TOWN OF
Portola Valley
AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW
Prepared for:
Town of Portola Valley
June 2026
2023 - 2031 Housing Element Update
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TOWN COUNCIL
Sarah WernikoffCraig Taylor, Mayor
Mary Hufty, Vice Mayor
Rebecca Flynn
Judith Hasko
Rebecca FlynnHelen Wolter
Jeff Aalfs
Former
Craig Hughes, Mayor
Sarah Wernikoff, Mayor
Jeff Aalfs
John Richards
Maryann Derwin
Jeff Aalfs
Maryann Derwin
Craig Hughes
John Richards
Sarah Wernikoff
PLANNING COMMISSION
Jon Goulden, Chair
Nicholas Targ, Vice Chair
Lynda Brothers, Vice Chair
Ronny Krashinsky, Vice Chair
Nicholas Targ
Doug Morss Anne Kopf-Sill
Ronny Krashinsky
Karen Vahtra
Lynda Brothers
Judith Hasko
Craig Taylor
Former
Jon Goulden, Chair
Anne Kopf-Sill
Judith Hasko
Craig Taylor
AD HOC HOUSING ELEMENT COMMITTEE
Jocelyn McArthur, Chair
Al Sill, Vice Chair, and Architectural & Site Control Commission Representative
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ii AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Jeff Aalfs, Town Council Subcommittee
Sarah Wernikoff, Town Council Subcommittee
Anne Kopf-Sill, Planning Commissioner Representative
Nicholas Targ, Planning Commissioner Representative
Andrew Pierce, Race and Equity Committee Representative Aimee Armsby
Sarah Dorahy
Erik Doyle
William Kelly
Bob Turcott
Janey Ward
Helen Wolter
TOWN STAFF
Darcy Smith, Town Manager
Sarah Cawrse, Planning and Building Director
Ocoee Wilson, Senior Planner
Jon Biggs, Interim Planning & Building Director
Adrienne Smith, Senior Planner
Sharif Etman, Town Manager
Former
Jon Biggs, Interim Planning & Building Director
Adrienne Smith, Senior Planner
Sharif Etman, Town Manager
Laura C. Russell, AICP, Planning & Building Director
Jeremy Dennis, Town Manager
Melvin Gaines, Assistant Town Manager
Dylan Parker, Assistant Planner
CONSULTANTS
Urban Planning Partners
388 17th Street, Oakland, CA 94612
Curtis Banks, AICP, Principal Planner
Carla Violet, Associate Principal
Claire Mei, Planner
Emily Culling, Assistant Planner
Alexia Rotberg, Associate Planner
Alyssa Chung, Planner
Lisa Wise Consulting
870 Market Street #977, San Francisco, CA 94102
Roger Eastman, Director
Monica Szydlik, Senior Associate
Caroline Chen, Associate
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................1 PURPOSE AND CONTENT................................................................................................................................ 1 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PROCESS......................................................................................................... 1 STATE LAW AND LOCAL PLANNING............................................................................................................... 2 HOUSING ELEMENT ORGANIZATION ............................................................................................................ 3 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT .......................................................................................................................... 4 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS.......................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................7 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA) ..................................................................................... 8 PORTOLA VALLEY POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS ..........................................................17 EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME TRENDS.........................................................................................................20 HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS ...................................................................................23 SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS ....................................................................................................................25 SECTION 3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING.............................................................31 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................................................31 PRIMARY FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................32 CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AND FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN ................................................................38 SECTION 4. CONSTRAINTS .................................................................................................................43 GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS...............................................................................43 NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS........................................................................................................67 NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS SPECIFIC TO PORTOLA VALLEY ..................................................72 SECTION 5. RESOURCES .....................................................................................................................95 FINANCIAL RESOURCES.................................................................................................................................95 INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................98 REGULATORY RESOURCES............................................................................................................................99 SECTION 6. ADEQUATE SITES.......................................................................................................... 109 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA) .................................................................................109 CREDIT TOWARDS RHNA.............................................................................................................................112 SITE INVENTORY METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................................116 SITES INVENTORY.........................................................................................................................................119 PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS......................................................................................124 SITES SUMMARY...........................................................................................................................................140 OPT-IN HOUSING DIVERSIFICATION PROGRAM.......................................................................................142 SECTION 7. GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS .......................................................................... 145 PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX .....................................................................................................167 2023-2031 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES .........................................................................................................177
TABLE OF CONTENTS
iv AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Community Engagement
Appendix B: Housing Needs Data Report
Appendix C: Fair Housing Assessment
Appendix D: Review of the 2015-2023 Housing Element Performance
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW v List of Figures
Figure 2-1: Population Growth Trends............................................................................................................17 Figure 2-2: Population By Age, 2000-2019......................................................................................................18 Figure 2-3: Senior and Youth Population By Race .........................................................................................19 Figure 2-4: Portola Valley Population by Race, 2000-2019 ...........................................................................20 Figure 2-5: Jobs-Household Ratio ....................................................................................................................21 Figure 2-6: Households by Household Income Level....................................................................................22 Figure 2-7: Housing Tenure..............................................................................................................................24 Figure 3-1: Portola Valley Population by Race Compared to Region...........................................................33 Figure 3-2: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Area Median Income (AMI), Portola Valley, 2019.................35 Figure 3-3: Overpayment (Cost Burden) by Tenure, Portola Valley, 2019 ..................................................35 Figure 3-4: Cost Burden by Income for Renters, Portola Valley, 2015-2019................................................36 Figure 3-5: Cost Burden by Income for Owners, Portola Valley, 2015-2019................................................36 Figure 4-1: U.S. Average Interest Rates – February 2019 – January 2022 ...................................................72 Figure 4-2: Sites Inventory With Fault Setbacks .............................................................................................75 Figure 4-3: Sites Inventory With Flood Zones.................................................................................................76 Figure 4-4: Sites Inventory With Ground Movement Potential – Least Soil Stability .................................77 Figure 4-5: Sites Inventory With Slopes Greater Than 30% ..........................................................................81 Figure 4-6: Sites Inventory With Parcels with Single Evacuation Routes.....................................................82 Figure 4-7: Sites Inventory and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones .......................................................83 Figure 4-8: Sites Inventory with Moritz Map Vegetative Fuel Types ............................................................84 Figure 6-1: ADU Building Permits Issued 2021-2023; ADU Applications in 2023.....................................114 Figure 6-2: Adequate Housing Sites Inventory Map....................................................................................120
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vi AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT List of Tables
Table 2-1: The Town of Portola Valley’s Past and Current RHNA ................................................................. 9 Table 2-2: Unsheltered Homeless Count by San Mateo County Jurisdiction............................................29 Table 3-1: Summary Matrix of Fair Housing Issues and Actions ................................................................39 Table 4-1: General Plan Residential Land Use Designations and Zoning Districts...................................46 Table 4-2: Portola Valley Uses in Residential Zoning Districts ....................................................................48 Table 4-3: Residential Density Combining District Development Standards ............................................51 Table 4-4: Slopes and Minimum Parcel Areas in S-D Combining Districts ................................................52 Table 4-5 Length of Time Between Application Approval and Building Permit Application, Examples .........................................................................................................................................63 Table 4-6: Fees for a Hypothetical Single-Family Home ..............................................................................64 Table 4-7: Total Fees per Unit Comparison: San Mateo County Jurisdictions (Includes Entitlement, Building Permits, and Impact Fees) .......................................................................65 Table 4-8: Total Fees as a Percentage of Total Development Costs...........................................................66 Table 4-9: Summary of Portola Valley Fees Compared to Median.............................................................66 Table 4-10: San Mateo County Single-Family Land Sites up to 1 Acre, 2018-2021.....................................69 Table 4-11: Disposition of Applications by Income of Applicant, 2020........................................................71 Table 4-12: Housing Sites by Vegetation Type................................................................................................79 Table 5-1: Federal and State Funding Programs ..........................................................................................96 Table 6-1: RHNA Affordability Levels in Portola Valley ..............................................................................110 Table 6-2: Portola Valley Regional Housing Needs Allocation (2023-2031).............................................111 Table 6-3: Regional Housing Needs Allocation Buffer ...............................................................................111 Table 6-4: Approved Pipeline Units and Units Pending Approval ............................................................113 Table 6-5: RHNA Credits Summary ..............................................................................................................116 Table 6-6: Adequate Sites Land Inventory...................................................................................................121 Table 6-7: Housing Sites Summary ..............................................................................................................141 Table 7-1: Program Implementation Matrix ...............................................................................................168 Table 7-2: Quantified Objectives for Portola Valley ...................................................................................177 PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 1 SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION
The Housing Element of the General Plan identifies and analyzes existing and projected housing needs and contains the official policies for the preservation, conservation, rehabilitation, and production of housing in the Town of Portola Valley. This Housing Element covers the Planning Period from January 2023 through January 2031.
PURPOSE AND CONTENT
The Town of Portola Valley’s Housing Element is the component of the Town’s General Plan that addresses housing needs and opportunities for present and future residents through 2031. It provides the primary policy guidance for local decision-making related to housing. The Housing Element of the General Plan is the only General Plan Element that requires review and certification by the State of California.
The Housing Element provides a detailed analysis of Portola Valley’s demographic, economic, and housing characteristics as required by State Law. The Housing Element does this through assessing the success of the previous Housing Element, the need for and status of housing in the town, constraints on the provision of housing, and sites available for housing. Building on this foundation, the Element sets forth the goals and policies of the Town with regard to housing and establishes programs to increase the supply of housing, and especially affordable housing. This is the 6th update and revision of the Housing Element which was first adopted by the Town of Portola Valley in 1969.
HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE PROCESS
The California State legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every Californian as a State-wide goal. Local planning programs play a critical part in achieving this goal; therefore, the Legislature mandates that all jurisdictions prepare a Housing Element as part of their comprehensive General Plans (California Government Code Section 65580 et al.).
The Town intends to review this Housing Element annually and update it not less than every eight years to ensure it remains relevant and reflects the community’s changing housing needs. The Town will annually review its progress implementing the Housing Element through Annual Progress Reports required to be submitted to the State. The Town is updating its Housing Element at this time to comply with the update required of all jurisdictions in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) region, as well as to respond to the unique character of the town.
Community engagement has been an integral part of the update process. Portola Valley’s community was consulted throughout the update process and diligent efforts were made to reach those in protected classes and communities who have historically been left out of 1 | INTRODUCTION
2 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT planning processes. The community engagement process and results are detailed in Appendix A of the Housing Element.
STATE LAW AND LOCAL PLANNING
CONSISTENCY WITH STATE LAW
The Housing Element responds to State requirements as set forth in Government Code Section 65580 et seq. Accordingly, this revision addresses Portola Valley’s share of regional housing need as determined by the San Mateo County subregion allocation process for the 2023-2031 planning period.
There have been substantive changes to State law since the Town’s last Housing Element.
Some of the most notable changes in housing legislation are described below. ▪ Assembly Bill (AB) 68, AB 587, AB 671, AB 881, and Senate Bill (SB) 13. Further incentivize the development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) through streamlined permits, reduced setback requirements, increased allowable square footage, reduced parking requirements, and reduced fees.
▪ AB 1763. Requires jurisdictions to provide a larger density bonus and enhanced concessions to development projects that restrict 100% of their units as affordable to lower- and moderate-income households and provides greater bonuses for such projects when they are within 0.5 miles of a major transit stop. ▪ AB 101. Requires jurisdictions to allow low barrier navigation centers by-right in areas zoned for mixed uses and in nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses if the center meets specified requirements.
▪ AB 686. Require public agencies in California to affirmatively further fair housing, which is defined as taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity by replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns; transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity; and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws.
▪ AB 1255 and AB 1486. Identify and prioritize State and local surplus lands available for housing development affordable to lower-income households. ▪ AB 2162. Requires that supportive housing be a permitted use without discretionary review, in zones where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, including nonresidential zones permitting multi-family uses.
▪ SB 330. Enacts changes to local development policies, permitting, and processes. These changes include establishing new criteria on application requirements and processing times for housing developments; preventing localities from decreasing the housing capacity of any site, such as through downzoning or increasing open space requirements; preventing localities from establishing non-objective standards; and requiring that any 1 | INTRODUCTION
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 3 proposed demolition of housing units be accompanied by a project that would replace or exceed the total number of units demolished.
GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
The California Government Code (Section 65300.5) requires internal consistency among each Element of the General Plan. The General Plan Elements shall provide an integrated, internally consistent, and compatible statement of policy. The Town of Portola Valley continuously reviews the General Plan for internal consistency when updates or amendments occur. The Town has reviewed the other Elements of the General Plan and determined that the Housing Element is not consistent with other elements; therefore, the Town plans to amend other elements at the same time the Housing Element is adopted so that the General Plan will be internally consistent.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND PROGRAMS
The Housing Element identifies goals, objectives, policies, and actions for the 2023-2031 planning period that directly addresses existing and future housing needs in Portola Valley.
Town plans and programs work to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the Housing Element.
HOUSING ELEMENT ORGANIZATION
Consistent with State law, this Housing Element consists of the following major components:
▪ Introduction [Section 1]: Explains the purpose, process, and contents of the Housing Element.
▪ Housing Needs Assessment [Section 2]: Includes an analysis of population and employment trends, the Town’s fair share of regional housing needs (RHNA), household characteristics and the condition of housing stock.
▪ Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing [Section 3]: Summarizes the ways the Town is affirmatively furthering fair housing under the requirements of Assembly Bill 686.
Affirmatively furthering fair housing means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combatting discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics.”
▪ Constraints [Section 4]: Reviews governmental constraints, including land use controls, fees, and processing requirements, as well as non-governmental constraints, such as construction costs, availability of land and financing, physical environmental conditions, and units at-risk of conversion that may impede the development, preservation, and maintenance of housing.
▪ Resources [Section 5]: Identifies resources available for the production and maintenance of housing, including an inventory of land suitable for residential development and discussion of federal, state, and local financial resources and programs available to address the Town’s housing goals.
1 | INTRODUCTION
4 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Adequate Sites [Section 6]: Describes and maps the land suitable for residential development to accommodate the Town’s RHNA.
▪ Goals, Policies, and Programs [Section 7]: Details specific goals, policies, and programs the Town will carry out over the planning period to address Portola Valley’s housing goals.
Given the detail and lengthy analysis in developing the Housing Element, supporting background material is included in the following appendices:
▪ Appendix A: Community Engagement
▪ Appendix B: Housing Needs Data Report
▪ Appendix C: Assessment of Fair Housing
▪ Appendix D: Review of the 2015-2023 Housing Element Performance ▪ Appendix E: Sites Inventory Spreadsheet
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
The Town has a proud history of community engagement and volunteerism that has existed since the Town’s incorporation. It is customary for residents to participate at very high levels in all aspects of government. An Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee with 15 members was formed in August 2021 with the charge of developing a Housing Element that complies with State Law and facilitating completion of the Housing Element on the State’s’ required timeline.
The Ad Hoc Committee met at least monthly during the Housing Element update process with community participation of 25-160 people per meeting. The Town also held several community meetings, focus group meetings, and decision-maker meetings to discuss various aspects of the Housing Element update. During the Housing Element update process, the Town posted information on the Town’s website, social media, distributed information through the Town’s e-Notification system with over 450 subscribers and posted information on the Portola Valley Forum, an active list serve with over 3,600 members. Key lessons learned during the community engagement process to date include:
▪ The community is interested in producing real affordable housing. ▪ ADUs alone won’t be enough to satisfy RHNA and get certified. ▪ Equity and Fair Housing are important.
▪ Using Town-owned property makes affordable housing more feasible. ▪ There is discomfort with upzoning single family homes if owners don’t want to. ▪ Rural character is important—but means slightly different things to different people. ▪ Safety is the first priority, then spread units throughout the community if feasible. ▪ Preserving local business is important.
All meetings are described in more detail in Appendix A.
In addition to conversations focused on Portola Valley, the 21 Elements working group provided additional opportunities for community input. 21 Elements is a multi‐year, multi‐ phase collaboration between all San Mateo County jurisdictions, along with partner agencies and stakeholder organizations, that aims to support jurisdictions in developing, adopting, and implementing local housing policies and programs. Let's Talk Housing is a collaborative effort 1 | INTRODUCTION
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 5 between all 21 jurisdictions in San Mateo County focused on increasing awareness of and participation in the Housing Element update process. The 21 Elements working group organized an additional series of introductory meetings about the Housing Element update attended by more than 1,000 community members countywide, an All About RHNA webinar, four Stakeholder Listening Sessions that convened more than 30 groups, and a four-part Creating an Affordable Future webinar series to help educate community members about local housing issues.
The draft Housing Element is available at Town Hall and at the library, as well as on the website. Town residents and others interested in housing in Portola Valley have had the opportunity to comment both at meetings and in writing. More detail about the Town’s community engagement efforts is included in Appendix A.
PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS
Since adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, the Town has re-evaluated the feasibility of the vacant portion of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site as a housing opportunity site. While constraints affecting the site were identified during prior Housing Element analysis, further evaluation undertaken as part of Housing Element implementation clarified the extent to which those constraints limit the feasibility of residential development. In particular, the limited developable area (after accounting for creek and scenic setbacks) results in an irregular lot configuration with limited development potential.
To ensure continued compliance with State Housing Element law, the Town is proposing to replace the units vacant portion of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site with a combination of newly identified housing opportunity sites and an existing site with increased development capacity. Skyline Open Space and Village Square are newly identified sites proposed for rezoning to a new Mixed-Use High Density zoning designation, while Christ Church is an existing Housing Element site proposed for rezoning at the same Mixed-Use High Density designation. Together, these sites are proposed to be rezoned at densities sufficient to accommodate the Town’s remaining RHNA at all income levels, including very low-income units. The Housing Element has been updated throughout the document to reflect these changes.
Collectively, the proposed replacement sites maintain the total number of housing units identified in the Sites Inventory (at all income levels) and continue to demonstrate the Town’s ability to meet its RHNA, while better aligning the Housing Element with site-specific constraints and implementation feasibility. Following HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will proceed with adoption of the required zoning amendments within 90 days.
1 | INTRODUCTION
6 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This page intentionally left blank
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 7 SECTION 2. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
To successfully plan for housing needs, the demographic and socioeconomic variables of the community must be assessed. This section discusses the components of housing needs, which include population characteristics, household characteristics, and employment and housing stock conditions. Unless otherwise specified, the data and figures in this section are specific to the Town of Portola Valley. This section highlights the primary findings of the Housing Needs Assessment Report prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)/Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Additional information and graphs can be found in Appendix B: Housing Needs Data Report. For the Assessment of Fair Housing required under California’s Assembly Bill 686 of 2018, please see Appendix C or a summarized version in Section 3, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing.
The data for this section has been collected using the most current available data from the ABAG, the 2010 U.S. Census and 2015-2019 5-year American Community Survey, 1 the
Department of Housing and Urban Development Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), the California Department of Finance, the San Mateo Annual Homeless Point in Time Count Report, and other currently available real estate market data. These data are samples and as such, are subject to sampling variability. This means that data is an estimate, and that other estimates could be possible if another set of respondents had been reached.
A summary of key facts from the ABAG/MTC Housing Needs Assessment included in Appendix B is below:
▪ Age – In 2000, the median age in Portola Valley was 47.2; by 2019, this figure had increased to about 51 years. More specifically, the population of those under 14 has decreased since 2010, while the 65-and-over population had increased. The 15-24 age group also jumped between 2010 and 2019.
▪ Race/Ethnicity – Since 2000, the percentage of residents in Portola Valley identifying as White has decreased—and by the same token the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased—by 9.7%, as of 2019. ▪ Number of Homes – The number of homes in Portola Valley increased, 1.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for San Mateo County and below the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
▪ Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all Portola Valley residents to live and thrive in the community. o Ownership – The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $2M+ in 2019. Home prices increased by 149% from 2010 to 2020.
1 The 2010 U.S. Census and 5-year ACS estimates were used as much of this work was done before the 2020 U.S.
Census data was publicly available.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
8 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT o Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in Portola Valley was $2,940 in 2019. Rental prices increased by 47% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $117,760 per year.2 ▪ Housing Type – In 2020, 81.1% of homes in Portola Valley were single-family detached,
0.0% were single-family attached, 2.1% were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 16.8% were medium or large multi-family (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of singlefamily units increased more than multi-family units. ▪ Cost Burden – In Portola Valley, 12.9% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 13.5% of households are severely cost burden and use the majority of their income for housing.
▪ Special Housing Needs – In Portola Valley, 10.2% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 8.0% of Portola Valley households (135 households) are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 5.8% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.
To address these housing needs, the Town has developed a comprehensive policy program, detailed in Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs, which includes introducing multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts to increase housing development. These are the first multi-family zoning districts in the Town’s history.
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA)
The RHNA process is part of Housing Element Law used to determine how many new homes, and the affordability of those homes, each local government must plan for in its Housing Element. This process is repeated every eight years, and for this cycle the Bay Area is planning for the period from 2023 to 2031. In the case of the San Francisco Bay Area, ABAG and the State department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) determine the number of housing units that should be produced in the region. This determination of need is primarily based on estimated job growth. ABAG then allocated that need for each jurisdiction, based on their share of the region’s households, and adjusted for access to high opportunity areas, proximity of jobs to transportation and transit, and an equity adjustment to ensure that each jurisdiction receives an allocation of lower-income units that is at least proportional to its share of the region’s total households in 2020 (see Table 2-1). As shown in Table 2-1, the amount of housing being required is significantly higher than required for the last Housing Element cycle. Approximately 45.4% of all new housing is required to be affordable to low- and very low-income households.
2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices. 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 9 TABLE 2-1: THE TOWN OF PORTOLA VALLEY’S PAST AND CURRENT RHNA 0BHousing Element Cycle 1BVery Low 2BLow 3BModerate
4BAbove
Moderate 5BTotal
36B2014 – 2022 (5th Cycle) 37B21 38B15 39B15 40B13 41B64 42B2023 – 2031 (6th Cycle) 43B73 4B42 45B39 46B99 47B253 Source: ABAG, 2021. Final RHNA Allocation Report 2023-2031, December.
State law also requires that the Housing Element include an analysis of subsidized affordable units at risk of conversion to market rate. At-risk units are defined as multi-family rental housing complexes which are eligible to convert to market-rate due to the expiration of some types of affordability restrictions, such as termination of subsidy contract, mortgage prepayment, or expiring use restrictions. According to a database maintained by the California Housing Partnership, there are no federal or state subsidized affordable multi-family developments in Portola Valley. There are three deed-restricted affordable units, none of which are subsidized nor at risk of conversion to market-rate.
SAN MATEO COUNTY
To provide context, this subsection begins with the demographic and socioeconomic variables of the surrounding County first, then moves on to data specific to Portola Valley.
San Mateo County makes up 10% of the total Bay Area population, which is the fifth largest metropolitan area in the country. The number of people living here has steadily grown over the past few decades. In 2020, our population was estimated to be 773,244, an increase of 19% since 1990.
3 That trend is expected to continue–despite the impact of the pandemic– because jobs continue to be added.
People are also living longer, with those 65 and over expected to make up nearly 20% of the population by 2026. Equally important is the fact that Millennials recently surpassed the Baby Boomers as our largest generation. As Millennials enter their 40s, they will continue to shape 3 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
10 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT countywide housing needs. By 2026, people 25-44 and 45-64 will make up more than 50% of the population.4
What does this mean for housing needs?
Both seniors and Millennials have shown a preference for more walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods that are close to work, schools, parks, and amenities. The majority of seniors prefer to stay in their homes and communities, known as aging-in-place. Yet many live on fixed incomes and may have mobility issues as they age, which require supportive services.
Simultaneously, Millennials are less likely to own homes and have less savings than previous generations; they are more likely to live alone and delay marriage; and as they start families, may be in greater need of support when purchasing their first home. Coupled with increasing housing prices, it is more difficult for younger generations to rent or purchase a home than it was for current residents.
We must address how to support our seniors as they get older so they can stay in their homes and communities, and make sure young people, new families, and our workers can find housing they can afford that meets their needs.
4 Claritias Population Facts 2021.
Our population is
becoming more
diverse
Asian Latinx Other *
.5%
21.8%
4.6%
29.6%
Black White
*
39.2% 24.4%
2.2%
Race +
Ethnicity
2019
51.5% 22.6%
Race +
Ethnicity
2000
3.5%
*Due to small percentage, Other is grouped as American Indian, Alaska Native, “Other” or Multiple Races
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 11 San Mateo County is a very diverse place to
live, even when compared to the State of
California. Countywide, more than one-third
of the population is foreign-born and almost
half speaks a language other than English at
home. By contrast, a quarter of all
Californians are foreign-born and less than a
quarter speak a language other than English
at home. Over 120 identified languages are
spoken in San Mateo County, with top
languages including Spanish (17%), Chinese
(8%) and Tagalog (6%).
Our population has become increasingly
more diverse over time. In 2000, more than
half of people identified as White, which fell
to 39% in 2019, and is expected to decrease
further to 35% by 2026. However, while the
Asian and Latinx populations increased
during that time, but the Black population
decreased by almost half, from 3.5% to
2.2%.5
What does this mean for housing
needs?
When planning for housing, we need to
consider a variety of housing needs—like
larger homes for multi- generational families or those with more children—and how to create opportunities for everyone to access quality, affordable housing near schools, transit, jobs, and services.
Past exclusionary practices have prevented people of color from purchasing homes, living in certain neighborhoods, and building wealth over time. As a result, they are more likely to experience poverty, housing insecurity, displacement, and homelessness and while many of our communities are very diverse, we are still contending with segregation and a lack of equitable opportunities. To help prevent displacement due to gentrification and to create a future where it is possible for everyone to find the housing they need, it will be important to plan for a variety of housing types and affordability options in all neighborhoods.
Over the past 30 years, new home construction has not kept up with the number of jobs added to the economy. This has led to a housing shortage.
5 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.
61%
6 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
12 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT In 2020, there were 265,000 households in San Mateo County. By 2050 we expect that to increase by almost 50%, to 394,000.6 This growing demand will continue to put pressure on home prices and rents. Given that nearly 75% of our housing was built before 1980, there will also be a need to upgrade older homes. While upgrades will be essential to make sure housing is of high quality and safe to residents, redevelopment or repair can sometimes result in a loss of affordable housing, especially in older multi-family or apartment buildings.
For every six low-wage jobs ($20/hour) there is one home in the county that is affordable to such a worker (monthly rent of $1,500).7
What does this mean for housing needs?
Along with planning for more housing, we also need to consider how to best support the development of low- and moderate-income housing options while preserving existing affordable homes. This includes transitional and supportive housing options for the unhoused and universal design to meet accessibility and mobility needs.
Although the majority of housing produced in the past few decades has been single-family homes or larger multi-family buildings, some households have become increasingly interested in “missing middle” housing—smaller homes that include duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, cottage clusters, garden apartments, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). These smaller homes may provide options to a diversity of community members across income, age, and household size. The Bay Area is a great place to live, but throughout the region and county there just isn’t enough housing for all income levels, which has caused costs to go up. Home prices and rents have been steadily increasing the past two decades, but in recent years the jump has been dramatic. Since 2009, median rent increased 41% to $2,200, and median home values have more than doubled to $1,445,000.
8 6 Plan Bay Area 2050 Projected Growth Pattern, U.S. Census, American Community Survey. 7 Association of Bay Area Governments Jobs Housing Fit. 8 San Mateo County Association of Realtors, Zillow.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 13 Overall, many residents are paying too much for
housing, while many others have been priced out
entirely. If a household spends more than 30% of
its monthly income on housing, it is considered
cost-burdened. If it spends more than 50%, it is
considered severely cost-burdened. Renters are
usually more cost-burdened than homeowners.
While home prices have increased dramatically,
homeowners often benefit from mortgages at
fixed rates, whereas renters are subject to ups and
downs of the market.
In San Mateo County, 17% of households spend
half or more of their income on housing, while 19%
spend between a one-third to half. However, these
rates vary greatly across income and race. Of
those who are extremely low-income—making 30%
or less of the area median income (AMI)—88% spend more than half of their income on housing. Latino renters and Black homeowners are disproportionately cost-burdened and severely cost-burdened. Given that people in this situation have a small amount of income to 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
14 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT start with, spending more than half what they make on housing leaves them with very little to meet other costs, such as food and healthcare. Very low-income households paying more than 50% of their income on rent are often at a greater risk of homelessness.9 As a result, more people are living in overcrowded or unsafe living conditions. They are also making the tough choice to move further away and commute long distances to work or school, which has created more traffic. Since low-income residents and communities of color are the most costburdened, they are at the highest risk for eviction, displacement, and homelessness.
What does this mean for housing needs?
Although there are complex supply, demand, and economic factors impacting costs, not having enough housing across all incomes has meant rent and prices are just higher. Programs and policies that can support more homes across all income levels, particularly very low-, low-, and moderate-income, are essential, as are more safe, affordable housing options to address homelessness.
The Bay Area and San Mateo County have had very strong economies for decades. While some communities have more jobs and some have less, we have all been impacted by the imbalance of job growth and housing.
Since 2010, we have added over 100,000 jobs but only 10,000 homes.10 At the same time, our population is growing naturally, meaning more people are living longer while our children are growing up and moving out into homes of their own. All of this impacts housing demand and contributes to the rising cost of homes. We need more housing to create a better balance.
In 2020, there were 416,700 jobs, and by 2050 we expect that to increase 22% to 507,000.
11 While some jobs pay very well, wages for many others haven’t kept up with how costly it is to live here.
9 U.S. Census, American Community Survey.
10 U.S. Census American Community Survey, State of CA Employment Development Dept (EDD). 11 Plan Bay Area 2050 Projected Growth Pattern,
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 15 What does this mean for housing needs?
As we plan for housing, we need to consider the needs of our workforce—folks who are a part of our communities but often end their day by commuting long distances to a place they can afford. Many have been displaced in recent decades or years, as housing rent and prices soared along with a job-generating economy. The lack of workforce housing affects us all, with teachers, fire fighters, health care professionals, food service providers, and many essential workers being excluded from the communities they contribute to every day. The long-term sustainability of our communities depends on our ability to create more affordable and equitable housing options.
To be considered low- or moderate-income in the Bay Area means a very different thing than in most parts of the country. The income or wage gap—the difference between the highest and lowest wages—is large in our region. Affordable housing here can mean that your favorite hairstylist, your child’s principal, or the friendly medical assistant at your doctor’s office can qualify for—and often needs—below market rate or subsidized affordable housing so they can live close to their work.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
16 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT The starting point for this calculation is the Area Median Income (AMI)—the middle spot between the lowest and highest incomes earned in San Mateo County. Simply put, half of households make more, and half of households make less. Moderate-income is 80% to 120% of the AMI, low-income is 50% to 80% AMI, and very-low-income is 30% to 50% AMI. Below 30% AMI is considered extremely low-income. The rule of thumb is households should expect to pay about a third of their income on housing.
In San Mateo County, the AMI is $104,700
for a single person, $119,700 for a
household of two and $149,600 for a
family of four. When we talk about
affordable housing, we mean housing that
is moderately priced for low- or moderateincome residents so that new families and the workforce can live in our communities.
Affordable housing programs are generally
for those who earn 80% or below the AMI,
which is $102,450 for a single person,
$117,100 for a household of two, and
$146,350 a year for a household of four.12
What does this mean for housing
needs?
Given the price of land in San Mateo County
and what it costs to build new housing,
creating affordable housing is extremely
challenging—and often impossible without
some form of subsidy. Sometimes this is in
the form of donated land from a local
government or school district. Sometimes this is in the form of incentives to developers or zoning rules requiring affordable units to be included. Most commonly, subsidies happen through special financing, grants, and tax credits. Often all of these factors and more are needed to make affordable housing work. The housing element update process is an opportunity for each community to look at what is possible and put in place policies and programs to help make affordability a reality.
12 State of CA Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 2021 Income Limits. Income 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 17
PORTOLA VALLEY POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND
TRENDS
Housing needs are generally influenced by population and employment trends. This subsection provides a summary of the changes to the population size, age, and racial composition of the Portola Valley.
POPULATION GROWTH
Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. San Mateo County makes up 10% of the total Bay Area population, which is the fifth largest metropolitan area in the country. In 2020, the County’s population was estimated to be 773,244, an increase of 19% since 1990. That trend is expected to continue—despite the impact of the pandemic–because jobs continue to be added.
As Figure 2-1 highlights, from 1990 to 2000, Portola Valley’s population increased by 6.4%, while it decreased by 2.4% during the first decade of the 2000s. This is in stark contrast to the Bay Area region which grew by 14.8%. In the most recent decade, the population of Portola Valley increased by 5.8%. The population of Portola Valley makes up 0.6% of San Mateo County.13 As of 2020, the population of Portola Valley is estimated to be 4,607.
FIGURE 2-1: POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series Note: The data shown on the graph represents population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the first year shown. The data points represent the relative population growth in each of these geographies relative to their populations in that year.
For some jurisdictions, a break may appear at the end of each decade (1999, 2009) as estimates are compared to census counts. DOF uses the decennial census to benchmark subsequent population estimates. 13 To compare the rate of growth across various geographic scales, Figure 2-1 shows population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the year 1990. This means that the data points represent the population growth (i.e., percent change) in each of these geographies relative to their populations in 1990. 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
Index (Year %s = Index 100)
Index
Bay Area
Index
San Mateo County
Index
Portola Valley
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
18 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
AGE COMPOSITION
The median age for community members in Portola Valley has increased from 47.2 in 2000 to 51 in 2019. In 2019, 23% of the population was under 18 and 29% (1,336 residents) was over
65. Between 2010 and 2019, there was a large increase in the amount of young people from age 15 to 24 in the Town of Portola Valley (see Figure 2-2).
FIGURE 2-2: POPULATION BY AGE, 2000-2019
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001.
An increase in the older population may mean there is a developing need for more senior housing options. There has also been a move by many to age-in-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multi-family and accessible units are also needed. Regionally, families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing. People of color14 make up 7.4% of seniors and 20.3% of the population is youth under 18 (see Figure 2-3).
14 Here, we count all non-white racial groups. 223 631 311 225
642
829
663
415
359
164
175
634
337
144
394
794
702
513
403
257
104
620
557
128
408
751
717
479
490
338
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
Age 0-
4 Age 5-
14 Age
15-24
Age
25-34
Age
35-44
Age
45-54
Age
55-64
Age
65-74
Age
75-84
Age
85+
Population
2000 2010 2019
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 19 FIGURE 2-3: SENIOR AND YOUTH POPULATION BY RACE
Note: In the sources for this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, and an overlapping category of Hispanic / non-Hispanic groups has not been shown to avoid double counting in the stacked bar chart.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G).
