of potential ADU designs tool shall be completed by the end of 2024
Program H4.G Consider City-Owned Land for Housing (Downtown Parking Lots).

Promote housing development on underutilized City-owned parking lots in downtown and adhere to procedures consistent with the Surplus Lands Act to provide affordable housing developers a first right of refusal (AB 1486). Solicit proposals and conduct a feasibility study to assess which parking lots are most suitable for residential development (2024); issue RFP for affordable housing development on some or all of the parking lots sites, including information on City land write-down incentives (2025); complete development entitlements (2026); seek to complete development of 345 affordable housing units on a combination of parking lot sites (2028). In publishing requests for competitive proposals for any City-owned land, land dedicated to affordable housing under the City's inclusionary ordinance or City housing funds, Tthe City of Menlo Park shall grant additional points to proposals that address the city's most difficult to achieve housing priorities including providing a greater number of extremely low-, very low-, low-, and moderate-income units, or committing to make a percentage of the units subject preferential for people with special needs who will benefit from coordinated on-site services, such as for peopleliving with disabilities, including developmental disabilities. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Page H-1.349
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-26

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Objectives: Achieve the development of 345 affordable units on a combination of City-owned parking lot sites in the downtown.Develop and issue a request for proposal to explore development options, including affordable housing wit Timeframe: Community outreach and dDevelopment strategy shall be completed by the end of 2024, at which time an RFP can be issued.

Program H4.H Review the Subdivision Ordinance.

Review the Subdivision Ordinance to ensure consistency with Housing Element policies and implementing actions. Update the Subdivision Ordinance to fully comply with the current Subdivision Map Act and streamline the review and approval process. Responsibility: Planning Division; Public Works; Building Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Review and adopt amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance as needed Timeframe: Within three years of Housing Element adoption Program H4.I Create New Opportunities for Mixed-Use Development.

Adopt a Zoning Ordinance amendment for non-residential zones, including, but not limited to, C-4, C-2, C-2-A, C-2-B, C-2-S, C-1-C, C-1-A and P, to allow residential uses with 30 units/acre and/or mixed-use developments. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Adopt a Zoning Ordinance amendment Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption Program H4.J Increase Residential Density.

Modify the Zoning Ordinance to allow a base density of 30 units/acre in R-3 zoned lots in the area around the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan area.

Responsibility: Planning Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Increase residential density in certain areas of the city Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption
Program H4.K Maximize Development Proposals.

Modify minimum densities and development standards to facilitate development proposals that maximize the use of R-3 properties near Downtown. Explore potential rezoning of other R-3 properties.

Page H-1.350
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-27

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General FundObjectives: Develop additional multifamily housing on suitable parcels Timeframe: Rezoning of R-3 properties near Downtown will be completed concurrently with the Housing Element adoption. Study for rezoning all other R-3 properties will occur within two years of Housing Element adoption.

Program H4.L Modify El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan.

AdoptConsider modifications to the El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan to include, but are not limited to, the following changes:
a. Eliminate housing cap in El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan to align with SB 330. b. Increase the maximum base level density to at least 30 units/acre across all subareas. c. Increase the maximum bonus level density in certain subareas to encourage more housing. d. Establish a minimum density of 20 units/acre to all subareas, upon the addition of residential uses on a site. e. Review development standards such as height and parking ratios to reduce potential constraints on development and evaluate the design guidelines to establish objective design standards. Investigate opportunities for shared or district parking and parking in-lieu fees as part of district parking.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General FundObjectives: Increase housing opportunities in El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan Area Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption
Program H4.M Update Parking Requirements and Design Standards.

Review and modify parking requirements and design standards to provide greater flexibility in site planning for multifamily residential housing, including establishing a parking or alternative transportation in-lieu fee. Parking amendments could involve reducing parking minimums, expanding parking maximums, eliminating parking requirements for affordable housing projects, expanding shared parking, exploring district parking, and exploring other parking recommendations provided by ABAG-MTC.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Public Works; City Commissions; City Council; City Attorney Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Modify Municipal Code to include amended parking requirements and establish a parking or alternative transportation in-lieu fee
Page H-1.351
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-28

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption; an in-lieu fee shall be establishedwill be evaluated within two years of Housing Element adoption. Additional amendments will be completed as needed thereafter with ongoing staff review of parking standards Program H4.N Achieve Long-Term Viability of Affordable Housing.

Work with non-profits and other project sponsors to implement the City's Preferences for Affordable Housing policy (Policy H4.10), and to ensure a fair tenant selection process, appropriate project management, a high level of project maintenance and upkeep, and coordination with the City departments (such as Planning, Public Works, Police, etc.) and other agencies on an ongoing basis as needed. Responsibility: Housing Division; BMR Administrator (HouseKeys); Planning Division; City Attorney Financing: General Fund Objectives: Establish project management and other ongoing project coordination needs Timeframe: As developments are proposed and ongoing thereafter Program H4.O Identifying SB 10 Sites.

In conjunction with the Community Outreach and Development Strategy to be completed in 2025, conduct outreach to property owners about opportunities for development under an SB 10 overlay. Based on this input, Ddevelop and adopt an overlay zone where SB 10 could be implemented throughout the city, particularly in transit-rich areas. Parcels identified in the overlay zone could be developed with up to 10 housing units.

Responsibility: Planning Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Amend the Zoning Ordinance and Map to implement an SB-10 overlay Timeframe: Adopt the overlay by December 2026 Within five years of Housing Element adoption Program H4.P Community Opportunity to Purchase.

Adopt an ordinance that provides qualified non-profit organizations the right of first offer, and/or the right of first refusal to purchase buildings with five or more residential units or vacant land that could be developed into five or more residential units, within the city.

Responsibility: Planning Division; City Council; City Attorney Financing: General Fund Objectives: Adopt a community opportunity to purchase ordinance. Increase opportunities for affordable housing development
Time Frame: Adopt ordinance by the end of 2024
Program H4.Q Reuse Sites.

Page H-1.352
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-29

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Modify the Zoning Ordinance so that parcels in the Site Inventory identified as Reuse Sites allow for by-right processing (ministerial review) for housing developments that propose at least 20 percent of the units be affordable to lower-income households, in accordance with Government Code § 65583.2(c).

Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Allow for ministerial review for housing development on reuse sites that propose at least 20 percent of the units as affordable for lower-income households
Timeframe: Within three years of Housing Element adoption Program H4.R Work with the Fire District.

Work with the Fire District on local amendments to the State Fire Code to pursue alternatives to standard requirements that could otherwise be a potential constraint to housing development and achieving the City's housing goals.Responsibility: Fire District; Planning Division; Public Works; Building Division; City Attorney; City Commissions; City Council
Financing: General Fund Objectives: Undertake local amendments to the State Fire Code and approve City Council Resolution ratifying the Fire District's local amendments
Timeframe: Complete local amendments to the State Fire Code by the end of 2025.

Ratify amendments by the end of 2026.

Program H4.S Coordinate with School Districts to Link Housing with School District Planning Activities.

Work with the five school districts in Menlo Park to coordinate demographic projections and school district needs as the Housing Element is implemented and housing is developed. Consistent with Policy H4.1, site development should consider school capacity and the relationship to the types of residential units proposed (i.e., housing seniors, small units, smaller workforce housing, etc. in school capacity impact areas) and the relationship to the types of residential units proposed. (i.e., housing seniors, small units, smaller workforce housing, etc.). The City and applicants for market-rate residential rezoning/upzoning should also coordinate with the school districts during the development review process to discuss potential impacts and benefits to the school community. Responsibility: Planning Division; School Districts; City Manager; City Commissions; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Coordinate with local school districts in planning for future housing in consideration of each school district's long-range planning, resources and capacity
Timeframe: Ongoing through project implementation
Page H-1.353
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-30
REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM Goal H5 EQUITY.

Ensure equitable access to housing.

Policy H5.1 Equal Housing Opportunity.

Actively support housing opportunities for all persons to the fullest extent possible. The City will ensure that individuals and families seeking housing in Menlo Park are not discriminated against based on race, color, religion, marital status, disability, age, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), family status (due to the presence of children), national origin, or other arbitrary factors, consistent with the fair housing laws.

Policy H5.2 Community Participation in Housing and Land Use Plans.

Strengthen a sense of community by providing opportunities for community participation, developing partnerships with various groups, and providing community leadership to address housing needs effectively. The City will undertake effective and informed public participation from all economic segments and special needs groups in the community to formulate and review housing and land use policy issues.

Policy H5.3 Neighborhood Meetings.

Require developers of major housing projects to conduct neighborhood meetings with residents early in the process to problem solve and facilitate more informed, efficient and constructive development review.

Policy H5.4 Renter Protections.

Ensure compliance with fair housing laws and pursue programmatic services and funding to assist renters and minimize the risk of evictions and displacement.

Policy H5.5 Equitable Investments.

Partner with non-profit support services that specialize in outreach, education, and advocacy.

Policy H5.6 Rental Assistance Programs.

Continue to publicize and create opportunities for using available rental assistance programs, such as the project-based and voucher Section 8 certificates programs, in coordination with the San Mateo County Department of Housing and other entities.

Policy H5.7 Opportunities for Homeownership.

Increase opportunities for homeownership in underserved, low-income and racially segregated communities.

Program H5.A Fair Chance Ordinance.

Adopt a Fair Chance Access to Housing Ordinance, which would prohibit housing providers from inquiring about or using criminal history and criminal background as a factor in the tenant selection process. Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; Housing Commission; Planning Commission; City Council Page H-1.354
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-31

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Expand renter protections
Timeframe: Within five years of Housing Element adoption Program H5.B Undertake Community Outreach When Implementing Housing Element Programs.

Coordinate with local businesses, housing advocacy groups, neighborhood groups and others in building public understanding and support for workforce, special needs housing and other issues related to housing, including the community benefits of affordable housing, mixed-use, and pedestrian-oriented development. The City will notify a broad representation of the community, including people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities, to solicit ideas for housing strategies when they are discussed at City Commissions or City Council meetings. Specific actions should be linked to the preparation and distribution of materials as identified in Program H5.C. Specific outreach activities may include:
a. Maintain the Housing Element Update mailing list and send public hearing notices to all interested public, non-profit agencies and affected property owners.
b. Post notices at City Hall, the library, and other public locations. c. Publish notices in the local newspaper. d. Post information on the City's website. e. Conduct outreach (workshops, neighborhood meetings) to the community as Housing Element programs are implemented.
f. Assure that Housing Commission meetings are publicized and provide opportunities for participation from housing experts, affordable housing advocates, special needs populations, and the larger community. g. Provide public information materials concerning recycling practices for the construction industry, as well as the use of recycled materials and other environmentally responsible materials in new construction, consistent with Chapter 12.48, Salvaging and Recycling of Construction and Demolition Debris, of the Municipal Code and California Building Code requirements.
h. Provide public information materials about available energy conservation programs, such as the PG&E Comfort Home/Energy Star new home program, to interested property owners, developers, and contractors. i. Promote and help income-eligible households to access federal, state and utility income qualifying assistance programs.
j. Provide public information materials to developers, contractors, and property owners on existing federal, state and utility incentives for the installation of renewable energy systems, such as rooftop solar panels, available to property owners and builders.

Responsibility: Planning Division
Page H-1.355
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-32

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Financing: General Fund
Objectives: Conduct community outreach and distribute materials Timeframe: At least on an annual basis Ongoing on a project-by-project basis Program H5.C Provide Multilingual Information on Housing Programs.

Promote the availability of San Mateo County programs for housing construction, homebuyer assistance, rental assistance, special needs housing and programs including for people living with disabilities, including developmental disabilities; shelters and services for people experiencing homelessness; and housing rehabilitation through the following means: (a) providing information on the City's website that is readily translatable into multiple languages that describes programs available in the City of Menlo Park and provides direct links to County agencies that administer the programs; (b) including contact information on County programs in City mailings and other general communications that are sent to residents, landlords, property owners, realtors, local banks; (c) maintaining multilingual information on programs at the City's public counters; (d) training selected City staff to provide referrals to appropriate agencies; (e) distributing multilingual information on programs at public locations (libraries, schools, etc.); (f) using the activity calendar and public information channel; and (g) continue using multilingual translation/interpretation services and providing additional financial compensation to multilingual staff working on housing programs. Information may include:
a. Fair Housing Laws, renter protections, and past discriminatory practices (including source of income discrimination) b. Rehabilitation loan programs c. San Mateo County Housing Authority information d. Housing programs, including rental assistance programs such as Section 8 e. Code enforcement f. Homebuyer assistance g. Foreclosure assistance h. Information about affordable housing i. Information about shelters, navigation centers, and other supportive programs for people experiencing homelessness
Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division Financing: General Fund Objectives: Improve access to information on housing programs to persons with limited English proficiency Review and obtain materials by end of 2023; distribute and post materials, conduct staff training by the end of 2026; annually update as needed thereafter Page H-1.356
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-33

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Timeframe: Continue to provide readily translatable information on the City’s webpage. Work to provide written information and handouts on the City’s key housing programs in multiple languages by December 2024.Distribute educational materials at public locations and make public service announcements through different media at least two times a year Program H5.D Address Rent Conflicts.

Provide for increased use and support of tenant/landlord educational and mediation opportunities by continuing to fund and refer residents to Project Sentinel, as well asand other non-profits that handle fair housing complaints. Support Project Sentinel in expanding fair housing outreach to residents and landlords (refer to specific actions in the AFFH)Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Attorney Financing: General Fund Objectives: Increase awareness among residents, including low income and special needs populations, of available Update the City's website with resources for addressing rent conflicts and fair housing complaints Timeframe: AFFH Actions: Provide multilingual fair housing information at City facilities (2023); Conduct informational workshops at the Family Recreation Center and before City Council (2024, 2026); Provide fair housing information to rental property owners (2025, 2028)Update the City's website and other housing materials at least annually with information Program H5.E Publicize Fair Housing Laws and Respond to Discrimination Complaints.

Promote fair housing opportunities for all people and support efforts of City, County, State and Federal agencies to eliminate discrimination in housing by continuing to publicize information on fair housing laws and State and federal anti-discrimination laws. Below are specific aspects of this program:
a. Discrimination complaints will be referred to the appropriate agency. Specifically, the City will continue to work with Project Sentinel, Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto, Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County and the San Mateo County Department of Housing in handling fair housing complaints. Calls to the City are referred to these resources for counseling and investigation. These resources also provide direct fair housing education to Menlo Park residents. b. Enforce a non-discrimination policy in the implementation of City City-approved housing programs. c. Information regarding the housing discrimination complaint referral process will be posted on the City's website and available for the public and City staff.
d. As needed, the City will reach out to lenders to increase the flow of mortgage funds to city residents.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Housing Division; City Manager; City Attorney Financing: General Fund Page H-1.357
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-34

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Objectives: Affirmatively further fair housing by increasing awareness among residents, including low income and special needs populations, of available resources for addressing fair housing issues Post fair housing laws on the City's website. Refer discrimination complaints to appropriate agencies.

Timeframe: AFFH Actions: Provide multilingual fair housing information at the Family Recreation Center (2023); Conduct informational workshops at the Center and before City Council (2024, 2026); Provide fair housing information to rental property owners (2025, 2028)Update the City's website annually Program H5.F First-Time Homebuyer Program.

Continue the City’s partnership with the Housing Endowment and Regional Trust of San Mateo County (HEART) to implementing the first-time homebuyer program by working with agencies and organizations offering first-time, moderateincome homebuyers down- payment assistance loans for homes purchased in the city. Add information on the HEART homeownership program to the City’s website, and coordinate with HEART on additional opportunities to promote the program.Responsibility: Planning Division Financing: HEART; MeriwestUnion Bank (or other bank affiliated with the program) Objectives: Provide opportunities for moderate income first-time homebuyers to reside in the communityreferrals
Timeframe: Conduct program outreach by December 2024Ongoing Program H5.G Improve Access to City Law.

Improve ease of access for the public to find fees, zoning, and development standards on the City website. This will include an easily-locatable landing page that provides basic information and reference links and is translatable through web-based translation services (i.e. Google Translate). Responsibility: Planning Division Financing: General Fund Objectives: Have a one-stop landing page for development information that can be easily understood by developers and members of the public.

Timeframe: Develop website by December 2024
Goal H6 SUSTAINABLE HOUSING.

Implement sustainable and resilient housing development practices.

Policy H6.1 Siting Development.

Ensure new developments in the highest hazards areas include mitigation measures. Expand beneficial uses, such as open space, flood mitigation and recreation, in non-developable high hazard lands.

Policy H6.2 Resilient Design.

Page H-1.358
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-35

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Encourage housing designs that are resilient to hazards and climate impacts through land use planning tools, development standards, and building standards.

Policy H6.3 Renewable Energy/Energy Conservation in Housing.

Encourage energy efficiency and/or renewable energy in both new and existing housing and require all-electric fuel sources, energy conservation measures and renewable energy in the design of all new buildings. Promote energy conservation and/or renewable energy and weatherization features in existing homes. In addition, the City will support the actions contained in the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP).

Policy H6.4 Promote Energy Efficient/Renewable Programs.

Implement local policies and programs that promote and/or increase energy efficiency/renewable energy in the community, including participation in Peninsula Clean Energy. Promote county, state (Energy Upgrade California), federal and PG&E energy programs for energy assessments and improvements. Seek grants and other funding to supplement City energy conservation/renewable activities.

Policy H6.5 Emergency Housing Assistance.

Participate and allocate funds, as appropriate, for county and non-profit programs providing disaster preparedness, emergency shelter, and related counseling/supportive services.

Policy H6.6 Reduce Personal Automobile Usage.

Encourage residents to reduce reliance on personal automobiles for transportation and encourage use of public transit and other alternative forms of mobility.

Program H6.A Reach Codes.

Continue implementing reach codes that go beyond State minimum requirements for energy use in building design and construction, creating more opportunities to support greenhouse gas reduction targets.

Responsibility: Building Division
Financing: General FundObjectives: Achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets Timeframe: Ongoing on a project-by-project basis
Program H6.B Electric Vehicle Charging.

Evaluate opportunities for retrofitting existing multifamily housing developments with electric vehicle charging stations. Responsibility: Building Division Financing: General FundObjectives: Achieve greenhouse gas reduction targets Timeframe: Concurrent with the next building code update in 2025 Program H6.C Air Conditioning or Cooling Alternatives.

Page H-1.359
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-36

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Require alternatives to conventional air conditioning for new construction, including high-efficiency heat pumps, ceiling fans,air exchangers, increased insulation and low-solar-gain exterior materials to reduce peak electrical demands during high heat events to ensure the reliability of the electrical grid. Encourage Evaluate cooling products that recirculate inside air and do not bring in outside air, such as efficient HVAC systems and heat pumps. Responsibility: Building Division; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Ensure healthy building environmentsTimeframe: Within two years of Housing Element adoption Program H6.D Promote Energy Efficient/Renewable Programs.

Continue to encourage participation in Peninsula Clean Energy and publicize energy efficient and renewable energy programs on the City’s website. Responsibility: Sustainability Division Financing: General Fund Objectives: Encourage participation in the energy efficient and renewable energy programs Timeframe: Update the City’s website annually
Program H6.E Explore Multimodal Improvements.

Identify multimodal improvements in the city that support housing development. This includes pedestrian and bicycle improvements, transportation demand management programs, and coordination with neighboring cities and transit providers to explore investments that provide multimodal connections to regional destinations.

Responsibility: City Manager; Public Works, City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund; outside funding sources Objectives: Coordinate with Redwood City on potential pedestrian and bicycle improvementsTimeframe: Within three years of Housing Element adoption Program H6.F Transit Incentives.

Integrate transit demand management strategies for all residential development, particularly in areas further away from transit to increase access to transit and reduce vehicle trips and parking demand. Responsibility: Planning Division Financing: General Fund Objectives: Reduce vehicle trips and parking demand and increase use of alternative forms of mobility.

Timeframe: Ongoing on a project-by-project basis
Page H-1.360
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-37
REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM Program H6.G Neighborhood Connectivity.

Invest in neighborhood connectivity, walkability, and access to services, healthy food, and recreation, particularly in lowresource neighborhoods north of US-101, to improve access and reduce the division of the urban form produced by the highway. Coordinate and prioritize activities with consideration of the City's capital improvement projects list.

Responsibility: Planning Division; Public Works; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: State Cap and Trade; General Fund; State and Federal grants; project impact fees Objectives: Reduce disparities in access to opportunities Timeframe: Identify project priorities annually through coordination with the City's capital improvement projects list; implementation of the projects shall be ongoing throughout the planning period Goal H7 DESIGN OF HOUSING.

Ensure new housing is well-designed and addresses the housing needs of the city.

Policy H7.1 Housing Design.

Review proposed new housing to achieve excellence in development design through an efficient process, and encourage infill development on vacant and underutilized sites that meet the community's needs. The City will encourage innovative new construction and universal housing design that enhances mobility and independence of the elderly and those living with disabilities in existing neighborhoods, enhancing neighborhood identity and sense of community.

Program H7.A Create Residential Design Standards.

Solicit input from the development community in the creation and adoption of objective design and development standards to be applied to all residential and residential mixed-use projects that are eligible for ministerial review (refer to Program H4.E) Adopt objective design standards for each residential zoning district.Responsibility: City Commissions; Planning Division; City Attorney; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Adopt objective design standards for multifamily developments, mixed-use housing developments, and ADUs to add greater certainty to and streamline the development review process Timeframe: Objective design/development standards outreach (2024) and adoption (2025)Commence within two years of Housing Element adoption
Program H7.B Develop and Adopt Standards for SB 9 Projects.

Develop and adopt objective design standards for SB 9 (2021) projects, including urban lot splits and duplexes. Responsibility: Planning Division; Planning Commission; City Council Financing: General Fund Objectives: Ensure new development is of high architectural quality and consistent with State law Page H-1.361
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary Secondary HCD Review Draft Goals, Policies and Programs | Page 8-38

REFERENCE GOAL/POLICY/PROGRAM
Timeframe: Concurrent with Housing Element adoption
Page H-1.362
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-1
Definitions of Key Housing Terms
In the context of Housing Elements, “affordable housing” generally focuses on housing for extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households. Generally, housing that costs no more than 30 percent of household income is considered affordable to these income groups. The definitions below are used throughout this Housing Element.

DEFINITIONS
 Above Moderate-Income Households: Defined by California Housing Element law as households earning over 120 percent of the area median household income.
 Accessible Housing: Defined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) as units accessible and adaptable to the needs of the physically disabled.
 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU): Defined in the City’s Municipal Code (16.79.020), accessory dwelling units (ADUs) are attached or detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. The unit shall contain permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, sanitation, and exterior access separate from the primary dwelling.
 Accessory Dwelling Unit, Junior (JADUs): Defined in the City’s Municipal Code (16.79.020), junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) are dwelling units that are no more than 500 square feet and contained entirely within an existing or proposed single-family dwelling. A JADU must include a cooking facility with appliances and a food preparation counter and storage cabinets. A JADU may include separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitation facilities with the primary dwelling. A JADU must have exterior access separate from the primary dwelling.
 Affordable Housing: Affordable housing, for the purposes of the Housing Element, refers to housing that is affordable to extremely low-, very low-, lowand moderate-income households.

Page H-1.363
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-2
 Emergency Shelter: Defined by Health and Safety Code § 50800-50806.5 as housing with minimal supportive services that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a person experiencing homelessness. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.  Extremely Low-Income Households: Defined by Government Code § 65583(a) to require local Housing Elements to provide “documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality’s existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households.” Extremely low-income is a subset of the very low-income regional housing need and is defined as households earning less than 30 percent of the area median household income.  Housing Affordability: The generally accepted measure for determining whether a person can afford housing means spending no more than 30 percent of one’s gross household income on housing costs, including utilities, principal and interest. In the Bay Area, people can pay closer to 50 percent of their income for housing due to the high costs of housing. The two graphics below illustrate housing affordability in Menlo Park.
 Housing Density: The number of dwelling units per acre of land. Gross density includes the land within the boundaries of a particular area and excludes nothing.