RACE AND ETHNICITY
Understanding the racial makeup of a town and region is important for designing and implementing effective housing policies and programs. Historically, these patterns are shaped by both market factors and government actions, such as exclusionary zoning, discriminatory lending practices and displacement that has occurred over time and continues to impact communities of color today. Since 2000, the percentage of residents in Portola Valley identifying as White has decreased and the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased by 9.7 percentage points (see Figure 2-4). However, Portola Valley remains much less diverse than the Bay Area as a whole. In 2019, 82% of the population was White, 6.7% was Hispanic or Latinx, 6.5% was Asian, and 0.4% was African American. 9% 6%
16%
80% 87% 93%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Age 0-17 Age 18-64 Age 65+
Population
White (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic)
Other Race or Multiple Races (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) Black or African American (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic)
Asian / API (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic)
American Indian or Alaska Native (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
20 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 2-4: PORTOLA VALLEY POPULATION BY RACE, 2000-2019 Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002.
EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME TRENDS
Generally, having a similar number of jobs and employed residents produces more benefits for a community, such as reducing traffic and climate impacts, and allowing people who work in the community to also live there. Smaller jurisdictions, like Portola Valley, typically will have more employed residents than jobs and export workers, while larger cities tend to have a surplus of jobs and import workers. This dynamic not only means many workers will need to prepare for longer commutes, but in the aggregate, it contributes to traffic congestion and time lost for all road users. Despite the number of jobs in Portola Valley increasing by 8.2%
4.1% 5.6% 6.5%
91.9% 88.2% 82.3%
4.1%
4.0% 6.7%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2000 2010 2019
Share of Population
Hispanic or Latinx
Other Race or Multiple Races, Non-Hispanic
White, Non-Hispanic
Black or African American, Non-Hispanic
Asian / API, Non-Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 21 between 2002 and 2018, the jobs-to-household ratio remains at 0.63 which is significantly less than San Mateo County and the Bay Area Region (see Figure 2-5).
FIGURE 2-5: JOBS-HOUSEHOLD RATIO
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state, and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment; households in a jurisdiction
Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are cross-walked to jurisdictions and summarized. The ratio compares place of work wage and salary jobs with households, or occupied housing units.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs), 2002-2018; California Department of Finance, E-5 (Households).
Portola Valley has a lower percentage of lower income households than the rest of the county and region, with 22% of households earning less than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI)15 compared to 40% of households in San Mateo County and 39% of households in the Bay Area as a whole (see Figure 2-6). This equates to 480 households currently living in Portola Valley who are below the AMI, and 255 households who are below 50% AMI which means they would qualify for very low-income housing.
15 The Area Median Income is the middle spot between the lowest and highest incomes earned. The AMI for the county is $104,700 for a single person, $119,700 for a household of two and $149,600 for a family of four.
0.50 0.70
0.90 1.10
1.30 1.50
1.70 Ratio
San Mateo County Bay Area Portola Valley
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
22 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 2-6: HOUSEHOLDS BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVEL
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Throughout the region, there are disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters. Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households. In Portola Valley, although the largest proportion of both renters and owners falls in the greater than 100% of AMI income group,
19.1% of renters earn less than 30% of AMI compared to 4.1% of owners, and 48.5% of renters earn less than 80% AMI compared to 16.1% of owners.
Poverty in Portola Valley is extremely low, with a rate close to zero. The more pressing issue faced by workers in Portola Valley is being able to afford housing as home and rental prices have greatly increased over time.
Some neighborhoods are identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” by the State of California based on a range of indicators such as access to quality schools, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors.16 However, 16 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 23 neighborhoods don’t always receive an equitable share of these community resources and may be designated as “Low Resource” if they lack these amenities. All Portola Valley residents live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” meaning there are no “Low Resource” neighborhoods in Portola Valley.
HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS
HOUSING GROWTH
The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in Portola Valley has increased 1.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is much lower than the growth rate for San Mateo County of 3.6% and the 5.0% growth rate of the Bay Area region’s housing stock during this time.
HOUSING COSTS AND COST BURDEN
Given high job growth and low housing growth in the county, the cost of housing in Portola Valley has increased significantly in the past decade:
Ownership – In 2020, the average sales price of a single-family home in Portola Valley was approximately $4,150,338. Home prices increased by 149% from 2010 to 2020. This change is significantly above the change in San Mateo County (107%) and the region (103%).
Rental Prices – Rental prices increased by 47% from 2009 to 2019. The median rent in 2019 was $2,940. To rent a home without cost burden, a household would need to make $117,760 per year.
While household incomes within Portola Valley are relatively high when compared to other jurisdictions, there are still households considered some level of cost-burdened. In Portola Valley, 12.9% of households spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing and are considered “cost-burdened” while 13.5% of households are severely cost-burdened and use over 50% of their income for housing. There are disparities in housing cost burden in Portola Valley by tenure, while 20.1% of property owners experience cost burden, 40.2% of renters experience the same. This disparity may be attributed to the Bay Area’s relatively high housing prices, as well as a lack of affordable rental housing options within the town, relative to need.
HOUSING TYPE AND TENURE
It is important to the Town of Portola Valley to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future, as indicated in the Housing Strategic Plan adopted in 2016 that emphasizes the needs of seniors, young people, and workers. High-cost areas, like Portola Valley, often have difficulty attracting and retaining important vital employees such as teachers, fire fighters, health care professionals, food service providers, and other essential workers that are important to the health and well-being of the town. In 2020, 81.1% of homes in Portola Valley were single-family detached, 0.0% were single-family attached, 2.1% were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 16.8% were medium or large multi- 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
24 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT family (5+ units). Within the Town of Portola Valley, multi-family units are comprised of units located at the Sequoias, a multi-unit buy-in retirement community located in the central portion of the town along Portola Road.
Between 2010 and 2020, the number of single-family detached units continued to increase more than any other unit type.
The number of residents who own their homes compared to those who rent their homes can also help identify the level of housing insecurity, which can be understood as the ability for individuals to stay in their homes and not be forced to leave due to increases in cost or owners’ activities outside of their control. Generally, renters may be displaced more quickly if prices increase, and are more likely to experience overcrowding. Overcrowding occurs when the number of people living in a household is greater than the home was designed to hold, defined by HCD as more than one occupant per room (not including bathrooms or kitchens).
Additionally, the Census Bureau considers units with more than 1.5 occupants per room to be severely overcrowded. In Portola Valley, 0.0% of both renter and owner households are severely overcrowded, but 8.1% of renters experience moderate overcrowding (1 to 1.5 occupants per room) compared to 0.0% for those that own.
In Portola Valley there are a total of 1,685 housing units, and fewer residents rent than own their homes: 22.6% versus 77.4% (see Figure 2-7). By comparison, 39.8% of households in San Mateo County are renters, while 43.9% of Bay Area households rent their homes.
FIGURE 2-7: HOUSING TENURE
Universe: Occupied housing units
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B25003.
The age of residents who rent or own their home can also signal the housing challenges a community is experiencing. Younger households tend to rent and may struggle to buy a first home in the Bay Area due to high housing costs. At the same time, senior homeowners seeking to downsize may have limited options in an expensive housing market. In Portola Valley, 0.0% of householders between the ages of 25 and 44 are renters, while 26.1% of householders over 65 are renters.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 25 Vacant units make up 7.7% of the overall housing stock in Portola Valley. The rental vacancy stands at 0.0%, while the ownership vacancy rate is 2.8%. Of the vacant units in Portola Valley, the most common type of vacancy according to Census data is for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use which included 104 units according to Census data from 2019. A vacancy rate of at least 5% for rental housing and 2% for ownership housing is generally considered a healthy balance between supply and demand.
HOUSING CONDITION
Generally, there is limited data on the extent of substandard housing issues in a community.
However, Census Bureau data gives a sense of some of the substandard conditions that may be present, specifically a lack of kitchen and plumbing facilities which is often used as an indicator of substandard housing conditions. Per US Census Data, 31.8% of renters in Portola Valley reported lacking a kitchen and 0% of renters lack plumbing, whereas 1.2% of property owners in the town report lacking a kitchen and 0% of property owners report lacking plumbing. It is likely that the high number of renters reporting a lack of kitchen facilities in the town may be attributed to The Sequoias retirement community located off Portola Road. This facility accommodates over 300 senior citizens and offers meal plans/packages to residents as well as studio living arrangements.
In addition to lacking plumbing or kitchen facilities, the age of a community’s housing stock can provide another indicator of overall housing conditions. Typically, housing over 30 years in age is likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include new plumbing, roof repairs, foundation work, and other repairs. In Portola Valley, the largest proportion of the housing stock was built between 1960 to 1979, with 763 units constructed during this period. While most of the town’s housing stock was constructed prior to the 30-year benchmark, due to the town’s high household incomes which allow for routine maintenance and improvements, the age of units in the town is not believed to contribute to substandard housing conditions. More so, existing homes in the town are bought and sold, new owners are anticipated to remodel and update housing units. Based on the above data, staff estimates that approximately 10 ownership units may require rehabilitation, mostly due to long term owners, or children of long-term owners, that may own property but lack discretionary income to fund improvements.
SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS
Finally, some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. Government Code Section 65583, subdivision (a)(7) requires each jurisdiction to include analyses for the following populations: senior households, persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities), large households, farmworkers, female-headed households, and homeless. For resources available for these special needs populations, see Section 5, Resources.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
26 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
SENIOR HOUSEHOLDS
Senior households often experience a combination of factors that can make accessing or keeping affordable housing a challenge. They often live on fixed incomes and are more likely to have disabilities, chronic health conditions, and/or reduced mobility. Understanding how seniors might be cost-burdened is of particular importance due to their special housing needs, particularly for low-income seniors. In Portola Valley, there are a total of 821 senior households. 71.4% of seniors making less than 30% of AMI in Portola Valley are spending most of their income on housing. For seniors making more than 100% of AMI, 94.5% are not costburdened and spend less than 30% of their income on housing. As a part of this update, the Town is introducing two multi-family zoning districts to encourage a greater variety in housing types and establishing a Home Sharing Program to improve housing opportunities for seniors and low-income Portola Valley residents (see Programs 1-1b and 1-6).
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
People with disabilities face additional housing challenges. Encompassing a broad group of individuals living with a variety of physical, cognitive, and sensory impairments, many people with disabilities live on fixed incomes and need specialized care, yet often rely on family members for assistance due to the high cost of care. In Portola Valley, 10.2% of residents (467 individuals) have a disability of some kind and may require accessible housing, 17 which is
above the percentage in the County (8.2%) and the Bay Area Region (9.6%). According to the California Department of Developmental Services, in 2020, there were 6 individuals with a developmental disability, including 3 children and 3 adults. The approved Willow Commons residential development at 4388 Alpine Road will include nine multi-family supportive housing units for 13 individuals with intellectual developmental disabilities (IDD). Furthermore, one of the housing element sites (4394 Alpine Road) is controlled by the same two local residents developing Willow Commons. The owners plan to use the property to support their philanthropic mission of building permanent affordable housing for adults with IDD, a vulnerable population historically facing limited housing options (see Program 9-1).
LARGE HOUSEHOLDS
Large family households often have special housing needs due to a lack of adequately sized affordable housing available. The higher costs required for homes with multiple bedrooms can result in larger families experiencing a disproportionate cost burden than the rest of the population and can increase the risk of housing insecurity. In Portola Valley, for large households with five or more persons, most units (89.6%) out of the 134 total units are owner occupied. In 2017, 0.0% of large households were very low-income, earning less than 50% of AMI. Large families are generally served by housing units with three or more bedrooms, of which there are 1,374 units, or 82% of Portola Valley’s housing stock. Among these large units with three or more bedrooms, 9.9% are renter-occupied and 90.1% are owner-occupied. Given 17 These disabilities are counted separately and are not mutually exclusive, as an individual may report more than one disability. These counts should not be summed.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 27 Portola Valley’s status as a “Highest Resource” community, its plentiful stock of large family homes and low demand (only 8% of Portola Valley households are larger) the current needs of large family households are being adequately served.
FEMALE-HEADED FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS
Households headed by one person are often at greater risk of housing insecurity, particularly female-headed households, who may be supporting children or a family with only one income.
In Portola Valley, the largest proportion of households is married-couple family households at
64.2% of total, while female-headed households make up 5.8% of all households. Femaleheaded households with children may face particular housing challenges, with pervasive gender inequality resulting in lower wages for women. Moreover, the added need for childcare can make finding a home that is affordable more challenging. In Portola Valley, none of the female-headed households with children fall below the Federal Poverty Line, nor do any of the of female-headed households without children.
FARMWORKERS
Across the state, housing for farmworkers has been recognized as an important and unique concern. Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural work. Farmworkers have special housing needs because they earn lower incomes than many other workers and move throughout the season from one harvest to the next. Farmers and farmworkers are the keystone of the larger food sector, which includes the industries that provide farmers with fertilizer and equipment; farms to produce crops and livestock; and the industries that process, transport, and distribute food to consumers. While overall the Bay Area has shifted away from our historical agricultural economic base, Bay Area counties still preserve strong agricultural roots; and yet, the responsibility for farmworker housing is not just with these counties. In many counties, farmworkers choose to live within incorporated cities due to the diversity and availability of housing, proximity to schools and other employment opportunities for other family members, and overall affordability. Many farmworker households tend to have difficulties securing safe, decent, and affordable housing. Far too often, farmworkers are forced to occupy substandard homes or live in overcrowded situations.
In the Bay Area, about 3.7% of farmworkers, including both seasonal and permanent residents, are in San Mateo County. However, per the USDA, today’s farmworkers can commute up to 75 miles to the workplace. Based on this, the need for housing for agricultural workers is not just the responsibility of Bay Area counties with a robust agricultural economy.
In Portola Valley, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 5-Year Data (2015-2019), there are approximately 22 residents employed in the agriculture, forestry, and fishing industries.
EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Extremely low-income (ELI) households refer to households earning less than 30% of AMI and are considered a subset of very-low-income households, one of the income groups identified in State RHNA requirements. In San Mateo County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
28 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT income of $44,000 for a family of four. Many households with multiple wage earners— including food service workers, full-time students, teachers, farmworkers, and healthcare professionals—can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.
As part of the Housing Element update process communities are required by the State to analyze the existing and projected housing needs of extremely low-income households. There are three deed-restricted affordable units, none of which are subsidized nor at risk of conversion to market-rate. The Town’s Affiliated Housing Program provides for the development of below-market rate housing options, affordable to lower-income households.
With this update, the Town’s Municipal Code has been updated to further incentivize use of this program to provide affordable workforce housing and to establish the parameters and process for the Affiliated Housing Program (see Program 1-4). This update also includes a program to encourage development of housing for extremely low-income households including outreach to affordable housing developers, reduced fees, priority processing, and assisting applicants with grant and funding opportunities and technical assistance (see Program 2-4). In analyzing the projected housing needs of ELI households, HCD advises communities to utilize available census data OR assume 50% of their very-low income (VLI) RHNA requirement represents needs of ELI households. Accordingly, due to the Town’s VLI RHNA requirements equating to 73 units, approximately 37 of these units are assumed to be ELI households.
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
Homelessness remains an urgent challenge throughout the region, reflecting a range of social, economic, and psychological factors. Homelessness is disproportionately experienced by people of color, people with disabilities, those struggling with addiction and those dealing with traumatic life circumstances. In San Mateo County, the most common type of household experiencing homelessness is those without children in their care. Among households experiencing homelessness that do not have children, 75.5% are unsheltered. Of homeless households with children, most are sheltered in emergency shelters. More information on each of these population groups can be found in Appendix B.
San Mateo County conducted the latest point-in-time (PIT) Count on February 24, 2022.
Volunteers were deployed to conduct an observational count of those experiencing unsheltered homelessness. San Mateo County conducted the unsheltered homeless survey through March 3, 2022. In both 2019 and 2022, Portola Valley had zero homeless individuals according to the most recent PIT San Mateo County data (https://www.smcgov.org/hsa/2022- one-day-homeless-count) (see Table 2-2). Nonetheless, Portola Valley will continue to provide zoning to allow emergency shelters in Town. The zoning updates that will be approved immediately following this Housing Element will include changes to allow emergency shelters by-right within the Multi-Family zones. They are described in more detail in Section 4, Constraints, under the Zoning Code subheading.
2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 29 TABLE 2-2: UNSHELTERED HOMELESS COUNT BY SAN MATEO COUNTY JURISDICTION 6BCity/Town
7B2011
Count
8B2013
Count
9B2015
Count
10B2017
Count
1B2019
Count
12B2022
Count
48BAtherton 49B1 50B0 51B1 52B0 53B1 13B3
54BBelmont 5B1 56B43 57B11 58B3 59B7 14B13
60BBrisbane 61B0 62B34 63B21 64B19 65B4 15B6
6BBurlingame 67B3 68B13 69B7 70B21 71B25 16B10
72BColma 73B1 74B7 75B3 76B1 7B8 17B1
78BDaly City 79B44 80B27 81B32 82B17 83B66 18B49
84BEast Palo Alto 85B385 86B119 87B95 8B98 89B107 19B169 90BFoster City 91B0 92B7 93B0 94B6 95B4 20B4
96BHalf Moon Bay 97B41 98B114 9B84 10B43 10B54 21B68
102BHillsborough 103B0 104B0 105B0 106B0 107B0 2B0
108BMenlo Park 109B72 10B16 1B27 12B47 13B27 23B56
14BMillbrae 15B1 16B21 17B8 18B7 19B9 24B9
120BPacifica 12B95 12B150 123B63 124B112 125B116 25B161 126BPortola Valley 127B16 128B2 129B0 130B1 13B0 26B0
132BRedwood City 13B233 134B306 135B223 136B94 137B221 27B245 138BSan Bruno 139B14 140B98 14B8 142B26 143B12 28B63
14BSan Carlos 145B9 146B10 147B20 148B28 149B30 29B14
150BSan Francisco International
Airport 15B9 152B5 153B1 154B3 15B21 30B14
156BSan Mateo 157B68 158B103 159B82 160B48 16B74 31B60
162BSouth San Francisco 163B122 164B173 165B55 16B33 167B42 32B42 168BUnincorporated 169B47 170B46 17B32 172B30 173B73 3B105 174BWoodside 175B0 176B6 17B2 178B0 179B0 34B0
180BTotal 18B1,162 182B1,299 183B775 184B637 185B901 35B1,092 Note: Universe: Population experiencing homelessness.
Source: 2022 San Mateo County One Day Homeless Count and Survey Executive Summary. 2 | HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
30 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This page intentionally left blank
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 31 SECTION 3. AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR
HOUSING
The State of California’s 2018 Assembly Bill (AB 686) requires that all public agencies in the State affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH) beginning January 1, 2019. Public agencies receiving funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are also required to demonstrate their commitment to AFFH. The federal obligation stems from the fair housing component of the federal Civil Rights Act mandating federal fund recipients to take “meaningful actions” to address segregation and related barriers to fair housing choice.
AB 686 also makes changes to Housing Element Law to incorporate requirements to AFFH as part of the housing element and general plan to include an analysis of fair housing outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and current fair housing practices.
In order to comply with AB 686, the Town has collaborated with Roots Policy Research, 21 Elements, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), and UC Merced to complete a full assessment and outreach plan, including an analysis of the history of the region in regard to fair housing, which can be found in Appendix C.
BACKGROUND
The Town of Portola Valley is considered a high resource community that has historically consisted of single-family detached homes on large lots. In recent decades, housing has not been affordable to households earning less than 100% area median income (AMI). This pattern of development, compounded by opposition to past affordable housing development projects, has contributed to a lack of affordable housing opportunities in Portola Valley.
AF F I RM A TIV EL Y FU R TH ER I NG FAI R HO U SI NG
“Affirmatively furthering fair housing” means taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity based on protected characteristics. Specifically, affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking meaningful actions that, taken together, address significant disparities in housing needs and in access to opportunity, replacing segregated living patterns with truly integrated and balanced living patterns, transforming racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty into areas of opportunity, and fostering and maintaining compliance with civil rights and fair housing laws. The duty to affirmatively further fair housing extends to all of a public agency’s activities and programs relating to housing and community development. (Gov.
Code, Section 8899.50, Subd. (a)(1).)”
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
32 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Recognizing these challenges, the Town created an Affiliated Housing Program in 1990 to allow multi-family housing on “institutional” sites for employees and staff affiliated with the institution that owns the parcel, to live and work in Town. The Program has had three “partners” that have the option of building housing for their employees. This has successfully led to the development of 13 affiliated housing units at the Woodside Priory School. The second partner, The Sequoias, is a retirement community that is currently interested in developing new senior units and five workforce housing units. The third partner is Stanford University; the Town has 39 proposed housing units in the pipeline including 27 faculty units and 12 affordable units.
As part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element Update, the Town is working with a new partners interested in the Affiliated Housing Program (Ladera Church and Christ Church), in addition to the Town itself, to provide more multi-family housing for low- and moderate-income families and people employed in the Town. The Town is also creating two new multi-family zoning districts and a two new mixed-use zoning districts to increase the diversity of housing types in the community. Finally, the Town is proposing a new innovative programs to affirmatively further fair housing, including:
▪ Developing a matching Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) rental program for low-income tenants located outside of Portola Valley who have experienced displacement with Portola Valley ADU owners renting ADUs at below market rates. (see Program 7-6) ▪ Identifying a portion of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space (a Town-owned site) as a housing opportunity site to be developed with 50 very low-income units.
PRIMARY FINDINGS
This section summarizes the primary findings from the Fair Housing Assessment for Portola Valley including the following sections: fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and contributing factors and the Town’s fair housing action plan. The full Fair Housing Assessment is included as Appendix C.
▪ Compared to the county overall, Portola Valley has limited racial and ethnic diversity:
Countywide, racial/ethnic minorities account for 61% of the overall population; however, they only account for 18% in Portola Valley.
▪ Economic diversity is also limited: 73% of households in Portola Valley earn more than 100% AMI compared to 49% in the county overall. All census block groups in the town have median incomes above $125,000 and poverty is low throughout Portola Valley. ▪ Looking at trends over time, although household income has continually increased, the Town has been successful in maintaining diversity in ethnicity, income, disability, and household characteristic—although these residents make up a very small portion of the Town. Between 2010 and 2020, Portola Valley’s number of residents of Hispanic descent increased by 43 people. Persons living in poverty increased by 15 people. Persons with disabilities increased by 150 people. Single-female heads of household increased by 20 households.
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 33 FIGURE 3-1: PORTOLA VALLEY POPULATION BY RACE COMPARED TO REGION Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B03002.0F 1 ▪ Countywide, racial and ethnic minority populations are disproportionately impacted by poverty, low household incomes, cost burden, overcrowding, and homelessness compared to the non-Hispanic White population. Additionally, racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to live in moderate resources areas and be denied a home mortgage loan.
Similar disparities are not evident in the Town of Portola Valley, however, in part due to the limited racial/ethnic and economic diversity noted above. In the regional context, Portola Valley represents a high opportunity area with relatively low accessibility to low- and moderate-income households, which are more likely to be racial/ethnic minorities.
1 The 2010 U.S. Census and 5-year ACS estimates were used as much of this work was done before the 2020 U.S.
Census data was publicly available.
7%
30% 27%
6%
82% 39% 39%
4%
4% 5%
7%
24% 24%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Portola Valley San Mateo County Bay Area
Percent of Population
Hispanic or Latinx
Other Race or Multiple Races, Non-Hispanic
White, Non-Hispanic
Black or African American, Non-Hispanic
Asian / API, Non-Hispanic
American Indian or Alaska Native, Non-Hispanic
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
34 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ No fair housing complaints were filed in Portola Valley from 2017 to 2021. Even so, the Town of Portola Valley could improve the accessibility of fair housing information on their website and resources for residents experiencing housing discrimination. However, a new program proposes creating a webpage specific to fair housing on the Town’s website identifying it as a resource for residents to understand and report housing discrimination. ▪ There are disparities in housing cost burden in Portola Valley by income and tenure—but the population of racial minorities is so low that there are not disparities by race/ethnicity.
As shown in Figure 3-2, lower-income households are more likely to experience housing cost burden. Nearly three out of every four households earning less than 30% AMI—considered extremely low-income households—are severely cost-burdened, compared to only 4% of households earning more than 100% of AMI. The programs in this update include new multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts intended to provide more diverse housing types that would be more affordable.
▪ The vast majority of households (98%) in Portola Valley are not overcrowded—indicated by more than one occupant per room. Based on ACS 2017-2021 data, 1.46% of the housing units in the census tract the Town is located in is overcrowded. ▪ Overpayment (cost burden) impacts renters more than homeowners in Portola Valley. Figure 3-3 shows us that 17.1% of renters spend 30% to 50% of their income on housing (cost-burdened) compared to 11.7% of those that own. Additionally, 23.1% of renters spend 50% or more of their income on housing (severely cost-burdened), while only 8.4% of owners do so. Overall, however, a smaller portion of households in Portola Valley (25%) struggle with cost burden compared to the county (37%). ▪ Figures 3-4 and 3-5 further breaks down the cost burden for renters according to HAMFI (HUD Adjusted Median Family Income). The most cost-burdened renters (Figure 3-4) are those households earning greater than 30% to less than/equal to 50% of HAMFI.
Of those 85 households, 82% are severely cost-burdened. Of the total low income and extremely low-income renter households 25% are cost-burdened (22% severely costburdened). Figure 3-5 demonstrates that most cost-burdened owners fall into the greater than 50% to less than/equal to 80% of HAMFI. Of the 125 households in this category, 52% are cost-burdened and 24% are severely cost-burdened. Of the total lowincome and extremely low-income owner households 7% are cost-burdened (4% severely cost-burdened).
▪ Poverty in Portola Valley is extremely low, with a rate close to zero. The more pressing issue faced by workers in Portola Valley is being able to afford housing as home and rental prices have greatly increased over time.
▪ The composite opportunity score for Portola Valley shows the town to be a “highest resource area” and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) ranks the town as “low vulnerability to a disaster (based on four themes of socioeconomic status, household composition, race or ethnicity, and housing and transportation).
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 35 FIGURE 3-2: OVERPAYMENT (COST BURDEN) BY AREA MEDIAN INCOME (AMI), PORTOLA VALLEY, 2019
Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook.
FIGURE 3-3: OVERPAYMENT (COST BURDEN) BY TENURE, PORTOLA VALLEY, 2019 Source: ABAG Housing Needs Data Workbook.
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
36 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 3-4: COST BURDEN BY INCOME FOR RENTERS, PORTOLA VALLEY, 2015-2019 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release.
FIGURE 3-5: COST BURDEN BY INCOME FOR OWNERS, PORTOLA VALLEY, 2015-2019 Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2015-2019 release.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Household Income <= 30% HAMFI
Household Income >30% to <=50%
HAMFI
Household Income >50% to <=80%
HAMFI
Household Income >80% to <=100%
HAMFI
Household Income >100% HAMFI
Cost Burden by Income (Renters)
Cost burden > 30% Cost burden > 50%
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Household Income <= 30% HAMFI
Household Income >30% to <=50%
HAMFI
Household Income >50% to <=80%
HAMFI
Household Income >80% to <=100%
HAMFI
Household Income >100% HAMFI
Cost Burden by Income (Owners)
Cost burden > 30% Cost burden > 50%
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 37 ▪ Portola Valley is entirely contained within a single census tract—the standard geographic measure for “neighborhoods” in U.S. Census data products. The town does not contain any racial/ethnic concentrations of poverty nor concentrations of housing problems.
▪ Portola Valley is a Racially Concentrated Area of Affluence (RCAA): All sites lie within the RCAA that captures the entirety of Portola Valley, as well as areas beyond the Town’s borders. Sites at the edge of the town boundary (Ladera Church, Vacant Portion of Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site, Stanford Glen Oaks, and Christ Church) are adjacent to RCAAs outside of Portola Valley. Additionally, these sites are located outside of geological hazard and very high fire hazard areas and are situated in areas with adequate infrastructure to serve the sites. In the RCAA containing Portola Valley, 82.5% of the population is white and the RCAA average median income (AMI) of $237,163. Portola Valley is not unique in these statistics; surrounding communities are also all RCAAs, with an AMI of $140,625-$250,001. The region at large has a lower AMI in comparison to these areas; the AMI in San Mateo County is $122,641. Portola Valley has consistently had a higher AMI in comparison to the County; in 2010, San Mateo County had an AMI of $85,648 and the Town had an AMI of $167,227.
▪ Portola Valley, served by the Sequoia Union High School District and the Portola Valley Elementary School District, has very high education outcomes. However, the schools in Portola Valley have the highest share of White students in the County, making them among the least racially and ethnically diverse districts. Portola Valley has the least diverse faculty and staff in the county, with 59% identifying as White. While Sequoia Union has among the highest rate of graduates who met admission standards for a University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) school, Pacific Islander, Black, and Hispanic students in the Sequoia Union district were substantially less likely to meet the admission standards, with rates of 38%, 50%, and 55% respectively. Overall, Sequoia Union High School has one of the highest dropout rates—10% of students— compared to other districts in the county. Still, dropout rates among Hispanic (16%), Black (12%), and Pacific Islander (20%) students are even higher. ▪ Portola Valley lacks a variety of housing types. In 2020, 81.1% of homes in Portola Valley were single-family detached, 0.0% were single-family attached, 2.1% were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 16.8% were medium or large multi-family (5+ units). The medium or large multi-family units are located at The Sequoias. There is no multi-family zoning in Portola Valley.
▪ Portola Valley is home to more single-person households than the County, with 25% of households compared to only 22% in the County. Additionally, there are more married-couple families in Portola Valley (64%) than in the County (55%), offset by fewer single-parent households (6% in Portola Valley, compared to 10% in County) and fewer non-family multiple-person households (3% in Portola Valley, compared to 8% in the County).
▪ Barriers to housing choice are largely related to the town’s very high costs of housing and lack of affordable production. Since 2015, the housing that has received permits to accommodate growth has largely been priced for above moderate-income 3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
38 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT households. Approximately 49.4% of the town’s rental units rent for $3,000 or more, compared to 22.1% in San Mateo County and 13.0% in the Bay Area region. ▪ Renters are more likely to be living in 1- and 2-bedroom units than owners, and owners are more likely to be occupying 3- to 4- and 5-bedroom units. To the extent that larger renter households desire to live in Portola Valley, the lack of rental housing stock to accommodate their needs could limit their access to housing in the town. ▪ Portola Valley has a slight concentration of residents with a disability with 10% of the population compared to 8% in the county. Even so, unemployment among residents living with a disability (3%) in Portola Valley is the same as those without a disability (3%) and similar to the county overall. The approved Willow Commons residential development under construction at 4388 Alpine Road will include nine multi-family supportive housing units for 13 individuals with intellectual developmental disabilities (IDD). The same property owners also control 4394 Alpine Road. The owners plan to use the property to support their philanthropic mission of building permanent affordable housing for adults with IDD (see Program 9-1).
▪ Disparities by race and ethnicity are prevalent for home mortgage applications, particularly in denial rates. Hispanic (29% denial rate) and Asian households (19%) had the highest denial rates for mortgage loan applications in 2018 and 2019. Conversely, nonHispanic White (15%) and households of unknown race/ethnicity (11%) have the lowest denial rates during the same time.
CONTRIBUTING FACTORS AND FAIR HOUSING ACTION PLAN
The disparities in housing choice and access to opportunity discussed above stem from historical actions, socioeconomic factors that limit employment and income growth, broad barriers to open housing choice, and until recently, very limited resources to respond to needs. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583 (c)(10)(A)(v), the Housing Element includes several policies and programs to proactively address fair housing issues. Table 3-1 below summarizes the fair housing issues, contributing factors, and implementation programs included in the Housing Element to affirmatively further fair housing in Portola Valley. Contributing factors are prioritized on whether they most limit or deny fair housing choice or access to opportunity or negatively impact fair housing or civil rights compliance. 3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 39 TABLE 3-1: SUMMARY MATRIX OF FAIR HOUSING ISSUES AND ACTIONS Fair Housing Issues Contributing Factors
Meaningful Program Actions (from
Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs) Targets and Timelines The Town of Portola Valley has
limited racial and ethnic diversity
(18% of residents are non-White
Hispanic) compared to San Mateo
County (61%) and the Bay Area
overall, and very limited
economic diversity (73% of
households earn more than 100%
AMI compared to 49% in the
county overall). Portola Valley has
a lower percentage of lower
income households than the rest
of the San Mateo County and the
Bay Area, with 22% of households
earning less than 80% of the AMI
compared to 40% of households
in San Mateo County and 39% of
households in the Bay Area as a
whole. This equates to 480
households currently living in
Portola Valley who are below the
AMI, and 255 households who
are below 50% AMI which means
they would qualify for very lowincome housing.
There is a lack of affordable
housing opportunities
throughout the town. (High)
There are no areas of the town
that are zoned to allow moderate
or high-density residential
development. Existing policies do
not encourage a range of housing
types. (High)
Community opposition to
affordable housing. (High)
▪ 1-1a: Create a new “Gateway” land use
classification in the General Plan to
provide for development of housing at
lower-income levels.
▪ 1-1b Create two new zoning districts in
the Municipal Code that allows for multifamily housing at four with up to 4 and 20 25 du/acre to provide for development of
housing at lower-income levels.
▪ 1-1c: Create Objective Design Standards
for new multi-family zoning.
▪ 1-2a: Create a two new zoning districts
that allows for mixed-use development
with up to 6 and 25 du/ac six du/ac and
would allow for up to 100% of building
floor area to be dedicated to residential
uses.
▪ 1-2b: Create Objective Design Standards
for new mixed-use zoning.
▪ 1-3: Create a new Opt-In Housing
Diversification Program that allows
property owners to develop 4 du/acre.
▪ 1-5: Participate in HIP Housing’s “Home
Sharing Program”.
▪ 2-1: Amend the zoning ordinance to
establish inclusionary housing
requirements for new multi-family
housing developments.
▪ 2.2: Develop a program to manage new
affordable housing units in the town.
▪ Adopted by Town Council on May
10, 2023
▪ March 2024
▪ March 2024
▪ March 2024 (for 6 du/ac M-U
District) and within 90 days of
HCD certification of updated
Housing Element (for 25 du/ac MU-HD District).
▪ March 2024
▪ Develop objective design and
development standards by June
2025.
▪ Connect with HIP Housing by
December 2024.
▪ September 2026
▪ Initiate in 2023; implement
program by September 2024.
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
40 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 3-1: SUMMARY MATRIX OF FAIR HOUSING ISSUES AND ACTIONS Fair Housing Issues Contributing Factors
Meaningful Program Actions (from
Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs) Targets and Timelines ▪ 2-4: Facilitate housing development for
extremely low-income households.