Net density excludes certain areas such as streets, open space, easements, water areas, etc.
 Housing First: “Housing First” is an approach that centers on providing people experiencing homelessness with housing quickly and then providing services as needed. What differentiates a “Housing First” approach from other strategies is that there is an immediate and primary focus on helping individuals and families quickly access and sustain permanent housing. This approach has the benefit of being consistent with what most people experiencing homelessness want and seek help to achieve. The “Housing First” model offers an alternative to an emergency shelter or transitional housing, but does not eliminate the City’s need to zone for such uses.
 Jobs/Housing Relationship: The relationship of the number and types of jobs in a community with the availability and affordability of housing. In simplistic terms, an appropriate balance is commonly thought to be between 1.0-1.5 jobs for every 1 housing unit. However, the issue is more complex when a community strives to reduce in commuting and provide a better match of local jobs to employed residents working in those jobs. Other factors include the types of jobs and the salaries paid, the number of employed people in the community, affordability of housing relative to the income of people working in local jobs, and household Page H-1.364
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-3
size and income. Affordable housing strategies strive to create opportunities for local workers, especially those employed in service and retail jobs, to have a choice in finding local housing to fit their household needs in terms of type, affordability, amenities and location.
 Low Barrier Navigation Center: Defined by California Government Code § 65660 as a Housing First, low-barrier, service-enriched shelter focused on moving people into permanent housing that provides temporary living facilities while case managers connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing.  Low-Income Households: Defined by California Health and Safety Code § 50079.5, which establishes the low-income limits set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as the state limit for low-income households. HUD limits for low-income households are generally households earning 50-80 percent of the median household income, adjusted for family size, with some adjustment for areas with unusually high or low incomes relative to housing costs.
 Manufactured Homes: Defined by California Health and Safety Code § 18007 as a structure that is transportable, is built on a permanent chassis and designed to be used as a single-family dwelling with or without a foundation when connected to the required utilities.
 Median Household Income: The middle point at which half of the City's households earn more and half earn less. Income limits are updated annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for San Mateo County.
 Moderate-Income Households: Defined by § 50093 of the California Health and Safety Code as households earning 80-120 percent of the area median household income.
 Overlay Zoning or Zone: Overlay zoning is a regulatory tool that is placed over an existing base zone(s) and identifies special provisions in addition to those in the underlying base zone. The overlay district can share common boundaries with the base zone or cut across base zone boundaries. Regulations or incentives are attached to the overlay district to protect a specific resource or guide development within a special area. Examples include the City’s Affordable Housing Overlay and Emergency Shelter Overlay zoning.
 Persons per Household: Average number of persons in each household.

Page H-1.365
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-4
 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA): The RHNA for the 6th cycle of housing element updates in the Bay Area identifies the number of housing units needed at various income levels for the 2023-2031 planning period/timeframe.  Residential Care Facilities: There are a variety of residential care facilities that address the needs of special segments of the population, including special care for the chronically ill, seniors, special needs adults or youths, etc. The California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division, issues licenses for residential facilities that provide 24-hour non-medical care for children, adults and the elderly.
 Secondary Dwelling Unit: Defined in the Menlo Park Municipal Code as a dwelling unit on a residential lot that provides independent living facilities for one (1) or more persons and includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, cooking and sanitation independent of the main dwelling on the residential lot.

Also commonly referred to an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).  Senior Housing: Defined by California Housing Element law as projects developed for, and put to use as, housing for senior citizens. Senior housing is based on: (1) if the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has determined that the dwelling is specifically designed for and occupied by elderly persons under a federal, state or local government program; (2) it is occupied solely by persons who are 62 or older; or (3) or it houses at least one person who is 55 or older in at least 80 percent of the occupied units and adheres to a policy that demonstrates intent to house persons who are 55 or older. Under federal law, housing that satisfies the legal definition of senior housing or housing for older persons, described above, can legally exclude families with children.
 Single Room Occupancy (SRO): This housing type typically has single rooms with shared bathrooms and kitchen facilities.
 Special Needs Housing: Defined by California Housing Element law (65583(a)(6)) as populations with special needs that must be addressed in a housing element — these include the needs of people experiencing homelessness, seniors, people who are living with disabilities, persons with developmental disabilities, large families, and female-headed households.  Supportive Housing: Defined by California Housing Element law as housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists the supportive housing Page H-1.366
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-5
resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.  Target Population: Defined by California Housing Element law as persons with low incomes who have one or more disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse, or other chronic health condition, or individuals eligible for services provided under the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Division 4.5 (commencing with § 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code) and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated minors, families with children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting from institutional settings, veterans, and homeless people.  Transitional Housing: Defined by California Housing Element law as buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six months from the beginning of the assistance.  Very Low-Income Households: Defined by California Health and Safety Code § 50079.5, which establishes very low-income limits set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as the state limit for very low-income households, which are households earning less than 50 percent of the area median household income, with some adjustment for areas with unusually high or low incomes relative to housing costs.
 Workforce Affordable Housing: Housing that is affordable to the workforce in the community.

Acronyms
AARP American Association of Retired Persons
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
AHO Affordable Housing Overlay zone
BMR Below Market-Rate housing
CHAS Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
CCRH California Coalition for Rural Housing
CAP Climate Action Plan
Page H-1.367
Menlo Park 2023-2031 Housing Element Primary HCD Review Draft Definitions of Key Housing Terms | Page 9-6
DOF California Department of Finance
DOH San Mateo County Department of Housing
ECHO Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity
ECR/DSP El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan
ELI Extremely Low-Income households
GGRC Golden Gate Regional Center
HCD California Department of Housing and Community Development HEART The Housing Endowment and Regional Trust
HIP Human Investment Project
HOPE San Mateo County HOPE (Housing Our People Effectively) Interagency Council
HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
LIHTC Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program
LTIRC Landlord and Tenant Information and Referral Collaborative NPH Non-Profit Housing of Northern California
PCRC Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center
R-L-U Retirement Living Units (Menlo Park zoning for senior housing) RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation
SRO Single-Room Occupancy unit
VA United States Department of Veterans Affairs
Page H-1.368
November 11, 2022
City of Menlo Park
751 Laurel St.

Menlo Park, CA 94025
Subject: Integrating Climate Resilience and Adaptation Policies into Menlo Park’s General Plan
Dear Chair DeCardy and Commissioners,
The impacts of climate change have reached a staggering magnitude, as record-setting urban heat, wildfires, extended drought, and compromised air quality are the new norm. In the coming years, these challenges will be joined by rapid sea level rise and inland flooding, especially in San Mateo County. The impacts of these climate disasters will be widespread, though the disproportionate burden will fall on the most vulnerable, especially lower-income communities of color.

The update to Menlo Park’s Safety Element and the new Environmental Justice Elements provide opportunities to ensure that the city is ready for these impacts. Integrating climate resilience policies will ensure that decision makers effectively utilize city plans and cross-departmental collaboration to ensure communities are prepared for impacts in the decades to come.

As Menlo Park updates its Safety and Environmental Justice General Plan elements, we strongly recommend that the city integrate planning for the impacts of climate change and nature-based solutions across all projects and departments. We recommend the city incorporate the following elements into the General Plan:
● Prioritize the Belle Haven community and other frontline communities (low income, communities of color, historically underinvested, impacted by environmental injustice) for investments and policy changes that are developed by those communities. Ensure robust representation from these communities in decision-making and planning.
● Require climate resilience planning as part of project design and approval.

Integrate nature-based solutions to flooding, extreme heat, and sea level rise such as green stormwater infrastructure (i.e. rain gardens, bioswales, green roofs, and adapted street tree wells) into road, transit, complete streets, and other public infrastructure projects.
● Broaden and accelerate planning, funding, and construction of green streets and other multi-benefit greening projects, especially in underinvested communities.

Integrate nature-based solutions such as rain gardens, swales, green roofs, and tree canopy into road and transit projects, flood zones, and other public infrastructure. 1 Page H-1.369 ATTACHMENT F
● Prioritize planning of communities that are SMART: Sustainable, Mixed-use, Affordable, Resilient, Transit-oriented. Avoid developing along the shoreline and in the hills to protect from flooding, sea level rise, and wildfire.

There is no doubt about the urgency of responding to the climate crisis. Climate hazards are the norm, and Menlo Park residents don’t have to look far to see the impacts in their own communities. The General Plan is an important opportunity for the city to make lasting climate adaptation policies. We urge you to pursue these opportunities immediately to create a safer, more resilient future for Menlo Park.

Sincerely,
David Lewis, Executive Director
Save The Bay
2 Page H-1.370
Page H-1.371
Page H-1.372
Page H-1.373
Page H-1.374
Page H-1.375
Page H-1.376
Page H-1.377
Page H-1.378
From: Jen Michel
To: _CCIN
Cc: PlanningDept; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Representative Anna G. Eshoo Subject: General Public Comment - Non-agenda item - Coming Correct as a Sexual Assault Survivor Date: Saturday, November 12, 2022 10:43:19 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, DO NOT click links, open attachments or reply.

Dear Mayor Nash, Vice Mayor Wolosin, Council members, neighbors and members of the public,
My name is Jenny Michel, a white chick, from the Coleman Place Neighborhood Block, your local recovering homeless teacher (School in Menlo Park) from 20 years ago, who has lived on Willow Road for about 15 years (love it), and educationally, without a degree because I took care of my dying mother up until age 20. Personally, I find it ironic that I'm a licensed real estate agent, who used to help sell luxury real estate at Alain Pinel Realtors, and am currently representing commercial landlord interests by managing commercial product along San Mateo County. To be clear, I doubt our little family will ever have an owning interest in real property or ever have access directly to capital. We have no assets to report save for our IEP son who attends Laurel Elementary.

I'm speaking today on no agenda item. These are my own general public comments for the record.

Congratulations to Council member Mueller. We are excited for you and the opportunities to strengthen our region's resiliency together. Likewise, congratulations to the Menlo Fire District - we are thrilled to have you with us to create a strong bedrock of coordination, communication, and representation. What an exciting time to be a resident! With the midterms behind us, I need to come correct with you regarding my very personal bias, as in response to the specific comments Council Member Combs highlighted during the recent Planning Commissioner appointment:

Vice Mayor Wolosin said it correctly that change is coming to Menlo Park in response to the HCD letter. In parallel, Planning Commissioner Riggs suggested that the residents of Menlo Park are not ready for this growth and respective change, in his response for his support of Measure V. I would argue we are indeed ready, capable, and committed for reasonable growth. For anyone who feels they are not ready, I suggest they underestimate themselves and how they relate to the larger regional needs. We, neighbors and I, need you to get on board with how awesome and impactful you are. You have the ability to welcome more neighbors - it is the right thing to do, and you know it.

Although, I speak up about functional zero homelessness because I am a recovering homeless woman and my workforce is heavily, if not detrimentally, impacted by the housing crisis, that is not what personally drives me:

I am a part of the population that suffers from PTSD, and related health conditions, due to Page H-1.379
chronic, sustained childhood sexual assault over many years. In my case, it was levied by my Uncle in our 2-story 4 Bed/ 2.5 Bath SFR on a cul-de-sac in Barron Park Palo Alto. He lived with us in the 80's to offset the mortgage. Let me say it again: He and my father's sister lived with us throughout the 80's to help offset the mortgage in Palo Alto.

That was about 40 years ago. Over 20 years ago, I became homeless after my mother died from a long term fatal illness, while being a teacher in Menlo Park. I took care of her over obtaining a college degree. Needlesstosay, I do not have a simple degree.

We've had this housing crisis for my entire life, almost half a century. How many of us endured abuse that was not necessary? How many of us have never had a vacation? How are those impacts still being felt today? What are the fiscal impacts? What are the health and productivity impacts? Right? Have you digested the full impacts of a leveraged populace? It's far worse than it was a few decades ago. The scope is truly vast, like fourth dimensional chess.

The dialogue we've had surrounding the housing element has been engaging, informative, honest, but I think is missing an important and delicate voice that does not like to speak up to connect the dots: childhood sexual assault survivors.

I'm averse to large homes on cul-de-sacs also because of the sexual trafficking my friends and I were exposed to. The scope of this issue is real, current, and right here in our backyard, mostly in our most affluent neighborhoods and homes. We are lousy with large SFR homes in affluent neighborhoods. This is the PRECISE community character I call into question when I speak with you.

Recently, I've seen a neighbor from the Suburban Park Neighborhood post on Nextdoor that she indeed would rather have less vehicle traffic, stating that her children playing in the street trump's big developers, assuming those would be the parties proposing dense or non ultra low density buildings. My immediate thought was why are you being so exclusionary? Do you not understand what we need to do to offset our high base-line land costs? Or maybe it's that you don't want other people knowing what you do or how you live? Do we need to recommend more eyeballs in your neighborhood? See how my safety planning brain works? I'm hardly alone in this thinking, whether distorted or not. The point is that we have this variable of childhood sexual abuse, in our community that is not tied together. It must be tied together.

HCD is looking for this specially per their letter as we have a large single mom constituency that is at risk of displacement.

So when the neighbors are talking about safety, I'm not thinking about the risks of single use vehicle traffic or increased fire risk, no. My brain goes to dark, real, and lived places.

Unfortunately, my lived experience asks: what are we doing behind closed doors? Why don't we want neighbors around to keep us in check? What am I and my neighbors really against? Is it that my kid cannot play basketball in the street whenever he wants? Seriously? I suspect the simplicity of this argument. I challenge us to go deeper within ourselves, because we have to. There is no more time with climate collapse imminent. Besides the world can see our story by way of the AFFH overlay map; there is no more hiding from ourselves. It's time to own it. I promise, it is okay, and we are ready to own the truth about ourselves.

Page H-1.380
Recently, I heard a neighbor talking about bad actors, like common criminals taking fruit from the front yard, or stealing our son's bike. Sadly, I thought about the bad actors that I know hiding in plain sight, some of us who are held in societal esteem, have criminal exposure on a multiplier factor due to the devastating impacts. If we have the appetite to try our neighbors for petty theft, like fruits, why not for chronic criminal behavior? See my point? Although the Palo Alto police were informed and the Santa Clara County District Attorney believed me, they lacked the appetite, not the evidence, to press charges. My abuser is at large, a Stanford graduate, and routinely seen with children, if not teaching them. I feel safe in apartments. Grant me this right. Grant us this privilege to call our home with others, not alone in a large structure designed for a single family when we know it must be leveraged for the use of many. Do you see my points? Do you understand the urgency? Despite my personal efforts to heal my wounds, I cannot heal fully alone. I need you, my neighbors, to help me understand why apartment dwellers like me, and my small family, with an IEP student, are so scary or represent a devaluing of your asset? Do you see that based on my very real lived experience that all y'all are the scary ones who protect this odd way of life? You see my perspective? I am not alone to see why all these 5 beds and 4 bath homes being built scare the literal hell out of me.

Aside from my personal concerns about abuse, let's talk about what one needs to do to maintain the financial load of a median $2.4M home in Menlo. Right? What if our neighbors are let go due to any number of different circumstances? A neighbor's child shared with us that his parents almost died when downsized from the downturn in 2008. Who has savings to endure a hardship longer than 60 days - right? 1% of us? See how we are set-up to fail? The municipality must account for the delta! I'm simply calling in to account or play all these variables.

Offset the load, the health, this bridge, this delta, has to be gapped today. This is where I am at work. If one day, my Uncle Rod was held accountable and could get help, maybe I could rest, but not today. There is no statute to provide a pathway for justice or accountability for these criminal acts after so many years. I take full responsibility for these failures because there is someone being abused in our city right now. I resolve directly to these new victims, on the record: not on my watch. Not on my time. Not in my lifetime. Not ever in the future.

Housing stability for women and mothers is especially important. We cannot be held down by men enforcing their sick or ill will upon us. Grant us agency, grant us capital, grant us dignity.

What is my point?
Abuse is a far reaching variable not taken into consideration nor do we talk about it like it's the real devastating factor it is. How are we reducing sexual abuse actively today, minimizing our rape culture, and keeping it at a healthy bay? Is keeping this 'community character' what we want? Is this concern for accountability or why you can't be my neighbor or why we don't build density? Am I making sense?
Let's reimagine what safety in our city means. Please continue to listen to us, your constituency. Start asking the difficult questions, cause we are ready to answer.

Page H-1.381
With my coming correct and gratitude for your continued service to us, thank you, Jenny from the Coleman Place Block
565 Willow Road, Apartment 9
--
Jen Michel
DRE #01900228
Cell: 650.400.8299
E-mail: [email protected]
Page H-1.382
November 13, 2022
Dear Menlo Park City Council, Planning Commission, Housing Commission, and Housing Element staff and consultant team, and HCD,
On behalf of Menlo Together and El Comite, I am writing to share feedback on the letter received by the City from the state department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on October 21, 2022, regarding Menlo Park’s 2023-2031 Draft Housing Element. Menlo Together is submitting a separate letter focused on Sites and Site Strategies to meet HCD requirements This letter focuses on Program H2.E Anti-Displacement Strategy, with specific recommendations for strengthening tenant protection programs and policies. Lack of tenant protections is an identified contributing factor to fair housing issues and homelessness. As shown in the Draft Housing Element (Figure 3-22), our Black, Latino and Native American residents are disproportionately housing cost-burdened.

We live in one of the most expensive areas of the country, and we have already lost far too many residents to evictions and excessive rent increases. In our letter of June 2, 2022, where we provided feedback on the housing element draft, we pressed the City to expeditiously enact effective anti-displacement and strong tenant protection programs. These ideas were not implemented. Now that Page H-1.383
HCD has rejected the draft, we urge the City to revise our draft housing element with specific tenant protections in order to prevent displacements–and homelessness–due to no-fault evictions.

To stem the rising tide of evictions, we urge the City to extend tenant protections beyond those provided by the statewide ‘just cause for eviction’ law of 2019, aka the Tenant Protection Act (TPA). We offer this as an action that the City can take immediately, with tangible benefits.

According to the Anti-Displacement Coalition[1] of San Mateo County (SMADC), a local just cause for eviction ordinance is one of the most powerful tools our cities can implement to prevent evictions. As evidence, SMADC points to A study of four California cities, including East Palo Alto, where evictions and eviction filings decreased after passing local just cause for eviction ordinances. Preventing no-fault evictions will affirmatively further fair housing and prevent homelessness.

While there are a number of factors that constitute a robust local just cause for eviction policy, Menlo Together recommends prioritizing these specific policies in the Menlo Park Housing Element:
● Just Cause for Eviction protections extended to cover tenants with tenure of any duration. ● Relocation assistance equal to four months’ rent for all no-fault evictions. This can prevent episodic homelessness, and it creates a cost to landlords who choose to use excessive rent increases as a way to evict people without cause.

To ensure effective implementation of a just cause eviction policy, it is critical that tenants and landlords understand the law and know where to turn if they need support. We have anecdotal evidence from trusted community-based organizations that scores of local evictions are done in ways that are not enforceable. Tenants are likely to leave when served with an eviction notice, often because they do not understand their rights or because they have been misinformed by their landlord. [2] The City needs to hold landlords accountable. To do so, it needs timely data about eviction actions.

For these reasons we advise incorporating the following programs into the HE:
● Tenant Education: Provide regular, robust, and culturally competent tenant education in partnership with one or more trusted community-based organizations (CBOs). ● Eviction Data Collection: Create an ordinance through which a notice of eviction must be filed with the City as a condition of enforceability. See this innovative policy from the City of Cudahy, CA.

Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Nationally, eviction rates are significantly higher for Black renters than for white renters, according to the Eviction Lab.

In San Mateo County, Legal Aid organizations studied the demographics and impact of eviction using data from 2014-2015, and found:
● 75% of reported eviction activity was due to no-fault evictions (36%) or unaffordable rent (39%) ● Latino people are 25% of the county population and were evicted at a rate of 49% ● Black people are 2.5% of the county population and were evicted at a rate of 21.4% Page H-1.384
● Respondents (those who experienced eviction proceedings) were 63% female head of household and 70% of respondents had children.
● 94% have incomes below $60,000/year in 2016
Data from Menlo Park’s Draft Housing Element shows a disproportionate number of lower income households (Figure 3-20), senior households (Figure 3-21), and Latino, Black and Native American households (Figure 3-23), are disproportionately rent burdened.

As previously mentioned, findings of a recent study by the Eviction Lab cite a decrease in evictions and eviction filings after just cause eviction ordinances were passed in several California cities, including in East Palo Alto. These findings, taken together with the demographic data cited above, establishes a clear connection between preventing no-fault evictions without just cause and affirmatively furthering fair housing.

Preventing evictions is all but required by the state requirement to affirmatively further fair housing. In addition, our homeless population were once housed, and suffered evictions - whether formal or coerced. We can and must do better. To prevent formal and coerced evictions we urge the City to adopt these tenant protection programs into the updated Housing Element with specific timelines and responsible parties:
● Just Cause for Eviction required for tenants of any tenure ● Four months’ rent relocation assistance
● Tenant ‘know your rights’ education
● Eviction monitoring by requiring notice to city for enforceability Sincerely,
The Menlo Together Team
in collaboration with El Comité de Vecinos del Lado Oeste, East Palo Alto [1] About the San Mateo County Anti-Displacement Coalition (SMADC): Since 2014, Public Advocates, Faith in Action, Urban Habitat, the Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto, HLC and others have come together to advocate for tenant protections and other anti-displacement measures as lower income renters in San Mateo County are facing intense displacement pressures, including mass evictions, staggering rent increases, and record housing prices.
[2] We present anecdotal evidence from local community groups here for expediency; we are seeking corroborating data.

Page H-1.385
Campaign for Fair Housing Elements
fairhousingelements.org
Nov 14, 2022
To: Menlo Park City Council, Planning Commission & Staff; and HCD On behalf of Menlo Together, the Campaign for Fair Housing Elements, and YIMBY Law, I am writing to share feedback on the letter received by the City from the state Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on October 21, 2022 regarding our draft housing element. A separate letter will be sent to address tenant protections in program H2.E - Anti-Displacement Strategy.

Earlier this year, the Campaign for Fair Housing Elements and YIMBY Law sent the city a letter outlining ways to improve its draft housing element, primarily via site selection and program commitments. Menlo Together also submitted letters on sites and programs. The City did not incorporate these changes.

Now that HCD has rejected the draft, we urge the City to revise our draft housing element with (1) bolder plans for broad and gentle density, (2) more analysis and outreach to stakeholders, (3) more planning and detail for City-owned sites, and (4) more realistic program commitments. Failure to do so could result in suspension of the City’s zoning authority, lawsuits against the City, and denial of funding for affordable housing and infrastructure.

By looking at cities in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) region, which had to submit their elements earlier this year, we can predict the potential future our city could face if we do not address HCD’s feedback:

1. The city can lose its zoning authority - cities that do not have a compliant housing element by January 31st will be required to approve “Builder’s Remedy” applications even if they do not comply with our zoning or development standards. (Gov. Code § 65589.5(d)(5).) The city of Santa Monica received 16 Builders Remedy applications between their housing element deadline and adoption of a compliant element, and HCD has issued a memo that the city must approve those projects.

2. The city could be subject to lawsuits - Californians for Homeownership has sued nine Southern California cities for not having compliant housing elements. Housing Element Law confers standing on the Attorney General, HCD, individual applicants and residents, and housing organizations such as YIMBY Law to sue the City for noncompliance. (Gov. Code §§ 65585(j)–(p), 65589.5(k).)

3. The city could lose access to funding sources - many sources of affordable housing and infrastructure funding require a compliant housing element.

Page H-1.386
Campaign for Fair Housing Elements
fairhousingelements.org
To avoid these consequences, we advise the City to achieve HCD certification as soon as possible.

Below are our recommendations for priorities in our next draft:

1. More analysis and outreach to stakeholders
As HCD says, the evidence presented for our opportunity sites is at best unclear and at worst insufficient. We recommend the city:
a. Contact the owners of opportunity sites and ensure they want to develop housing on their properties. We understand the city received few responses to its initial outreach by mail. The City needs to bring these owners to the table for evidence of their support in our element. b. Upzone sites with existing uses, in order to justify likelihood of development. We still do not believe enough evidence has been provided that the larger sites with current uses are likely to be redeveloped based on historical or market trends. Sites such as #1, 3-4, 11, 22-24, 28, 49 are completely unrealistic under current or proposed rules, and more aggressive zoning changes will be needed.

2. More planning and detail for city-owned sites
As expressed in our previous letters, Menlo Park’s city-owned parking lots present the greatest available opportunity for the city to promote affordable housing, and it is critical the city move quickly to establish viability of the sites.
a. The City should produce a more specific timeline and action plan for these sites(see Gov.

Code, § 65583(c)). The housing element should describe a specific date the city will release an RFP for any parking lots in its site inventory and set a target minimum number of units for those sites.
b. We were concerned to hear in the June 6th City Council meeting that there may still be a property rights issue at play. This question has come up time after time, when city-owned parking lots are being discussed for development, and the Housing Element should explain how the ownership question will be resolved. Unless clear ownership and right to develop city-owned parking lots can be demonstrated, they should not be included in the inventory, which would require substantial rezoning elsewhere.
c. We support the Housing Commission’s recent proposal to solicit developers’ ideas for how to use these sites for housing.

3. Adjust programs to be more realistic
Page H-1.387
Campaign for Fair Housing Elements
fairhousingelements.org
Vague, unrealistic, and misleading plans will cause the housing element to fall short of its goals and therefore out of compliance. To address this:
a. Programs must have specific timelines, metrics, and commitments so that the City, HCD, and the community can track progress and adjust as needed.
b. The city must designate more opportunity sites to make up for those in the current inventory whose owners do not intend to sell or redevelop. Per the staff report from June 6th, 2022, these are sites #4, 6, 40(C), 49.
c. As mentioned in the HCD letter, the Willow Village project represents a significant number of homes in our plan. As the staff report made clear to the planning commission on Oct 24th/Nov 3rd (p.431), 686 of these units (including 96 BMR) will not be completed within the next RHNA cycle, and another 419 units (including 42 BMR) are at risk. The realistic capacity must be adjusted down by a minimum of 44% ( ), with more analysis of other risks to the project 42+96 308
such as the recent layoffs at Meta.