▪ 3-1: Pursue an affordable housing project
on the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space
site.
▪ 3-12: Provide technical assistance to
nonprofits/religious institutions to
develop affordable housing.
▪ 4-5: Allocate funds from the Affordable
Housing Trust Fund through a Notice of
Funding Availability (NOFA) to support the
development of 100% affordable housing
projects.
▪ 7-3: Provide direct assistance from the
Building Division for property owners
interested in making minor changes to
accommodate a JADU.
▪ 7-4: Establish staff and consultant ADU
office hours so that applicants can ask
questions of subject matter experts.
▪ 7-6: Develop an affordable ADU rental
program that matches landlords willing to
rent ADUs at below market rates with lowincome tenants that who have been experienced displacement from areas
outside of Portola Valley due to increasing
rents with Portola Valley ADU owners
willing to rent ADUs at below market
rates.
▪ 8-5: Rezone properties in the town to
allow multi-family housing with a range of
▪ January 2026, reach out to
affordable housing developers.
▪ Issue RFP by January 2026
▪ Monthly meetings starting
September 2024.
▪ Publish initial NOFA by August
2026
▪ June 2024
▪ Initiate office hours by
September 2024.
▪ Develop program by September
2024.
▪ Initiate in October 2024.
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 41 TABLE 3-1: SUMMARY MATRIX OF FAIR HOUSING ISSUES AND ACTIONS Fair Housing Issues Contributing Factors
Meaningful Program Actions (from
Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs) Targets and Timelines affordability levels and deed restrictions
to ensure affordability over time.
Affirmatively market the housing to
households that are under-represented in
the town including Black and Hispanic
households.
▪ 8-6: Through collaboration with local
service providers, convene a discussion of
populations that are experiencing
comparatively high rates of cost burden
to discuss solutions for relief. Consider a
rental assistance program tailored to
extremely high cost-burdened residents
(residents that pay a very high percentage
of their income towards housing). This
may be in coordination with ADU/JADU
programs. Include Black, Indigenous and
people of color in these conversations.
▪ Convene by June 2024. Consider
program by December 2024.
In 2018 and 2019, Hispanic or
Latinx and Asian households in
Portola Valley faced higher rates
of mortgage loan denials when
trying to purchase homes in
Portola Valley (29% and 19%,
respectively).
a
It is well documented that
persons of color have been
historically denied loans to
purchase homes at a higher rate
than white applicants. These
historical patterns persist in some
cases. (High)
▪ Mortgage acceptance rates are outside of
local control. It is included here to bring
attention to this issue.
Portola Valley residents do not
report experiencing fair housing
discrimination. However,
residents may not take action
because they are not aware of
resources for fair housing.
Tenants and property owners
may lack knowledge about fair
housing laws. Limited
information provided by the
Town on fair housing rights. (Low)
▪ 8-7: Collaborate with other cities/towns
and Project Sentinel, or another similar
organization, to perform fair housing
training for property owners, real estate
agents, and tenants across the region. The
training would include information on
▪ Establish list by May 2024. Issue
written materials annually
thereafter. Conduct two
workshops by 2030.
3 | AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING
42 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 3-1: SUMMARY MATRIX OF FAIR HOUSING ISSUES AND ACTIONS Fair Housing Issues Contributing Factors
Meaningful Program Actions (from
Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs) Targets and Timelines reasonable accommodation and source of
income discrimination, as well as other
fair housing information with emphasis
on certain topics driven by housing
complaint data and information from
stakeholders. Participation in fair housing
training will be required for approval of
landlords’ business licenses. Focus
enforcement efforts on race-based
discrimination and reasonable
accommodations.
▪ 8-8: Create a webpage specific to fair
housing including resources for residents
who feel they have experienced
discrimination, information about filing
fair housing complaints with HCD or HUD,
and information about protected classes
under the Fair Housing Act.
▪ 8-9: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of
the Municipal Code to ensure there are no
regulatory constraints (actual or
perceived) to reasonable accommodation
and providing housing for persons with
disabilities. If any are found, amend code
to remove them within six months.
▪ May 2024
▪ January 2027 for analysis;
September 2027 for code
amendments
a Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council's (FFIEC) Home Mortgage Disclosure Act loan/application register (LAR) files.
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 43 SECTION 4. CONSTRAINTS
Many factors can encourage or constrain the development, maintenance, and improvement of the housing stock, including economic forces in the private market as well as regulations and policies imposed by public agencies. Constraints including physical constraints, land availability, the economics of development, and governmental regulations each have an impact on the cost and amount of housing produced.
State law, specifically Government Code Section 65583(a)(5-6), requires that housing elements analyze potential and actual governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the production, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons of all income levels and disabilities. The constraints analysis must also demonstrate local efforts to remove or mitigate barriers to housing production and housing for persons with disabilities. The identification and analysis of these constraints have informed the Town of Portola Valley’s development of appropriate programs that mitigate these constraints, as provided in Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs.
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
FEDERAL AND STATE
Federal and State programs and agencies play a role in the imposition of non-local governmental constraints. Federal and State requirements are generally beyond the influence of local government and therefore cannot be effectively addressed in this document.
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was developed to protect the quality of the environment and the health and safety of the public from adverse environmental effects.
Development projects are required to be reviewed consistent with CEQA standards to determine if there is potential for the project to cause significant adverse effect on the environment. Depending on the type of project and its potential effects, technical traffic, noise, air quality, biological resources, and geotechnical reports may be needed. If potential adverse effects can be mitigated, a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required. If potentially adverse effects cannot be mitigated, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required. These documents have mandated content requirements and public review times. Preparation of CEQA documents can be costly and, despite maximum time limits set forth in the Public Resources Code, can extend the processing time of a project by a year or longer.
Prevailing Wage Laws
Public works projects and affordable housing financed with public funds are required to pay prevailing wages, which create a significant cost impact on the construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing units for low- or moderate-income persons and the infrastructure to 4 | CONSTRAINTS
44 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT support such housing. The rehabilitation of certain qualifying affordable housing units for lowor moderate-income persons is exempt from this requirement. Senate Bill (SB) 972 provided exemptions from prevailing wage requirements for the construction or rehabilitation of privately owned residential projects.
Governmental constraints can limit the supply and increase the cost of housing, making it difficult to meet the demand especially for affordable housing. Governmental constraints typically include policies, standards, requirements, or actions imposed by the various levels of government upon land use and development such as zoning and subdivision regulations, growth management measures, building codes, fees, and processing and permit procedures.
The City has limited influence over state and federal requirements that may constrain housing, but the State affords local agencies considerable flexibility in establishing land use policies and regulations. Therefore, the discussion in this subsection is generally limited to the policies, standards, requirements, and actions at the local level.
LOCAL
Town policies and regulations designed to address the Town’s goals for the overall quality of housing, preservation of neighborhood character, or safety or environmental goals can also result in constraints to housing. Portola Valley is a rural, low-density town on the fringe of the San Francisco Peninsula’s urban area. The physical environment of the town is challenging, with many steep slopes, unstable soils, landslide hazards, worsening wildfire hazards, and the presence of the San Andreas fault. The Town’s development regulations are based on these facts. This subsection describes the Town’s policies and regulations that could potentially constrain housing and discusses measures to reduce such constraints.
Context for the Town’s Development Regulations
The town’s low-density nature is consistent with and was partially based on the San Mateo County Master Plan that was in place at the time the town incorporated. This plan included the following principles:
a. The highest population densities should occur in relatively level areas close to major centers of commerce and industry where coordinated development is possible and where transportation and other necessary public facilities can readily be provided. b. Population density should decrease as the distance from district centers, industrial areas, and employment centers increases.
c. Population density should decrease as distance from local service facilities increases. d. Population density should decrease as steepness of terrain increases. e. The lowest densities and largest lots should occur on steep hillsides or in mountainous areas where it is necessary to limit storm runoff, prevent erosion, preserve existing vegetation, protect watersheds, and maintain the scenic quality of the terrain.
The Town’s geologic setting is a major constraint on housing production. Starting in 1965, the Town has evolved an innovative and systematic approach to regulating the development of 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 45 lands crossed by the San Andreas fault and encumbered with extensive areas of steep and unstable slopes. The regulations, which have been used as models for ordinances adopted by other jurisdictions in California and in other states, control the uses of land and the intensity of development according to slope and geologic characteristics. The base regulations include a slope-density system, setbacks from the San Andreas fault and land use limitations based on landslide hazards. The Town has detailed fault and landslide potential maps to support the regulations. The maps are updated from time to time as more accurate and detailed information from site investigations becomes available.
Portola Valley is in a region of high seismicity because of the presence of the San Andreas Fault that bisects the town, the Hayward Fault across the bay to the east, and the San Gregorio Fault to the west. Therefore, the entire town is susceptible to potential ground shaking from these three large faults. However, the Portola Valley Municipal code has established special building setbacks along earthquake fault traces to minimize the potential loss of property and life resulting from differential movement along such traces caused by tectonic forces.
As the town reaches buildout, the development potential is increasingly affected by geologic regulations. Most of the remaining vacant land is in steep and often hazardous terrain. The Upper and Lower Western Hillsides, which contain most of the undeveloped land in the town, are very steep: approximately 70% of the land has slopes greater than 30% and 25% has slopes greater than 50%. Slope density provisions encourage concentration of development on flatter portions of the large holdings in these areas. These provisions lead to safer, more easily accessible, and more efficiently served development than might occur otherwise.
The potential for developing is also constrained by wildfire hazards. Many areas of high and extreme wildfire hazard exist within the Portola Valley community. The highest-hazard areas are generally on steeper slopes of canyons or gullies, in difficult-to-access places where vegetation management is very difficult to accomplish. Hazards are amplified in east-west oriented canyon areas where the topography will funnel strong autumn winds, which tend to blow from the east or west.1 The Safety Element Update includes policies and programs related to vegetation management, emergency access, water availability/suppression, and new building standards to help reduce the risk of wildfires for existing and future development.
The town also has an important and growing role in providing open space for the entire region.
The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District now owns over 1,000 acres of public open space within the town limits. The district lands are available for hiking and other low-intensity recreation uses and attract people in large numbers from all over the region. An extensive trail system throughout town is used by residents and visitors. In addition, the preserved land provides a significant conservation benefit to the region by providing habitat and protecting water and air quality. The low-density housing pattern and the clustering of development in the town serves to protect this important regional resource.
In addition to the natural and environmental constraints discussed above, options for housing have been limited by the town’s historic lack of multi-family zoning that could have allowed 1 Deer Creek Resources, 2022. Portola Valley Wildfire Hazards Memo. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
46 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT more variety in housing types in areas appropriate for development. Community opposition has been a significant obstacle to obtaining approvals for new housing developments. Most notably, plans for multi-family and low-income housing have drawn the most public opposition because they are perceived to take away from the existing rural character, increase traffic congestion, and put further strain on limited infrastructure capacity. In recent years, fire safety has also become a significant concern. Land prices in Portola Valley, which are among the highest in San Mateo County, are an additional constraint to housing. To mitigate these constraints, the Town has designed a variety of housing programs, including establishing a multi-family zone, which are consistent with the of town’s character, but allow for a greater variety of housing opportunities. Those programs can be found in Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs.
Land Use Controls
General Plan Land Use Element
The Town’s Land Use Element of the General Plan sets forth guidelines for land occupancy and describes the location and distribution aspects of land uses. The Land Use categories and corresponding zoning districts that allow residential development are listed in Table 4-1. The updated Land Use Element was adopted on May 10, 2023, and amended on January 24, 2024, to be consistent with the classifications and density in the Housing Element. It is now being updated again, to incorporate a new Mixed-Use High Density Residential designation that will apply to three housing sites. Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the General Plan amendment within 90 days.
TABLE 4-1: GENERAL PLAN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND ZONING DISTRICTS Residential Designation Acres/Housing Unit (HU)
Low-Medium Intensity Less than 1 acre/HU
Low Intensity 1-2 acres/HU
Conservation-Residential 2-4 acres/HU
Open Residential More than 4 acres/HU
Note: Where geologic conditions limit development, these densities will be less.
Source: Portola Valley General Plan, Portola Valley Code of Ordinances.
Zoning Code
The policies set forth in the General Plan are implemented largely through the Town’s zoning ordinance. There are three residential zoning districts in town: Residential Estate (R-E), SingleFamily Residential (R-1), and Mountainous Residential (M-R). Mobile and manufactured housing is considered single-family housing and is permitted accordingly. Table 4-2 below summarizes the uses permitted in each of these districts. Sections 18.12, 18.14, and 18.16 of the Town’s zoning ordinance contain the full text and detailed information concerning these regulations.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 47 Because, historically, multi-family housing was not generally permitted in the town, Portola Valley has developed two mechanisms to allow multi-family housing on certain sites. To that end, the municipal code allows multi-family affordable housing to be constructed with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) permit on properties designated in the General Plan for such uses (Section 18.44.060.I). Secondly, the Affiliated Housing Program allows multi-family housing on institutional sites for employees and staff affiliated with the institutions that own the parcels. The program is being expanded with the Housing Element update and the requirement that housing units be occupied exclusively by employees of the institution is being removed. A detailed description can be found in Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs.
In addition, in conjunction with the update, two new multi-family districts are proposed to be created. These are the first multi-family zoning districts in the Town’s history. The proposed development standards for the multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts are currently being developed and are expected to be adopted by March 2024. The Town proposes a new MixedUse High Density Zoning District (20 to 25 du/ac) to increase residential capacity on three housing sites in the Sites Inventory: two newly identified sites (Skyline Open Space and Village Square) and one existing Housing Element site (Christ Church). These will replace the Dorothy Ford Field housing site. The overall number of projected housing units by income category remains unchanged from the existing Housing Element adopted in March 2024. Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the required zoning code amendments and rezonings within 90 days. Several of the individual sites in Section 6, Adequate Sites, include basic development standards or assumptions about future development. These standards have been carefully developed using site modeling, in order to allow the densities described in this Housing Element.
The Town amended its zoning ordinance in 2011 to comply with SB 2 and make provisions for emergency homeless shelters in town. However, these amendments are not compliant with AB 1398. Therefore, the Town will update its zoning in order to continue to provide zoning to allow emergency shelters in Town. The zoning updates are expected to be adopted by March 2024 and will include changes to allow emergency shelters by right within the Multi-Family zones. Regulations for emergency shelters will include the following, as allowed by Government Code Section 65583 (a)(4)(A):
▪ Shelters may serve up to 10 individuals.
▪ The shelter shall be available to individuals for no more than 60 days. Extensions up to a total stay of one hundred 80 days may be permissible if no alternative housing is available. ▪ On-site management shall be provided during the hours of shelter operation. ▪ Emergency shelters may include common space for the exclusive use of the guests, and office and meeting space for the exclusive use of emergency shelter staff. ▪ On-site parking shall be provided to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter at any given time.
▪ Lighting as described in the Portola Valley Municipal Code.
The new Multi-Family zones will apply to two parcels in Town, described in Section 6, Adequate Sites, as Glen Oaks and Ladera Church. These sites are suitable for development, as shown in 4 | CONSTRAINTS
48 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT the Environmental Constraints section; the Ladera Church site is especially well situated, as they are within walking distance to grocery stores and other services.
Table 4-2 depicts the uses currently allowed in the various residential districts in town. The table identifies uses permitted by right, those subject to a conditional use permit and allowed as an accessory use. As previously discussed, multi-family projects are not currently allowed in any residential zoning district, which has served as a constraint to housing development, particularly affordable housing.
TABLE 4-2: PORTOLA VALLEY USES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Use R-E R-1 M-R
Streets, utilities, etc. P P P
Single-family dwellings, including residential care facilities with 6 or fewer residents P P P
Temporary voting places, festivals, signs, etc. P P P
Public buildings located in conformance with the general plan P Public school located in conformance with the general plan P P Major utilities, signs, wireless communications facilities C C C Crop and tree farming and truck gardening C C
Nurseries and greenhouses, with no retail sales allowed C C Churches, schools, group living accommodations for seniors, and nursery schools: only when located on an arterial or expressway C Recreation facilities and boarding stables: only when located on an arterial or expressway
C C
Residential planned unit developments C C C
Multiple single-family homes on parcels of 10 or 100 acres or more C C Horticulture and grazing of cattle C C
Wineries C C
Publicly owned recreation and open space areas located in conformance with the general plan C C C
Employee housing for qualified agricultural uses, as permitted under the California Employee Housing Act (Health and Safety Code Section 17000 et. seq.)
C
Landscaping, growing of plants and similar uses attendant to adjoining uses in the CC district C
Fences, lights, parking, signs, etc. A A A
Second units on parcels 1 acre or more A A A
Equestrian facilities A A A
Renting of rooms to no more than one paying guest A A A Home occupations A A A
Swimming pools, tennis courts A A
Garages, signs, pets A A A
Sale of agricultural products grown on the premises A A A Notes: P = Permitted, C = Conditional, A = Accessory
Source: Portola Valley Code of Ordinances.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 49 The Town’s site development criteria are set forth in the Town’s zoning ordinance, site development ordinance, and design guidelines. In the zoning ordinance, many of the criteria are established within combining districts. These include a Design Review (D-R), a Floodplain (F-P), a Historic Resources (H-R), and a Slope Density (S-D) combining district, as well as a number of residential density combining districts. The requirements established by each of these combining districts are explained below.
Design Review (D-R) Combining District
This combining district is only applied to specific parcels, primarily in the mountainous western hills. This district does three things: 1) requires all building permits to be approved by the Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC); 2) prohibits certain uses within 100 feet of Skyline Boulevard to protect the scenic nature of that corridor; and 3) requires all subdivisions of parcels 10 acres or larger to be treated as a planned unit development.
It is recognized that most undeveloped parcels in the D-R combining district have significant characteristics such as steep slopes, unstable land, limited access, limited or absent infrastructure, and vegetation important for ecologic purposes, and that flexibility in normal standards afforded by the planned unit development procedure will help achieve subdivisions carefully adjusted to specific site conditions to protect health, safety, and ecological objectives.
In addition, this requirement provides for design review and for imposing specific requirements on developments to help ensure that design objectives related to vegetation management, native planting, water conservation, limited lighting, and wildlife movement are implemented.
The combining district will not meaningfully impact projects in the Sites Inventory or add additional processing time. The only housing site in the D-R Combining District is the Christ Church Affiliated Housing Site. Affiliated Housing projects will be processed at a Planning Commission level in order to approve flexibility in development standards such as floor area and setbacks. The Stanford Wedge Housing project is included as a Pending Project and the review process for that project is well underway.
Design Review requirements have not been a significant constraint on the provision of housing, including affordable housing, in Portola Valley in recent years. In 2020, the Priory School started construction on six new housing units for employees and staff affiliated with this institution; two of those units are deed restricted for lower-income households. The Town is developing objective standards to further reduce the potential for design review to constrain housing development. Requirements of this combining district do not preclude the provision of affordable housing.
Floodplain (F-P) Combining District
This district establishes conditions for development in floodplain areas, including requiring residential structures to be elevated above the base flood level and requiring new construction to be anchored to withstand flooding. Such conditions are standard and required by the federal government in communities that participate in the National Flood Insurance Program.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
50 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This district includes all land within the floodplain as shown on the federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps. This land is generally that which borders the major streams in town: Los Trancos Creek, Corte Madera Creek, and Sausal Creek.
The F-P combining district is not a constraint on the provision of market rate and below market rate housing in Town. The areas which fall under this district are generally expected to develop with market rate housing, which can usually accommodate these requirements within the normal price range for market rate housing in Portola Valley. The only sites for below market rate housing that are covered by this district are potential sites for accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
Historic Resources (H-R) Combining District
This district requires all properties that contain historic resources to conform to the principles and standards of the historic element of the general plan. There are 41 historic resources in town as identified in the General Plan. These resources are scattered throughout the town, as shown on the historic element diagram. There is a list of buildings/structures to be preserved but they do not significantly limit the potential for development in town because the majority of the historic elements are on large sites or locations where new residential development is unlikely.
Given the nature of the historic resources in the town, the H-R combining district does not constrain the provision of housing in Portola Valley, including affordable housing. The principles and standards of the historic element simply prevent the removal of resources that are designated “to be preserved.” No maintenance or restoration is necessary, although if it does occur, certain guidelines must be followed. Therefore, this district may affect the design of a development but does not necessarily increase the cost of a development.
Residential Density Combining Districts
The residential density combining districts determine the development standards that apply to a given lot. These standards include required front, rear, and side yards; height limits; floor area limits; and impervious surface limits. There are nine combining districts:
▪ 7.5M: 7,500 square feet
▪ 15M: 15,000 square feet
▪ 20M: 20,000 square feet
▪ 1A: 1 acre
▪ 2A: 2 acres
▪ 2.5A: 2.5 acres
▪ 3.5A: 3.5 acres
▪ 5A: 5 acres
▪ 7.5A: 7.5 acres
The exact locations of these combining districts are shown on the Town’s zoning map. In general, the smaller-lot districts are found in the more densely developed, older subdivision areas of town while the larger-lot districts are found in the less densely developed, newer 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 51 areas. This makes sense given the fact that only since town incorporation has there been a more complete understanding of the complex geological conditions and steep slopes that affect the remaining undeveloped lands in town.
The Upper Western Hillsides are the only part of town in the 7.5-acre combining district. There are no lands in the 5-acre combining district, but the Lower Western Hillsides, Blue Oaks, the Woods property, and the Stanford Wedge are in the 3.5-acre combining district. Westridge is generally in the 2.5-acre combining district. The other, smaller-lot districts cover the remainder of the town. The 7.5M zoning district is included in the Code but not applied to any sites on the zoning map.
The development standards governed by these combining districts are summarized in Table 4-3 below. The development standards were established to reflect the town’s rural, single-family residential character. Over the years, the regulations have become important to support geologic and fire safety and for environmental protection. The maximum floor area requirements and setbacks for single-family homes are intentionally limited compared to some other affluent communities in the Bay Area to limit the impact of the development on the natural environment. The regulations on single-family homes are not considered a constraint to development, as existing single-family homes have been consistently developed over the town’s history.
TABLE 4-3: RESIDENTIAL DENSITY COMBINING DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS District
Minimum
Lot Area
(sf)
Front
Yard
Rear
Yard
Side
Yard
Height
Limita
Maximum
Heightb
Maximum
Floor
Areac
Maximum
Impervious
Surfacec
7.5M 20 20 5 15-28 34 3,019 2,231
15M 15,000 20 20 10 15-28 34 3,623 3,877
20M 20,000 20 20 10 15-28 34 3,910 5,090
1A 43,560 50 20 20 28 34 5,260 7,808
2A 87,120 50 20 20 28 34 7,013 11,358
2.5A 108,900 50 20 20 28 34 7,514 13,177
3.5A 152,460 50 25 25 28 34 8,065 15,566
5A 217,800 50 25 25 28 34 8,766 17,370
7.5A 326,700 50 25 25 28 34 9,581 19,822
a The height limit restricts the height as measured parallel to the ground surface. b The maximum height restricts the height as measured from the lowest point of contact between the building and the ground to the highest point of the building.
c The maximum floor area and maximum impervious surface are based on the total net lot area after geology, flood hazard areas, and steep slopes are taken into consideration. The numbers shown in the table indicate the maximum for a lot with the given lot area and no environmental constraints.
Source: Portola Valley Code of Ordinances.
The minimum lot area requirements function as a constraint on the provision of housing by keeping the density of development low. Many of the programs set forth in this Housing Element are intended to address this constraint while preserving the character of the town.
For example, the Affiliated Housing Program allows higher density residential development on institutional sites.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
52 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT The ADU/Junior ADU (JADU) programs also increase density by allowing additional housing units to be built throughout the community. Portola Valley has long had a progressive ADU program, permitting multiple ADUs on larger parcels. In addition, as part of this update, the Town is creating two multi-family districts and a mixed-use district to allow for mixed-use residential development.
Slope Density (S-D) Combining Districts
Most of the residential land in town is under an S-D combining district as well. These districts modify the minimum lot size to require larger minimum lots in areas with steep slopes. As shown in Table 4-4 below, there are six slope-density combining districts. The table also provides selected examples of the required minimum parcel areas at given slopes under each of the S-D districts.
TABLE 4-4: SLOPES AND MINIMUM PARCEL AREAS IN S-D COMBINING DISTRICTS Slope
Required Minimum Parcel Area in Acres
SD-1 SD-1a SD-2 SD-2a SD-2.5 SD-3
1% and under 1.02 – 2.03 – – 3.05
15% and under 1.36 1.00 2.60 2.00 2.50 3.99
25% 1.79 1.34 3.25 2.56 3.14 5.12
40% 3.42 2.72 5.21 4.44 5.10 8.85
50% and over 8.70 8.73 8.70 8.70 8.73 17.24
Source: Portola Valley Code of Ordinances.
In general, the flatter parts of Portola Valley fall into the SD-1 and SD-1a districts, with the remaining districts used in steeper areas. The only part of town in the SD-3 district is the Upper Western Hillsides (primarily open space), and the only area in the SD-2.5 district is Westridge.
Areas in the SD-2 district include the Lower Western Hillsides, Blue Oaks, the Stanford Wedge, and the Woods property.
As with the residential density combining districts, the S-D districts do constrain the provision of housing by restricting the density of development. This restriction is necessary, however, given the hazards of developing steep slopes. Some of the Town’s existing housing programs work to mitigate this constraint while still providing adequate protection. For example, the Affiliated Housing Program allows for increased density in specified areas. In addition, the ADU program allows a second unit on an existing or proposed primary residence and allows two ADUs on lots 3.5 acres or more, thereby increasing potential residential density. In addition, as part of this update, the Town will be creating two multi-family districts and a mixed-use district.
Creek Setbacks
Since 2007, the Town has enforced setbacks along Los Trancos Creek, Corte Madera Creek and Sausal Creek to protect the unique scenic qualities and habitat values of the creek environment that sustain wildlife by furnishing habitation, freshwater, and migration corridors. The measures are intended to help ensure that, over time, changes within creek 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 53 setbacks will help restore the creeks and creeksides to a healthy natural environment. For building permits and site development permits, setbacks may be measured from either the top of creek bank or ordinary high-water mark at the option of the property owner:
1. Parcels less than 1 acre in size—30 feet from top of bank, or 35 feet from ordinary high water mark.
2. Parcels of 1 acre to 2.5 acres—45 feet from top of bank or 50 feet from ordinary high water mark.
3. Parcels of 2.5 acres or more—55 feet from top of bank or 60 feet from ordinary high water mark.
For planned unit developments, setbacks may be modified by the Planning Commission. For new subdivisions, parcels shall have a minimum creek setback of 55 feet from the top of creek bank, but this setback may be required to be enlarged as part of the subdivision process to increase safety as well as protect the natural environment. Sensitive habitats, floodplains, and eroding creek banks should be included within the setback area. Persons proposing development along creeks should consult Section 18.32 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances, F-P (Floodplain) Combining District Regulations, as these provisions affect development in the floodplains along creeks.
Open Space and Landscaping Requirements
The Town’s development standards specify front, side, and rear yard requirements for residential parcels. These requirements vary depending on the district, with smaller yard requirements for smaller lots. The requirements can be altered based on certain scenarios, such as if a property is located in a special setback district or if a property is adjacent to a future right-of-way. These open space requirements are applied consistently to all residential development based on the district they are located in and are not considered by the community to be necessary for wildfire resilience, environmental protection, and wildlife corridors. The required yards are not excessive and are not a constraint to housing development.
The Portola Valley zoning ordinance sets forth minimal landscaping requirements for residential parcels. For example, the regulations specify that parcels adjacent to the Community Commercial and Administrative-Professional districts are required to have consistent landscaping with the adjacent non-residential property. There are few parcels in Portola Valley with residences adjacent to these districts. The landscaping regulations also stipulate that for parcels with frontages along Alpine Road and Portola Road, trees and shrubs must be approved by the Town’s conservation committee within 75 feet of the road right-ofway. These two provisions are not constraints to the development of housing because they do not require significant costs or alterations for new housing developments.
The Town’s zoning ordinance contains minimal regulation for residential landscaping, but the Town’s Design Guidelines provide more comprehensive landscaping policies, including a Native Plant List and Landscaping Guidelines. The Guidelines state that “The fundamental approach of the ASCC is to encourage architectural solutions that blend with the natural 4 | CONSTRAINTS
54 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT conditions of the site and area, and at the same time require only minimum landscaping.” Typical guidelines include: “Use native plants,” “Create a simple rather than elaborate landscape solution,” and “Consider the future height of trees and shrubs such that major views on- and off-site will not become obstructed.” ASCC consideration of applications is limited to the issues set forth in the guidelines. The Landscaping Guidelines promote native planting, minimal water use, and wildfire resilience and are not a constraint to housing development.
Parking Requirements
The Town’s zoning ordinance includes off-street parking provisions. The minimum number of off-street residential spaces for dwelling units is: one space for each dwelling having zero or one bedroom, and two spaces for each dwelling with two or more bedrooms. In residential districts with a minimum lot size of 1 acre or more, two additional guest parking spaces are required. In addition, convalescent homes must have one space for each five beds and retirement homes must have one space for each apartment, double room, or family unit.
JADUs and internal ADUs shall not require any dedicated parking spaces, but external ADUs require one dedicated covered or uncovered parking space.
Most residential parking spaces must be located in a carport or garage and all spaces have to be located on the same site as the building unless authorized by a conditional use permit.
Uncovered or tandem parking spaces may be permitted with approval from the Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC) if there is no reasonable location for a second required covered parking space in larger parcel districts. Additionally, on parcels of 20,000 square feet or less, an uncovered parking space may occupy required yard areas with approval from the ASCC and after notification of the affected neighbors.
The Town requires up to four parking spaces at residences in districts requiring 1 acre or more but allows exceptions if the requirements cannot be met on the parcels. In smaller parcel districts, only 1 to 2 spaces are required based on the number of bedrooms in the dwelling unit, and the location of the parking space can be changed if needed. Overall, the off-street parking requirements for larger parcels do not constrain the development of housing given the ample amount of space typically available on those properties. Additionally, the alternative provisions enable smaller parcels with space constraints to meet reduced requirements. New parking standards will be established for the new mixed-use and multi-family zoning districts.
Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types
Historically, the town has been zoned primarily for single-family residential use, with limited options for a variety of housing types. However, provisions of Portola Valley’s Zoning Ordinance do include various regulations intended to implement relevant State Housing Laws and facilitate development of affordable housing and diverse housing types. This includes the following measures which are described in more detail within Section 5, Resources:
▪ Chapter 18.17 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances implements Government Code Section 65915, referred to as the State Density Bonus Law which provides for a by-right density bonus for residential developments that provide a percentage of below-market rate housing units.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 55 ▪ Pursuant to SB 35 the Town provides a streamlined ministerial review of housing developments which propose at least 50% affordability among their provided residential units. While the Town has not adopted a written procedure for SB 35 applications, it will follow State law as to application processing requirements. ▪ Chapter 18.36 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances implements the various state laws related to the development of ADUs. This Chapter implements the streamlined, ministerial review procedure for ADUs and outlines objective design standards and reduced parking standards applicable to ADUs.
▪ Pursuant to SB 2 the Town permits transitional and supportive housing developments byright in all zoning districts that permit residential uses by-right. The Town is in the process of updating its Municipal Code to update the definition of transitional housing to comply with the State definition and to remove the six-resident cap currently specified in the Code.
The Town currently does not have a multi-family zoning district, but when adopted in connection with this Housing Element update, transitional housing will be treated similarly to other residential uses (see Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs). ▪ Pursuant to SB 2 the city permits emergency shelters by-right on sites in the R-E Residential Estate zoning district containing a religious institution. Operational standards for emergency shelters developed are included within Chapter 18.12 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances.
▪ The Town does not have a zoning code definition for Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Units but the Town has no short-term rental restrictions in any of its residential zones, except as required by State ADU law.
▪ Pursuant to State and Federal laws, the Town has adopted Reasonable Accommodation Measures within Chapter 18.11 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances to help in eliminating any potential regulatory constraints to the development of housing to serve persons with disabilities. These measures provide for reasonable flexibility in land-use/zoning, building regulations, policies, and practices as necessary to provide for the development of housing options suitable for disabled persons. The Town recently approved a supportive housing project for developmentally delayed adults.
▪ Portola Valley defines household as “…one or more people living together as the functional equivalent of a family where the residents share a single kitchen and form a single housekeeping unit by sharing living expenses, chores and/or meals, and are a close group with social and economic commitments to each other.” While this definition is consistent with State law and does not result in discrimination against unrelated persons living together, the Town recognizes it should be modernized. As part of this update process, the Town will also conduct a comprehensive analysis of the Municipal Code to improve its regulatory process for reasonable accommodation. This action is outlined in Section 3, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, Program Action 8-7.
Accessory Dwelling Unit Provisions
Portola Valley revised its zoning ordinance provisions for second units in 2021 to comply with California law. A "second unit" which is now referred to as an "accessory dwelling unit" in state 4 | CONSTRAINTS
56 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT law and the Municipal Code means an attached or detached residential dwelling unit located on the same parcel as a main dwelling unit and which provides complete independent living facilities, including those for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation, for one household.
ADUs and JADUs are permitted on all parcels in all zoning districts to help achieve the Town’s goals which include but are not limited to:
▪ Create new housing units while respecting the existing character of the town; ▪ Provide housing that responds to residents’ changing needs, household sizes, and increasing housing costs, and provide accessible housing for seniors and persons with disabilities;
▪ Offer environmentally friendly housing choices with less average space per person and smaller associated carbon footprints; and
▪ Promote provision of affordable housing for people who work in town.
The Town’s ADU ordinance allows one ADU and one JADU on all parcels smaller than 3.5 acres in all zoning districts, except on parcels that are subject to the fire safety exception for parcels that are smaller than 1 acre whose direct vehicular access is from a road or cul-de-sac which 1) has a single point of ingress/egress, and 2) has a width of less than 18 feet. This provision limits new ADUs in these areas due to concern related to access by emergency personnel and evacuation. Parcels with 3.5 or more acres are allowed to have two ADUs. All existing development restrictions in the base zoning district apply, including adjusted maximum floor area, impervious surface, height, setbacks, parking, site development, and outdoor lighting requirements, except as preempted by State law.
Ministerial review of ADUs and JADUs requires no public hearings, consistent with State law.
An ADU or JADU application which qualifies for ministerial review is acted upon within 60 days of the date the Town receives a completed application. An ADU or JADU application made pursuant to an application for a main building may be delayed until a decision is made on the permit application to create the new main building.
Overall, the zoning ordinance provisions for ADUs comply with State law because standards are clearly set forth and are permitted as of right and can be administered ministerially as long as they do not exceed certain criteria. The Town continues to work to encourage production of ADUs, and this Housing Element includes additional actions to that end, as described in Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs.