4. Take decisive action to get more housing built
Our analysis of Menlo Park’s current site inventory demonstrates the city has a large shortfall of capacity for affordable housing to meet our RHNA goals. Forget the bare legal minimum: the city must take bold action to actually address our housing shortfall. Here are policies that would make a real-world difference:
a. Provide density bonuses for “gentle density” / missing middle projects. State laws like SB9 have made it easier to build duplexes, triplexes, and fourplexes on smaller lots. These types of units are relatively cheap, promote walkability, and add much needed housing. The City’s current FAR and lot coverage constraints, unfortunately, do not incentivize these types of units.

We encourage the city to allow a higher FAR and lot coverage maximums to promote these smaller multi-family projects over simply turning smaller homes into bigger mansions. b. Significantly increase allowable densities on ALL sites with existing uses. We suggest implementing Mr. Bohannon’s suggestion of at least 150-200 du/ac to facilitate vibrant and walkable neighborhoods with enough residents to support local businesses. This applies to both the Bohannon-owned sites off of Marsh Rd and any site with existing commercial uses, including the Safeway sites (El Camino and Sharon Park) and Sand Hill office buildings. c. Get more aggressive on downtown up-zoning. Menlo Park’s downtown provides excellent access to services and transit and it makes sense to further add density and housing here. It would have the added benefit of adding to the vibrancy of our downtown and supporting local businesses. We recommend
Page H-1.388
Campaign for Fair Housing Elements
fairhousingelements.org
i. Increasing the maximum allowable dwelling units per acre. 60 du/ac is substantially smaller than the 2019 Connect Menlo general plan, which allowed for 100 du/ac in R-MU zoning districts far away from the levels of transit and services available downtown. This recommendation also enables more affordable housing to be built on the government owned parking lots.
ii. Similarly, the current maximum downtown FAR of 2.0 and maximum FAR 1.55 for other El Camino zones is far too low, and we’re concerned that the proposal only increases allowed FAR for developments qualifying for the step-up basis/public benefit. We recommend a general increase in maximum allowable FAR for all downtown zones iii. Increase the magnitude of the density bonus, and add flexibility to the ways a project can qualify for the increase. The currently listed requirements of 50% two bedroom units, 5% three bedroom units, and a 1,000 square foot average seem overly prescriptive, especially when paired with the very small density increase provided by the step up basis. Increasing the density bonus and the variety of developments that would qualify for a step up basis would incentivize more developers to seriously consider downtown Menlo Park as a viable location for housing. We need more housing of all kinds, and being overly restrictive here risks reducing the number of units that end up being built, including the kind we are trying to incentivize. d. The city has had critical vacancies in the Housing Department since August 2021 and no staff since June 2022. We support and encourage the city to hire more staff or consultants ASAP in order to meet the moment and put together a powerful and strong housing element.

Menlo Park has an opportunity to legalize the much-needed housing our community needs. We hope the City adopts our recommendations and avoids further penalties. We look forward to the next draft.

Respectfully,
Misha Silin, Menlo Park Resident and Campaign for Fair Housing Elements Volunteer Cosigned:

Adina Levin, Menlo Park Resident
Jeremy Levine, Policy Manager for HLC
Karen Grove, Menlo Park Resident, former Housing Commissioner Katie Behroozi, Menlo Park Resident
Page H-1.389
Campaign for Fair Housing Elements
fairhousingelements.org
Katherine Dumont, Menlo Park Resident\
Keith Diggs, Housing Elements Advocacy Manager, YIMBY Law Marlene Santyo, Organizer, Menlo Together
Michal Bortnik, Menlo Park Resident
Michael Arruza Cruz, Menlo Park Resident
Pam D Jones, Menlo Park Resident
Page H-1.390
From: Patti Fry
To: _Planning Commission
Cc: _CCIN; PlanningDept
Subject: Comments Housing Element Subsequent EIR Draft and Zoning Ordinance Study Session Date: Sunday, November 13, 2022 10:33:27 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, DO NOT click links, open attachments or reply.

With apologies for not having time to make this shorter, I submit the following comments:

STUDY SESSION - CHANGES TO ZONING ORDINANCE AND ECR/D-SPECIFIC PLAN Fix existing problems with the El Camino Real/Downtown-Specific Plan zoning rules that have resulted in projects that worsen the jobs/housing imbalance. Otherwise, it is unlikely that the massive revisions contemplated for density, FAR and height will result in the hoped-for increase in housing units. Instead, it is more likely that Office space will increase, Why? One reason is because it is quicker to build and generally more profitable to developers.

But another big reason is that the current Zoning rules allow a disproportionate amount of Office with no requirements for housing. This comes into play when a developer prefers office.

Examples:
-The Stanford Middle Plaza project at 500 El Camino Real was approved at the Base FAR that would have allowed 337 housing units or if built at the Bonus FAR, the project could have provided 506 units. Instead, it provides only 215 units. -The Springline project at 1300 El Camino Real, in the Northeast-RESIDENTIAL District, was approved at the Bonus FAR level that allows 322 housing units. But the project provides only 183 housing units, not even as many as the 206 units allowed at the Base FAR level.

The Specific Plan (“SP”) zoning rules are flawed and need modified to achieve a healthy jobs/housing balance. Note that the Specific Plan projected a jobs/housing ratio of 1.57 whereas the above two projects come in at 4.4 jobs/housing and 5.2 jobs/housing, respectively.

Why? The zoning rules have not been changed since the Specific Plan’s 2012 adoption even though market conditions and business practices have changed. When the SP was adopted, the city’s consultants claimed that there would be no market demand for Office space in the foreseeable future. Not only did that prove untrue, business practices also changed so that more workers are now packed into the same amount of office space. Recent business practices pack office spaces, allowing just 50 SF/worker (incubators) to 150 SF/worker (Facebook).

Page H-1.391
Result – the city is scrambling to identify sites for nearly 4,000 housing units.

The shortage will never get solved in the downtown area unless the amount of office allowed is reduced, such as:
-Limit the allowed office to a fixed, more limited FAR rather than a percentage of a potentially higher FAR. In calculating an appropriate amount, consider mixed use of retail/community serving uses on the first floor, and then identify the ratio of housing units to jobs for the entire project and back into the maximum office allowable. That number would surely be less than 50% total FAR in the current SP rules. -Require mixed use that is proportional so that non-residential uses can only increase when the housing provided increases. Since retail/restaurants are essential to downtown vibrancy, the proportions left for office need to assume first floor (minimum) retail/restaurant.

This is just arithmetic. I don’t have the time to pose specific suggestions but the Commission or the Housing Element team can run some calculations.

Be very wary of unintended consequences, and identify ways to avoid them. For example:
-Height – The allowed height must take into account the potential of the state’s “plus 3 stories” for certain projects. Identify an ideal maximum height that includes the state’s "plus 3" and work backwards.

Avoid the urban look that was strongly opposed during the Specific Plan’s visioning process by requiring additional and deeper modulation of front setbacks at both ground level and along the façade.
-Façade height – An increased façade height could produce “canyons” that also were strongly opposed during the Specific Plan’s visioning process. Do not increase it.

But if it were increased, also require additional, deeper modulation and setbacks of the façade.
-FAR – Increased square footage could be eaten up by Office space. Avoid this by limiting Office space to a fixed, more limited FAR (see more about this above) or to a fixed, more limited percentage of an entire project. (refer to above discussion about things to consider in calculating ratios that would result in retail/restaurant and more housing, and a healthy jobs/housing balance.

Identify ways to minimize negative impacts on neighbors of properties that are proposed to become more dense than the adjacent properties. Examples of ideas:
-Promote and protect use of solar panels by adopting a meaningful daylight plane (i.e., 30 degrees).
-Protect privacy and aesthetics by adopting the above daylight plane and by limiting the vertical height of ADU's within the current side setback adjacent to a single family property.
- For larger projects (e.g., 1 acre of more), require large setbacks (30') to minimize Page H-1.392
privacy and noise impacts. If height would be increased, the setback should be increased proportionately.

Identify ways to enhance receptivity to ADU’s.
-Allow only the smallest ADU’s (i.e., the minimum size required by the state) to be built within current side or back setbacks.
-Allow larger ADU’s within the current buildable envelope, perhaps on a sliding scale such as allowing larger units the farther from the property line that they are. On larger lots with larger setbacks, there is ample space for ADU’s to be placed farther from the property line where they would cause fewer impacts on neighboring homes and families. -Retain overnight parking restrictions (promotes alternative modes of getting around) DRAFT SUBSEQUENT EIR: a few comments:

Transportation impacts are not adequately described –It doesn't appear to examine the potential impacts of modifying densities for the listed sites much less for the more broad impacts of modifying zoning rules for entire districts or the entire SP area. ·How was the traffic studied in the SP area? What would be the impacts on side streets such as Middle, Valparaiso/Glenwood, Oak Grove, Menlo/Ravenswood? Cutthrough traffic in neighborhoods? Without additional clarity, it is not possible to identify specific mitigation measures that might help ameliorate new impacts except in very general terms. ·The SEIR states that the VMT would incrase and that increase is ostensibly acceptable because the VMT per capita citywide may decline. That is like saying a temperature is fine because the average is normal even though one area is freezing and another is extremely hot.

Further, more total Vehicle Miles Traveled in a concentrated area must have impacts that should be examined for potential mitigation.

Specific Plan development cap
-The staff report states that the HE update would remove the SP’s 680 housing unit cap. To what? What would trigger additional review? -How does Specific Plan area development to date (plus pipeline) compare with the Specific Plan’s caps and development scenario in the vision plan? -If the FAR were increased in the SP area, how would this affect non-residential development?
In closing - I again urge you to fix inherent problems in the zoning ordinance.

Otherwise, housing-only changes will not have the intended results.

Page H-1.393
A SUGGESTION: Given the complexities of the Zoning Ordinance, the Specific Plan, the state laws, the city could convene a task group such as the Residential Review Task Force or the Commercial Zoning Ordinance Update task force to arrive at some alternatives. It seems as if the current effort is rushed and is susceptible to making modifications with unintended negative consequences.

Thank you for your service.

Patti Fry, former Planning Commissioner
Page H-1.394
Page H-1.395
Page H-1.396
Page H-1.397
Page H-1.398
From: Virginia Calkins
To: Chow, Deanna M; Smith, Tom A
Cc: Benjamin Elder; Brad Scott
Subject: HCD Follow up
Date: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 6:50:08 PM
Attachments: Divco--Sand Hill Housing Element Letter.pdf RE_ Menlo Park Housing Element Update - Quadrus Site.pdf RE_ Housing element follow up.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, DO NOT click links, open attachments or reply.

Deanna and Tom,
Hope you had a nice holiday break. We came across the following “HCD Transmittal Index”--hcdtransmittal-index-of-comments-for-public-review-draft.pdf (menlopark.gov)—on the City’s Housing Element website.

As you may recall, we sent a letter to the City in February 2022 and followed up in May 2022 expressing our long-term intentions of keeping our Sand Hill Road office campuses as office campuses and confirming that we have no intentions of building any housing on these campuses in the near or long-term. Attached is the correspondence for ease of reference. We expected that this correspondence would have been included as part of the public record on the draft Housing Element; however, in reviewing the index we noticed that it was not referenced.

We are following up to ensure our stated intention with respect to our Sand Hill sites is understood and that the City does not intend to rely on our sites for potential housing. As such, we respectfully ask that our comments on the Housing Element be added to the list and that it be shared with the public on the City’s website and with HCD as part of the City’s next draft Housing Element submittal.

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter, and please feel free to contact us if there is anything else you need in order for our correspondence to be incorporated into the next draft.

Thank you,
Virginia

VIRGINIA CALKINS
Development
O248.961.5664301 HOWARD STREET, SUITE 2100
C
24 248.961.5664SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105

DIVCOWEST
Invested in the power of place. Inspired by the energy of people.

WWW.DIVCOWEST.COM
Page H-1.399
This message may contain confidential or privileged information and is intended only for the party named above. If you are not the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose or take any action based on the information herein.

Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this message in error and delete this message from your system. This message is for information purposes only and is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Any performance information provided is estimated and unaudited; no representation or warranty is made to, and no reliance should be placed on, the fairness, accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the information contained herein. Any investment strategy entered into for potential profit also involves risk of loss. For more information regarding how we collect and process personal information, please visit our Privacy Policy.

Page H-1.400
From: Andrew Bielak
To: _Planning Commission
Subject: Comments for Tonight"s Study Session
Date: Thursday, December 1, 2022 4:18:24 PM
Attachments: 22_0606 MidPen Housing Element Letter.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe, DO NOT click links, open attachments or reply.

Good afternoon Planning Commissioners,
I represent the affordable housing developer MidPen Housing and wanted to write in regards to tonight’s study session.

I’m re-sending a letter I previously provided in regards to the Housing Element. In addition to the points described in this letter, I would add the following:

If feasible, we recommend the Commission consider updating the Affordable Housing Overlay zone to provide benefits that are equivalent to the State Density Bonus Law, so the AHO could be used independently to reach the desired outcome, instead of requiring to be paired with the SDBL. This approach would avoid a project needing to separately apply for the SDBL and ensure the City can provide the housing densities it seeks independent of State law.

In its current iteration, the proposed revision to the AHO would allow 100% affordable projects to reach 99 units when using the SDBL. We recommend allowing projects to reach 150 units per acre, which would maximize potential for senior or supportive projects which can be feasible at higher densities
We would like to reiterate the points from the letter regarding other important components of the AHO, including parking, fee waivers, and possibility for ministerial review. Lastly, we would continue to emphasize the importance of having a strong focus and clear strategy around publicly owned sites, which often present the strongest opportunity for affordable housing development.

Thank you,
Andrew Bielak
Andrew Bielak I Associate Director of Housing Development MidPen Housing Corporation
303 Vintage Park Drive, Suite 250, Foster City, CA 94404 c. 650.830.1360
Page H-1.401
June 6, 2022
Dear Members of the Menlo Park City Council, City Commissions, and Staff -- Thank you for your continued progress in the preparation of the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update. We applaud the effort to incorporate extensive community input and to examine a comprehensive approach to encourage the development of the nearly 3,000 mandated units for the City of Menlo Park through its Housing Element
As a 100% affordable non-profit housing organization with five communities either under construction or completed in Menlo Park, MidPen Housing is deeply committed to partnering with the City to implement strategies that can support expansion of housing opportunities for those in need. We believe many of the concepts described in the plan could help achieve progress, but require additional detail and timely implementation to ensure success. With that in mind, MidPen is providing the following comments and questions on the May 11th draft of the City’s Housing Element for 2023-2031.
• Affordable Housing Overlay Zone (AHO): Under Program H4.D, please provide clarification on how the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone is to be defined and what incentives it will provide in comparison to the incentives in the 2015-2023 Housing Element codified under Government Code Chapter 16.98. MidPen’s recommendation is that the City make the AHO zone as expansive as possible to cover the 73 recommended sites and that the incentives to be included provide concrete benefits for affordable housing developments above what is available under State Density Bonus Laws. • Ministerial Review of 100% Affordable Housing: MidPen is supportive of applying ministerial review to 100% Affordable projects per policy H4.E but requests that the City shorten the currently proposed program timeframe of three years from Housing Element adoption. We recommend the City examine opportunities to streamline so the benefits of this policy become available before the City is nearly halfway through the new Housing Element cycle.
• CEQA Requirements and Transportation Analysis: The City should review Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines to ensure consistency with CEQA. The City’s current TIA guidelines require preparation of Level of Service (LOS) analysis for affordable projects, even when it is not required under CEQA, which only requires a VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled) analysis and assumes no significant impact for affordable developments. We also recommend that the City analyze which of its 73 proposed sites are currently within what they have categorized as a low VMT area. • Height limits – We recommend the AHO zone include height limits that provide at least as much flexibility allowed under the State Density Bonus programs Page H-1.402
• Density – The draft Housing Element proposes a 100 dwelling units per acre density allowance for 100% Affordable projects. We ask the City consider a limit of up to 150 units per acre for housing for affordable developments below 2 acres and/or for senior and supportive housing projects, which can be feasible at higher densities due to lower parking needs and smaller unit sizes.
• Parking – We appreciate the efforts to revise parking standards per Policies H4.D and H4.M, and recommend the City adopt parking requirements that offer at least as much flexibility as the State Density Bonus Law. In particular, we suggest that a maximum parking ratio for any 100% affordable project of .5 spaces per unit if it is either a) serving permanent supportive housing population b) serving seniors, or b) located within ½ mile from a major transit stop. We also hope these strategies can be implemented well before the two years described in the Report.
• Fee Waivers and Exemptions – In support of Housing Element Policies H1.4 and H4.8, we request that the City develop a more standardized and simplified rule around fee waivers. Fee waivers are a critical component of ensuring feasibility of an affordable development, and it is important for non-profit developers to understand early in the process how fee waivers or reductions will be calculated and applied. • Inclusionary Housing – We applaud the Draft Element’s proposed amendments of the Inclusionary Housing requirements per Policy H4.A to further incentive affordable housing. In considering future development of mixed-income communities on larger sites such as the SRI or USGS sites, MidPen recommends Staff engage with both affordable and market-rate developers to help devise policies that can best support achievement of different types of housing on realistic time frames.
• Public Land – Due to the incredibly high cost of land, the inclusion of downtown parking lots in the Housing Element is a key ingredient to supporting future affordable units. We ask the City to maintain a strong focus on public sites for affordable housing and develop a strategy and work plan towards preparing Request for Qualifications for any viable public sites to solicit developer interest through a public process.

Thank you for your review of these comments. Please don’t hesitate to reach out if you have any questions.

Sincerely
Andrew Bielak
Associate Director of Development
[email protected]
Page H-1.403
City Manager's Office

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 12/6/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-240-CC
Informational Item: City Council agenda topics: December 2022 Recommendation
The purpose of this informational item is to provide the City Council and members of the public access to the anticipated agenda items that will be presented to the City Council. The mayor and city manager set the City Council agenda so there is no action required of the City Council as a result of this informational item.

Policy Issues
In accordance with the City Council procedures manual, the mayor and city manager set the agenda for City Council meetings.

Analysis
In an effort to provide greater access to the City Council’s future agenda items, staff has compiled a listing of anticipated agenda items, Attachment A, through December 21, 2022. The topics are arranged by department to help identify the work group most impacted by the agenda item.

Specific dates are not provided in the attachment due to a number of factors that influence the City Council agenda preparation process. In their agenda management, the mayor and city manager strive to compile an agenda that is most responsive to the City Council’s adopted priorities and work plan while also balancing the business needs of the organization. Certain agenda items, such as appeals or State mandated reporting, must be scheduled by a certain date to ensure compliance. In addition, the meeting agendas are managed to allow the greatest opportunity for public input while also allowing the meeting to conclude around 11 p.m. Every effort is made to avoid scheduling two matters that may be contentious to allow the City Council sufficient time to fully discuss the matter before the City Council.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. City Council agenda topics: December 2022
Report prepared by:

Judi A. Herren, Assistant to the City Manager/City Clerk AGENDA ITEM I-1 Page I-1.1
Through December 21, 2022
Tentative City Council Agenda
# Title Department Item type City Council action1 Willow Village - second reading and adoption CDD Consent Second read/adopt ordinance2 Adopt Resolution to continue conducting the City’s Council and advisory body meetings remotely due to health and safety concerns for the public CMO Consent Adopt resolution 3 Appoint City Council representatives and alternates to various local and regional agencies and as liaisons and members to City Council advisory bodies CMO Regular Decide 4 Appoint City Councilmembers to various standing and ad hoc subcommittees, and disband inactive ad hoc subcommittees CMO Regular Decide 5 Certify 2022 election results CMO Consent Adopt resolution6 City Council agenda topics December 2022 - Jan 10 2023 CMO Informational No action7 Interview and appoint City Councilmember to District 5 seat vacancy CMO Regular Decide 8 City Council Minutes CMO Consent Approve
9 Provide direction to the City’s voting delegate regarding regional vacancies for the next City Selection Committee meeting December 16, 2022 CMO Regular Decide 10 Recognition of outgoing City Councilmember CMO Regular No action11 Recognition of outgoing Mayor CMO Regular No action 12 Selection of the 2023 Mayor and Vice Mayor CMO Regular Decide 13 Swearing in of new city councilmembers CMO Regular No action ASD-Administrative Services
CMO- City Manager's Office
CDD-Community Development
LCS-Library and Community Services
PD-Police
PW-Public Works

ATTACHMENT A
Page I-1.2
City Manager's Office
City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 12/6/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-238-CC
Informational Item: Transmittal of city attorney billing Recommendation
This is an informational item and does not require City Council action.

Policy Issues
In accordance with the City Council informational requests, this staff report transmits information to the public.

Background
On February 23, 2021, the City Council approved an agreement with Burke Williams Sorenson, LLP (BWS) for city attorney services.

Analysis
As requested by the City Council, the city attorney has prepared monthly summaries of billing activity (costs/fees) for legal services that could be shared with the public. This staff report transmits the summaries for the months of September and October 2022.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Billing summaries – September and October 2022
Report prepared by:

Justin I.C. Murphy, City Manager
AGENDA ITEM I-2 Page I-2.1
Client.Matter Description Fees Costs Total Billed
08241.0001 GENERAL MUNICIPAL MATTERS $ 32,658.50 $ 296.67 $ 32,955.17 08241.0002 REAL ESTATE, COMPLEX HOUSING, CEQA, NEPA $ 7,180.00 $ 87.50 $ 7,267.50 08241.0003 CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKS $ 1,667.50 -$ $ 1,667.50 08241.0005 MENLO UPTOWN $ 528.00 -$ $ 528.00
08241.0006 123 INDEPENDENCE $ 6,153.50 -$ $ 6,153.50
08241.0009 WILLOW VILLAGE $ 80,084.00 -$ $ 80,084.00
08241.0010 1350 ADAMS COURT $ 4,848.00 -$ $ 4,848.00
08241.0012 162-164 JEFFERSON $ 1,824.00 -$ $ 1,824.00
08241.0013 1105-1165 O'BRIEN DRIVE $ 576.00 -$ $ 576.00 08241.0014 BOHANNAN DEVELOPMENT $ 5,760.00 -$ $ 5,760.00 08241.0015.001 SOLID WASTE FRANCHISE $ 3,534.00 -$ $ 3,534.00 08241.0018 1035 O'BRIEN $ 384.00 -$ $ 384.00
08241.0019 CODE ENFORCEMENT/ PITCHESS / NUISANCE PR $ 2,418.00 -$ $ 2,418.00 08241.0021 SRI CAMPUS $ 1,104.00 -$ $ 1,104.00
08241.0022 MPCC PG&E EMINENT DOMAIN $ 961.00 -$ $ 961.00 08241.0023 HOTEL MOXY / 3723 HAVEN AVENUE $ 1,776.00 -$ $ 1,776.00 08241.0027 UUT CLAIM/LITIGATION $ 1,643.00 $ 494.35 $ 2,137.35 08241.0029 ZONING INITIATIVE PETITION $ 682.00 -$ $ 682.00 08241.0030 PUBLIC RECORDS ACT $ 2,106.00 $ 122.40 $ 2,228.40 08241.0032 CITY COUNCIL $ 1,512.00 -$ $ 1,512.00
08241.0033 980-1030 O'BRIEN $ 1,548.00 -$ $ 1,548.00
FEES PAID BY CITY $ 55,362.92
FEES PAID BY DEVELOPERS $ 104,585.50
TOTAL $ 159,948.42
Page I-2.2 ATTACHMENT A
Client.Matter Description Fees Costs Total Billed
08241.0001 GENERAL MUNICIPAL MATTERS $26,717.50 $123.75 $26,841.25 08241.0002 REAL ESTATE, COMPLEX HOUSING, CEQA, NEPA $16,306.50 $0.00 $16,306.50 08241.0003 CONSTRUCTION AND COMPLEX PUBLIC WORKS $3,391.00 $0.00 $3,391.00 08241.0005 MENLO UPTOWN $3,600.00 $0.00 $3,600.00
08241.0006 123 INDEPENDENCE $7,418.50 $0.00 $7,418.50
08241.0009 WILLOW VILLAGE $146,483.00 $0.00 $146,483.00 08241.0010 1350 ADAMS COURT $144.00 $0.00 $144.00
08241.0011 1075 O'BRIEN/CS BIO $912.00 $0.00 $912.00
08241.0012 162-164 JEFFERSON $720.00 $0.00 $720.00
08241.0013 1105-1165 O'BRIEN DRIVE $4,464.00 $0.00 $4,464.00 08241.0014 BOHANNAN DEVELOPMENT $1,392.00 $0.00 $1,392.00 08241.0019 CODE ENFORCEMENT/ PITCHESS / NUISANCE PR $1,705.00 $0.00 $1,705.00 08241.0021 SRI CAMPUS $2,496.00 $0.00 $2,496.00
08241.0022 MPCC PG&E EMINENT DOMAIN $930.00 $59.95 $989.95 08241.0023 HOTEL MOXY / 3723 HAVEN AVENUE $10,512.00 $0.00 $10,512.00 08241.0026 1005 O'BRIEN $1,824.00 $0.00 $1,824.00
08241.0027 UUT CLAIM/LITIGATION $1,271.00 $107.50 $1,378.50 08241.0029 ZONING INITIATIVE PETITION $899.00 $0.00 $899.00 08241.0030 PUBLIC RECORDS ACT $4,104.00 $0.00 $4,104.00 08241.0032 CITY COUNCIL $729.00 $0.00 $729.00
08241.0033 980-1030 O'BRIEN $1,333.00 $0.00 $1,333.00
08241.0034 3705 HAVEN $432.00 $0.00 $432.00
$237,783.50 $291.20 $238,074.70
FEES PAID BY CITY $56,344.20
FEES PAID BY DEVELOPERS $181,730.50
TOTAL $238,074.70
Page I-2.3
Public Works

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov

STAFF REPORT
City Council
Meeting Date: 12/6/2022
Staff Report Number: 22-239-CC
Informational Item: Update on the Willow Oaks Park improvement project
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council review this informational report containing updates related to phasing the delivery of components of the Willow Oaks Park improvement project. This is an informational item and does not require City Council action.