On- and Off-Site Improvements
The subdivision ordinance includes standards for on-site and off-site improvements including roads, trails, paths, bike lanes, utilities, drainage facilities, street trees, and conservation easements. These standards allow development that is consistent with the natural environment of the town. Utility requirements, i.e., water, sewer, and electricity are typical for residential subdivisions. Street plantings are rarely required because the existing vegetation normally provides a natural setting. Conservation easements are occasionally required when appropriate to help preserve natural areas. Minimal contributions of land or fees are required 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 57 to help preserve open space. Developers have found the requirements reasonable and that they enhance the quality of their projects.
In some parts of town, however, connections to required utilities and roads cannot be made.
For instance, in most of the western hillsides, public roads and utilities are not available. As noted elsewhere in this Housing Element, the western hillsides are hazardous and comprise steep hillsides and canyons as well as large areas of landslides. Since these areas are not suitable for development, the lack of infrastructure does not pose a problem.
Road Requirements
The paved surfaces of roads have been set wide enough to allow for traffic but also as narrow as safety permits. Paving widths vary from 20 feet to 28 feet depending on the type of road.
Since most properties include space for off-street parking, the roads are generally not designed for on-street parking. Right-of-way widths vary from 60 to 100 feet. In PUDs paving and rights-of-way can be varied to fit the design of the development.
Trails, Paths, and Bicycle Lanes
Portola Valley residents value the ability to ride horses, hike, and bicycle throughout the community. Accordingly, where these planned facilities pass through a proposed subdivision, the developer will be required to provide the facility and dedicate an easement that is normally 15 feet wide, or up to 30 feet in areas of particularly difficult terrain.
Utilities
California Water Service Company provides water throughout the town. The company has indicated it has sufficient capacity to meet the housing needs stipulated in this housing element. Gas and electrical utilities are normally readily available. Where required for public utility purposes, utility easements not less than 10 feet in width shall be provided within the subdivision.
Drainage
Given the low density of development in the town and extensive natural areas, most drainage is surface drainage that eventually flows into one of the three major creeks in the town. By and large, the only culverts are where drainage passes under roads. Drainage improvements, therefore, are a minimal requirement on developments. In some instances, a developer will be required to pay a fee to help offset downstream impacts from a development.
Conservation Easements
The Town may require conservation easements to protect natural vegetation, terrain, watercourses, waters, wildlife and for preventing or limiting erosion and drainage problems.
Normally, these easements are on lands that are not suited for development and therefore do not interfere with well-planned developments.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
58 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Dedication and Land for Park or Recreational Purposes
In subdivisions of more than 50 lots, the subdivider must dedicate 0.005 acres of land for each anticipated resident of a subdivision. For subdivisions less than 50 acres, the subdivider must pay a fee based on the above requirement. In the town, no subdivisions of 50 lots or more are anticipated, so only small in-lieu payments can be expected.
Impact of Improvement Requirements on Cost and Supply of Housing Fundamentally, the cost of land in Portola Valley is high. Subdivisions consequently are aimed at rather expensive housing. Given this context, the cost of improvements is a small portion of the total cost of housing. There have been no instances in recent history where the applicant has appealed or otherwise challenged any of the requested dedications.
Inclusionary Housing Requirement
All new single-family homes in Portola Valley are custom built, and as a result, inclusionary housing is implemented differently in town than in other jurisdictions. Since 1991, Portola Valley has required all subdividers in town to provide 15% of their lots (for subdivisions with seven or more lots) or an in-lieu fee (for smaller subdivisions and fractional lots) to the Town for affordable housing. The original intention was for the Town to receive the land and arrange for the construction of the below market rate units. However, this approach was not practical because the Town could not secure an affordable housing developer to build such a small project. As a result, the Town has collected the in-lieu funds and is developing appropriate financial assistance programs with the Housing Element update process.
Some analysts believe that inclusionary housing requirements can sometimes act as a constraint on housing by either substantially raising the price of market rate housing or making housing too expensive to build. One subdivision with multiple units has been developed under this requirement and smaller lot splits have also been approved indicating that development can occur under this requirement. In addition, the Town’s inclusionary housing program provides developers with a 10% density bonus to offset the costs of providing the land.
Because land prices in Portola Valley are high, development of affordable housing is very difficult without the inclusionary ordinance provisions or other direct intervention. Market rate housing in Portola Valley is only affordable to households with incomes well above the moderate range. Given the high cost of market rate housing in town, the effects of the inclusionary housing provisions on affordability are not a significant constraint to development.
Summary of Analysis of Land Use Controls
Portola Valley’s land use controls were developed to fit the town’s situation on the edge of the urban San Francisco Peninsula area, with complex and unstable geology, steep terrain, significant wildfire concerns, and the San Andreas Fault bisecting the town. Within this context, the controls the Town has adopted allow for flexibility to fit development to the land. For 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 59 instance, development intensity is conditioned by steepness of slope, unstable geology, areas subject to flooding and remoteness from major roads. The development approval process results in development that is appropriate to the environment. The Town allows and encourages cluster development and planned developments whereby designs address site specific concerns and sustainability goals.
These natural constraints, including a location well removed from public transportation and significant employment centers, have led to low density development. The low densities permitted are appropriate for the environment and location, and to ensure the safety of residents.
Despite these constraints, the Town recognizes that a range of housing types can be appropriate in certain locations. Therefore, the Town allows multi-family housing in specified locations as set forth in the Affiliated Housing Program of this Housing Element. In addition, as part of this update, the Town is creating two multi-family districts and a mixed-use district.
Building Code
The Town of Portola has adopted the 2022 California Building Code, which establishes construction standards for all residential buildings developed within the State. The Town amends the Code as needed to further define requirements based on the unique local conditions of the town. The Code is designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of Portola Valley’s residents. To support green building and sustainability goals, the Town now requires new residential developments to be all electric, with no natural gas or propane piping installed. To protect the health and safety in this fire-prone area, the local amendments related to fire safety require non-combustible exterior materials, such as stucco, hardiboard, tile, or stone. These amendments are not an impediment to housing; as long as the applicant plans for them in advance, they do not add time or cost to developing housing. Planning staff actively notifies applicants of these requirements early in the process and handouts are available on the Town’s website.
Local Permit and Processing Procedures
The Town’s processing and permit procedures protect the community interest while permitting safe and responsible new construction, additions, and remodeling on private property. A key aspect is the requirement for geologic investigations to ensure safe development in areas of the town mapped as potentially hazardous.
Subdividing
The Town’s subdivision regulations reflect the complicated and unique features of the land such as soils, land movement potential and drainage capacity. A subdivision proposal includes the following steps:
1. Review of a preliminary map by Town staff and professional consultants;
2. Review and approval of the tentative map by the planning commission; and
3. Review and approval of the final map by the Town Council. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
60 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT It is difficult to estimate the time needed for review and approval of a subdivision applications because they are uncommon and the factors that impact timing are unique for each proposal.
Historically, subdivisions have only occurred for single-family detached homes on individual lots. The last significant subdivision was for the Blue Oaks development, a 30-lot hillside subdivision that was approved in the 1990s. There have been a few smaller subdivisions in recent years that took about two years to process because of ownership issues or unique physical characteristics of the site. Staff estimates that a small subdivision with limited environmental review would take approximately one year and a larger subdivision with a full environmental impact report would take approximately two or two and half years.
Lot by Lot Construction
Most residential development occurs on a lot-by-lot basis. As there are few vacant lots in town, most of the development is in the form of an addition/remodel or demolition of an existing house and construction of a new house in its place. More recently, most new home applications also now include an ADU. The process for residential development includes:
1. Preliminary design review at the staff level.
2. Architectural review by the Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC). Some projects are also subject to homeowners’ association architectural review. These reviews are usually concurrent with ASCC review.
3. Review by the Planning Commission (only for proposals with grading exceeding 1,000 cubic yards).
4. Building permit review and approval.
The review process typically, including the first four steps listed above, takes from four months to one year. Another 8 to 12 weeks are then usually needed to process a building permit application. Prior to approving a building permit, Town staff and consultants review the plans, as well as outside agencies.
The Town’s processing and permit procedures may take longer than in typical Bay Area communities because of the complexity of the environment. Most projects require a geotechnical investigation and review by the Town Geologist. Additionally, the process of upgrading septic systems or connecting to sewer can add several months or longer for complex cases. Staff and consultants work closely with developers to explain the process, expectations, and requirements necessary for approval. This attention given early in the process avoids delays in the long run by ensuring that the most appropriate project for the site is presented for approval.
ASCC Review Process
All new single-family homes and major additions must be reviewed and approved by the Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC), whose decisions may be appealed to the Planning Commission. The ASCC process begins with a preliminary meeting with staff to discuss the applicant’s initial ideas and outline the Town standards, regulations and design guidelines that would apply. The applicant then has the opportunity to revise the design 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 61 before formally submitting the application. Simple projects, such as an addition or modest new home, are usually decided at that meeting. Most projects are acted on in no more than two meetings, although occasionally a complex project may take additional time. As a result, ASCC review typically takes approximately three months from formal submittal of a complete application. (The Town experienced a backlog of projects during the COVID-19 pandemic that increased processing times during this period.)
Housing projects on sites included in the Housing Element inventory accommodating low or very low-income units with at least 20% of the units available to low- or very low-income households which require a rezoning will be processed through a by-right process as required by State law. Objective standards are being developed to clarify expectations to applicants and the community in advance of applications being made and are set to be adopted in March 2024 with the new multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts (see Program 1-1c). The ASCC will need to determine if all multi-family projects are consistent with the objective development standards. Market rate multi-family projects will be subject to ASCC review, with the discretionary component limited to design details. Consistent with State law, the ASCC does not have the authority to deny or reduce the density of multi-family housing projects, except under limited health and safety considerations.
All staff reports for the ASCC follow a standard format and address the same topics, which are set forth in the zoning ordinance and the design guidelines. Both the zoning ordinance and the design guidelines are written documents which applicants can consider in putting together their applications. The Town uses a standard format for the ASCC staff reports to give consistency to the review process and ensure that each application is considered in the same way as all others.
While the criteria are the same for each project, the specific physical conditions on an individual parcel of land may be unique. Given the prevalence of slope, geology, drainage and other physical issues throughout Portola Valley, individual consideration of each project is necessary. The ASCC provides this individual consideration along with consistent application of standards and guidelines.
The ASCC review process is reasonable, based on written standards and guidelines and uses a standard format to ensure consistency in its decisions. The cost, as discussed below in the subsection on fees, deposits and exactions, is similar to the cost in other, similar communities, and is a very small percentage of the cost of a project given the high costs of land and construction in the town. For all these reasons, ASCC review does not act as a significant constraint to the provision of housing in Portola Valley.
Site Development Permit
The Site Development Ordinance establishes the framework for the removal of vegetation, including significant trees, and excavation and fill (grading) on a site. Persons conducting those activities are required to apply for a site development permit. Depending on the amount of grading, the application is acted on by either the staff, the Architecture and Site Control Commission, or the Planning Commission. Applicants can appeal a decision to the Town 4 | CONSTRAINTS
62 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Council in a public hearing. This process is necessary to protect both the environment and the applicants, especially in steep and unstable areas. The process is the same for all applicants and does not act as a constraint to the development of housing.
Conditional Use Permit and Planned Unit Development Permit Processes Most residential development in town is not required to obtain either a conditional use permit (CUP) or a planned unit development permit (PUD). Subdividers who would like flexibility in the development standards may apply for a PUD, and most subdivisions in recent years have used PUDs. Since Portola Valley treats PUDs as a type of CUP, the process is similar for both.
The ASCC first reviews the application as an advisory body, and then the application moves to the Planning Commission for a decision. Neither CUPs nor PUDs require action by the Town Council unless the Planning Commission action is appealed.
The Affiliated Housing Program does require CUPs for development, as the institutions where these units are located are generally regulated with a CUP. The CUP process allows greater flexibility than would otherwise be possible with the base zoning for these sites as the development standards required by the base zoning would preclude affiliated uses. For example, at the Woodside Priory School, six multi-family units were approved and built as workforce housing. To build these units, the Priory needed to amend its conditional use permit, a process that took approximately four months. The Priory has also received approval for a master plan that includes 11 additional housing units, six of which have recently been approved. The CUP findings primarily address site suitability, safety, and harmony with surrounding uses and historically have not been difficult to make for affiliated housing projects.
The cost for the permits is a very small percentage of the cost for the project as a whole and is not significant given the high costs of land and construction in Portola Valley. For these reasons, the CUP/PUD requirements for multi-family housing do not appear to be acting as a constraint on the provision of housing in the town—in fact, these permits provide flexibility for multi-family housing possible in Portola Valley.
Environmental Review
The Town facilitates environmental review as required by CEQA. Many projects are categorically exempt from CEQA but some projects may require a Negative Declaration, Environmental Impact Report, or other form of CEQA documentation. Under Public Resources Code 21080.1 and 21080.2, a lead agency must determine if a housing development is exempt from CEQA within 30 days of receiving a complete application. If a project is deemed exempt, this triggers the 60-day approval requirement described in the previous paragraph. While Portola Valley complies with this requirement, it does not issue a formal determination of CEQA exemption within 30 days of an application being deemed complete but will now do so.
Program 5-4 in this Housing Element recommends a change in development processing procedures to issue such determinations as required by State Law. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 63 Length of Time between Application Approval and Building Permit Application Housing Elements are now required to provide an evaluation of the length of time between receiving approval from the city/town and applying for a building permit. Once a project is approved by the Town, such as the Architectural and Site Control Commission or Planning Commission, it is the applicant’s responsibility to submit an application for a building permit.
The time it takes can vary and is largely determined by the applicant. Factors include the time it takes to prepare the construction drawings and any necessary technical studies, preparation and recording of subdivision maps (if necessary), retaining contractors, and securing financing. Table 4-5 provides some examples of recent projects and the time it took between application approval and building permits or master home models. The time varies from 31 days to 43 days.
TABLE 4-5 LENGTH OF TIME BETWEEN APPLICATION APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION, EXAMPLES
Project Length of Time
107 Degas – New House 38 Days: 6-14-21 to 7-23-21
35 Possum – New House 43 Days: 8-18-21 to 9-30-21
Priory – Multi-Family 6 Units 31 Days: 9-9-19 to 10-10-19 Source: Portola Valley, Planning & Building Department.
Fees, Deposits, and Exactions
To assist jurisdictions in meeting requirements for analysis of fees and permit processing, 21 Elements released a survey to all jurisdictions in San Mateo County. The survey asked about potential government constraints to housing, including impact fees, entitlement fees, building permit fees, and permit processing times. In conjunction with that survey, 21 Elements hired Century Urban, a San Francisco based real-estate consulting firm, to examine the cost of land and labor for new housing development in the County. Combined, those two data sets provide a basis for a preliminary examination of constraints for jurisdictions in San Mateo County.
Participation in the 21 Elements government restraints survey was excellent, with 18 of 21 jurisdictions participating. While not all the respondents answered all the questions, the high overall participation results in a meaningful look at the landscape of government-imposed fees in San Mateo County. 21 Elements distributed the survey in November 2021 and accepted results through February 2022.
The survey asked jurisdictions to calculate fees for three hypothetical housing developments:
a single-family house, a 10-unit apartment building, and a 100-unit apartment building.
Single-Family Home – Participants were asked to estimate fees for one of two, hypothetical single-family home developments:
▪ 2,600-square-foot house with 500-square-foot garage. The house is two stories tall with four bedrooms and two bathrooms. The house is constructed on an empty lot in an existing neighborhood and requires no significant grading or other complications. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
64 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ 5,000-square-foot house with 1,000-square-foot garage. House is two stories tall with four bedrooms and three bathrooms. The house is constructed on an empty lot in an existing neighborhood and requires no significant grading or other complications.
Three other Jurisdictions, including Atherton, Woodside, and Unincorporated San Mateo, chose to estimate fees for the larger house. All other respondents estimated fees for the smaller house. For purposes of comparison, all the data are presented in the same table, regardless of which size hypothetical house was chosen.
Small Multi-Family – Jurisdictions were asked to estimate the fees for a hypothetical development with 10 units with moderate complexity.
Large Multi-Family – Jurisdictions were asked to estimate fees for a 100-unit development.
The Portola Valley fees estimated for the prototypical single-family project are shown in Table 4-6. Town entitlement fees are likely higher than other communities due to the detailed engineering and geotechnical review that happens early in the process.
TABLE 4-6: FEES FOR A HYPOTHETICAL SINGLE-FAMILY HOME
Jurisdiction
Entitlement
Fees
Building
Permit
Fees
Impacts
Fees
Other
Fees Total
Atherton 1,520 13,363 0 1,058 15,941
Brisbane 0 4,300 10,608 10,032 24,940
Burlingame 3,645 49,500 16,280 0 69,425
Colma 0 6,760 0 0 6,760
Daly City 0 19,128 15,682 0 34,810
East Palo Alto 6,342 6,606 51,717 39,576 104,241
Foster City 3,000 64,886 9,854 0 77,740
Half Moon Bay 4,019 3,750 36,500 8,300 52,569
Hillsborough 7,951 48,891 11,904 14,250 82,996
Millbrae 7,397 -- 83,213 0 90,610
Pacifica 11,000 10,803 11,922 0 33,725
Portola Valley 15,954 30,753 0 6,216 52,923
Redwood City 1,493 4,952 14,350 0 20,795
San Bruno 5,000 28,000 25,209 0 58,209
San Mateo 4,979 43,844 50,180 0 99,003
South San Francisco 1,490 476 54,944 0 56,910
Unincorporated San Mateo 420 28,013 7,996 0 36,429
Woodside 1,980 35,497 33,480 0 70,957
Source: 21 Elements, 2022.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 65 The total fees per unit are compared to all San Mateo County jurisdictions below in Table 4-7.
Since Portola Valley does not currently have any multi-family projects that fit these scenarios, there was no data to include. However, the Town has processed one project that is similar; the permit fees per unit for the six-unit project at the Priory School was approximately $12,000 per unit. This is well below the per-unit fees in other communities but did not require environmental review. As part of this update, the Town will be creating two multi-family districts.
TABLE 4-7: TOTAL FEES PER UNIT COMPARISON: SAN MATEO COUNTY JURISDICTIONS (INCLUDES
ENTITLEMENT, BUILDING PERMITS, AND IMPACT FEES)
Jurisdiction 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, 2022.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
66 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Total fees as a percentage of total development costs can be found in Table 4-8. Portola Valley’s fees are 1% of total development cost, which is among the lowest of the County.
TABLE 4-8: TOTAL FEES AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS Jurisdiction Single-Family Small Multi-Family Large Multi-Family Atherton 0% No Data No Data
Brisbane 1% 1% No Data
Burlingame 3% 4% 3%
Colma 0% 17% 2%
Daly City 1% 4% 2%
East Palo Alto 4% No Data 4%
Foster City 3% 6% 2%
Half Moon Bay 2% 2% No Data
Hillsborough 3% No Data No Data
Millbrae 2% 8% 7%
Pacifica 1% 5% No Data
Portola Valley 1% No Data No Data
Redwood City 1% 2% 8%
San Bruno 2% 8% 5%
San Mateo 4% 14% 6%
South San Francisco 3% 9% 4%
Unincorporated San Mateo 1% 3% 1%
Woodside 2% 9% No Data
Note: The above table is calculated using average soft costs (including an average of jurisdiction charged fees) and average land costs for the county. A more precise determination of fees as a percentage of total development costs can be calculated using jurisdiction specific land costs and fees.
Source: 21 Elements.
Portola Valley’s fees per unit, including the percentage of total development costs and a comparison to the median of fees are shown in Table 4-9.
TABLE 4-9: SUMMARY OF PORTOLA VALLEY FEES COMPARED TO MEDIAN Project Type Fees per Unit
Percentage of Total
Development Cost
Median of Fees
for 21 Jurisdictions
Single-Family $52,923 1% $55,566
Multi-Family in Small Project No data No data $36,355
Multi-Family in Large Project No data No data $28,699
Source: 21 Elements.
Development Impact Fees are one-time charges levied on new developments and serve as tools to mitigate the impacts of new development by funding a range of capital programs required to address needs related to that development, including transportation, parks, and utilities (such as water, sewer, and storm drain). Other than a park in lieu fee under the 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 67 Quimby Act for subdivisions, the Town does not currently have any impact fees; however, projects that connect to the West Bay Sanitary District are charged fees and construction costs that are outside of the Town’s control.
Infrastructure and Public Service Constraints
The infrastructure and level of public services in the Town is geared to a small, dispersed population. Many of the roads are narrow and winding with restricted capacity. SamTrans along Portola and Alpine Roads (Bus 85) provide limited bus service. Only a portion of the Town is served by sanitary sewers. On-site disposal systems are used in much of the Town, and in many areas, successful disposal requires large sites because of adverse soils and drainage conditions. Most local public services are provided by special districts or San Mateo County under contract. The Woodside Fire Protection District provides fire protection services.
The County Sheriff provide police services. The Town has limited control over the quality and quantity of these services.
The Town government operates on a minimal budget with a small staff. The Town’s ability to undertake major programs to provide housing is severely constrained by fiscal realities and limited staff time. As a result, housing programs with high administrative demands have not been practical for the Town and have been avoided.
To mitigate the constraints pertaining to public services, this Housing Element update provides for affordable housing on sites with current access to services or in locations where connections are feasible. In-lieu fees collected through the inclusionary housing program may also be used to help cover costs when no other source is available.
NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
Non-governmental constraints are those that are generated by the economic and social environment which are beyond the control of local governments. Some of the impacts of nongovernmental constraints can be offset to a minimal extent by local governmental actions, but usually the effects are localized and have little influence on the housing need in the jurisdiction or market area.
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COSTS
As part of the 21 Elements collaboration, Century|Urban and Baird + Driskell performed research on the development costs of certain residential prototypes in San Mateo County as well as the unit mixes of residential projects delivered since 2013. The estimated prototype project costs described in this subsection reflect high-level averages and do not represent any specific project budget. Project costs vary by geography, topography, site conditions, finish level, entitlement and permit status, contractor type, and time among other factors. The data presents over 100 projects and over 13,000 units and as such is informative with respect to the types and sizes of units built during the period surveyed. Non-governmental constraints to affordable housing are traditionally considered to consist of three major factors: land costs, cost of construction, and availability of financing.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
68 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Price of Land
Land costs include acquisition and the cost of holding land throughout the development process. Due in part to the desirability of the region and because land is in short supply, land costs in San Mateo County are high. These costs can account for as much as half of the final sales prices of new homes in small developments or in areas where land is scarce. These costs vary both between and within jurisdictions based on factors like the desirability of the location and the permitted density with multi-family and mixed-use land costing more.
The extremely high cost of land in Portola Valley is the most significant constraint on the development of affordable housing in the Town. For typical multi-family construction in San Mateo County, Century|Urban reports estimates of land costs at approximately $100,000 per unit in San Mateo County but noted a range of land costs between $40,000 to $160,000 per unit.
To generate single-family land values, Century|Urban collected sales data for land lots totaling 1 acre or less which transacted over the past three years. Table 4-10 below represents the available single-family home lot sales data points collected, which demonstrates that land sites up to 1 acre can range from $1,325,000 to $3,000,000, a price that is probably too high to allow the development of affordable housing under market conditions. Further, most sites in Portola Valley are above 1 acre and have an even higher value than what is shown in Table 4-10. However, homes on smaller sites are typically in the older neighborhoods of Portola Valley with older or more modest homes.
The challenge from the Town’s perspective is to provide affordable housing opportunities in the face of extreme market pressure, while at the same time preserving the characteristics that make Portola Valley a desirable place in which to live. The Town’s housing programs attempt to mitigate the effects of these market conditions. To offset the high cost of land, the inclusionary housing program provides affordable housing, including land. The affiliated multi-family housing program allows increased density, reducing costs per unit. The ADU program provides the opportunity for construction of second units by the private market with essentially no land cost. As previously mentioned, as part of this update, the Town will also be creating a multi-family district and mixed-use district.
Cost of Construction
Construction costs, which can comprise a significant portion of the sales price of a home, are one of the major cost factors with residential development. Construction costs include both hard costs, such as labor and materials, and soft costs, such as architectural, geotechnical, and engineering services, development fees and insurance. As noted above, costs will vary by geography, topography, site conditions, finish level, entitlement and permit status, construction type, and time among other factors.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 69 TABLE 4-10: SAN MATEO COUNTY SINGLE-FAMILY LAND SITES UP TO 1 ACRE, 2018-2021 Jurisdiction
Available
Data
Points
Per Square Foot Per Single-Family Home
Minimum Maximum Median Average Minimum Maximum Median Average Moss Beach 19 $14 $117 $64 $64 $125,000 $582,500 $375,000 $335,053 Woodside 4 $10 $88 $24 $36 $150,000 $2,000,000 $377,250 $726,125 South San
Francisco 4 $33 $89 $59 $60 $165,000 $3,800,000 $431,000 $1,206,750 Montara 12 $23 $269 $65 $79 $275,000 $1,750,000 $439,000 $533,917 Half Moon Bay 33 $1 $324 $75 $91 $5,000 $2,300,000 $447,000 $514,455 Pacifica 6 $14 $105 $70 $63 $300,000 $925,000 $447,000 $500,000 Belmont 12 $2 $721 $56 $118 $55,000 $4,470,000 $495,000 $960,583 East Palo Alto 5 $72 $135 $92 $100 $235,000 $3,550,000 $675,000 $1,379,600 Redwood City 18 $6 $345 $129 $145 $50,000 $5,350,000 $825,000 $1,170,250 Emerald Hills 2 $125 $132 $129 $129 $975,000 $980,000 $977,500 $977,500 San Bruno 2 $179 $207 $193 $193 $560,000 $1,500,250 $1,030,125 $1,030,125 San Carlos 11 $2 $405 $94 $126 $29,000 $2,980,000 $1,100,000 $1,214,455 San Mateo 1 $500 $500 $500 $500 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 Portola Valley 4 $47 $129 $58 $73 $1,325,000 $3,000,000 $1,578,000 $1,870,250 Burlingame 1 $125 $125 $125 $125 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Menlo Park 3 $165 $591 $459 $405 $2,580,000 $6,500,000 $2,780,000 $3,953,333 Millbrae 1 $239 $239 $239 $239 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 Hillsborough 3 $85 $306 $116 $169 $3,050,000 $8,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,016,667 Atherton 2 $147 $208 $178 $178 $2,500,000 $6,400,000 $4,450,000 $4,450,000 Total 143 $1 $721 $84 $110 $5,000 $8,000,000 $510,000 $1,026,691 Source: Century|Urban, 2022.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
70 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT The cost of construction can also constrain housing production, particularly for affordable housing. Residential construction in Portola Valley is comparable to the neighboring communities of Woodside, Palo Alto, and Atherton. The costs average around $350-$450 per square foot. These high costs, however, are often a result of homeowners’ choices to use unique designs and expensive materials.
The price paid for material and labor at any one time will reflect short-term considerations of supply and demand. Future costs are difficult to predict given the cyclical fluctuations in demand and supply that in large part are created by fluctuations in the state and national economies. Such policies unilaterally impact construction in a region and therefore do not deter housing construction in any specific community. According to data from the California Construction Cost Index, hard construction costs in California grew by 44% between 2014 and 2018, or an additional $80 per square foot.
2 Between 2020 and 2021 alone, construction costs
increased 13.4%. Construction costs are estimated to account for upwards of 60% of the production cost of a new home, especially for multi-unit residential buildings which often require the use of more expensive materials, like steel, and need additional amenities such as parking structures.3
For San Mateo County, construction costs for multi-unit buildings vary based on the form of parking (structure vs. surface) in addition to other environmental factors such as topography, pre-existing structures, etc. For a small multi-family development with surface parking, Century|Urban estimates hard costs at $521,500 per unit and soft costs at $165,000 per unit for a total cost including land of $786,500 per unit.
In terms of labor, the California Labor Code applies prevailing wage rates to public works projects exceeding $1,000 in value. Public works projects include construction, alteration, installation, demolition, or repair work performed under contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds.
A factor contributing to the high construction costs on the Peninsula is the scarcity of construction labor. Contractors have difficulty attracting and retaining workers because most cannot afford to live in the area on construction labor wages. Many construction workers must commute long distances from their jobs to more affordable housing.
AVAILABILITY OF FINANCING
The availability of capital to finance new residential development is a significant factor that can impact both the cost and supply of housing. Two types of capital are involved in the housing market: 1) capital used by developers for initial site preparation and construction, and 2) capital for financing the purchase of units by homeowners and investors. Interest rates substantially impact home construction, purchase, and improvement costs. Fluctuation in interest rates can have a significant impact on costs for construction or purchase, as well as 2 Hayley Raetz, Teddy Forscher, Elizabeth Kneebone and Carolina Reid. The Hard Costs of Construction: Recent Trends in Labor and Materials Costs for Apartment Buildings in California. The Terner Center for Housing Innovation, University of California Berkeley, March 2020, p. 8, http://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/uploads/Hard_Construction_Costs_March_2020.pdf. 3 Ibid, page 4.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 71 impact whether a potential buyer can qualify for a loan. Following several years of historically low interest rates, the expectation is that interest rates are likely to rise in 2022 and beyond.4 Table 4-11 summarizes the total number of home loans applied for, approved (and originated), and denied within the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). In 2020, a total of 97,147 applications for home loans were submitted within the MSA. Of these loan applications, over 66% were approved and originated while approximately 11% of applications were denied. This percentage of loan approvals and denials vary throughout the MSA by income group. As anticipated, there is a direct relationship between household incomes and home loan application approvals and denials. As depicted in Table 4-11 as household incomes rise, the percentage of home loans denied decreases and the percentage of loans approved increases. Similarly, as household income falls, the percentage of home loan applications denied increases and the percentage of loans approved decreases. This data suggests it is much more difficult for lower-income households in the MSA to obtain home loan financing than higher-income households. This difficulty has the potential to directly affect the production and rehabilitation of housing units serving lowerincome households, throughout the MSA.
TABLE 4-11: DISPOSITION OF APPLICATIONS BY INCOME OF APPLICANT, 2020 Income Group
Total Loan
Applications
Loans
Originated
Applications
Denied
Percentage
Denied
<50% MFI 6,876 3,095 1,924 28%
50-79% MFI 12,351 7,792 1,793 14.5%
80-99% MFI 5,052 3,371 543 10.7%
100-119% MFI 15,158 10,462 1,502 9.9%
>120% MFI 57,710 39,177 5,059 8.8%
Total 97,147 63,897 10,821 11.1%
Note: MSA 41884 – San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland. MFI: Median Family Income Source: Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Data, 2020.
Interest Rates
Interest rates can influence the borrowing activity of those seeking to purchase a home or existing homeowners looking to repair their residences. When interest rates are relatively low, loans are considered more advantageous to borrow than when interest rates are higher.
Figure 4-1 below shows the average federal interest rate between February 2019 and January 2022. During this time, interest rates have been at historic lows and are not likely a significant constraint on constructing or purchasing housing. However, even with the lower interest rates, lower-income households still face significant obstacles to purchasing a home due to the high home prices in the Bay Area and difficulty meeting down payment requirements. 4 Kiplinger. Interest Rates: The Fed Gets Aggressive, April 14, 2022, https://www.kiplinger.com/economic-forecasts/interestrates#:~:text=Expect%20the%20Treasury%2010%2Dyear,from%204.2%25%20to%204.7%25. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
72 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Most homes in Portola Valley are custom-built homes funded by individual households.
Financing for this type of construction is more difficult to obtain now that banks have increased their requirements. However, financing is no more of a constraint in Portola Valley than in other communities in the Bay Area. In fact, loans for individual homes may currently be easier to obtain than loans for speculative housing developments.
FIGURE 4-1: U.S. AVERAGE INTEREST RATES – FEBRUARY 2019 – JANUARY 2022 Source: Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey.
NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS SPECIFIC TO PORTOLA
VALLEY
NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION
Opposition from neighbors can be a significant obstacle to obtaining approvals for new housing developments. Most notably, developments that are multi-family or low-income housing draw the most public opposition because they are perceived to take away from the existing rural character, increase traffic congestion, raise fire safety concerns, and put further strain on limited infrastructure capacity. Town officials and developers can work to assuage these concerns by implementing objective design standards for multi-family development that help preserve the town’s rural environment and educating the public about the benefits of increasing affordable housing in the town to help reduce long commutes for workers.
Undergoing a thorough public planning process to address and develop clear and explicit requirements can combat public opposition.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 73
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
The Town of Portola Valley has identified areas where land development should be carefully controlled to ensure public health and safety. The following environmental constraints may impact future development of residential units in the town.
Biological Resources
Special-status plant and animal species are known or suspected to occur in the planning area.
No occurrences of special-status plant and animal species overlap parcels in the Sites Inventory with the exception of a generalized record of arcuate bush-mallow (Malacothamnus arcuatus) that extends over portions of the Stanford Wedge and Glen Oaks housing sites and a historic record from 1906 for foothill yellow-legged frog that encompasses the north-central portion of the planning area that extends over the Village Square, Christ Church and The Sequoias housing sites.
Principals and objectives in the Conservation Element of the Town’s General Plan call for avoidance of sensitive resources such as special-status species and require that detailed assessments be prepared where potential impacts could occur. Where natural habitat remains that could support special-status species, wetlands, and other sensitive resources, further detailed studies and assessment would need to be performed when a development project is proposed to verify presence or absence. Development is required to be done in accordance with the General Plan policies to ensure that potential impacts on special-status species would be less than significant.
A few of the parcels in the Sites Inventory are located adjacent to creeks and other drainages, and there remains a potential for presence of seasonal wetlands or other regulated waters on these parcels and in other locations in the planning area. The Town’s General Plan calls for avoidance of sensitive resources such as regulated waters and requires that detailed studies be conducted where potential impacts could occur. Where necessary, further detailed studies and assessment will be required to be performed to verify the presence or absence of regulated waters. This further assessment process would serve to ensure that occurrences of sensitive natural communities are identified, avoided, or adequately mitigated. Development under the project would be performed in accordance with the General Plan and Municipal Code consistency review discussed above, which would ensure that potential impacts on regulated waters would be less than significant.
Geologic and Seismic and Flooding Hazards
As mentioned in the beginning of this section, the town’s geologic setting in steep and often hazardous terrain does constrain the amount and types of housing that can be built. In addition, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is an important source of open space for hiking and recreational uses for the region. The land preserved provides habitat for wild animals and plants and protecting water and air quality, and therefore the low-density housing pattern and the clustering of development in the town serves to protect this important regional resource.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
74 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT San Mateo County is in a region of high seismicity because of the presence of the San Andreas Fault that bisects the county (and the town), the Hayward Fault across the bay to the east, and the San Gregorio Fault to the west. The primary seismic hazard for Portola Valley is potential ground shaking from these three large faults.
The Town of Portola Valley also has both 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood zones as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). In the past, Portola Valley has experienced minor flooding in areas adjacent to streams. These areas include portions of the natural floodplains of Corte Madera, Sausal and Los Trancos creeks, and locations where inadequate or obstructed drainage facilities have been unable to contain peak flows.
To protect the residents and properties of Portola Valley, the Safety Element includes policies and implementation actions including review of the Town’s Geologic Map and Ground Movement Potential Map and Federally issued Flood Insurance Rate Maps during development application review and a site-specific fault investigation for structures within an Earthquake Fault Zone.
The Town mapped several hazards constraints to inform the sites selection process and determine areas safest for future development. This included fault setbacks, flood zones, and least stable soil types (based on the Town’s Ground Movement Potential Map) (see Figures 4-2 through 4-4).
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
A hazardous material is any substance or material that could adversely affect human health or the environment. Hazardous materials are commonly used in the planning area including uses for construction, service/maintenance industries, commercial businesses, pest/weed management, agriculture, medical facilities, schools, and households. Hazardous wastes are hazardous materials that no longer have practical use or are discarded or released into the environment. Hazardous wastes can be liquids, solids, or contained gases, and can be the byproducts of manufacturing processes, used materials (e.g., used oil), or discarded unused commercial products (e.g., cleaning products or pesticides). Soil that is excavated and contains hazardous materials may also be a hazardous waste if it exceeds specific criteria outlined in California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22.
All of the hazardous materials release sites identified in the planning area have a “closed case” status, indicating that investigation and/or remediation has been completed to the satisfaction of the regulatory agency(ies) providing oversight. In some cases, closed sites may be certified as having completed investigation and/or remediation; however, site management requirements or land use restrictions may be in place to ensure that residual contamination does not pose a risk to human health or the environment.
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-2
Sites Inventory With Fault Setbacks
Fault Setbacks
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025 Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-3
Sites Inventory With Flood Zones
Flood Zones
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025
Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-4
Sites Inventory With Ground Movement Potential - Least Soil Stability Least Soil Stability
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025 Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
4 | CONSTRAINTS
78 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Some parcels identified in the Sites Inventory are located in relatively close proximity to closed hazardous materials release sites. Because hazardous materials contamination can migrate through groundwater and soil vapor, properties located near hazardous materials release sites can also be impacted by hazardous materials contamination. Two of the parcels identified in the Sites Inventory were identified as hazardous materials release sites and are discussed below.
The Sequoias, located at 501 Portola Road, is identified on GeoTracker as a closed leaking underground storage tank (LUST) case under the name North Calif. Presbyterian Home. [1]
According to the Case Closure Letter59
[2] issued by San Mateo County Environmental Health
Division (SMCEH), a 1,000-gallon gasoline UST, a 350-gallon gasoline UST, and a hydraulic jack were removed from this property in 1994, and a 15,000-gallon diesel UST was removed from this property in 1996. Approximately 100 cubic yards of petroleum hydrocarbon impacted soil was removed from the property between 1994 and 1997. Concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and associated volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were detected in soil samples collected before cleanup, and residual concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons remained in groundwater after cleanup. One groundwater monitoring well was installed at the property and groundwater was as shallow as approximately 6.9 feet below the ground surface. The Case Closure Letter indicated that there are no site management requirements and no need to review corrective action if land use changes. While there are no site management requirements for this property, it is possible that there could be residual impacts from petroleum hydrocarbons and associated VOCs in soil, groundwater, and soil vapor beneath this property.
Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space, 3329 Alpine Road
Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space, located at 3329 Alpine Road, is a closed Cleanup Program case. Information available for this Cleanup Program case indicates that in 2014 a dump truck ran off the road and collided with a fence and trees at Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space. It was estimated that 80 gallons of diesel fuel was released, and the area of release was excavated to a depth of approximately 14 feet, removing 61 tons of diesel contaminated soil and 800 gallons of diesel contaminated groundwater. In 2015, a Soil and Groundwater Assessment Report61Fwas prepared which indicated that dissolved-phase hydrocarbons remained in groundwater at concentrations above Environmental Screening Levels when the remedial excavation was backfilled, however residual contamination at the release site was adequately delineated with concentrations near or below reporting limits in the soil and groundwater samples collected during the 2015 investigation. Information presented in a Case Closure Letter62
]
issued by SMCEH in 2017 indicates that the diesel release and cleanup occurred in the riparian corridor of Los Trancos Creek adjacent to the south of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space parking lot. This release area appears to be within the northern end of the Glen Oaks parcel identified in the Sites Inventory. The Case Closure Letter indicates that site investigation and remedial action carried out at the release site satisfied the cleanup goal requirements.[6] It is possible that there could be residual contamination from petroleum hydrocarbons and associated VOCs in soil, groundwater, and soil vapor beneath this release area; however, the release area appears to be an adequate distance away from the developable areas on both the Vacant Portion of Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space and Glen 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 79 Oaks sites such that residual contamination, if present, would not affect potential development of these properties.
Prior to the Town issuing demolition, grading, or building permits for a proposed redevelopment or development project that would disturb soil (except for residential renovations/additions), the project applicant is required to prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the project site and shall submit the Phase I ESA to the Town for review. If any Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) or other environmental concerns are identified in the Phase I ESA, the project applicant shall prepare a Phase II ESA to evaluate the RECs or other environmental concerns and shall submit the Phase II ESA to the Town for review and approval. Phase I and II ESA reports shall be prepared by a qualified environmental professional and include recommendations for further investigation or remedial action, as appropriate, for hazardous materials contamination.
Wildfire Hazards
Portola Valley is also characterized by steep canyons and gullies, with dense vegetation, including thick brush and trees, interspersed throughout its residential neighborhoods. The town is bounded to the south, east, and west by open space land uses: Windy Hill Open Space Preserve, Pearson-Arastradero Preserve, and Thornwood Open Space Preserve, respectively.
The deep canyons that dominate the topography creates difficult-to-access areas where vegetation management is difficult to accomplish; in addition, east-west oriented canyons create funnels for strong autumn winds, which tend to blow from the east or west and amplify wildfire hazards.5
The climate in San Mateo County is Mediterranean and characterized by warm, dry temperatures accompanied by wind. The topography, fuel conditions, and climate combine to make Portola Valley and surrounding areas at risk for wildfire. Historic weather data suggests that the greatest wildfire threat may be driven by eastern winds, which are typically drier and less common; therefore, areas where the topography aligns with the dominant fire-season winds (east-west oriented canyons) face a higher likelihood of extreme wildfire behavior.6 In the event of a fire emergency, the Portola Valley planning area is served by the Woodside Fire Protection District, Cal Fire, and Stanford University. Northern and eastern portions of the planning area are also served by the Menlo Park Fire Protection District and the Palo Alto Fire Department. Woodside Fire Protection District Station #8 serves Portola Valley. All of these fire protection services fight both structural and wildland fires.
To protect the residents and properties of Portola Valley, the Safety Element includes policies and programs that promote new development outside of the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, require private vegetation management, expand the Town’s home hardening ordinance, and incorporating the Woodside Fire Protection District’s forthcoming fire hazard and risk assessment findings.
5 Deer Creek Resources, 2022, op. cit.
6 Ibid.
4 | CONSTRAINTS
80 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT As part of the site inventory development process, the Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee considered four maps related to fire safety (see Figures 4-5 through 4-8), a presentation from the Fire Marshal, as well as the opinion of a fire consultant. The Town mapped slopes greater than 30%, as greater slopes increase the spread of fire and difficulty in fighting wildfires. The parcels with single evacuation routes were mapped, and CalFire’s Very High Fire Severity Zone map was also consulted. The Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee also consulted a fuel hazard assessment map, called the Moritz Map, that was commissioned by the Town along with an accompanying report and incorporated by the Town into the 2010 Safety Element. The Moritz Map includes mapping of vegetative fuels and ranking of fuels as to fire behavior. The report then provides specific fire hazard mitigation strategies in light of these hazards. The Housing Sites have been mapped (Figure 4-8) on the Moritz Map and the vegetation types are shown in Table 4-12.
TABLE 4-12: HOUSING SITES BY VEGETATION TYPE
Housing Site Type of Vegetation
The Sequoias Fire-Prone Oak Woodland (highest)/Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high)
Christ Church Mowed Grass (low)/Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high) 4394 Alpine Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high)
Willow Commons Pipeline Project Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high) 4370 Alpine Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high)
Ladera Church Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high)
Skyline Open Space Mixed Evergreen Forest (highest)
Village Square Mowed Grass (low)/Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high) Vacant portion of the Ford Park Fire-Prone Urban Forest (high) Glen Oaks Mowed Grass (low)/ Fire-Prone Oak Woodland (highest) Stanford Wedge Pending Project Fire-Prone Urban Forest (highest)/Chaparral (highest) Source: Town of Portola Valley Fuel Hazard Assessment Study Moritz Map.
At its meeting of December 13, 2023, the Town Council received a report on a draft Joint Work Plan “7+13” with the Woodside Fire Protection District. This draft Work Plan was jointly prepared by staff of the Town of Portola Valley and the Woodside Fire Protection District. The Work Plan reflects the Town’s and the District’s mutual interest in fire protection and emergency preparedness. The draft Work Plan indicates the responsible party, the implementation strategy, and the timing for each proposed policy or action.
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-5
Sites Inventory With Slopes Greater Than 30%
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley
Slopes Greater Than 30%
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025
Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-6
Sites Inventory With Parcels With Single Evacuation Routes Parcels With Single Evacuation Route
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025 Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-7
Sites Inventory and Very High Fire Hazard Zones
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley
Very High Fire Hazard Zones
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Vacant Housing Sites
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDENI H SLL
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
G
E
ROVE
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025
Village Square
The Sequoias
4370Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
F P U F ( h )
F P U F ( h )
M G ( l )
G R ( m )
F P O ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
C S ( h )
R F ( h )
F P O ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
M G ( l )
F P U F ( h + )
F P U F ( h )
F P U F ( h )
ME F ( h + )
G R ( m )
F P U F ( h )
M G ( l )
F P U F ( h )
R F ( h )
M G ( l )
V I N ( l )
V I N ( l )
ME F ( h + )
F P U F ( h )
V I N ( l ) C H ( h + )
C H ( h + )
G R ( m ) U S ( m )
C H ( h + )
G R ( m )
M G ( l )
F P U F ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
M G ( l )
M G ( l )
M G ( l )
M G ( l )
M G ( l )
C S ( h )
F P U F ( h )
V I N ( l )
ME F ( h + )
ME F ( h + )
C S ( h )
C H ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
F P U F ( h )
F P O ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
F P U F ( h + )
C H ( h + )
M G ( l )
F P O ( h + )
F P O ( h + )
M G ( l )
Basemap: Town of Portola Valley
Vegetation Data Source: Moritz Arboricultural Consulting Map: TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc.
October 2008
CH (h+) CHAPARRAL (highest)
CS (h) COASTAL SCRUB (high)
FPO (h+) FIRE-PRONE OAK WOODLAND (highest)
FPUF (h) FIRE-PRONE URBAN FOREST (high)
FPUF (h+) FIRE-PRONE URBAN FOREST (highest)
GR (m) GRASSLAND (moderate)
MEF (h+) MIXED EVERGREEN FOREST (highest)
MG (l) MOWED GRASS (low)
RF (h) REDWOOD FOREST (high)
US (m) URBAN SAVANNAH (moderate)
VIN (l) VINEYARD (low)
0 1,200 2,400
Feet
Village Square
The Sequoias
4370 Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394 Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
Stanford Wedge
Pending Project
Willow Commons
Pipeline Project
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Figure 4-8
SITES INVENTORY WITH MORITZ MAPVEGETATIVE FUEL TYPES
N 0 1,700 3,400
Feet
1 inch = 3,400 feet Source: Town of Portola Valley; Moritz Arboricultural Consulting; TRA Environmental Sciences, Inc. 4 | CONSTRAINTS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 85 Attachment 1: Memo from Century Urban, San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Development Cost & San Mateo County Unit Mix Research, dated April 7, 2022.
PAGE 1
BAIRD + DRISKELL
TO: Baird + Driskell
FROM: Century Urban, LLC
SUBJECT: San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Development Cost & San Mateo County Unit Mix Research
DATE: April 7, 2022
Century | Urban has been engaged by Baird + Driskell to perform research on the development costs of certain residential prototypes in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties as well as the unit mixes of residential projects delivered since 2013 in San Mateo County. The research findings shown below in Exhibits 1, 2, 3, and 4 are based on Century | Urban’s recent work on other assignments as well as on third-party data sources, further detailed below, which Century | Urban considers credible but has not independently verified.
The estimated prototype project costs shown below reflect high-level averages and do not represent any specific project budget. Project costs vary by geography, topography, site conditions, finish level, entitlement and permit status, contractor type, and time among other factors. Key elements of the prototypes were provided by Baird + Driskell.
The San Mateo County unit mix results represent the data available to Century | Urban through its research and does not represent every project built in each market or market-level conclusions.
However, the data does present over 100 projects and over 13,000 units and as such is informative with respect to the types and sizes of units built during the period surveyed.
With respect to the unit mix data, please note that a lack of data for a given city does not necessarily mean that no projects or units were built in that city, but rather that no relevant data was available for that city.
Land prices range substantially across the surveyed transactions. To convey the range of land costs reviewed, Century | Urban provided the averages of the bottom third of the land sales, the middle third, and the highest third. Further detail on the land sales that were available is reflected in Exhibits 3 and 4.
PAGE 2
Research and Data Sources
The estimates shown below are based on data and sources including but not limited to: similar projects Century | Urban has underwritten and/or priced; specific project economics Century | Urban has reviewed; direct conversations with developers and cost estimators; database research including CoStar, MLS, Redfin, and title databases; online research sources including City and project websites; market reports compiled by real estate sales and research organizations; and, Century | Urban’s general experience assessing residential project feasibility in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Single Family Home Land Price Data
To generate the single-family land values utilized in the development cost estimates, Century | Urban collected sales data for land lots totaling one acre or less which transacted over the past three years across the surveyed jurisdictions in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. Over 250 data points were collected. The data does not include properties with existing homes or infrastructure that were redeveloped as new single-family homes, and the data for some cities is limited.
As the data collected is not comprehensive, summaries and averages may be valuable for reaching overall conclusions about the range of land prices in the counties, but they may or may not be representative of a given city’s average or median land price or the land price for a given parcel. The table in Exhibit 3 should therefore be reviewed noting the limited number of data points for certain cities. Land prices vary substantially by location, topography, site conditions, shape of the parcel, neighboring uses, access, noise, and many other factors. In addition, completed sales are necessarily past transactions and may not represent the current state of the market and expected future land sale prices.
Multi Family Home Land Price Data
Century | Urban collected available multi family land sales data from 2013 to the present in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties. Over 65 data points were collected. In certain cases, the multi family projects designated for the sites have not been completed. In those cases, Century | Urban based unit counts based on approved or the reported number of units planned. The data includes both sites with for-rent and for-sale projects.
Similar to the single family data points, the available information is not comprehensive and is more informative at a county level. Summaries and averages by city may not be valuable for reaching definitive conclusions about a given city’s average or median land price or the land price for a given parcel. Particularly in cities with a less than five data points, any given sale or set of sales could represent an outlier or outliers which may affect median and average calculations. As noted above, land prices vary substantially by location, topography, site conditions, shape of the parcel, neighboring uses, access, noise, and many other factors. In addition, completed sales are necessarily past transactions and may not represent the current state of the market and expected future land sale prices.
PAGE 3
Exhibit 1: Total Development Cost: Single-family
Baird and Driskell
Total Development Costs - San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Large numbers rounded to nearest $'000 or nearest $'0,000 Total $ / SF Total $ / SF
Prototype Elements
1) Gross Residential Square Feet 2,600 5,000
Hard Costs
1) Residential Hard Costs $1,040,000 $400 $2,500,000 $500 2) Site improvements and utilities
3) Grading and erosion control
4) Parking Hard Costs
5) Contingency 5% $52,000 $20 $125,000 $25
Total Hard Costs $1,092,000 $420 $2,625,000 $525
Soft Costs
1) Soft Costs 25.0% $270,000 $104 $660,000 $132
2) City Fees $75,000 $29 $75,000 $15
3) Soft Cost Contingency 5% $20,000 $8 $40,000 $8
Total Soft Costs $365,000 $133 $775,000 $147
% of hard costs 33% 30%
Land Costs Total Per SF Bldg Total Per SF Bldg
1) Land Costs - San Mateo $1,030,000 $396 $1,030,000 $206 2) Land Costs - Santa Clara $1,320,000 $508 $1,320,000 $264 Single Family Land Cost Range
SFH Land - Lower Price Tier $210,000 $81 $210,000 $42
SFH Land - Middle Price Tier $730,000 $281 $730,000 $146 SFH Land - Higher Price Tier $2,510,000 $965 $2,510,000 $502 Total Development Cost - San Mateo $2,487,000 $949 $4,430,000 $878 Total Development Cost - Santa Clara $2,777,000 $1,060 $4,720,000 $936 Total Development Cost by Range of Land Cost
Single Family - Lower Land Price Tier $1,667,000 $633 $3,610,000 $714 Single Family - Middle Land Price Tier $2,187,000 $833 $4,130,000 $818 Single Family - Higher Land Price Tier $3,967,000 $1,518 $5,910,000 $1,174 Single Family Small Single Family Large
PAGE 4
Exhibit 1: Total Development Cost: Multi-family
Baird and Driskell
Total Development Costs - San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties Large numbers rounded to nearest $'000 or nearest $'0,000 Total $ / SF $ / Unit Total $ / SF $ / Unit
Prototype Elements
1) Gross Residential Square Feet 10,000 93,750
2) Parking Square Footage 3,750 40,000
3) Parking Type Surface Lot Standalone above grade
4) Units 10 100
5) Avg Net SF / Unit 850 750
6) Efficiency 85% 80%
Hard Costs
1) Residential Hard Costs $4,150,000 $415 $420,000 $39,840,000 $425 $400,000 2) Site improvements and utilities $605,000 $1,165,000
3) Grading and erosion control $110,000 $335,000
4) Parking Hard Costs $100,000 $28 $4,800,000 $120
5) Contingency 5% $250,000 $21 $21,000 $2,310,000 $21 $20,000 Total Hard Costs $5,215,000 $522 $521,500 $48,450,000 $517 $484,500 Soft Costs
1) Soft Costs 25.0% $1,303,750 $130 $130,000 $12,110,000 $129 $120,000 2) City Fees $350,000 $35 $35,000 $2,800,000 $30 $28,000 3) Soft Cost Contingency 5% $80,000 $8 $8,000 $750,000 $8 $7,500 Total Soft Costs $1,733,750 $165 $165,000 $15,660,000 $159 $148,000 % of hard costs 33% 32%
Land Costs Total Per Unit Per Unit
1) Land Costs - San Mateo $1,000,000 $100,000 $10,000,000 $100,000 2) Land Costs - Santa Clara $600,000 $60,000 $6,000,000 $60,000 Range of Land Costs
Apts/Condo- Lower Price Tier $400,000 $40,000 $4,000,000 $40,000 Apts/Condo- Middle Price Tier $800,000 $80,000 $8,000,000 $80,000 Apts/Condo- Higher Cost Tier $1,600,000 $160,000 $16,000,000 $160,000 Total Development Cost - San Mateo $7,948,750 $795 $786,500 $74,110,000 $791 $732,500 Total Development Cost - Santa Clara $7,548,750 $755 $746,500 $70,110,000 $748 $692,500 Total Development Cost by Range of Land Cost
Apts/Condo- Lower Land Price Tier $7,348,750 $726,500 $68,110,000 $672,500 Apts/Condo- Middle Land Price Tier $7,748,750 $766,500 $72,110,000 $712,500 Apts/Condo- Higher Land Price Tier $8,548,750 $846,500 $80,110,000 $792,500 Multi-Family Small Multi-Family Large
PAGE 5
Exhibit 2: Unit Mixes – Number of Units by Unit Type and Unit Mix Percentages San Mateo County Apartments
Number of Units
Projects Studios One Two Three Four Total Studios One Two Three Four Proposed 25 936 1,639 888 124 56 3,643 26% 45% 24% 3% 2% Existing 63 905 4,223 2,626 523 1 8,279 11% 51% 32% 6% 0% Final Planning 3 328 19 75 33 7 462 71% 4% 16% 7% 2%
Under Construction 16 268 619 523 79 0 1,489 18% 42% 35% 5% 0% Totals 107 2,437 6,500 4,112 759 64 13,872 18% 47% 30% 5% 0% Projects Studios One Two Three Four Total Studios One Two Three Four South San Francisco 8 90 853 604 55 0 1,602 6% 53% 38% 3% 0% San Mateo 19 228 734 715 154 1 1,832 12% 40% 39% 8% 0%
Redwood City 28 1,019 2,262 1,125 163 0 4,569 22% 50% 25% 4% 0% Menlo Park 12 600 995 411 80 47 2,133 28% 47% 19% 4% 2% Millbrae 3 147 151 133 23 0 454 32% 33% 29% 5% 0%
Foster City 5 12 367 302 83 0 764 2% 48% 40% 11% 0%
Burlingame 11 105 606 474 28 0 1,213 9% 50% 39% 2% 0%
Daly City 3 206 79 72 23 0 380 54% 21% 19% 6% 0%
San Carlos 7 0 101 84 88 9 282 0% 36% 30% 31% 3%
Half Moon Bay 2 0 149 21 2 0 172 0% 87% 12% 1% 0%
East Palo Alto 2 8 55 80 27 7 177 5% 31% 45% 15% 4%
San Bruno 4 4 119 62 14 0 199 2% 60% 31% 7% 0%
Belmont 1 18 25 21 17 0 81 22% 31% 26% 21% 0%
El Granada 1 0 3 6 0 0 9 0% 33% 67% 0% 0%
Pacifica 1 0 1 2 2 0 5 0% 20% 40% 40% 0%
Total 107 2,437 6,500 4,112 759 64 13,872 18% 47% 30% 5% 0% San Mateo County Condominiums
Number of Units
Projects Studios One Two Three Four Total Studios One Two Three Four Proposed 2 72 0 8 1 1 82 88% 0% 10% 1% 1%
Existing 12 0 46 293 194 0 533 0% 9% 55% 36% 0%
Final Planning 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Under Construction 1 0 0 10 0 0 10 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Total with Unit Mix Data 15 72 46 311 195 1 625 12% 7% 50% 31% 0% Projects Studios One Two Three Four Total Studios One Two Three Four South San Francisco 1 0 40 57 0 0 97 0% 41% 59% 0% 0%
San Mateo 5 72 0 201 97 1 371 19% 0% 54% 26% 0%
Daly City 2 0 0 2 84 0 86 0% 0% 2% 98% 0%
San Carlos 1 0 3 8 9 0 20 0% 15% 40% 45% 0%
Menlo Park 1 0 0 15 0 0 15 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Burlingame 3 0 3 18 1 0 22 0% 14% 82% 5% 0%
Redwood City 1 0 0 10 0 0 10 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Half Moon Bay 1 0 0 0 4 0 4 0% 0% 0% 100% 0%
Brisbane No data available
Belmont No data available
Foster City No data available
Pacifica No data available
Total 15 72 46 311 195 1 625 12% 7% 50% 31% 0%
Unit Numbers Unit Mix
Unit Numbers Unit Mix
PAGE 6
Exhibit 2: Unit Mixes – Unit Sizes
San Mateo County Apartments
Average Unit Sizes
Studios One Two Three Four
Proposed 506 688 1,115 1,565 2,208
Existing 535 745 1,108 1,411 1,939
Final Planning
Under Construction 508 708 1,081 1,413
Total Data Available 524 733 1,105 1,422 2,186
Studios One Two Three Four
South San Francisco 511 705 1,116 1,321
San Mateo 590 769 1,109 1,436 1,939
Redwood City 546 756 1,125 1,421
Menlo Park 538 692 1,062 1,434 1,782
Millbrae 475 656 1,147 1,369
Foster City 579 716 1,088 1,402
Burlingame 518 785 1,128 1,368
Daly City 422 649 932 1,187
San Carlos 774 1,206 1,520 2,303
Half Moon Bay 659 957 1,330
East Palo Alto 530 795
San Bruno 476 716 1,006 1,386
Belmont
El Granada 616 1,047
Pacifica 1,750 900 1,100
San Mateo County Condominiums
Average Unit Sizes
Insufficent data
PAGE 7
Exhibit 3: Single Family Land Sale Data Summary
The data in the table above represents the available single family home lot sales data points collected for this high-level survey. As the data is limited for certain cities, the specific, median, and average amounts per city may not be representative of a city’s current median or average land costs or the city’s land costs relative to other cities listed.
Single Family Home Land Sites up to 1 acre, last 3 years Available
County City Data Points Min Max Median Average Min Max Median Average San Mateo County Moss Beach 19 $14 $117 $64 $64 $125,000 $582,500 $375,000 $335,053 San Mateo County Woodside 4 $10 $88 $24 $36 $150,000 $2,000,000 $377,250 $726,125 San Mateo County South San Francisco 4 $33 $89 $59 $60 $165,000 $3,800,000 $431,000 $1,206,750 San Mateo County Montara 12 $23 $269 $65 $79 $275,000 $1,750,000 $439,000 $533,917 San Mateo County Half Moon Bay 33 $1 $324 $75 $91 $5,000 $2,300,000 $447,000 $514,455 San Mateo County Pacifica 6 $14 $105 $70 $63 $300,000 $925,000 $447,500 $500,000 San Mateo County Belmont 12 $2 $721 $56 $118 $55,000 $4,470,000 $495,000 $960,583 San Mateo County East Palo Alto 5 $72 $135 $92 $100 $235,000 $3,550,000 $675,000 $1,379,600 San Mateo County Redwood City 18 $6 $345 $129 $145 $50,000 $5,350,000 $825,000 $1,170,250 San Mateo County Emerald Hills 2 $125 $132 $129 $129 $975,000 $980,000 $977,500 $977,500 San Mateo County San Bruno 2 $179 $207 $193 $193 $560,000 $1,500,250 $1,030,125 $1,030,125 San Mateo County San Carlos 11 $2 $405 $94 $126 $29,000 $2,980,000 $1,100,000 $1,214,455 San Mateo County San Mateo 1 $500 $500 $500 $500 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 San Mateo County Portola Valley 4 $47 $129 $58 $73 $1,325,000 $3,000,000 $1,578,000 $1,870,250 San Mateo County Burlingame 1 $125 $125 $125 $125 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 $1,600,000 San Mateo County Menlo Park 3 $165 $591 $459 $405 $2,580,000 $6,500,000 $2,780,000 $3,953,333 San Mateo County Millbrae 1 $239 $239 $239 $239 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 $3,080,500 San Mateo County Hillsborough 3 $85 $306 $116 $169 $3,050,000 $8,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,016,667 San Mateo County Atherton 2 $147 $208 $178 $178 $2,500,000 $6,400,000 $4,450,000 $4,450,000 San Mateo County Total 143 $1 $721 $84 $110 $5,000 $8,000,000 $510,000 $1,026,691 Santa Clara County Los Gatos 15 $1 $251 $6 $50 $9,500 $3,250,000 $250,000 $716,237 Santa Clara County Morgan Hill 11 $1 $495 $15 $79 $29,000 $1,365,000 $475,000 $490,533 Santa Clara County San Jose 54 $12 $677 $75 $150 $32,000 $5,300,000 $925,000 $949,380 Santa Clara County Campbell 8 $13 $897 $120 $194 $10,000 $1,500,000 $1,038,000 $975,000 Santa Clara County Mountain View 3 $76 $271 $141 $163 $1,050,000 $2,300,000 $1,150,000 $1,500,000 Santa Clara County Santa Clara 1 $169 $169 $169 $169 $1,275,000 $1,275,000 $1,275,000 $1,275,000 Santa Clara County Sunnyvale 3 $167 $602 $214 $328 $1,080,000 $5,750,000 $1,345,000 $2,725,000 Santa Clara County Cupertino 4 $47 $297 $197 $185 $872,000 $2,900,000 $2,175,000 $2,030,500 Santa Clara County Monte Sereno 2 $61 $1,006 $534 $534 $2,142,714 $2,427,500 $2,285,107 $2,285,107 Santa Clara County Saratoga 5 $61 $171 $74 $93 $1,380,000 $2,900,000 $2,640,000 $2,386,000 Santa Clara County Palo Alto 7 $79 $584 $333 $323 $2,050,000 $4,000,000 $3,100,000 $2,965,000 Santa Clara County Los Altos 5 $121 $352 $257 $235 $1,600,000 $7,250,000 $3,470,000 $3,723,600 Santa Clara County Los Altos Hills 1 $99 $99 $99 $99 $3,995,000 $3,995,000 $3,995,000 $3,995,000 Santa Clara County Total 119 $1 $1,006 $84 $157 $9,500 $7,250,000 $1,065,000 $1,320,556 Per Square Foot Per Single Family Home
PAGE 8
Exhibit 4: Multi Family Land Sale Data Summary
Multi Family Land Sites - Available Data
Available Per Multi Family Unit
County City Data Points Min Max Median Average
San Mateo San Mateo 3 $135,000 $180,000 $151,000 $155,000 San Mateo San Carlos 4 $33,000 $333,000 $262,000 $222,000 San Mateo Millbrae 2 $64,000 $92,000 $78,000 $78,000
San Mateo Redwood City 6 $78,000 $400,000 $95,000 $157,000 San Mateo South San Francisco 2 $44,000 $77,000 $61,000 $61,000 San Mateo Burlingame 3 $59,000 $117,000 $73,000 $83,000 San Mateo Menlo Park 3 $37,000 $98,000 $50,000 $62,000
San Mateo Daly City 2 $29,000 $60,000 $45,000 $45,000
San Mateo Pacifica 2 $117,000 $118,000 $117,000 $117,000 San Mateo Belmont 1 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 $105,000 San Mateo Total 28 $29,000 $400,000 $95,000 $123,000
County Weighted
Average $96,000
Per Unit Land Amount Applied $100,000
Available Per Multi Family Unit
County City Data Points Min Max Median Average
Santa Clara San Jose 17 $16,000 $125,000 $50,000 $52,000 Santa Clara Gilroy 1 $44,000 $44,000 $44,000 $44,000
Santa Clara Morgan Hill 1 $86,000 $86,000 $86,000 $86,000 Santa Clara Campbell 3 $42,000 $184,000 $59,000 $95,000 Santa Clara Santa Clara 6 $18,000 $146,000 $92,000 $83,000 Santa Clara Sunnyvale 6 $55,000 $306,000 $238,000 $215,000 Santa Clara Palo Alto 1 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 $73,000 Santa Clara Mountain View 4 $45,000 $736,000 $120,000 $256,000 Santa Clara Los Altos 1 $513,000 $513,000 $513,000 $513,000 Santa Clara Total 40 $16,000 $736,000 $60,000 $117,000
County Weighted
Average $63,000
Per Unit Land Amount Applied $60,000
The data in the table above represents the available multi family home lot sales data points collected for this high-level survey. As the data is limited for certain cities, the specific, median, and average amounts per city may not be representative of a city’s current median or average land costs or the city’s land costs relative to other cities listed.
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 95 SECTION 5. RESOURCES
This section analyzes resources available for the development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing in Portola Valley, including organizations and agencies, financial sources, regulatory assets, and resources for energy conservation. The inventory of land resources suitable for housing can be found in Section 6, Adequate Sites.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
The Town’s housing programs are funded through a variety of State, and federal sources.
These funds actively support fair housing choice, improving the housing stock, and protecting housing affordability in Portola Valley and throughout the region. This section offers a summary of funding sources that are currently available in Portola Valley, as well as additional funding sources that are potentially available to support various housing programs.
LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDITS (LIHTC)
The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) allocates federal and State tax credits to the developers of affordable housing for households at 30% to 60% of median income.
Project equity is raised through the sale of tax benefits to investors. This is a competitive process with 4% and 9% credits available.
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS (SECTION 8)
The housing choice voucher program is a federal program of the HUD administered by the San Mateo County Housing Authority. The voucher provides rental subsidies to low-income households to pay the difference between 30% of their income and the federally approved payment standard. The program allows households to find their own housing. Effective January 1, 2020, California source of income protections went into effect requiring all landlords in California to accept Section 8 and VASH (Veteran) vouchers and other forms or rental assistance.
VETERANS AFFAIRS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING (VASH) VOUCHERS
The VASH voucher program combines HUD’s housing choice voucher rental assistance for homeless veterans with case management and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
OTHER STATE RESOURCES
Table 5-1 identifies additional funding federal and State resources for affordable housing activities, including but not limited to new construction, acquisition, rehabilitation, and homebuyer assistance.
5 | RESOURCES
96 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 5-1: FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Federal Programs
Continuum of Care (CoC)
Program
Funding is available on an annual basis through HUD to quickly rehouse homeless individuals and families.
Home Ownership for People
Everywhere (HOPE)
Provides grants to low-income people to achieve homeownership.
Housing Opportunities for
Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
Funds are made available countywide for supportive social services, affordable housing development, and rental assistance to persons living with HIV/AIDS.
HUD Section 202 Supportive
Housing for the Elderly
Program
Interest-free capital advance to private, non-profit sponsors to cover the costs of construction, rehabilitation, or acquisition of very lowincome senior housing.
HUD Section 221(d)(3) and
221(d)(4)
Insures loans for construction or substantial rehabilitation of multifamily rental, cooperative, and single-room occupancy housing.
Section 811 Project Rental
Assistance
Section 811 Project Rental Assistance offers long-term project-based rental assistance funding from HUD. Opportunities to apply for this project-based assistance are through a Notice of Funding Availability published by CalHFA.
State Programs
Affordable Housing and
Sustainable Communities
Program (AHSC)
Funds land use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects that support infill and compact development and GHG emissions.
CalHome Grants to local public agencies and non-profits to assist first-time homebuyers become or remain homeowners through deferredpayment loans. Funds can also be used for ADU/JADU assistance (i.e., construction, repair, reconstruction, or rehabilitation).
CalHFA Residential
Development Loan Program
Loans to cities for affordable, infill, owner-occupied housing developments.
California Emergency Solutions
and Housing (CESH)
Grants for activities to assist persons experiencing or at-risk of homelessness.
California Self-Help Housing
Program
Grants for sponsor organizations that provide technical assistance for low- and moderate-income families to build their homes with their own labor.
Community Development
Block Grant-Corona Virus
(CDBG-CV1) – CARES Act
Funding
A subsidiary of the CDBG program that provides relief to eligible entities due to hardship caused by COVID-19.