Policy Issues
The Willow Oaks Park improvement project is consistent with the City’s General Plan Policy LU-6.1 and the Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan goals adopted in October 2019. The project promotes developing and maintaining parks that provide areas for facilities to serve the recreation needs of all visitors.

Background
On May 10, 2022, staff and Callander Associates Landscape Architecture Inc. presented concept designs for Willow Oaks Park to the City Council. The design included reconstructing the existing playground and dog park, and incorporating a new park restroom, pathway improvements, purpose-built pickleball courts, seating, picnic areas and landscaping. The proposed design did not include improvements along the park frontage, the area west of the tennis courts and adjacent to Willow Road (Attachment A.) City Council unanimously approved the concept plans and directed staff to explore additional park uses in the frontage area as part of a future phase of work. Staff has also been working with Ravenswood City School District (RCSD) to assess options to fence in the joint-use youth playing field located on RCSD-owned land adjacent to the park, in response to safety concerns raised by the community about interactions with unleashed dogs on the playing field and the adverse impacts of dog activity and dog waste to the field’s turf.

Since May, staff has continued work on the detailed design documents of the improvements in the concept plans approved by the City Council as well as prepared additional conceptual designs for the frontage area of the park along Willow Road. In order to deliver the improvements within a timely manner, staff proposes to develop and construct the improvements in phases, as the City Council suggested during the May meeting. Staff has also received extensive public comments regarding pickleball courts at Willow Oaks and other parks since May. In particular, concerns raised included noise associated with pickleball and the proximity of the BuildingKidz preschool and homes near the park.

Analysis
Phased delivery approach
Staff is committed to ultimately delivering all of the elements approved by the City Council May 10, 2022. In order to properly execute this delivery in a timely manner, staff has proposed a phased approach to project AGENDA ITEM I-3 Page I-3.1
Staff Report #: 22-239-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov delivery. Phase 1 improvements will include the new playground and dog park, pathway upgrades, new restroom, resurfacing of the basketball court, and landscaping. The playground equipment design, including the request to add roof coverings to the structures, is continuing to progress. The new restroom identified for phase 1 improvements will require additional permitting from the Planning Commission.

Phase 2 improvements may include purpose-built pickleball courts and expansion of passive recreational use through new picnic areas, seating and games. These improvements will require additional community outreach and City Council coordination, which will take some time. Of note, the 2019 Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan does not include pickleball courts anywhere in the City. For this reason, part of the Phase 2 work could potentially include the development of a narrowly focused addendum to the 2019 Master Plan to incorporate current and future pickleball needs into the plan with community and stakeholder input.

By phasing the improvements, staff can begin constructing the critical elements in Summer 2023, without delay. The elements identified in phase 2 will follow thereafter.

Willow Oaks Park – Frontage area use for Phase 2
Staff has been evaluating three park frontage design alternatives. These alternatives represent expanded programming opportunities, area enhancements and new amenities. The three alternatives are available in Attachments B, C and D. Staff will return to City Council at a later date after the Phase 1 work is underway to present the frontage options and receive direction on what to incorporate into Phase 2. A summary of the frontage area options is as follows:
• Alternative 1 (Attachment B) – Demonstration garden ($460,000):

Alternative 1 allows for passive recreational use. It includes a concrete path that meanders through a demonstration garden, and highlights the sustainable landscape design through the use of educational signage. Bench seating is incorporated to provide visitors an opportunity to enjoy the garden. A shaded picnic area on the south side of the park entrance driveway is also included to enhance the park’s seating and picnic table options. An area for bicycle racks and a game of corn hole is adjacent to the picnic area. The corn hole game is a concrete board that is permanently added to the area. Park users would bring their own bean bags, to engage in a game of corn hole. • Alternative 2 (Attachment C) - Small dog park ($620,000):

Alternative 2 converts the existing lawn space into a small dog park. It would allow the existing dog park, located to the east of the playground, to be used as a dedicated space for larger dogs. The new small dog park would be designed with the same features that are proposed for the larger dog park, including a vestibule entrance, synthetic turf surfacing, a 4-foot tall perimeter fencing, pet fountain and bench seating. It highlights the community’s desire to have separate small and large dog park areas. • Alternative 3 (Attachment D) – Two pickleball courts ($870,000):

Introducing pickleball courts to Menlo Park has been a subject of strong community interest in the past couple of years. In response to community needs and interest, the City in September 2020, launched a pickleball pilot program at Kelly Park and later expanded it to Nealon Park. In summer 2022, the City conducted a citywide survey to assess community needs and desires for recreation and community programs. The pilot program and community survey have indicated that substantial interest and demand for pickleball exists in Menlo Park. On October 26, 2022, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommended to extend the duration of the pickleball pilot program through June 2023, expand the pilot program’s scope at Nealon Park (staff is evaluating this recommendation further), analyze community needs and develop estimated costs and timelines for potentially creating additional purpose-built pickleball courts in alignment with the Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan, and construct new, Page I-3.2
Staff Report #: 22-239-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov purpose-built pickleball courts at Willow Oaks Park (in addition to the existing tennis courts) as part of the Willow Oaks Park improvement project.

Alternative 3 constructs two purpose-built pickleball courts to the front of the park. The pickleball courts were originally planned in the basketball court area, south of the existing tennis courts. Staff has explored relocating the two pickleball courts to the front of the park, to help attenuate noise concerns by creating more distance from nearby residences and the BuildingKidz preschool.

Willow Oaks Parks – Fence in the Baseball/Play Field:

City staff is working with staff from RCSD to evaluate options for fencing the joint-use youth playing field on the RCSD-owned property adjacent to Willow Oaks Park. This request originated from safety concerns received from residents and the Silicon Valley International School related to negative interactions with unleashed dogs on the field. Dog walkers were using the area as an off leash dog area for their dogs to roam. There were complaints during school hours of interactions with unleashed dogs, and the presence of dog excrement on the field and damage to the turf. Repeated efforts by City and school site staff to directly engage with and educate the dog owners to cease the unauthorized use of the playing field has had limited effectiveness. In February 2022, City staff temporarily erected an orange mesh barrier to separate the play field from the park. The temporary fence significantly reduced the frequency of off-leash dogs on the field until it was removed in summer 2022. Staff is coordinating with RCSD staff to design and install a permanent fence structure on RCSD’s property in early 2023, pending authorization by the RCSD board of education tentatively scheduled December 8, 2022. The permanent fence will be installed by RCSD separately from the City’s Willow Oaks Park improvements project in order to expedite the fence element.

Attachment E shows an approximation of the proposed fence location around the field and a photo with a sample of the fence material. The identified fence material is tubular steel, which is consistent with the fencing used in other City parks as well as the new fencing planned for other elements of the Willow Oaks Park improvement project.

Impact on City Resources
The capital improvement budget has $3.1 million allocated for Willow Oaks Park improvements. Funding for the phase 1 construction improvements is part of the fiscal year 2022-23 budget. Cost estimates will be updated during further development of the construction documents.

Environmental Review
This information item is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines 15378 and 15061 (b)(3) as it will not result in any direct or indirect physical change to the environment.

Public Notice
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with the agenda items being listed, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.

Attachments
A. Willow Oaks Park west frontage area
B. Concept plan Alternative 1
C. Concept plan Alternative 2
Page I-3.3
Staff Report #: 22-239-CC

City of Menlo Park 701 Laurel St., Menlo Park, CA 94025 tel 650-330-6600 menlopark.gov D. Concept plan Alternative 3
E. Willow Oaks sports field proposed perimeter fencing
Report prepared by:

Tanisha Werner, Assistant Public Works Director – Engineering Reviewed by:

Nicole Nagaya, Public Works Director
Sean Reinhart, Library and Community Services Director
Page I-3.4

W I L L O W O A K S P A R K W E S T F R O N T A G E A R E A

W I L L O W O A K S P A R K I M P R O V E M E N T P R O J E C T

EXISTING SCULPTURE
NORTH

ATTACHMENT A
Page I-3.5
BENCH
WILLOW RD.

COLEMAN AVE.

DECOMPOSED GRANITE

CONCRETE PATH

BIKE RACK

PICNIC TABLE

EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE

SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPE
WILLOW OAKS PARK FRONTAGECity of Menlo Park August 15, 2022 0 10’ 20’ 40’
NORTH

EXISTING SIDEWALK AND

STREET FRONTAGE TO REMAIN

PICNIC TABLE ON CONCRETE PAVEMENT

DECOMPOSED GRANITE PATH TO PICKLEBALL COURTS

LANDSCAPE BOULDERS

WOODLAND PLANTING

UNDER REDWOODS TO

REPLACE TURF
BIKE RACK, TYP.PICNIC TABLE ON DECOMPOSED GRANITE, TYP. PAVEMENT PROPOSED TREE, TYP.

EXISTING TREE TO
REMAIN, TYP.

EXISTING SCULPTURE, COULD

BE REMOVED OR REMAIN
6’ CONCRETE PATH

DEMONSTRATION GARDEN WITH

SUSTAINABLE LANDSCAPE
BENCH, TYP.

EDUCATIONAL SIGNAGE, TYP.

EXISTING

PARKING LOT

EXISTING TENNIS
COURTS
CONCEPT PLAN - Alternative 1

ATTACHMENT B
Page I-3.6
BENCH

PET WASTE STATION DECORATIVE CONCRETE
‘SMALL DOG’ DOG PARK

DOG DRINKING FOUNTAIN BIKE RACK

SYNTHETIC TURF
WILLOW OAKS PARK FRONTAGECity of Menlo Park August 15, 2022CONCEPT PLAN - Alternative 2 0 10’ 20’ 40’
NORTH
DECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT EXPANDED PARKING LOT, 10
ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLSBIKE RACK, TYP.EXISTING PARKING LOT EDGE 4’ TALL CHAIN LINK FENCE
‘SMALL DOG’ DOG PARK

EXISTING SCULPTURE

TO BE REMOVED

PET WASTE STATION
BENCH, TYP.

PET DRINKING FOUNTAIN
WILLOW RD.

COLEMAN AVE.

EXISTING TENNIS
COURTS
PROPOSED TREE, TYP.

MULCH AROUND EXISTING TREESDRAINAGE INFILTRATION AREAEXISTING TREE TO REMAIN, TYP.

NEW DROUGHT TOLERANT

PLANTING TO REPLACE LAWN

SYNTHETIC TURF

EXISTING SIDEWALK AND

STREET FRONTAGE TO REMAIN

WOODLAND PLANTING UNDER

REDWOODS TO REPLACE TURF
Page I-3.7
BENCH

PET WASTE STATION DECORATIVE CONCRETE
‘SMALL DOG’ DOG PARK

DOG DRINKING FOUNTAIN BIKE RACK

SYNTHETIC TURF
WILLOW OAKS PARK FRONTAGECity of Menlo Park July 26, 2022CONCEPT PLAN - Alternative  0 10’ 20’ 40’
NORTH

DECORATIVE CONCRETE PAVEMENT
EXPANDED PARKING LOT, 12 ADDITIONAL PARKING STALLS
BIKE RACK, TYP.