Emergency Housing Assistance
Program (EHAP)
Funds for emergency shelter, transitional housing, and related services for the homeless and those at risk of losing their housing.
Golden State Acquisition Fund
(GSAF)
Short-term loans (up to 5 years) to developers for affordable housing acquisition or preservation.
Homeless Emergency Aid
Program (HEAP)
$500 million block grant program designed to provide direct assistance to cities, counties and CoCs to address the homelessness crisis.
5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 97 TABLE 5-1: FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Homeless, Housing Assistance
and Prevention (HHAP)
Program
HHAP Round 1: $650 million grant to local jurisdictions to support regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address immediate homelessness challenges.
Round 2: $300 million grant that provides support to continue to build on regional collaboration to develop a unified regional response to homelessness.
Housing for a Healthy
California (HHC)
Funding for supportive housing opportunities intended to create supportive housing for individuals who are recipients of or eligible for health provided through Medi-Cal.
Housing Navigators Program $5 million in funding to counties for the support of housing navigators to help young adults aged 18 to 21 secure and maintain housing, with priority given to young adults in the foster care system.
Housing-Related Parks
Program
Funds the creation of new park and recreation facilities or improvement of existing park and recreation facilities that are associated with rental and ownership projects that are affordable to very-low- and low-income households.
Infill Infrastructure Grant
Program (IIG)
Grant funding for infrastructure improvements for new infill housing in residential and/or mixed-use projects.
Joe Serna, Jr., Farmworker
Housing Grant (FWHG)
Grants and loans for development or rehabilitation of rental and owner-occupied housing for agricultural workers with priority for lower-income households.
Local Early Action Planning
(LEAP) Grants
Assists cities and counties to plan for housing through providing onetime, non-competitive planning grants.
Local Housing Trust Fund
Program (LHTF)
Lending for construction of rental housing projects with units restricted for at least 55 years to households earning less than 60% AMI. State funds matches local housing trust funds as down-payment assistance to first-time homebuyers.
Mortgage Credit Certificate
(MCC) Program
Income tax credits to first-time homebuyers to buy new or existing homes.
Multi-Family Housing Program
(MHP)
Low-interest, long-term deferred-payment permanent loans for new construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of permanent and transitional rental housing for lower-income households.
No Place Like Home Invests in the development of permanent supportive housing for persons who need mental health services and are experiencing homelessness or chronic homelessness, or at risk of chronic homelessness.
Office of Migrant Services
(OMS)
Provides grants to local government agencies that contract with HCD to operate OMS centers throughout the state for the construction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and operation of seasonal rental housing for migrant farmworkers.
Permanent Local Housing
Allocation Program (PLHA)
Grants (competitive for non-entitlement jurisdictions) available to jurisdictions to assist in increasing the supply of affordable rental and ownership housing, facilitate housing affordability, and ensure geographic equity in the distribution of funds.
Predevelopment Loan Program
(PDLP)
Short-term loans to jurisdictions and non-profit developers for the continued preservation, construction, rehabilitation, or conversion of assisted housing primarily for low-income households.
5 | RESOURCES
98 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 5-1: FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING PROGRAMS
Program Description
Regional Early Action Planning
(REAP) Grants
Grant funding intended to help COGs and other regional entities collaborate on projects that have a broader regional impact on housing.
Senate Bill 2 Planning Grants
Program
One-time funding and technical assistance to help local governments adopt and implement plans and process improvements that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production.
Supportive Housing MultiFamily Housing Program
(SHMHP)
Low-interest loans to developers of permanent affordable rental housing that contain supportive housing units.
Transformative Climate
Communities (TCC) Program
Competitive grants for planning and implementation of communityled development and infrastructure projects that achieve major environmental, health, and economic benefits in the state’s most disadvantaged communities.
Transitional Housing Program
(THP)
Funding to counties for child welfare services agencies to help young adults aged 18 to 25 find and maintain housing, with priority given to those previously in the foster care or probation systems.
Veterans Housing and
Homelessness Prevention
Program (VHHP)
Long-term loans for development or preservation of rental housing for very low- and low-income veterans and their families.
Workforce Housing Program Government bonds issued to cities to acquire and convert market-rate apartments to housing affordable to moderate-/middle-income households, generally households earning 80% to 120% of AMI.
Source: Urban Planning Partners, 2022.
INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES
The following agencies and organizations contribute to the goal of preserving and increasing affordable housing in Portola Valley. Both government agencies and partnerships with nonprofit agencies and for-profit developers are necessary to implement many housing programs.
TOWN GOVERNMENT AND CONTROL OF DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING The Town's governmental organization and land use controls further the objectives contained in the General Plan and are supplemented by voluntary efforts of local citizens. The size of the Town staff has been kept small using volunteer citizen committees as well as professional consultants for planning, engineering, building inspections, plan check, geology, and legal services. San Mateo County Environmental Health reviews septic systems and West Bay Sanitation District regulates sewer connections. The Woodside Fire Protection District implements the Fire Code and defensible space requirements.
Most building, grading, or other land improvement activities are subject to Town permit requirements. Each application for a planning or building permit is carefully reviewed for completeness and compliance with Town plans and regulations and standard procedures. 5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 99
FAIR HOUSING SERVICES
Portola Valley, along with the County of San Mateo, contract with Project Sentinel to handle complaints of discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and for the mediation of tenant/landlord disputes. San Mateo County also has several local enforcement organizations including the Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County and Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto. These organizations receive funding from the County and participating jurisdictions to support fair housing enforcement and outreach and education in the County. The fair housing services include investigations and enforcement in response to reports of housing discrimination complaints, as well as independent testing of rental properties for signs of discrimination in rental practices. The Town disseminates fair housing information on its website, including where residents should go if they have a discrimination complaint. Program 8-8 in this Housing Element addresses how Portola Valley will continue to perform fair housing training in partnership with Project Sentinel for property owners, real estate agents, and tenants across the region to promote housing mobility. The Town recently formed a Race and Equity Committee with one of its goals being to examine the impact of historic laws that prohibited people of color from owning property in Portola Valley and make recommendations to redress the legacy of this systemic exclusion.
LOCAL NON-PROFIT RESOURCES
A number of non-profit organizations and support agencies currently work across San Mateo County. These agencies serve as resources in meeting the housing needs of the County and are integral in implementing activities for preservation of assisted housing and development of affordable housing, as well as creating safe and healthy places for all economic segments of the community. These organizations include but are not limited to the list below. ▪ HIP Housing: Human Investment Project
▪ HEART of San Mateo County
▪ Peninsula Habitat for Humanity
▪ First Community Housing
▪ MidPen Housing
▪ The Raiser Organization
▪ Alta Housing
REGULATORY RESOURCES
In addition to the institutional and administrative resources described earlier in this section, the Town has policy levers that it utilizes to facilitate the construction, rehabilitation, and preservation of affordable housing. Some of the Town’s existing policies and programs are described below.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING INCENTIVES AND DENSITY BONUS
The Town of Portola Valley has adopted a Density Bonus ordinance and developer incentives for affordable housing that implement State Density Bonus Law. As required by State law, 5 | RESOURCES
100 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Portola Valley’s Density Bonus program (Chapter 18.17 of the Municipal Code) grants an increase over the otherwise maximum allowable residential density under the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance for projects that include a mix of market-rate and affordable units.
In addition to a density bonus, pursuant to State law, projects are also eligible to receive concessions or incentives depending on the proposed level of affordability. These may include reductions or modifications in development standards, the inclusion of non-residential uses, and other regulatory incentives that will result in cost reductions that contribute to the feasibility of affordable or senior housing. Projects may also waive any standards that would preclude the physical development of the project with the density bonus units.
AFFILIATED HOUSING PROGRAM
Portola Valley is a rural community with historic development trends consisting of predominantly large-lot single-family residences. However, to accommodate multi-family development, the Town developed an affiliated housing program in the early 1990s that permits the development of multi-family housing on institutional sites for employees and staff affiliated with the institutions that own the parcels. This program, detailed within Section 7, Goals, Policies and Programs (Programs 1-4 and 4-2) allows for the development of affiliated affordable housing on sites throughout the town as identified within the Housing Sites Inventory included within Section 6, Adequate Sites.
The Town’s Affiliated Housing program provides for the development of below-market rate housing options, affordable to lower-income households. Currently the Affiliated Housing program is implemented through the Housing Element. However, with this update, the Town’s Municipal Code has been updated to further incentivize use of this program to provide affordable workforce housing and to establish the parameters and process for the Affiliated Housing Program, including development standards and affordability requirements (see Program 1-4). A discussion of the Affiliated Housing Program sites and analysis of development feasibility is provided in Section 6, Adequate Sites.
To date, the Town’s Affiliated Housing Program has provided for the development of a total of 13 affiliated housing units which are located at the Woodside Priory School, a private catholic college preparatory school located northwest of the intersection of Alpine Road and Portola Road in the town. In 2001, the Town of Portola Valley approved an amendment to the Woodside Priory’s approved Conditional Use Permit to allow for the development of seven workforce housing units intended to serve staff at the school. As part of this approval, the school was required to make every effort reasonably possible, to the satisfaction of the Town’s Planning Commission, to ensure a majority of the units at the Priory site were rented out to achieve the below market rate RHNA objectives for the Town. These seven units were subsequently permitted and developed by the school. In 2005 the Town approved a Master Plan for the School that approved an additional 11 housing units to be built in the future. Six housing units were completed in 2022 with two being deed restricted for lower income households. When engaged as part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element update process, Woodside Priory School indicated they do not anticipate developing the remaining units during the eight-year 6th Cycle planning period.
5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 101 Stanford University owns two sites in town and is also part of the Affiliated Housing Program.
Stanford is currently proposing the construction of 12 affordable units under the Affiliated Housing Program.
The proposed objective findings that will be introduced with the codification of the Affiliated Housing Program (as described in Program 1-4) are listed below:
1. The project complies with the requirements of the objective design standards and any other applicable objective standard established with adopted Town plans and documents;
2. There are adequate infrastructure and public services available to serve the proposed development, including sewerage, water, fire and police protection, storm drainage facilities, and legal access to the lot;
3. The proposed development is on a legally created lot; and
4. The project complies with mitigation measures of any applicable environmental document.
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUS)
Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs) provide additional opportunities to provide housing units that are spread through the Town. Ministerial review of ADUs and JADUs requires no public hearings and proceeds on an expedited schedule.
Consistent with State law, JADUs, and ADUs are also allowed where single-family or multifamily dwellings already exist without any corrections to a nonconforming zoning condition.
The Town has seen an increase in ADU development with the implementation of local Code amendments to facilitate ADUs as well as State laws, as discussed further in Section 6, Adequate Sites.
ZONING FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES
Housing Element law requires the Town to provide for a variety of housing types to address certain hard to serve populations.
Emergency Shelters
State law (Senate Bill (SB) 2) requires that cities identify one or more zoning districts that allow emergency shelters. The Town amended its Municipal Code during the 5 th Housing Element
Cycle to comply with SB 2. The Town of Portola Valley Municipal Code allows emergency shelters for up to ten individuals in the Residential Estate (R-E) District when located on a parcel with a conditional use for a religious institution, subject to a zoning permit. Architectural and site plan review are required for the design of the emergency shelter unless the shelter is located within an existing structure, but no discretionary approval is required. Emergency shelters must be available to residents for no more than 60 days but extensions up to a total stay of 180 days may be permissible if no alternative housing is available. On-site management must be provided during the hours of shelter operation. Emergency shelters may include common space for the exclusive use of the guests, and office and meeting space for the exclusive use of emergency shelter staff. Each shelter must have a designated outdoor 5 | RESOURCES
102 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT smoking area that is not visible from the street or from adjacent properties. The outdoor smoking area may be screened by vegetation. On-site parking may be provided as shared parking with the church use. If separate on-site parking is needed, the maximum amount required is 0.35 parking spaces per one bed plus one space per staff member on duty when guests are present.
In September 2022, Assembly Bill (AB) 2339 was signed by the Governor. It requires that every jurisdiction must identify a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit (Government Code Section 65583(a)(4)). The identified zone or zones must include sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelter (based on 200 square feet per person) as identified in the housing element, and each jurisdiction must identify a zone or zones to accommodate at least one year-round shelter. Adequate sites can include sites with existing buildings that can be converted to emergency shelters to accommodate the need for emergency shelters. AB 2339 further specifies that emergency shelters for purposes of these provisions include other interim intervention, including, but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care.
As discussed in Section 2, Housing Needs, San Mateo County conducted the unsheltered homeless survey through March 3, 2022. In both 2019 and 2022, Portola Valley had zero homeless individuals according to the most recent San Mateo County data (https://www.smcgov.org/hsa/2022-one-day-homeless-count). Nonetheless, Portola Valley will continue to provide zoning to allow emergency shelters in Town as required by AB 2339.
The standard for homeless shelters allow shelters to serve up to 10 people. The Housing Element must demonstrate that at least one shelter can be accommodated in Town. Facilities must be of sufficient size to provide 200 square feet per person. A 10-bed facility would require a minimum of 2,000 square feet. Program 8-3 states that the zoning updates that will be approved immediately following this Housing Element will include changes to allow emergency shelters by right within the Multi-Family zones, the Mixed-Use zones, and at religious institutions. The program also includes updating the definitions of emergency shelters to be consistent with state law and establishing objective standards for emergency shelters.
The new Multi-Family zones will apply to two parcels in Town, described in Section 6, Adequate Sites, as Glen Oaks and Ladera Church. These sites are all suitable for development. Ladera Church is within walking distance to grocery stores and other services. The Glen Oaks and Ladera Church sites are currently classified as nonvacant, but significantly under-utilized. The
0.5-acre development site proposed at Ladera Church is currently vacant, with only a small portion used as a children’s play area for the church. The development site is within Portola Valley town limits, although the church itself is outside of town limits. The Glen Oaks site is currently occupied by the Isola Stables at the Glen Oaks Equestrian Center. The site consists of grassy open fields surrounding the stables. Across the street from this site is the Stanford Wedge property, a 39-unit project (see pending project).
The new Mixed-Use zones will apply to 4394 Alpine Road, and 4370 Alpine Road, Skyline Open Space, Village Square, and the Christ Church housing sites. 4394 Alpine Road is approximately 5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 103
1.18 acres and is currently vacant. It is within walking distance to grocery stores and other services. 4370 Alpine Road is approximately 2.45 acres total with 1.5 acres estimated to be developable. The rear portion of the site is currently underutilized with existing uses being abandoned tennis courts, unused parking, and office uses. An ephemeral creek/drainage ditch runs along the rear of the existing office buildings bisecting the lot into two distinct portions— referred to as front and rear. The front portion of the site is currently developed with three separate underutilized office buildings. The rear, northwest portion of the site includes former tennis courts and parking area that are not being used.
The Village Square site is approximately 2.23 acres with 1.25 acres of developable area. The site is currently developed with commercial uses and surface parking, with the potential for housing or shelter-related uses located on the rear portion of the property, allowing existing commercial activity to remain. The site is centrally located within Town and is served by existing infrastructure and access.
The Christ Church housing site includes approximately 0.75 acres of developable area located behind the existing church and preschool uses. The site is largely constrained to surface parking and open areas, with minimal existing improvements outside of the church facilities.
The site is not immediately adjacent to residential neighborhoods and benefits from existing access and services.
The Skyline Open Space site is located on a parcel within the Thomas Fogarty Winery property north of 19501 Skyline Boulevard. The overall parcel is approximately 14.65 acres, with a viable developable area of approximately 0.80 acres located within a central portion of the site that avoids environmental and topographic constraints.
Emergency shelters would also be allowed by right at the Town’s religious institutions—Christ Church, Valley Presbyterian Church, and Our Lady of the Wayside Church. All of these sites have sufficient space for a 2,000-square-foot shelter with some site plan modifications or use of existing buildings.
Objective standards will be developed as allowed by Government Code Section 65583 (a)(4)(A):
▪ Shelters may serve up to 10 individuals.
▪ The shelter shall be available to individuals for no more than 60 days. Extensions up to a total stay of 180 days may be permissible if no alternative housing is available. ▪ On-site management shall be provided during the hours of shelter operation. ▪ Emergency shelters may include common space for the exclusive use of the guests, and office and meeting space for the exclusive use of emergency shelter staff. ▪ On-site parking shall be provided to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter at any given time and shall be no more than other uses in the same zones. ▪ Lighting as described in the Portola Valley Municipal Code. 5 | RESOURCES
104 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Low Barrier Navigation Centers
A Low Barrier Navigation Center (LBNC) is a temporary service-enriched shelter that helps homeless individuals and families to quickly obtain permanent housing. AB 101 (2019) established requirements for local jurisdictions to allow low barrier navigation centers as a byright use in certain mixed use and nonresidential districts. The Town currently does not have multi-family or mixed-use zoning districts, but when adopted in connection with this Housing Element update, Program 8-3 is included to amend the Portola Valley Zoning Ordinance to allow LBNCs and Program 8-4 is included to allow in the multi-family zone to comply with AB 2339 (see Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs).
Transitional Housing
SB 2 requires that transitional housing and supportive housing be treated as any other residential use, subject only to those restrictions on residential uses contained in the same type of structure in the same zone. The law also requires that the identified zones contain sufficient capacity to provide shelter for homeless persons that have unmet housing needs.
Transitional housing, which is housing intended for a limited length of stay that is often linked with supportive services, may be provided in the M-R (Mountainous Residential) District, the R-E (Residential Estate) District, and the R-1 (Single-Family Residential) District. No additional approval is required as long as a transitional housing project meets the requirements applicable to the type of residential development in which it is accommodated. The Town is in the process of updating its Municipal Code to update the definition of transitional housing to comply with the State definition and to remove the six-resident cap currently specified in the Code. The Town currently does not have a multi-family zoning district, but when adopted in connection with this Housing Element update, transitional housing will be treated similarly to other residential uses (see Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs). In accordance with AB 2339, transition housing will also be allowed in the multi-family zone.
Supportive Housing
Consistent with SB 2, supportive housing developments are permitted in all zoning districts that permit residential uses. AB 2162 requires local jurisdictions to permit the development of supportive housing by right in any zoning district that permits multi-family and mixed uses.
The Town has initiated an update to its Municipal Code to update the definition of Supportive Housing to be consistent with State law, to remove the six-resident cap and to accommodate the by-right, streamlined, ministerial review of supportive housing developments as mandated by AB 2162 (2019). This update will be complete prior the certification of this Housing Element. AB 2162 requires local jurisdictions to permit the development of supportive housing by right in any zoning district that permits multi-family and mixed uses.
The Town currently does not have a multi-family zoning district, but when adopted in connection with this Housing Element update, supportive housing will be permitted by right in qualifying districts (see Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs). 5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 105 Housing for Persons with Disabilities
Persons with disabilities have a number of housing needs related to accessibility of dwelling units; access to transportation, employment, and commercial services; and alternative living arrangements that include on-site or nearby supportive living services. The Town ensures that new housing development comply with State and federal requirement for accessibility.
Reasonable Accommodation Procedures
As a matter of State law (SB 520), cities/towns are required to analyze potential and actual constraints upon the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities, and demonstrate local efforts to remove governmental constraints that hinder the locality from meeting the need for housing for persons with disabilities. Cities are required to include programs that remove constraints and provide reasonable accommodations for housing designed for persons with disabilities.
The Town currently provides reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities seeking housing. Any person or project requiring reasonable accommodation may submit a request to the Town for approval. Section 18.11.050 of the Town’s Zoning Ordinance details the formal process for requesting reasonable accommodation. There are no permit fees required and all past requests have been approved by the Planning & Building Director. While the Town does not have past documentation to determine average timelines, the Town will continue to ensure reviews are done in a timely manner. The existing findings are listed below:
B. The written decision to grant, grant with modifications, or deny a request for reasonable accommodation shall be consistent with fair housing laws and based on the following criteria:
1. Whether the housing, which is the subject of the request for reasonable accommodation, will be used by an individual with disabilities protected under fair housing laws;
2. Whether the requested accommodation is necessary to make housing available to an individual with disabilities protected under the fair housing laws;
3. Whether the requested accommodation would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the town;
4. Whether the requested accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of the jurisdiction's land use and zoning or building program;
5. The potential impact of the requested reasonable accommodation on surrounding properties; and
6. The potential for other reasonable accommodation with less impact on neighbors and/or the town.
As described in Program 8-1, the Town will review these approval findings for objectivity and make any necessary revisions with other zoning code amendments and rezonings in March 5 | RESOURCES
106 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT 2024. Specifically, the Town will revise to remove approval finding #5 and #6, related to impacts on surrounding uses, neighbors and the Town.
Zoning and Other Land Use Designations
The following are methods by which the Town facilitates housing for persons with disabilities through its regulatory and permitting procedures:
▪ Residential care facilities for six or fewer persons are permitted as a residential use subject to the same requirements as any other permitted residential use of the same housing type that are permitted in the same zone.
▪ Residential care facilities for more than six persons are permitted in R-E, R-1, and M-R zoning districts.
ENERGY CONSERVATION OPPORTUNITIES
The State of California is a nationwide leader in sustainable building practices. Written into the State Building Code are several sets of requirements and guidelines to facilitate the production of more environmentally friendly buildings. These requirements are updated every three years. The most recent version, the 2019 California Building Standards Code took effect on January 1, 2020. Title 24, Part 6, of the California Code of Regulations (Building Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) contains building standards that provide for energy efficiency and focus on four key areas: smart residential photovoltaic systems, updated thermal envelope standards, residential and nonresidential ventilation requirements, and nonresidential lighting requirements. The Town of Portola Valley requires compliance with the 2019 California Building Code for all new construction. The Town amends the Code as needed to further define requirements based on the unique local conditions of the Town. The Code is designed to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of Portola Valley’s residents. Compliance with the California Building Code on the use of energy efficient appliances and insulation has reduced energy demand stemming from new residential development.
Portola Valley has had a number of regulations that encourage energy conservation for years.
These include permitting solar installations, utilizing subdivision regulations that protect solar access, and supporting energy efficient design. In addition, most new development is clustered, which reduces impacts on the land. The Town also requires native landscaping, which reduces the need for both water and energy. All of these policies and regulations will continue.
In addition to the green building regulations and the water conservation ordinances, the Town has been encouraging energy and water efficiency in existing homes through the State’s Energy Upgrade California program, California Water Service’s rebate programs, and other voluntary measures and tools developed by the Town’s Sustainability Committee. 5 | RESOURCES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 107 Local and Regional Programs
The Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BAYREN) is a coalition of the Bay Area’s nine counties working to promote resource efficiency at the regional level, focusing on energy, water, and greenhouse gas reduction. BAYREN provides rebates and financing for a variety of energy upgrades.
PG&E offers financial and energy-related assistance programs for its low-income customers, including:
▪ Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help (REACH). The REACH program helps low-income qualified customers who experience uncontrollable or unforeseen financial hardships.
▪ Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). This federally funded program provides financial assistance to help offset eligible household’s energy costs, including heating, cooling, and home weatherization expenses. ▪ CARE/FERA Discount Programs. CARE and FEA help eligible customers pay their energy bills. A monthly discount is applied on electricity and/or gas for eligible households. ▪ Medical Baseline Allowance. Customers who are eligible for Medical Baseline receive an additional allotment of electricity and/or gas per month. This helps to ensure that more energy to support qualifying medical devices is available at a lower rate. ▪ Vulnerable Customer Program. The Vulnerable Customer Program was designed to help address the needs of our customers whose life or health would be at risk should their electric or gas service be disconnected. Customers who self-certify that they have a serious illness or condition that could become life threatening if their electric or gas service is disconnected for nonpayment will receive an in-person visit from a PG&E representative before disconnection.
5 | RESOURCES
108 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This page intentionally left blank
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 109 SECTION 6. ADEQUATE SITES
State Housing Element Law (Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3)) requires that jurisdictions demonstrate their availability of adequate land resources to accommodate their “fair share” of regional housing needs. Jurisdictions must demonstrate that these land resources have the appropriate site characteristics and development regulations required to accommodate their community’s housing needs as identified by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Bay Area’s regional governing body, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). Land resources identified as suitable for potential future accommodation of residential development throughout the planning period are referred to as a “Sites Inventory.” This section describes the land resources which have been identified for inclusion in the Town’s Sites Inventory.
The analysis in this section demonstrates that there is an adequate supply of suitable land to accommodate the Town’s housing allocation of 253 units, including housing for very low- and low-income households. The section starts with a description of the Town’s housing target for the 2023-2031 planning period, called the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). It then provides an analysis of suitable sites, including residential units in the pipeline, anticipated accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and vacant and non-vacant sites where housing is or will become an allowed use.
REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (RHNA)
RHNA is the State-required process that seeks to ensure each California jurisdiction is planning for enough housing capacity to accommodate their “fair share” of the state’s housing needs for all economic segments of the community. The RHNA process for the nine-county Bay Area is described below.
▪ Regional Determination. The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) provided the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) with a Regional Housing Needs Determination. HDC provided ABAG with a regional determination of 441,176 units. This is the number the Bay Area must plan for between 2023 and 2031. It represents the number of additional units needed to accommodate the anticipated growth in the number of households, to replace expected demolitions and conversions of housing units to non-housing uses, and to achieve a future vacancy rate that allows for healthy functioning of the housing market. The Regional Housing Needs Determination for the first time ever also included adjustments related to the rate of overcrowding and the share of cost-burdened households, which resulted in a significantly higher number of housing units for which the Bay Area must plan compared to previous RHNA cycles.
▪ RHNA Methodology. ABAG developed a RHNA methodology to allocate the Regional Housing Needs Determination across all cities, towns, and counties in the region. The RHNA methodology must be consistent with State objectives, including but not limited to 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
110 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT promoting infill, equity, and environmental protection; ensuring jobs-housing balance; and affirmatively furthering fair housing. The allocation also considers factors such as employment opportunities, the availability of suitable sites and public facilities, commuting patterns, and type and tenure of housing need. ABAG developed the RHNA methodology in conjunction with a committee of elected officials, staff from jurisdictions, and other stakeholders called the Housing Methodology Committee. More information about ABAG’s RHNA methodology is available at 29Thttps://abag.ca.gov/our-work/ housing/rhna-regional-housing-needs-allocation29T.
▪ Housing Element Updates. Each jurisdiction must then adopt a Housing Element that demonstrates how it can accommodate its assigned RHNA for each income category through its zoning. HCD reviews each jurisdiction’s Housing Element for compliance with State law. Portola Valley’s Housing Element must demonstrate capacity to accommodate 253 units as further described below.
PORTOLA VALLEY’S “FAIR SHARE”
In determining a jurisdiction’s share of new housing needs, ABAG splits each jurisdiction’s allocation into four income categories:
▪ Very Low-Income – 0% to 50% of Area Median Income (AMI) ▪ Low-Income – 51% to 80% of AMI
▪ Moderate-Income – 81% to 120% of AMI
▪ Above Moderate-Income – more than 120% of AMI
The Area Median Income (AMI) in San Mateo County for a family of four is $149,600. How this breaks down into income categories for Portola Valley is shown in Table 6-1. Where this Housing Element refers to housing that is affordable to the different income levels shown above, we mean a household spends no more than 30% of their income on housing.
TABLE 6-1: RHNA AFFORDABILITY LEVELS IN PORTOLA VALLEY
0BAffordability Level 1BPercent of AMI
2BPortola Valley
Household Incomea
43BVery-Low-Income 4B0 – 50% of AMI 45B< $91,350
46BLow-income 47B51-80% of AMI 48B$91,351 - $146,350
49BModerate-income 50B81-120% of AMI 51B$146,351 - $179,499 52BAbove Moderate-Income > 120% of AMI 54B> $179,500
Note: AMI = Area Median Income, Household incomes based on San Mateo County’s 2021 AMI of $149,600 for a 4-person household.
P
a
P Household incomes are for households/families of four (4).
Source: Town of Portola Valley.
In December 2021, ABAG identified the Town of Portola Valley’s fair share of the region’s housing needs as 253 new housing units, as shown in Table 6-2. This allocation represents a planning goal by requiring the Town to demonstrate sufficient development capacity through the identification of potential site and zoning, and not a goal for actual production of housing within the planning period.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 111 TABLE 6-2: PORTOLA VALLEY REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION (2023-2031) 3BIncome Category 4BRHNA
5BPercent
of RHNA
5BVery-Low-Income (0% to 50% of AMI) 56B73 57B29%
58BLow-Income (50% to 80% of AMI) 59B42 60B17%
61BModerate-Income (80% to 120% of AMI) 62B39 63B15%
64BAbove Moderate-Income (120% or more of AMI) 65B99 6B39% 67BTotal 68B253 69B100%
Source: Final Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Plan: San Francisco Bay Area, 2023-2031.
In addition, each jurisdiction must also address the projected need of extremely low-income households, defined as households earning 30% or less of AMI. The projected extremely lowincome need is assumed to be 50% of the total RHNA need for the very low-income category.
As such, there is a projected need for 37 extremely low-income housing units.
RHNA Buffer
In 2017, Senate Bill (SB) 166 was signed into law and included new “no net loss” provisions that require communities to provide an ongoing, adequate supply of land resources for housing development during the entirety of the housing element update planning period. These provisions mean communities face risks of non-compliance should a housing site be developed with non-residential uses, lower residential densities, or residential uses at affordability levels higher than anticipated by the Housing Element. To avoid non-compliance, HCD advises communities to “buffer” their assigned RHNA numbers with additional housing units ranging from at least 15% to 30% of their assigned RHNA. The Town of Portola Valley proposes an 8% buffer of 19 housing units, to ensure an ongoing, adequate supply of land resources for housing development is available through the 6P th
P Cycle planning period (see
Table 6-3 below).
TABLE 6-3: REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ALLOCATION BUFFER
6BIncome Category
7BTarget
RHNA
8BProposed Units
With Buffer
70BVery Low-Income (0% to 50% of AMI) 71B73 72B86
73BLow-Income (50% to 80% of AMI) 74B42 75B45
76BModerate-Income (80% to 120% of AMI) 7B39 78B42
79BAbove Moderate-Income (120% or more of AMI) 80B99 81B99 82BTotal 83B253 84B272
Source: Town of Portola Valley Planning & Building Department, 2023. 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
112 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
CREDIT TOWARDS RHNA
Pursuant to HCD guidance, in addition to vacant and underutilized land resources, a community may satisfy their RHNA requirements through “alternative means” which may serve as “credits” toward their RHNA. These alternative means include the consideration of proposed, pending, or approved development projects that haven’t received a certificate of occupancy prior to the start of the 6P
th
P cycle on June 30, 2022—the projection period for the 6P th
P
cycle housing element update. The Town of Portola Valley’s pipeline and pending projects are discussed in more detail below.
Additionally, per HCD guidance, a community may also credit the number of ADUs that are anticipated to be developed during the 6P
th
P cycle housing element planning period toward their
RHNA requirements. The forecasted development of ADUs during the planning period must be based on an analysis of prior years’ building permit data and local development regulations that promote ADU development. The Town of Portola Valley’s anticipated ADU development over the course of the 2023-2031 planning period is discussed in more detail below.
PIPELINE AND PENDING PROJECTS
Residential projects that have been approved but have not received a certificate of occupancy prior to June 30, 2022, are referred to as “pipeline projects”. These projects will be developed during the 2023-2031 planning period. Similarly, pending projects are residential developments that have yet to be approved but will likely be developed during the 2023-2031 planning period. The Town is committed to a timely public review process in order to facilitate all pipeline projects and will follow all applicable State Laws (see Program 5-3). Both the pipeline and pending projects of the Town of Portola Valley are included below in Table 6-4.
These two developments include:
▪ The approved Willow Commons residential development at 4388 Alpine Road will include nine multi-family supportive housing units for 13 individuals with intellectual developmental disabilities (IDD) and two units for two on-site staff for a total of 11 units.
The project was approved through a by-right design review process in December 2021.
The nine IDD units will be deed-restricted for 55 years for lower-income people as required by State Density Bonus Law. To support the programming, the two additional units will house the managerial staff. These units will not be deed restricted but are anticipated to accommodate one moderate-income household and one above moderate-income household. The Willow Commons project is currently undergoing construction. ▪ The pending “Stanford Wedge” Faculty Housing development is proposed in the northeastern portion of the Town along Alpine Road will consist of 27 single-family residential units and 12 workforce housing units to be clustered on approximately 7 acres of a 75-acre site. The remainder of the site will be undeveloped and subject to a vegetation management plan to address fire safety concerns. The project requires a Planned Unit Development, Design Review, Site Development Permit, Affordable Housing Agreement and Tentative Subdivision Map approvals. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is close to issuance and public meetings are anticipated to begin in early 2024. The Town anticipates the Planning Commission and Town Council will consider the project by mid- 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 113 2024. The 12 workforce housing units will all be deed restricted for 55 years. Six will be restricted to low-income households as required by State Density Bonus Law. The other six are anticipated to be affordable- to moderate-income households. Since the project qualifies for State Density Bonus Law, overall project density cannot be reduced, nor can the project be denied; therefore, the Town anticipates the project will reach approval in no more than five public meetings in adherence to Senate Bill 330.
TABLE 6-4: APPROVED PIPELINE UNITS AND UNITS PENDING APPROVAL 9BAPN 10BAddress 1BSite Name
12BAffordability Category
13BVery
LowIncome14BLowIncome15BModerateIncome
16BAbove
ModerateIncome 17BTotal
85BApproved Pipeline Projects
86B79072120 87B4388 Alpine Road 8BWillow Commons 89B0 90B9 91B1 92B1 93B11 94BPending Projects
95B77281020 96BAlpine Road and
Golden Oak Drive 97BStanford Wedge 98B0 9B6 10B6 10B27 102B39 103BTotal 104B0 105B15 106B7 107B28 108B50
Source: Town of Portola Valley Planning & Building Department, 2023.
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS In addition to pipeline projects, a community may also count ADU development projected to occur during the 2023-2031 planning period towards their RHNA requirements. To do so, communities must analyze historic building permit trends, over the last several years, to accurately identify a reasonable projection of ADUs to be developed over the planning period.
This analysis considers the various California State laws passed since 2017 that are intended to encourage ADU development, as well as local efforts on behalf of the Town of Portola Valley to promote ADU development.
Figure 6-1 below includes an analysis of the Town’s issuance of building permits for ADUs between the years 2021 to 2023. In 2021, ADU permitting picked up after the COVID-19 shutdown, and the Town issued 11 building permits. In 2022, there were seven building permits issued. As of November 2023, the Town has issued seven building permits and received four applications for ADUs. During a focus group meeting for property owners interested in building an ADU or Junior ADU (JADU), over 50 people attended and provided valuable input for new policies to help incentivize and streamline the ADU and JADU process.
In October 2022, the Town Council appointed seven residents to form an ADU Ambassador working group. Their charge was to conduct a Town-wide survey with the following goals:
▪ Increasing education and outreach about ADUs and JADUs. ▪ Verifying the Town’s list of existing ADUs and JADUs in Town and tracking each category separately.
▪ Determining community interest in constructing additional ADUs and JADUs, and/or conversion of an existing space to a JADU.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
114 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 6-1: ADU BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED 2021-2023; ADU APPLICATIONS IN 2023 Note: The year 2023 represents seven building permits and four permit applications received as of November 2023.
Source: Town of Portola Valley Planning & Building Department, 2023 ▪ Gathering data on the current number of unpermitted ADUs and JADUs in Town and owners’ interest in an amnesty program that would formalize those units. ▪ Determine the number of properties interested in renting an ADU or JADU at below market rates (i.e., San Mateo County low and very low-income levels).
The survey was conducted in January 2023. All households were mailed a postcard with the online survey link for access. Additionally, this link was shared on the Town website, on banners and posters distributed throughout the Town, and communicated via social avenues and platforms. Paper copies were made available at the Town Center and the Town Library.
The survey was very successful, with a 35% response rate (578 responses received from validated addresses with one response per address). Additionally, at least one response was received from 87% of the streets in Portola Valley. Key findings include: there is a significant opportunity for outreach and education, as many residents are not familiar with the opportunity or requirements; 181 residents said they are very interested in building an ADU or JADU in the next eight years; respondents expressed a particular interest in pre-approved ADU plans or modular units; 30 property owners are interested in an amnesty program; and 72 people expressed an interest in renting to very low-income households.
Due to the Town’s trends in ADU building permits, property owner interest, survey response, as well as several new ADU and JADU programs with additional incentives and monitoring 11 7
11 0
2 4
6 8
10 12
2021 2022 2023
ADU Building Permits Issued
Year
Building Permits & Applications Issued
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 115 proposed as part of this Housing Element update to encourage development of ADUs and JADUs, the Town of Portola Valley assumes an average of 12-13 ADU/JADU building permits to be issued each year of the 6P
th
P Cycle planning period. This equates to a total of 102 dwelling units planned to be constructed over the next 8 years.
Affordability Levels of Projected ADU and JADU Development Due to their co-location on existing residential lots, and smaller building footprints, typically ranging in size between 800 and 1,200 square feet (ADUs) and 500 square feet (JADUs), ADUs and JADUs are generally considered to serve as affordable-by-design housing options in communities. However, due to a variety of local market factors, the level of affordability of ADU/JADU development may vary by community. The Town of Portola Valley’s proposed distribution of anticipated ADU/JADU development across affordability levels is consistent with the Technical Memorandum “Affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units” issued by ABAG on September 8, 2021 and detailed below in Table 6-5. Twenty-seven percent of anticipated ADU/JADU developments, or 28 ADUs/JADUs are anticipated to be developed as affordable to “very low-income” households, with another 28 anticipated to be developed as affordable to “low-income” households. Another 27% are anticipated to be developed as affordable to “moderate-income” households and 18%, or 18 ADUs/JADUs are anticipated to be developed as affordable to “above moderate-income” households. To encourage the development of ADUs/JADUs at various affordability levels, the Town proposes programs within Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs, to further encourage the development of ADUs and JADUs at various income levels. These programs are summarized below for reference as well.
Proposed ADU and JADU Policies and Programs
To continue to incentivize the development of JADUs and ADUs throughout the town, at a variety of affordability levels the Town proposes the creation and adoption of various JADU and ADU policies as outlined within Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs. These programs are summarized below for reference.
▪ Prepare pre-approved preliminary floor plans for ADUs and JADUs that are made available to property owners. These pre-approved floor plans would only require minimal additional engineering to account for the unique topography of sites and would significantly decrease the level of effort required of property owners in designing and permitting a JADU or ADU.
▪ Offer direct technical assistance and streamlining through the Town’s Building Department to residents that want to make minor improvements to accommodate a JADU, such as adding an efficiency kitchen or other facilities. ▪ Create a new program to match low-income renters with ADU owners in Portola Valley.
This program will match low-income renters who have experienced displacement from areas outside of Portola Valley, with ADU owners within Portola Valley to increase access to opportunities within the town. The Town will partner with the Human Investment Project for Housing (HIP Housing), a nonprofit organization that conducts a similar program in San Mateo County to match housing “providers” with housing “seekers.” 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
116 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Create an amnesty program for existing, unpermitted ADUs to obtain permits to legalize the ADUs during the 2023-2031 planning period. The amnesty program would provide property owners the opportunity to formally legalize existing unpermitted ADUs. ▪ Establish staff and consultant ADU office hours so that applicants can ask questions of subject matter experts.
▪ Develop and run a survey of ADU owners in Portola Valley to determine how ADUs are being used in the community and how much they are contributing to the housing stock and affordable housing.
▪ Develop and run a survey of ADU owners in Portola Valley to determine how ADUs are being used in the community and how much they are contributing to the housing stock and affordable housing.
▪ Update the Town’s existing ADU ordinance to maintain consistency with State law.
RHNA CREDITS SUMMARY
A summary of the pipeline and pending projects as well as projected ADU development which can serve as “alternative means” or credits toward the Town of Portola Valley’s RHNA requirements are included below in Table 6-5. Together these credits total 152 units.
TABLE 6-5: RHNA CREDITS SUMMARY
109BRHNA Credit
18BAffordability Category
19BVery
LowIncome20BLowIncome21BModerateIncome
2BAbove
ModerateIncome 23BTotal
10BWillow Commons Project 1B0 12B9 13B1 14B1 15B11
16BStanford Wedge Project 17B0 18B6 19B6 120B27 12B39
12BADUs/JADUs 123B28 124B28 125B28 126B18 127B102
128BTotal 129B28 130B43 13B35 132B46 13B152
Source: Town of Portola Valley Planning & Building Department, 2023.
SITE INVENTORY METHODOLOGY
Following consideration of applicable RHNA Credits as described above, the Town has identified land resources that are determined to be suitable for accommodation of the remaining portion of their RHNA requirements, inclusive of a buffer for all income categories.
These suitable land resources are referred to as Adequate Sites. Consistent with Government Code Section 65583.2(a), and the community’s priorities related to wildfire and geologic safety, Portola Valley’s adequate sites appropriate for residential development include the following standards or characteristics:
▪ As a threshold matter sites with significant wildfire risk, geologic safety concerns, or evacuation constraints were screened out.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 117 ▪ An attempt to disperse the sites throughout town and not concentrate in a single neighborhood.
▪ The highest density should be located on streets with good accessibility. ▪ Vacant sites zoned for residential use.
▪ Vacant sites zoned for nonresidential use that allows residential development. ▪ Residentially zoned sites that are capable of being developed at a higher density, including sites owned or leased by a Town, county, or Town and county. ▪ Sites zoned for nonresidential use that can be redeveloped for residential use, and for which the housing element includes a program to rezone the site. ▪ Sites occupied by members of the Affiliated Housing Program.
In addition to the above criteria, the Town and consultant team used HCD guidance as well as trends from recent development projects to calculate the realistic capacity of adequate sites.
These are described in greater detail below.
REALISTIC CAPACITY
Realistic capacity of sites identified within the Town’s Housing Sites Inventory was calculated using a combination of proposed zoning, physical constraints, feasibility analysis conducted by an architectural consultant, input from an affordable housing developer, general market feasibility analyzed by 21 Elements on behalf of the Town, an economic consultant, and input from Town staff on local conditions.
The Town’s historic lack of existing multi-family development acts as a limiting factor in calculating realistic capacity. Since the Town has never had multi-family zoning, there is no history of what has been built in the past under such zoning that can be used for comparison.
Furthermore, other demographically and economically similar communities in the area, such as Woodside, Atherton, Hillsborough, and Los Alto Hills, cannot be used to gauge market feasibility because there are no market-driven multi-family developments in those jurisdictions either.
However, the Town recently saw the completion of a 6-unit multi-family development at the Priory School through the Affiliated Housing Program, an 11-unit supportive housing project is currently in construction and a 12-unit multi-family affordable project is currently being proposed as part of a larger market-rate housing project proposed by Stanford University.
Those projects demonstrate that it is realistic to develop multi-family housing in the Town, and that, even before the new multi-family zones are in place, development is not limited to single family. Additionally, property owners have indicated interest in developing their properties. This interest will be facilitated by new zoning that expressly permits multi-family development.
Further, the Town owns the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site, one of the larger sites with a planned density of 20 dwelling units per acre. The Town plans to issue an RFP for the development of this site, which will require the developer to include a set number of deed 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
118 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT restricted affordable units (see Program 3-1). The site is planned for 50 very low-income units including family size units and elements of universal design to serve a range of residents.
Densities and Affordability
To make it feasible to develop housing that is affordable to very low- and low-income households, housing must be built at higher densities. HCD has published guidance that specifies the minimum residential densities deemed necessary to accommodate lowerincome households. Per this guidance, which has been updated with 2020 Census data, the Town of Portola Valley is considered a jurisdiction with a “default density” of 20 dwelling units per acre. This means that sites that allow denser development of at least 20 dwelling units per acre are considered able to accommodate lower-income units. Accordingly, the Town has identified sites included within the Sites Inventory which will be rezoned to newly created zoning districts as outlined within the “Rezoning Program” subsection below. These rezonings will provide for the development of housing at default densities identified by HCD during the 2023-2031 planning period.
Site Size and Quality
Consistent with HCD guidance, sites identified within the Town’s Site Inventory to accommodate lower-income housing units, designated for development at 20 dwelling units per acre are between 0.5 acres and 10 acres. Further, the sites have been selected in light of the serious hazards that exist in Town; flood zones, faults, soil stability, fire prone areas, and evacuation routes were all considered. The Sequoias property has a fault running through it and some areas of low soil stability; however, the Sequoias is a 42-acre property, and the site has undergone geotechnical testing to identify a portion of the site appropriate for development.
Utilities
Realistic capacity also considered the location of many housing sites in existing urbanized portions of the town, already serviced by existing utilities and infrastructure. These parts of the Town offer the presence of existing infrastructure to serve the housing sites; however, some sites may require lateral connections or expansions of existing utilities, these improvements are considered standard improvements and routine of redevelopment projects in urbanized areas. Such improvements will be made at the expense of the property owner or developers.
REZONING PROGRAM
Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c), the Town of Portola Valley will adopt three four new zoning districts including: 1) a new multi-family district allowing t2 to 4 dwelling units per acre; 2) a new multi-family district allowing 20 to 23 dwelling units per acre; and 3) a mixeduse district allowing residential uses at 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre; and 4) a mixed-use high density district allowing residential uses at 20 to 25 dwelling units per acre. Sites which are proposed to be rezoned to these new zoning designations as part of this Housing Element update are indicated within Table 6-7.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 119 These new zones represent the first time that Portola Valley will have multi-family zones, clearly signaling to developers that multi-family housing is not just allowed but encouraged in the Town. The new districts and rezonings are expected to be adopted March 2024. Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the Mixed-Use High Density (M-U-HD) District zoning code amendments and rezonings within 90 days (see Programs 1-1b and 1-2a).
Multi-Family Zoning Districts
Two new multi-family zoning districts will be created to allow for residential development between 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre and between 20 to 23 dwelling units per acre, respectively. Both districts will be subject to objective design standards that will be codified in the Municipal Code including but not limited to floor area, height, setback, lighting, and landscaping (see Program 1-1c). The 2 to 4 dwelling units per acre zoning district shall be limited to the Glen Oaks housing site. The 20 to 23 dwelling units per acre shall be limited to the Ladera Church Affiliated Housing site.
Mixed-Use Zoning Districts
Two new mixed-use zoning districts will be created to allow for The new mixed-use zoning district will allow for mixed-use residential development between 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre and 20 to 25 dwelling units per acre. Objective standards will be included in the Municipal Code including, but not limited to, floor area, height, setback, lighting, and landscaping (see Program 1-1c). If the whole site is redeveloped, the standards will require at least 50% of building floor area to be a residential use and will allow for up to 100% of building floor area to be dedicated to residential uses. TheTh 3 to 6 dwelling units per acreis zoning district shall be applied to the 4394 Alpine Road and 4370 Alpine Road housing sites. The 20 to 25 dwelling units per acre shall be applied to the Skyline Open Space, Village Square, and Christ Church housing sites.
SITES INVENTORY
Figure 6-2 below shows all adequate housing opportunity sites identified within the Town of Portola Valley as part of the 6P
th
P Cycle Housing Element update, similarly Table 6-6 below summarizes these sites according to how they will be utilized by the Town to meet its RHNA requirements. Based on pipeline and pending projects, projected ADU production, and the realistic capacity of the adequate sites inventory identified here within, the Town has capacity to accommodate 272 housing units, which is higher than the RHNA of 253. This includes a total of 86 units affordable to very low-income households, 45 units affordable to low-income households, 42 units affordable to moderate income households, and 99 units affordable to above moderate-income households.
Per HCD guidance, the Town’s adequate Sites Inventory is described herein on a site-by-site basis and organized according to vacant and non-vacant land resources. It should be noted that a majority of the Town’s adequate sites are non-vacant land resources as identified within
HAYWARD
Union
City
Fremont
SAN
LEANDRO
San Mateo
Foster City
Redwood
City
Palo Alto
580
880
Project Location
San Francisco Bay
92 84
101
Portola Valley Jurisdictional Boundary
Pipeline and Pending Developments
Vacant Housing Sites
Non-Vacant Housing Sites (Not Affiliated)
Non-Vacant Affiliated Housing Sites
WESTRIDGE
LAKE
CRESCENT
SIERRA
GEORG AI ARAPAHOE
TORO
ASH
LARGUITA
NAVAJO
CORDOVA
GOLDEN
HILLS
ANTONIO
PEAK
NATHHORST
PALOMA
PORTOLA
SHAWNEE
ALHAMBRA
ZAPATA
BOLIVAR
ADAIR
TAGUS
NARANJA
ECHO
SOLANA
CHEYENNE
BUCK MEADOW
DOS LOMA VISTA
VALENCIA
DEGAS
POSSUM
FAVONIA
FAWN
PINON
WILLOWBROOK
ALPINE
ALPINE
CORTE
MADERA
CHEROKEE
CERVANTES
GOYA
RAMOSO
INDIAN
GOLDENOAK
ALAMOS
GROV
GROVE
E
MAPACHE
MAPACHE
MEADOWOOD
MINOCA
PALMER
HILLBROOK
N 0 1,800 3,600
Feet
1 inch = 3,600 feet
Figure 6-2
Adequate Housing Sites Inventory Map
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE
Source: Town of Portola Valley
Village Square
The Sequoias 4370 Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394 Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
Source: Town of Portola Valley, 2025
Village Square
The Sequoias
4370 Alpine Rd
Christ Church
Ladera Church
Glen Oaks
4394 Alpine Rd
Skyline Open Space
Stanford Wedge
Pending Project
Willow Commons
Pipeline Project
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 121 TABLE 6-6: ADEQUATE SITES LAND INVENTORY
24BAPN 25BName 26BAcres
27BExisting
Use
28BExisting
General Plan
29BExisting
Zoning
30BProposed Rezoning
and/or General Plan
Amendment
31BAssumed
Density
(du/ac)
32BRealistic Capacity
3BVLI 34BLI 35BMI 36BAMI 37BTotal
134BVacant Sites
135B79072130 136B4394 Alpine Rd Housing
Site 137B1.18 138BVacant
139BCommercial &
Research/
Administrative: Local
Shopping & Service
140BA-P
1 du/ac
14BMixed-Use
3-6 du/ac 142B5 143B0 14B0 145B0 146B6 147B6
135B80010020 Skyline Open Space (N.
of 19501 Skyline Blvd)
14.65 (0.80 ac
developable area)
138BVacant
Scenic Corridor &
Greenway
Open Space Limited
Development
MR
Mixed-Use High
Density
20-25 du/ac
142BX20 143B16 14B0 145B0 146B0 147B16
148BSubtotal 149B6149B22
Non-Vacant Sites
15B77272010
152BVacant Portion of
Dorothy Ford Park and
Open Space Housing
Site
153B7.55
(2.48 ac
developable area)
154BUndeveloped
Area, Parking Lot
and Baseball Field
(To Remain)
15BNeighborhood
Community/
Existing Park
156BO-A & R-E
0.5 du/ac
157BGeneral Plan
Amendment to
Gateway Classification
158B20 159B50 160B0 16B0 162B0 163B50
164B77282030 165BGlen Oaks Housing Site
16B17.03
(4 ac developable
area)
167BUndeveloped
Area, Equestrian
168BAlpine Road Scenic
Corridor & Greenway
169BO-A & R-E
0.5 du/ac
170BMulti-Family
2-4 du/ac 17B4 172B0 173B0 174B2 175B14 176B16
17B79072060 178B4370 Alpine Rd Housing
Site
179B2.45
(1.5 ac
developable)
180BAbandoned
Tennis Court and
Parking Lot,
Office
Commercial &
Research/Administrati
ve: Local Shopping &
Service
182BA-P
1 du/ac
183BMixed-Use
3-6 du/ac 184B6 185B0 186B0 187B0 18B9 189B9
76261140 Village Square Housing
Site (884 Portola Rd)
2.3 (1.25 ac
developable area)
Undeveloped
Area and
Commercial Uses
Commercial &
Research/Administrati
ve: Local Shopping &
Service
C-C
Mixed-Use High
Density
20-25 du/ac
20 20 0 0 5 25
206B76262030 207BChrist Church Housing
Site (815 Portola Rd)
208B2.93
(0.75 ac
developable area)
209BChurch 210BInstitution "Church" 21BR-E
21BMixed-Use High
Density
20-25 du/ac
213B20 214B14 215B0 216B0 217B1 218B15
overl190BSubtotal 19B756519B65
Affiliated Housing Sites
193B79200030 194BSequoias Affiliated
Housing Site 195B42a
196BMulti-Family 197BInstitution "Other" 198BR-E 19BNo change 20BN/A 201B0 20B0 203B5 204B18 205B23bc 206B76262030 207BChrist Church Affiliated
Housing Site
208B2.9
(1 ac developable
area)
209BChurch 210BInstitution "Church" 21BR-E 21BNo change 213B6 c
213B 214B0 215B0 216B0 217B6217B 218B6218B 219B77271180 20BLadera Church Affiliated Housing Site 21B0.5 2BChurch 23BInstitution "Church" 24BR-E 25BGeneral Plan
Amendment to
Gateway Classification
27B20 28B8 29B2 230B0 231B0 23B10
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
122 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT 24BAPN 25BName 26BAcres
27BExisting
Use
28BExisting
General Plan
29BExisting
Zoning
30BProposed Rezoning
and/or General Plan
Amendment
31BAssumed
Density
(du/ac)
32BRealistic Capacity
3BVLI 34BLI 35BMI 36BAMI 37BTotal
26BMulti-Family
20-23 du/ac
23BSubtotal 234B3933234B 247BTotal 58 2 7 53 248B120
Notes: VLI = Very Low-Income, LI = Low-Income, MI = Moderate-Income, AMI = Above Moderate-Income, R-E = Residential Estate, R-1 = Single-Family Residential, A-P=Administrative Professional, M-R = Mountainous Residential, O-A = Open Area.
P
a
PDevelopable area is portion of the existing 42-acre site.
P
b
P Density determined by geotechnical study conducted 2021-2022.
P
c
P Density to be determined by Planning Commission.
Source: Town of Portola Valley, 20253.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 123 this subsection. While several non-vacant sites are proposed to be eventually redeveloped with residential uses, several other non-vacant sites are proposed to retain their existing uses in addition to being developed with affiliated housing options associated with those existing uses. Affiliated housing options refer to multi-family housing developments on institutional sites intended to serve employees and staff affiliated with the institutions that own the site or other members of the Town’s workforce. Due to the high cost of living within Portola Valley, many employees of these institutional uses cannot afford to live in market-rate housing options provided within the town. Accordingly, the Town has identified these “Affiliated Housing Sites” for inclusion within the Town’s 6P
th
P Cycle Housing Element update.
The inclusion of these Affiliated Housing sites within the Town’s Sites Inventory is based on the Town’s experienced success with their existing Affiliated Housing Program and the interest of these institutions in developing additional housing in the future. To date, the Town’s Affiliated Housing program has provided for the development of a total of 13 affiliated housing units which are located at the Woodside Priory School, a private catholic college preparatory school located northwest of the intersection of Alpine Road and Portola Road in the town. Six units were recently completed, two of which are deed restricted for lower-income residents.
The Affiliated Housing Program has become increasingly important to the community because it encourages people that work in town to also live here. This diversifies the community and reduces the impacts of employees driving into the town.
As discussed in Section 3, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, the Town of Portola Valley is a high-resource community that does not include any “low resource” areas or exhibited conditions of poverty within its municipal boundaries. Due to the town’s concentration of above-moderate income households, and prohibitive housing costs, relative to the broader county and region, 100% of neighborhoods within Portola Valley are considered exclusive to low-income households. Accordingly, the Town’s Housing Sites Inventory prioritizes increasing affordable housing opportunities throughout the town, including housing opportunities for lower-income households and other special needs populations.
Although Portola Valley doesn’t have significant segregation issues within the town, from a broader regional perspective, providing increased lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Portola Valley will help overcome countywide and regional patterns of segregation, disparate impacts for impacted racial and ethnic groups, and foster more inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity. The wide distribution of housing sites will provide additional housing options for lower-income households to choose housing near amenities and services. The locations in the Sites Inventory were selected based on accessibility to a variety of services and amenities, such as parks/trails, schools, shopping, and transportation. Providing increased lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Portola Valley will help overcome Countywide and regional patterns of disparate impacts for impacted racial and ethnic groups by providing more affordable housing choices near desirable resources such as employment and high-quality education. This will foster more inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
124 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT The increased quantity and distribution of affordable housing as proposed in the Sites Inventory will address disproportionate housing needs by providing more affordable housing in a wider variety of locations in the town. Increasing lower-income housing opportunities in a high resource community such as Portola Valley will help overcome countywide and regional patterns of disproportional housing needs.
PROPOSED HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS
Following adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element, the Town re-evaluated the feasibility of the vacant portion of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site. While constraints were previously identified, further evaluation during Housing Element implementation clarified that the limited developable area (after application of creek and scenic setbacks) and resulting irregular lot configuration create conflicts with ongoing and planned sports field uses, limiting the site’s feasibility for residential development. As a result, the site is no longer included in the Sites Inventory.
To ensure continued compliance with State Housing Element law, the Town proposes to replace the units previously attributed to the Dorothy Ford site with a combination of newly identified and existing housing opportunity sites. Skyline Open Space and Village Square are newly identified sites proposed for rezoning to a new Mixed-Use High Density zoning designation, while Christ Church is an existing Housing Element site also proposed for rezoning to the new Mixed-Use High Density zoning designation. Together, these sites provide sufficient capacity to accommodate the Town’s remaining RHNA across all income levels, including very low-income units.
VACANT SITES
4394 Alpine Road Housing Site
The housing site located in the Nathhorst Triangle at 4394 Alpine Road is an approximately
1.18-acre vacant site consisting of a grassy field. This site is currently zoned A-P (Administrative-Professional).
Background on Adjacent Site: Willow Commons at 4388 Alpine Road. The site at 4388 Alpine Road is currently controlled by two local residents who are developing an 11-unit affordable supportive housing project commonly known as “Willow Commons” for adults with (IDD). The 4388 Alpine Road site has been approved for nine lower-income deed restricted units for 13 adults with IDD and two units for two employees working at the project site. This project underwent a “by right” local approval process under the supportive housing (AB 2162) and density bonus state laws.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 125 Housing Potential at 4394 Alpine Road. The local
residents and owners of the Willow Commons
project at 4388 Alpine Road acquired the
adjacent 4394 Alpine Road property in 2021. The
owners have not yet developed a housing
program for the site, but they may do so in this
planning cycle. The owners plan to use the
property to support their philanthropic mission of building permanent affordable housing for adults with IDD, a vulnerable population historically facing limited housing options. The owners have surveyed supportive housing models throughout the United States and hope to bring a collection of best practices to this new site. Some of the options being considered are a stand-alone supportive housing site similar to the project at 4388 Alpine, development of additional supportive housing programs to complement 4388 Alpine, development of other housing models (e.g., shared housing) that address vulnerable populations, or a combination of these or other alternatives. The applicants are also exploring some mixed use (such as retail or art gallery) that would provide both job training and revenue, and a mix of market rate housing units to provide integration of tenant populations and additional revenue to crosssubsidize the below market rent units. The Town desires to support and facilitate the owners’ philanthropic efforts and recognizes this is a rare opportunity to showcase that a vital, yet scarce, form of housing can be developed in the core of an affluent, suburban community.
Feasibility and Property Owner Concerns. The property owners have not yet reached the stage of producing conceptual plans for the site. As the development program for this site has not yet been determined, the property owners have concerns about losing flexibility to design the best community-benefiting project based on the Town’s assumptions for the site in the Housing Element. Some of the concerns include the following:
▪ Flexibility Concerns. Losing rights currently available under the current A-P zoning (including ministerial processing for supportive housing under AB 2162. Accordingly, the owner has requested that supportive housing, recreational, and/or administrative will continue to be allowed under the new designation(s).
▪ Implications to Willow Commons. Implications to Willow Commons funding sources if 4394 Alpine Road development/design standards are untenable.
Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan
prepared by Lisa Wise Consulting
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
126 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Housing Element Redesignation. The intent is to allow for a variety of housing types via a MixedUse designation, while providing flexibility to permit the development of a supportive housing project on this site through a Supportive Housing Overlay. The site shall be governed by a new Mixed-Use designation, Supportive Housing Overlay, and development standards as outlined below.
Mixed-Use Designation. The 4394 Alpine site will be designated with a new Mixed-Use designation on the General Plan Map and in the Municipal Code that will allow 3 to 6 units per acre. The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved, which is anticipated by March 2024:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 3 units per acre and maximum of 6 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 75 feet; side setback is 15 feet and rear setback shall be 20 feet. ▪ 28 feet height limit and 34 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet.
In addition, a new Supportive Housing Overlay is hereby established and applied to this site with the following provisions:
▪ All principally permitted uses and all conditionally permitted uses in the A-P zone (Municipal Code Chapter 18-22) would be permitted by right in the Supportive Housing Overlay if the commercial use directly supports a new or existing supportive housing project.
▪ A density below the range specified in the Mixed-Use designation will be permitted provided the site accommodates at least two residential units at the lower-income level. ▪ Any supportive housing project that would be permitted by right under AB 2162 (or other applicable law) in the A-P zone will be permitted under the Supportive Housing Overlay.
For purposes of determining whether a proposed project on the Property is a "use by right" under the AB 2162 supportive housing requirements (Government Code Section 65650, et seq.), the designation will be deemed to be a designation where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted.
▪ Some market rate units and/or non-supportive units may be permitted to cross subsidize a supportive housing project provided that at least 25% of units are supportive housing units with at least two units at the lower-income level and no more than 21 units (including market rate, supportive housing and manager’s units) would be constructed on site.
Supportive housing units include the following categories: persons with disabilities (including IDD) or Extremely Low-Income.
▪ For purposes of determining the number of residential units in a proposed project, and at applicant’s request, a shared housing unit in a shared housing building will be counted as one residential unit. Alternatively, if requested by applicant, a unit will be counted traditionally by each dwelling unit as defined in the Municipal Code Section 18.04.150 (one 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 127 or more rooms arranged for the use of one household with cooking, living, and sleeping facilities).
o For purposes hereof, a “shared housing unit” shall mean one or more habitable rooms, not within another dwelling unit, that includes a bathroom, sink, refrigerator, and microwave, is used for permanent residence, that meets the “minimum room area” specified in Section R304 of the California Residential Code (Part 2.5 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) and complies with the definition of “guestroom” in Section R202 of the California Residential Code.
o For purposes hereof, a “shared housing building” shall mean a residential or mixeduse structure, with two or more shared housing units and one or more common kitchens and dining areas designed for permanent residence of more than 30 days by its tenants. The kitchens and dining areas within the shared housing building shall be able to adequately accommodate all residents. A “shared housing building” may include other dwelling units that are not shared housing units, provided that those dwelling units do not occupy more than 25% of the floor area of the shared housing building. A shared housing building may include 100% shared housing units. ▪ A supportive housing project that meets the Supportive Housing Overlay criteria defined herein would be subject to a ministerial, by-right approval process. In such case, a proposed project will be reviewed for compliance with objective standards by the Town Architecture and Site Control Commission (but not subject to discretionary review by the Town Council or Planning Commission).
The following development standards shall apply to the Supportive Housing Overlay:
▪ Height limit of 28 feet and 34 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Front setback shall be 75 feet.
▪ Rear setback shall be 20 feet.
▪ Side setback shall be 20 feet; provided that the side setback adjacent to 4388 Alpine Road may be reduced to zero feet, with the approval of the 4394 Alpine Road owner and 4388 Alpine Road owner.
▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet. ▪ Parking requirements will be subject to applicable density bonus law and supportive housing law standards if the project qualifies under either or both laws. ▪ Maximum percentage of non-residential uses for a supportive housing project shall be 33%.
▪ In the event any implementing zoning regulations provide different use, setbacks, height or lot coverage or more restrictive regulations than specified here or in the current A-P zoning, the more permissive regulations will prevail.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
128 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ The owner’s replacement of soil moved by the prior owner of the property to its original location on the property shall not be counted as soil movement subject to a Town Site Development Permit and shall not require Town approval.
Skyline Open Space Housing Site
Existing Conditions. The housing site is located on an assessor parcel near the Thomas Fogarty Winery, north of 19501 Skyline Boulevard. The parcel encompasses approximately 14.65 acres and is currently vacant, consisting primarily of open grassy fields and sloped areas. Of this total area, approximately 0.80 acres have been identified as the developable area based on site-specific constraints and screening criteria. The site is currently zoned Mountainous Residential.
Skyline Open Space housing site
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 129 Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan prepared by Urban Planning Partners Discussions have focused on how the site could support deeply affordable units or specialized housing aligned with community-serving needs. The Town currently maintains a fund balance in its Affordable Housing Trust Fund and has expressed interest in contributing to project feasibility, either through the purchase of a portion of the site or by directly supporting very low-income units.
Housing Feasibility. As noted above, the portion of the parcel identified as the developable area considers development standards and other environmental constraints such as scenic setbacks, ground movement potential, and slope. The identified developable portion of the site avoids sloped areas which could have the potential for landslides and places the development site over stable bedrock as indicated by the Town’s Ground Movement Potential map. The developable area also anticipates a 100-foot scenic corridor setback from Skyline Open Space, which would be permissible dependent on the proposed development with visual analysis and approval from the Town’s Architectural and Site Control Commission, without an approved reduction the setback would be required to be 200 feet, however the site could accommodate either setback. Both setbacks can be seen in the site plan. The conceptual site plan utilizes the 200-foot setback to demonstrate that a project is feasible with the larger setback. The site is directly accessible off Skyline Blvd, and entry into the site would be designed to minimize impacts along the corridor.
While infrastructure access is constrained by the site’s location, opportunities to accommodate the necessary infrastructure needs have been identified. The subject site is outside water and sewer utility districts that generally service the Town of Portola Valley.
Analysis indicates that the site would require an onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS), septic. Discussions with San Mateo County Environmental Health suggests the site could 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
130 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT accommodate OWTS, provided the proposal includes a system sized appropriately for the residential development based on estimated flow rates, bedroom count, and occupancy assumptions, consistent with guidance from the United States Environmental Protection Agency and subject to approval by San Mateo County Environmental Health. The Site Inventory includes 16 units for the site, and given infrastructure constraints, it’s anticipated these units would consist mostly of smaller units (Studios, 1 -bedroom, and 2 -bedroom units).
The conceptual site plan shows 16 one-bedroom units at 733 square feet (the county average for one-bedroom units) with 22 parking spaces, which meets the Town’s standards for multifamily housing. Early coordination is encouraged for a project proposal to ensure any proposed OWTS can accommodate the units proposed. The portion of the site identified for housing has been sited conservatively on a large parcel with consideration for accommodating the required onsite septic systems.
Water service constraints will require further evaluation, though the site would likely rely on a holding tank system or further analysis of spring and/or well availability depending on the proposed development. Housing development would likely be all electric and would incorporate solar infrastructure to support energy needs.
The site provides an opportunity to support a unique housing project that aligns closely with the values of Portola Valley by emphasizing sustainability and low-impact design, while also serving as a potential model for future development in more rural areas.
Housing Element Redesignation. The General Plan land use classification and zoning district for the site will be changed to Mixed-Use High Density, which shall be governed by a new designation and development standards as outlined below.
Mixed-Use High Density Designation. The housing site will be designated with a new Mixed-Use High Density designation on the General Plan Map and in the Municipal Code that will allow 20 to 25 units per acre. The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 20 units per acre and maximum of 25 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 30 feet unless subject to a Special Setback Line; side setback is 15 feet, and rear setback shall be 10 feet.
▪ 34 feet height limit and 38 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet.
NON-VACANT (UNDERUTILIZED) SITES
The Town’s non-vacant/underutilized land resources are anticipated to accommodate a total of 11498 residential units of the Town’s RHNA. These non-vacant land resources are categorized into fivesix housing sites throughout the town. As described above, several nonvacant sites are developed with existing land uses that are proposed to be eventually 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 131 redeveloped with residential uses, while other non-vacant sites are proposed to be developed with affiliated housing options. Affiliated housing is often provided by institutional, non-profit, and/or religious institutions such as churches and universities, among others. The Town of Portola Valley’s non-vacant land resources proposed for the future accommodation of residential development include:
Vacant Portion of Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space Housing Site The Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space
Housing Site has approximately 2.48 acres of
developable area in an irregular shape and is
located in the northeast corner of the town,
along Alpine Road. The Town owns the
overall site which is currently developed with
a baseball field and is located adjacent to Los
Trancos Creek and the Alpine Trail.
The Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site
is a highly valued open space in the
community. Development of this site would
result in the permanent change to open
space, which is contradictory to other Town
policies. The Town seeks to balance its
affordable housing goals and obligations
with the long-standing open space ethos of
the community. As such, the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site is included in the site inventory and detailed in Program 3-1. The Town will proceed with development of the site as outlined in Program 3-1 unless another confirmed, feasible site or program can achieve the same number of affordable units within the planning period.
A constraints analysis for the site has been done to maintain the Town’s 75-foot scenic corridor requirement and 55-foot creek setback while maintaining the existing baseball field. To determine if a multi-family development is physically possible in this area, the Town contracted with Lisa Wise Consulting to develop a conceptual site plan which demonstrates that up to 50 units are possible on the developable portion of the site. The site could also include 7,000 square feet of community space and a playground.