EXISTING PARKING LOT EDGE
4’ TALL CHAIN LINK FENCE
‘SMALL DOG’ DOG PARK

EXISTING SCULPTURE

TO BE REMOVED

PET WASTE STATION
BENCH, TYP.

PET DRINKING FOUNTAIN
WILLOW RD.

COLEMAN AVE.

EXISTING TENNIS
COURTS
PROPOSED TREE, TYP.

MULCH AROUND EXISTING TREESEXISTING TREE TO REMAIN, TYP.

NEW SHRUB PLANTING

TO REPLACE LAWN

SYNTHETIC TURF

EXISTING SIDEWALK AND

STREET FRONTAGE TO REMAIN

ATTACHMENT C
Page I-3.8

DECOMPOSED GRANITE

CONCRETE PATH

BIKE RACK

PICNIC TABLE

CONCRETE SEATWALL

PICKLEBALL COURTS CORN HOLE
WILLOW OAKS PARK FRONTAGECity of Menlo Park July 26, 2022CONCEPT PLAN - Alternative  0 10’ 20’ 40’
NORTH

PICKLEBALL COURTS
WILLOW RD.

COLEMAN AVE.

EXISTING TENNIS
COURTS
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN, TYP.

EXISTING SIDEWALK AND

STREET FRONTAGE TO REMAIN
PICNIC TABLE ON CONCRETE PAVEMENT, TYP.

BIKE RACK, TYP.

CORN HOLE ON DECOMPOSED GRANITE PAVEMENT
PROPOSED TREE, TYP.

EXISTING TREE TO
REMAIN, TYP.

CONCRETE SEATWALL, TYP.

EXISTING

PARKING LOT

EXISTING SCULPTURE

TO BE REMOVED

ATTACHMENT D
Page I-3.9
7'-0"
7'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"
7'-0"
7'-0"
Double Gate Width 10'
7'-0"
Double GateWidth 10' Willows Oaks Sports Field Proposed Perimeter Fencing North
Scale 0 ft 50 ft
10'-0"
LEGEND4' High Black Ornamental Tubular Steel Fence
Willow OaksSports Field
Willow Oaks Park

ATTACHMENT E
Page I-3.10

HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
December 6, 2022 City Council Study Session
H1-PRESENTATION

PROJECT OVERVIEW
 Required 6th Cycle Housing Element Update
– Plan for city’s housing needs from 2023 to 2031– Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is 2,946 units  Also includes update to General Plan Safety Element
and new Environmental Justice Element
 Housing Element must be adopted by January 31,
2023

BACKGROUND
3 Very Low Low Moderate Above
Moderate
Total Units
6th Cycle RHNA Needs
6th Cycle RHNA 740 426 496 1,284 2,946
30% Buffer 222 128 149 385 8846th Cycle RHNA
+ 30% Buffer
962 554 645 1,669 3,830
6th Cycle RHNA Credits
Pipeline Projects
134 230 230 3,050 3,644
ADUs 26 25 26 8 85Credits Subtotal 160 255 256 3,061 3,729 Total Net New Units Needed
802 299 389 0 1,490

NET RHNA
4  Affordable RHNA will be met by rezoning for up to 4,000 new units dispersed throughout city– The total would accommodate a mix of development types to achieve 1,490 affordable units
– Primarily in Council districts 2 through 5
 Five key zoning strategies
– Increase densities in El Camino Real/Downtown Specific Plan area and remove residential cap
– Increase densities in the affordable housing overlay (AHO)– Rezone commercial sites to allow mixed-use development– Remove minimum lot size to achieve 30 du/ac on R-3 lots around downtown– Re-use sites from current Housing Element

MAJOR LAND USE STRATEGIES
5 OPPORTUNITY SITES
6 Sharon Heights
Belle Haven/Bayfront
Downtown/
El Camino Real
 Study session
– Provide feedback on revisions to draft Housing Element in response to HCD comments
– Also an opportunity to provide feedback on potential zoning changes  No actions will be taken this evening
– Staff will use comments to prepare:
• Revised draft Housing Element• Draft Zoning Ordinance amendments• Draft Specific Plan amendments• Draft ordinances to rezone certain housing opportunity sites to allow multifamily residential or mixed use developments

MEETING PURPOSE
7 DRAFT HOUSING

ELEMENT
 May 2021 - Present: Outreach through project galleries, survey, pop-up events, focus groups, community meetings, and other methods
 May 11, 2022 - Initial draft Housing Element circulated for public review  May 16, 2022: Joint Planning Commission and Housing Commission meeting to review draft Housing Element
 June 6, 2022: City Council meeting to review draft Housing Element  July 25, 2022: City submitted initial draft Housing Element to HCD, beginning 90-day state review period
 October 21, 2022: City received letter from HCD with list of requested revisions Late October - Present: Project team has been developing second draft Housing Element

BACKGROUND
9  Initial draft Housing Element addresses many requirements  Majority of comments were in the following topic areas:
– Affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH)– Housing sites inventory and realistic capacity– Analysis of constraints that would reduce housing development– Addressing programs with more specificity and concrete action

HCD COMMENTS
10  Chapters 3, 4 and 5 have been updated to provide
more narrative and data regarding AFFH concerns and disparity between areas north and south of U.S. 101  Chapter 4 includes table of fair housing issues and
actions the City will take to address the issues
 Chapter 5 includes responses to identified constraints, many of which are now addressed as programs in to be implemented through 2031

PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT CHANGES
11  Chapter 7 includes an update to HCD’s realistic capacity methodology to estimate unit production on the housing opportunity sites  Site capacity is set as: Acreage x Density x Adjustment City is also able to apply proposed density increases from Affordable Housing Overlay
 Changes to the methodology increase total units from 2,108 to 2,906

PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT CHANGES
12 Total Adjustment Factors for Housing Opportunity Sites Geography Land Use Controls Realistic Capacity Typical Densities Infra. Availability Enviro. Constraints Total Specific Plan Area 0.95 0.80 0.90 1 1 0.684Elsewhere in City 0.95 0.90 0.95 1 1 0.812  Chapter 8 updated with new and revised programs
– Consider City-owned land for housing (downtown parking lots)– Streamlined project review for 100 percent affordable housing– Anti-displacement strategy– Amend BMR housing regulations to consider increasing requirements– Zoning text amendments for special needs housing– Others

PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT CHANGES
13  December 2022 – Release of draft Environmental Justice and Safety Elements
 December 19, 2022 – Close of Draft SEIR public comment period January 12, 2023 – Housing Commission and Planning Commission recommendations
 January 31, 2023 – City Council adoption hearingTENTATIVE UPCOMING MILESTONES 14 POTENTIAL ZONING

CHANGES

PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL

DENSITIES
16 Specific Plan Existing and Proposed Subdistrict Residential Densities (in du/ac) Subdistrict
Existing
Base
Density
Proposed
Base Density
Existing
Bonus
Density
Proposed
Bonus
Density
Downtown (D) 25 40 40 60
Downtown Adjacent (DA) 18.5 30 25 50El Camino Real North-East (ECR NE) 25 30 40 50El Camino Real North-East Low Density (ECR NE-L) 20 30 30 40El Camino Real North-West (ECR NW) 25 30 40 50Station Area East (SA E) 50 50 60 80 Station Area West (SA W) 50 50 60 80
El Camino Real South-West (ECR SW) 25 30 40 50
Note: Density, FAR, and height would remain as-is for the ECR SE and ECR NE-R subdistricts.

PROPOSED DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS
17 Select Existing and Proposed Development Standards for Downtown Subdistrict Development Standard Existing Proposed
Maximum Base FAR 2.00 2.00Maximum Public Benefit Bonus FAR 2.25 2.25Maximum Step Up Base FAR N/A 2.40*Maximum Step Up Public Benefit Bonus FAR N/A 3.00*Base Residential Density 25 du/ac max. 20 du/ac min. / 40 du/ac max.

Public Benefit Bonus Residential Density 40 du/ac max. 20 du/ac min. / 60 du/ac max.

Maximum Building Height 38 ft 50-60 ft**
Maximum Public Façade Height 30 ft 38 ft
*Step up FAR would be available to developments that provide between 50 percent and 65 percent of the overall building FAR toward residential uses and one of the following options: a) a minimum 50 percent of units with two or more bedrooms including 5 percent of units with three or more bedrooms, or b) all for-sale units.**The maximum height for buildings with a residential density of 20 to 40 du/ac would be 50 feet. For buildings with a density over 40 du/ac, 60 feet would be the maximum.  Development standards for six other subdistricts would be modified
 The limit of 680 residential units in the Specific Plan area would be removed
 A minimum density of 20 du/ac would be required to set a basic floor for residential development
 Minimum parking rate would be removed; maximum
parking rates may be established

OTHER PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN CHANGES
18 PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ZONING

DISTRICTS
19 Commercial Districts Existing and Proposed Residential Densities (in du/ac) District Proposed Change Proposed Density
Administrative and Professional, Restrictive (C-1)
Add new residential mixed use regulations 30 du/ac max.

Administrative and Professional (C-1-A) Combine with C-2-B 30 du/ac max.

Administrative, Professional and Research, Restrictive (C-1-C) Maintain AHO/Carveout OnlyNeighborhood Shopping (C-2) Combine Most Parcels with C-2-B 30 du/ac max.Neighborhood Shopping, Restrictive (C-2-A) Combine with C-2-B 30 du/ac max.Neighborhood Mixed Use, Restrictive (C-2-B) Maintain 30 du/ac max.Neighborhood Commercial, Special (C-2-S) Combine with C-2-B 30 du/ac max.

General Commercial (C-4) Combine with C-2-B or similar 30 du/ac max.

Office (O) Rezone portion to new O-R district 20-30 du/ac max.  10,000 square-foot minimum lot size requirement for R3 properties located around downtown would be removed
 “Carveout” residential development would be permitted on certain housing opportunity sites included in the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA housing inventory. – Intent would be to allow housing development of one or two acres that could be located anywhere on the applicable parcels

OTHER PROPOSED COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT CHANGES
20  Designed to encourage development of affordable units for low, very low, and extremely low income households
 Would be expanded to include all 6th Cycle RHNA housing opportunity sites, in addition to the Specific Plan area  Would be modified to work in combination with the state density bonus law on a site
 AHO density bonus for any applicable site would be set at 55 du/ac minus the base density of the underlying zoning for the site. By applying the AHO:
• Developments that qualify for the maximum state density bonus of 50 percent could achieve a development with a total density of up to 83 du/ac • 100 percent affordable developments that qualify for the state density bonus of 80 percent achieve a development with a total density of up to 99 du/ac

PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY CHANGES
21  Examples

PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING OVERLAY CHANGES
22 Example AHO Application to C-1 Zoned Parcel with 80 Percent State Density Bonus Acres Max
Density
Max Base
Units
AHO
Density
Bonus
AHO
Bonus
Units
Base Units +
AHO Bonus
Units
80% State
Density
Bonus Units
Total
Units
Total
Density
(A) (B)
A*B=
(C)
55-B=
(D)
A*D=
(E)
C+E=
(F)
F*.80=
(G)
F+G=
(H)
H/A=
(I)

1.0 30 du/ac 30 units 25 du/ac 25 units 55 units 44 units 99 units 99 du/ac Example AHO Application to C-1 Zoned Parcel with 50 Percent State Density Bonus Acres Max
Density
Max Base
Units
AHO
Density
Bonus
AHO
Bonus
Units
Base Units +
AHO Bonus
Units
50% State
Density
Bonus Units
Total
Units
Total
Density
(A) (B)
A*B=
(C)
55-B=
(D)
A*D=
(E)
C+E=
(F)
F*.50=
(G)
F+G=
(H)
H/A=
(I)

1.0 30 du/ac 30 units 25 du/ac 25 units 55 units 28 units 83 units 83 du/ac  Proposed changes to densities, FARs, and heights in Specific Plan area should increase further
 Create adequate open space and recreation facilities on- and off-site for new developments
 Set building façade heights near low-density residential lower than max building heights
 Remove minimum parking rates and explore max rates in Specific Plan area
 Consider removing requirement for certain single-family residents to obtain use permits
 Combine parcels of similar size in C-1-A, C-2, C-2-A, C-2-B, C-2-S, and C-4 zoning districts into single district with C-2-B mixed-use zoning as a starting point

PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
23 THANK YOU