The Town is creating a new Gateway Land Use classification that will include multi-family affordable housing that permits 20 dwelling units per acre (of the developable portion of the site). The Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site will be included in this new classification.
Program 1-1, New Gateway Land Use Classification, describes how the site will allow for affordable housing. As a Town-owned site, an RFP will be issued to non-profit low-income housing developers to provide 50 very low –income units. The Town will favor a developer that can provide a 5% set aside for extremely low income and/or special needs. To test the viability of this approach, the Town has spoken with Alta Housing, a non-profit agency that has built low- and moderate-income housing projects in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties.
Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan
prepared by Lisa Wise Consulting
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
132 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Alta’s preliminary review shows this project would be competitive for tax credits and a project would be feasible. The latest regulations provide points for new construction Large Family housing type in Highest/High Resource areas per the 2022 California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC)/HCD Opportunity Map. The Town plans to solicit interest from affordable housing developers to develop the site. The Town has an existing Affordable Housing Fund with over 4 million dollars that may be partially utilized to fund the project if necessary. The Town would likely ground lease the site to the housing developer at a nominal rate.
Glen Oaks Housing Site
The Glen Oaks site, owned by Stanford University,
has approximately 4 acres of developable land at
the corner of Alpine Road and Arastradero Road.
A portion of the land is occupied by the Isola
Stables at the Glen Oaks Equestrian Center with
grassy open fields surrounding the Stables. The
Equestrian Center is subject to a short term-term
lease. Across the street from this site is the
Stanford Wedge property, a 39-unit project (see
pending project). Stanford has expressed interest
in working with the Town to develop an
appropriate project at the Glen Oaks project site.
Since the primary mission of Stanford University
is education, the housing units are anticipated to
be for faculty/staff with an affordable housing
component. This site will be rezoned with a new
multi-family district that will allow up to 4 units to
the acre on the developable portions of the site.
The Site Inventory estimates 16 units could be
developed based on a feasibility analysis showing approximately 4 acres of developable area.
The feasibility analysis evaluated the most restrictive scenario by keeping development outside of a 75-foot scenic corridor setback (in orange) and 55-foot creek setback (in blue).
The width of each area (235 and 338 feet, respectively) was also considered wide enough to accommodate future development.
The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved, which is anticipated by March 2024:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 2 units per acre and maximum of 4 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 75 feet; side and rear setbacks shall be 30 feet. ▪ 28-foot height limit and 34-foot maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade.
Developable area based on feasibility
analysis
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 133 4370 Alpine Road Housing Site
Existing Conditions. The second housing site
in the Nathhorst Triangle located at 4370
Alpine Road is approximately 2.45 acres
total with 1.5 acres estimated to be
developable. The site is currently
underutilized with existing uses being
abandoned tennis courts, unused parking,
and office uses. A narrow ephemeral
creek/drainage ditch runs along the rear of
the existing office buildings bisecting the lot
into two distinct portions—referred to as
front and rear. The front portion of the site
is currently developed with three separate
underutilized office buildings. The rear,
northwest portion of the site includes
former tennis courts and parking area that
are not being used.
Housing Feasibility. Lisa Wise Consulting
prepared a preliminary concept plan
demonstrating that 20 units per acre would
be feasible with complete redevelopment
of the site. The Ad Hoc Housing Element
Committee found that this site would be
appropriate with 6 units per acre (with a
total of 9 units) and recommended a new
mixed-use district. The Site Inventory
estimates 9 townhome units could be developed with approximately 5 units developed in the rear and 4 developed in the front. The property owner has also expressed interest in redeveloping the property in meetings with staff. As a result of the housing element outreach process, the owner hired a local architect and has prepared several different housing plans.
The owner’s plans focused on the rear portion of the property only and demonstrated that up to eleven units (consisting of nine 3-bedroom units of 1,782 square feet and two 1-bedroom ADUs consisting of 582 square feet) could be developed on the rear portion. The development potential of the site is greatly enhanced through inclusion as a housing site; the property owner has significant financial incentive to develop residential units.
General Plan Classification and Unit Distribution. The site will be classified as mixed use. Because the site is located near a single-family neighborhood, unit distribution and development standards are important. Five units shall be permitted in the rear and will likely be the first units to be constructed. The remaining four units shall be permitted in the front, either in conjunction with office use or as a new exclusively residential project.
Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan
prepared by Lisa Wise Consulting
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
134 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Development Standards. The rear portion of the lot shall be governed by the following development standards:
▪ Permitted uses include residential and all principal permitted uses in the A-P zone (Municipal Code Chapter 18-22).
▪ Setback on Nathhorst Avenue shall be 30 feet; side and rear setback shall be 25 feet. ▪ Housing units fronting Nathhorst Avenue shall be one story; remaining housing units shall be subject to a height limit of 28 feet and 34 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet. ▪ To the extent feasible, as determined by the Planning & Building Director, the parking spaces shall be located in the interior on the site so they are not visible from the street. ▪ Five guest parking spaces shall be provided on the rear portion of the property or through a permanent shared parking arrangement with the front portion of the site.
The four housing units in the front shall comply with the scenic corridor setbacks and other objective development standards shall be defined in the implementing zoning ordinance.
Additional Requirements. It is anticipated that a Homeowner’s Association (HOA) will be formed to control the parking, driveway, and other neighbor impacts (e.g., deliveries, barking dogs, etc.) The implementing zoning code will contain additional objective criteria consistent with these parameters. A discretionary review process is not anticipated, although the applicant may elect to pursue a Development Agreement or a subdivision.
Village Square Housing Site
Existing Conditions. The housing site is an approximately 2.3-acre parcel located at 884 Portola Road within the Village Square area. The housing site includes existing commercial uses with associated surface parking and one single-family residence. The primary commercial building is 13,726 square feet and the secondary rear commercial building (currently occupied by a salon) is 989 square feet. The single-family residence is 808 square feet and was built in 1955. 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 135 Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan prepared by Urban Planning Partners Village Square housing site
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
136 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Both commercial buildings were built before the Town’s incorporation in 1964 and the rear building needs repair. Approximately 1.25 acres of the site have been identified as developable for housing, with the remainder either occupied by the primary commercial building and its parking or constrained by existing infrastructure, the single-family residence, and pump station. The Town uses this 1.25-acre developable area, rather than the gross site acreage, for purposes of calculating residential density and unit capacity in the Sites Inventory.
In addition, Sausal Creek traverses the site, and a creek setback (shown in blue) further limits the developable footprint and may be refined during project-level review. Development is also likely to require removal of some mature trees.
Housing Feasibility. The Sites Inventory assumes development of up to 25 housing units located on the rear portion of the property, allowing the primary commercial uses, required parking, single-family residence, and pump station to remain in place. The conceptual site plan shows two floors of residential development over ground floor parking and includes 25 units consisting of, 12 one-bedroom units at 733 square feet and 13 two-bedroom units at 1,105 square feet (the county averages for one-bedroom and two-bedroom units). The conceptual site plan shows 134 parking spaces, including 64 existing spaces and 70 new spaces, which exceeds the required minimum of 132 spaces, including 86 spaces for existing commercial uses and 46 spaces for new housing.
The property owner has expressed interest in redeveloping the site in meetings with Town staff and has engaged a local architect to investigate development feasibility/options. There are no significant feasibility constraints anticipated regarding infrastructure given its location and existing development. Any required expansion or extension of existing utility infrastructure would be evaluated through the development review process. The site has direct access from Portola Road, which contains access to existing utility infrastructure and services.
The site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. As part of the development review process, a licensed geologist will need to conduct a site-specific geologic investigation, in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone Act. The Town of Portola Valley also maintains a Ground Movement Potential Map identifying a potential fault (Pf) zones. This fault zone constitutes the required building setback lines for buildings for human occupancy. Therefore, based on currently available information, additional setbacks beyond those already identified that would lead to additional site constraints are not anticipated. Lastly, the site is subject to a creek setback as required by the Town’s municipal code, which would apply to the rear portion of the site. An approximate 50-foot creek setback is illustrated on the site plan for evaluation purposes. The final setback would need to be refined in the field based on a 45ft setback from the top of bank or 50ft from the ordinary high water mark, whichever is greater.
The setback isn’t anticipated to impact the development feasibility of the site, given the location of existing structures and the setbacks required from the fault zone as well. The conceptual site plans consider all these constraints.
Housing Element Redesignation. The General Plan land use classification and zoning district for the site will be changed to Mixed-Use High Density, which shall be governed by a new MixedUse High Density designation and development standards as outlined below. 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 137 Mixed-Use High Density Zoning Designation. The housing site will be designated with a new Mixed-Use High Density land use classification and zoning district in the Town Municipal Code that will allow 20 to 25 units per acre. The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 20 units per acre and maximum of 25 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 30 feet; side setback is 15 feet, and rear setback shall be 10 feet. ▪ 34 feet height limit and 38 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet.
Christ Church Affiliated Housing Site
Existing Conditions. Christ Church is a new member of the Affiliated Housing Program. The Christ Church site is an approximately 2.93-acre parcel located at 815 Portola Road in the northern central portion of the town. The project site is currently designated “Institution “Church” and zoned Residential Estate (R-E).
Christ Church affiliated housing site (parking lot)
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
138 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Feasibility analysis and conceptual site plan prepared by Urban Planning Partners Housing Feasibility. The site is presently developed with Christ Church, a preschool, and associated parking lot. Church leadership has expressed an interest in joining the Affiliated Housing Program for several years. The approximately 0.751-acre parking lot behind the Church is the potential location for housing (rectangular-shaped flag-shaped development area shown in diagram). Based on recent conversations, the Church is interested in building 15 units, which may be phased. The large parking area and adjacent vacant field represent minimal existing improvements, reducing site constraints and improving feasibility for future development. The 15 units can be accommodated within only a portion of the parking lot, still allowing adequate space for on-site parking and circulation. The conceptual site plan shows two floors of residential over ground floor parking, including 15 units, 9 one-bedroom units at 733 square feet and 6 two-bedroom units at 1105 square feet (the county averages for onebedroom and two-bedroom units), and 22 parking spaces. In addition, this conceptual site plan preserves the existing parking and circulation and, by splitting the housing into two buildings, preserves a large tree valued by the community. Six units are included in the housing inventory, which would fit in approximately the last row of the parking lot, leaving adequate space for parking and circulation. Preliminary analysis by staff indicates that the development of at least six townhomes is feasible at this location. There are no immediatelyadjacent neighbors to the potential development area, other than Town Hall, so no objections are anticipated for future development. Given the site’s existing development and location 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 139 directly off of Portola Road no significant feasibility constraints are anticipated regarding infrastructure.
Much like the Village Square Housing Site, Christ Church Housing Site is located within the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone. As part of development review or prior, a licensed geologist will need to conduct a site-specific geologic investigation to comply with the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone Act prior to issuing development permits. Portola Valley’s existing ground movement potential map provides setbacks for buildings designated for human occupancy; these setbacks have been considered when siting the developable area. Based on the current information available, there is no anticipation of additional setbacks being required because of the geologic investigation which could lead to additional site constraints.
The developable area is sited at the rear of the subject property, Sausal Creek runs through the front of the subject property, which requires a 45ft setback from the top of bank or 50ft from the ordinary high-water mark, whichever is greater. The setback isn’t anticipated to impact the development feasibility of the site. The conceptual site plan does not impact any existing parking for the church.
Housing Element Redesignation. The General Plan land use classification and zoning district for the site will be changed to Mixed-Use High Density, which shall be governed by a new MixedUse High Density designation and development standards as outlined below.
Mixed-Use High Density Designation. The housing site will be designated with a new Mixed-Use High Density land use classification and zoning district in the Town Municipal Code that will allow 20 to 25 units per acre. The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 20 units per acre and maximum of 25 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 30 feet; side setback is 15 feet, and rear setback shall be 10 feet, unless otherwise specified in the Municipal Code.
▪ 34 feet height limit and 38 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade. ▪ Setback from the creek/drainage shall be as specified in an individualized Engineering Study approved by the Town Engineer, but in no event less than 10 feet.
Affiliated Housing Sites
The following housing sites were identified for inclusion within the Town’s Site Inventory as affiliated housing sites, developed in accordance with the Town of Portola Valley’s existing Affiliated Housing Program as described within this section, and Section 7, Goals, Policies, and Programs. The Town’s Affiliated Housing Program was created in the 1990’s and allows for the development of affordable, multi-family housing on institutional sites. The Affiliated Housing Program will be codified in the Municipal Code to provide clarity about the application process and development standards. The Affiliated Housing Program provides a high level of flexibility 6 | ADEQUATE SITES
140 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT so that property owners can accommodate housing that meets their need and the constraints of the site.
The Sequoias Affiliated Housing Site
The Sequoias Affiliated Housing Site is an approximately 42-acre parcel located just south of Portola Road in the central portion of the town. The northern portion of the site is presently developed as The Sequoias, a buy-in retirement community operated by Sequoia Living. The project site is currently designated Institution “Other” and zoned Residential Estate (R-E). The site is near the San Andreas Fault and includes potentially unstable soils. The Sequoias has operated in Portola Valley since prior to incorporation in 1964. Given the age of the complex, the leadership is looking to the future to make infrastructure improvements and adapt to the changing needs of residents. Over the past several years, they have upgraded common areas and site amenities. Furthermore, they have indicated that some elements of the complex no longer serve current needs. These factors support a comprehensive, forward-looking approach to the site.
The largest barrier to additional development at the site is the location of the San Andreas Fault and potential for unstable soils. To address this issue early, they have performed preliminary geotechnical investigations of the site to analyze whether additional development would be possible and where on the site it should be located. Their initial findings indicate that there are two potential locations for additional housing. The Town Geologist concurs with their initial analysis; this clears the largest technical hurdle to development. The architectural team can now proceed with specific development plans for either, or both, of the identified portions of the site. Further design level geotechnical analysis will be required prior to approval by the Town, as is required for all projects near the San Andreas Fault or on potentially unstable soils. The Sites Inventory includes 18 market-rate units for seniors and five workforce housing units to serve their employees, as proposed by The Sequoias in conversation with the Town. This number of units was developed by the owner’s representative with knowledge of the geotechnical analysis, other site constraints, and operational needs. The workforce units are expected to reduce commutes for employees that travel great distances to work and help with emergency response capacity. Given the physical constraints of the site, The Sequoias may request relaxation of the setback requirement to accommodate future development. The Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee expressed support for a reasonable waiver of the setback to accommodate the workforce housing units.
The Sequoias is also looking to the future and the potential need to upgrade the site infrastructure and adapt with the changing needs of residents. The Town will continue to communicate with The Sequoias on their needs and how additional housing can be safely incorporated into the site.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 141 Ladera Community Church Affiliated Housing Site
The Town Council previously voted to
include Ladera Community Church in the
Affiliated Housing Program at their request;
this Housing Element formalizes that action.
Church representatives have expressed
interest in developing housing in town for
several years. The site is an approximately
0.5-acre parcel located west of Alpine Road,
in the northeastern portion of the town. The
project site is currently designated
Institution “Church” and zoned Residential
Estate (R-E). The church facility itself is
located on the immediately adjacent
property, which is located outside the Town limits. The development site is currently vacant, with only a small portion used as a children’s play area for the church. It will be rezoned to the new multi-family zoning district to allow 20 to 23 dwelling units per acre. The owner has expressed interest in developing housing on the site both publicly at Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee meetings as well as with Town staff.
The following development standards shall apply until zoning code amendments are approved, which is anticipated by March 2024:
▪ Residential uses are permitted with a minimum of 20 units per acre and maximum of 23 units per acre.
▪ The front setback shall be 75 feet; left side setbacks and rear setback shall be 15 feet. The right-side setback adjacent to Ladera Church may be reduced to 0 feet with permission of property owner(s).
▪ 28 feet height limit and 34 feet maximum height limit (which are the same limits as residential districts). Height shall be measured from natural grade.
State Density Bonus Law may be applied to this site if an affordable housing project is developed, which would likely impact the setbacks and height.
SITES SUMMARY
State Housing Element Law requires local governments to prepare an inventory of land suitable for residential development, including vacant sites, sites having the potential for redevelopment, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning, public facilities, and services to these sites. The inventory of land suitable for residential development must be used to identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period.
Table 6-7 summarizes the Town of Portola Valley’s capacity to meet RHNA goals.
Ladera Community Church affiliated housing site
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
142 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 6-7: HOUSING SITES SUMMARY
38BVery
LowIncome
39BLowIncome40BModerateIncome
41BAbove
ModerateIncome 42BTotal
249BLand Resources
250BPipeline & Pending Projects 251B0 25B15 253B7 254B28 25B50 256BProjected ADU Development 257B28 258B28 259B28 260B18 261B102 26BVacant Site
263B4394 Alpine Rd Housing Site 264B0 265B0 26B0 267B6 268B6 263BSkyline Open Space Housing Site 264B16 265B0 26B0 267B10 268B16 269BNon-Vacant Sites
270BGlen Oaks Housing Site 271B0 27B0 273B2 274B14 275B16 276BDorothy Ford Park and Open Space
Housing Site 27B50 278B0 279B0 280B0 281B50
28B4370 Alpine Rd Housing Site 283B0 284B0 285B0 286B9 287B9 Village Square Housing Site 283B20 284B0 285B0 286B5 287B25 295BChrist Church Housing Site 296B14 297B0 298B0 29B1 30B15 28BAffiliated Housing Sites
289BSequoias Affiliated Housing Site 290B0 291B0 29B5 293B18 294B23 295BChrist Church Affiliated Housing Site 296B0 297B0 298B0 29B6 30B6 301BLadera Church Affiliated Housing Site 302B8 30B2 304B0 305B0 306B10 31BTotal Unit Potential 314B86 315B45 316B42 317B99 318B272 319B2023-2031 RHNA 320B73 321B42 32B39 32B99 324B253
325BExtra Capacity 326B13 327B3 328B3 329B0 30B19
31B% Buffer Provided 32B18% 3B7% 34B8% 35B0% 36B8%
Source: Town of Portola Valley, 20253.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 143
OPT-IN HOUSING DIVERSIFICATION PROGRAM
The Town is implementing an Opt-In Housing Diversification Program on single family lots to address Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing goals by dispersing residential units throughout the community and increasing the diversity of housing types (see Program 1-3).
The Opt-In Housing Diversification Program discussed below is a program that is not in the Sites Inventory due to the lack of substantial evidence that the sites are likely to develop or redevelop during the Planning Period, although planning staff has received some inquiries regarding participation in the program.
As of 2020, 81% of the town’s housing stock was made up of single-family homes, many on lots sized one acre or larger. This program is intended to provide younger generations to stay and/or return to the town, seniors to downsize, and the local workforce to live in town. This feedback is supported by the town’s demographic data which shows that as of 2019, the age 15-24 population group increased 65% since 2010. Over the same timeframe, the age 75-84 and 85+ population groups increased 22% and 32%, respectively, which could indicate an increased need for multigenerational housing in the community.
To gauge interest in an opt-in program, the Town held an “Opt-In Housing Diversification Program” focus group meeting for property owners that may wish to voluntarily opt in to the program. After the meeting, five property owners expressed interest in the program. The Town expects the program to be viable based on this preliminary level of interest and the number of potential units that could be produced on those sites. The new program will allow single-family residential parcels one acre or greater to develop up to 6 dwelling units per lot, subject to the following safety criteria:
▪ Accessible to two ways of ingress and egress.
▪ Located on a slope less than 30%.
▪ Outside of a very high fire hazard severity zone, as adopted by the Town Council. ▪ Outside of a fault zone.
▪ Outside of areas identified with unstable soils or at risk of landslide or liquefaction.
The Opt-in Program allows the development of 6 units on a qualifying parcel, and therefore has the potential to create more units on a qualifying parcel than would otherwise be allowed under the provisions of SB 9. Properties may utilize SB 9 or the Opt-in Program, but not both.
Because the Opt-in Program achieves the intent of SB 9 (and more), properties that apply the Opt-in Program are not eligible to further subdivide the site under SB 9. The Town commits to developing and implementing processes, procedures, and marketing information to facilitate the implementation of this program. These potentially eligible parcels range from approximately one to three acres in size and are broadly dispersed throughout Portola Valley’s neighborhoods. The Town has conducted a preliminary analysis of the properties meeting the criteria and found that approximately 135 parcels in town would be eligible. Properties that are under one acre in size would continue to be eligible for development under the provisions of SB 9.
6 | ADEQUATE SITES
144 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This program will have an initial target of 3 low-, 6 moderate-, and 12 above-moderate income residential units during the 2023-2031 planning period.
To ensure successful program implementation, project applications will not require a conditional use permit and will be subject only to limited discretionary review. For consideration, only conceptual plans will be required. Only two decision-making bodies will be required. Projects will first be reviewed by the Planning Commission where applications will be screened for conformance with the abovementioned minimum safety criteria. Projects will be encouraged to include a diversification of housing types and sizes; consideration of natural terrain, and a comprehensive site planning approach to achieve superior design and community benefits through the provision of diversified housing types. Planning Commission review will be limited to two public meetings per project application to ensure a streamlined process. The Planning Commission will forward projects to the Architectural and Site Control Commission (ASCC). Detailed plans will be required for ASCC review.
The ASCC will conduct design review of each project. The Town will establish objective development and design standards that will encourage and facilitate the development of up to 6 units per lot and ensure that these standards do not preclude an eligible project from achieving the allowed number of units. Objective design and development standards will be created for this program, including but not limited to, floor area, setback, height, lighting, exterior material, landscaping, and water usage standards. ASCC review will be limited to one public meeting per project application.
The Town wishes to distinguish the program from SB 9 by creating additional incentives not offered by the Town’s SB 9 ordinance including additional floor area and impervious surface coverage, and a reduction of required minimum covered parking and guest parking:
▪ Floor area bonus of 1,600 square feet.
▪ Impervious surface bonus of 1,600 square feet.
▪ Parking for the primary unit may be uncovered and guest parking is reduced from two spaces to one space per unit.
No rezoning will be required, now or at any time through the planning period, for a property to participate.
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 143 SECTION 7. GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
California Government Code Section 65583(b)(1) requires the Housing Element to contain “a statement of goals, quantified objectives, and policies relative to the maintenance, preservation, and development of housing.” The policies and programs directly address the housing needs and constraints identified and analyzed in this Housing Element and are based on State law. Five goals are presented below pursuant to HCD requirements for the 6th Cycle.
As required by law, quantified objectives have been developed for housing production, rehabilitation, and conservation. These are presented at the end of this section. The quantified objectives provide metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of the Element.
Three types of statements are included in this section: goals, policies, and programs. Goals express broad, long-term statements for desired outcomes. Each goal is followed by multiple policies. The policies are intended to guide decision makers, staff, and other Town representatives in the day-to-day operations of the Town. They are statements that describe the Town’s position on specific housing issues. Some policies, but not all, require specific programs to ensure their effective implementation.
GOAL 1: Expand the types of housing allowed in the community. Facilitate the development of a range of housing types to meet the Town’s fair share of regional housing needs and accommodate current and new Portola Valley residents of diverse ages, races, and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Policy 1: Allow for new housing through new General Plan land use classifications for multi-family and mixed-use districts, an opt-in housing program, and other programs.
Program 1-1a: Create a new “Gateway” land use classification in the General Plan that allows affordable housing, recreation and open space. Include the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site as well as the Ladera Church site in the new “Gateway” land use classification. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent ofor more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards. 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
144 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt General Plan Amendment to facilitate construction of 50 8 “very-low income” and 10 2 “lowincome” units.
Geographic Targeting: Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space and Ladera Church sites.
Time Frame: General Plan Amendment by May 10, 2023. (Adopted by Town Council on May 10, 2023, Resolution 2926-2023.) Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-1b: Create two new zoning districts that allow for multi-family housing at 2 to 4 du/acre and 20 to 23 du/acre to provide for development of housing at lower-income levels. Create multi-family development standards in the new zoning district to allow for greater intensity, including floor area, height limits, minimum lot or unit sizes, and allowable dwelling units per acre. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent of or more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards.
This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of zoning for anything other than single family homes.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt Zoning Code amendments and rezone properties to facilitate construction of 26 units (including 8 very-low, 2 low-, 2 moderate-, and 14 above-moderate income units).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete Mixed-Use District 3 to 6 du/ac zoning code amendments and rezonings by March 2024. Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the Mixed-Use High Density (M-U-HD) District zoning code amendments and rezonings within 90 days.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-1c: Create Objective Design Standards for the new multi-family zoning districts to regulate building form and architectural details to create greater certainty in the design review process. As part of developing objective design standards, these standards will be used for the Affiliated Housing Program among other entitlement pathways under which objective design standards are required by law, and 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 145 the Town will ensure they promote certainty and objectivity, and be limited to health, safety, and objective design standards. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of zoning for anything other than single family homes.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt Objective Design Standards to facilitate construction of 49105 units.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete by March 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-2a: Create two a new zoning districts that allows for mixed-use residential development with 3 to 6 du/ac and 20 to 25 du/ac and would allow for up to 100% of building floor area to be dedicated to residential uses. Create mixed-use development standards in the new zoning district to allow for greater intensity, including floor area, height limits, minimum lot or unit sizes, and allowable dwelling units per acre. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of zoning for anything other than single family homes.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt Zoning Code amendments and rezone property to facilitate construction of 50 very low and 2115 above-moderate income units.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete Mixed-Use District 3 to 6 du/ac zoning code amendments and rezoning by March 2024.
Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the Mixed-Use High Density (M-U-HD) District zoning code amendments and rezonings within 90 days.
Responsible Agency: Planning and Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-2b: Create Objective Design Standards for the new mixed-use zoning districts to regulate building form and architectural details to create greater certainty in the design review process. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of zoning for anything other than single family homes.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt Design Standards to facilitate construction of 15 71 units.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete Mixed-Use District 3 to 6 du/ac Design Standards by March 2024.
Upon receipt of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element, the Town will complete the Mixed-Use High Density (M-U-HD) District Design Standards within 90 days.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
146 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-3: Create a new Opt-In Housing Diversification Program that allows property owners with sites 1 acre or greater to develop up to six dwelling units per lot, if they meet the following safety criteria:
▪ Accessible to two ways of ingress and egress,
▪ Located on a slope less than 30%,
▪ Outside of a very high fire hazard severity zone,
▪ Outside of a fault zone, and
▪ Outside of areas identified with unstable soils or at risk of landslide or liquefaction.
Properties may utilize SB 9 or the Opt-in Program, but not both.
Properties that apply the Opt-in Program are not eligible to further subdivide the site under SB 9 . The Town commits to developing and implementing processes, procedures and marketing information to facilitate the implementation of this program. Interested property owners would go before Planning Commission to demonstrate all safety criteria would be met. Subsequently, the Architectural Site Control Commission (ASCC) would review the planning application for compliance with a set of objective design and development standards. The Town will establish objective development and design standards that will encourage and facilitate the development of up to 6 units per lot and ensure that these standards do not preclude an eligible project from achieving the allowed number of units. The Town will evaluate the effectiveness of this program by mid-cycle, including making modifications to encourage and facilitate the units, and whether the program has achieved or is making progress towards supporting construction of 3 low-, 6 moderate-, and 12 above-moderate income units to address AFFH goals. Opt-in units will be affirmatively marketed to households with disproportionate housing needs, including renters, low-income households, and seniors on fixed incomes and persons from these populations that do not currently live in Portola Valley. This would include identifying underserved populations in the area and special outreach efforts such as marketing to local employees, translating materials and sharing information with community organizations that serve these populations, such as legal service or public health providers. All marketing plans would include strategies to reach groups with disproportionate housing needs.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Develop objective design and development standards and processes to support construction of 3 low-, 6 moderate-, and 12 above-moderate income units.
Affirmatively market Opt-in units to at least three community organizations.
Time Frame: Develop objective design and development standards by June 2025. Issue calls for projects in September 2025. Develop procedures and processes to implement program by September 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 147 2025. Evaluate program effectiveness by 2026 and annually thereafter. Program evaluation will include progress on number of units, affordability, potential constraints and impacts on AFFH housing mobility. Based on the mid-term evaluation, the Town will modify the program within one year if any constraints are identified and/or the program is not achieving the intended outcomes.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density/single-family neighborhoods Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-4: Currently the Affiliated Housing Program is implemented through the Housing Element. With this update, the Municipal Code will be updated to further incentivize use of this program to provide affordable workforce housing and to establish the parameters and process for the Affiliated Housing Program, including objective development standards, objective findings for approval, and affordability requirements. To facilitate development under the Affiliated Housing Program, the Town will work with property owners and maintain at least quarterly communication with program members to assess their progress and provide technical assistance. By mid-way through the RHNA cycle (2027), if trends indicate a potential shortfall in meeting the estimated units in the Sequoia Housing Site and, Ladera Church Site, and Christ Church Site, the Town will consider additional efforts to incentivize the Affiliated Housing Program to accommodate the RHNA or may include identifying additional sites for rezoning.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Update the zoning code to include a combining district (overlay zone) and apply that district to six initial properties to facilitate the construction of 339 units. Throughout the planning period, the Town will continue to engage potential partners to facilitate the construction of at least 10 additional units beyond the RHNA.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Zoning code amendments to codify the program will be completed by March 2024. The Town will conduct a mid-cycle review (2027) of the Affiliated Housing Program and progress towards meeting the RHNA. If found necessary, the Town will implement additional actions such as rezoning, if needed, by the following year (2028).
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-5: Participate in HIP Housing’s “Home Sharing Program” as a way to improve housing opportunities for lower-income seniors and lowincome Portola Valley residents. 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
148 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Work with HIP Housing, which serves residents throughout San Mateo County. The Home Sharing program matches persons
needing housing with homeowners who have available space. The Town will explore the feasibility of engaging HIP Housing to start a comparable program in Portola Valley. Implementing this program will support the Town’s housing mobility efforts to increase access to high-resource neighborhoods in Portola Valley for low-income households in Portola Valley and from other areas of San Mateo County that otherwise could not afford to live in Portola Valley, for example seniors on fixed incomes or persons with physical or developmental disabilities. This program can also include working with HIP Housing to market units resulting from the Opt-in Housing Diversification Program 1-3 and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7.
Quantified Objective/Metric: As an outcome of these efforts, connect 10 eligible tenants to homes or opportunities in Portola Valley through the Home Sharing Program to assist in housing mobility for eligible households.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Connect with HIP Housing by December 2024 to establish a shared housing program in Portola Valley. Develop an outreach program to inform Portola Valley residents about the shared housing program by June 2025.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 1-6: Rezone sites as identified within Section 6, Adequate Sites, to accommodate 272 residential units, representing the Town’s RHNA of 253 units and an 8 percent buffer to allow for compliance with No Net Loss Provisions of SB 166. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent orf more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards. The rezonings will support housing development at the following income levels:
▪ VLI: 86
▪ LI: 45
▪ MI: 42
▪ AMI: 99
This program is in compliance with Govt Code Section 65583.2 (H) and (I).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Rezone 73.621.16 acres to allow for 41272 residential units by March 2024 and 19.15 acres to allow for 56 residential 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 149 units (within 90 days of HCD certification of the updated Housing Element).
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Policy 2: Create a well-managed affordable housing program that preserves affordability in perpetuity.
Program 2-1: Amend the Municipal Code to establish inclusionary housing requirements for new multi-family housing developments to complement existing inclusionary requirements for projects with subdivisions. This program addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendment for
inclusionary requirements.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Adopt amendments by September 2026.
Responsible Agency: Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 2-2: Develop a program to manage new affordable housing units in the town. Consider including the following:
▪ Maintain affordability restrictions for 99 years or in perpetuity. ▪ Prioritize affordable housing for residents, former residents or those who work, or used to work in the town.
▪ Use a small percentage of a future housing trust fund to pay for housing staffing.
▪ Join with other cities in San Mateo County to share qualified housing staff to support the housing program.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Coordinate with other San Mateo County cities to establish a shared housing staff person. Facilitate construction of at least 131 very low- and low-income units.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Initiated in 2023 and implement program by
September 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund Program 2-3: Establish a more proactive and continual evaluation of housing needs beyond what is required for Housing Element certification. ▪ Create an accessible web-based repository of information from the Housing Element Update process including analyses of sites that were not included in the current Element and reasons why they were omitted; potential sites for future development; and the process and discussion of the Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
150 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Begin tracking existing or newly identified sites, noting any legal, safety, or other impediments to including such sites in future Housing Element updates.
▪ Establish a working group or ad hoc committee to focus on conducting community discussion of longer-term Town housing needs outside of the Housing Element update cycle.
▪ Utilize existing ADU working group to promote new ADU/JADU opportunities, especially ones for very low-income
tenants/workers.
Quantified Objective/Metric Timeframe: Create repository and begin tracking sites by December 2024. Establish a working group by May 2026.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Responsible Agency: Town Council and Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 2-4: The Town understands the need to encourage and facilitate housing development for households earning 30% or less of the median family income. The Town will encourage development of housing for extremely low-income households through a variety of activities that include:
▪ Reach out to affordable housing developers.
▪ Reduce development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Fund, if necessary and as available). ▪ Provide priority processing.
▪ Assist applicants with identifying grant and funding
opportunities.
▪ Provide technical assistance to the extent possible.
Quantified Objective/Metric: 50 very low-income units developed.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Ongoing; as projects are processed by the Planning & Building Department. By January 2026, reach out to affordable housing developers, and review and prioritize local funding at least twice in the planning period, and support expediting applications on an ongoing basis.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund Program 2-5: The Town will seek funding sources every 2 years and provide information regarding the availability of rehabilitation programs, including those through the Santa Mateo County, to targeted groups such as very low-, low- and moderate-income homeowners, owners of older residences, and owners of units occupied by lowerincome seniors, and those on fixed incomes through an annual newsletter. Share information on the Town’s Home Sharing Program (see Program 1-5).
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 151 Quantified Objective/Metric: Assist five very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Assess funding sources every 2 years beginning in 2025 and ongoing throughout planning period.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Policy 3: Develop housing on town or non-profit owned parcels where feasible.
Program 3-1: Initiate a site planning process for the sites in the new “Gateway” land use classification to make the most efficient use of the property and preserve open space. Pursue an affordable housing project on the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site in partnership with an affordable housing developer.
Maintain compliance with provisions of the Surplus Land Act (Assembly Bill 1486- Ting, 2019) throughout the Housing Element period.
Establish and implement incentives to facilitate housing development including outreach with affordable housing
developers, reduced development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Fund, if necessary), and priority processing.
Potentially ground lease the site to the housing developer at a nominal rate.
Consider improvements to the baseball field as part of the site planning process.
Consider collaboration with Ladera Church to integrate their site into the Town’s affordable housing project.
Establish an RFP process and solicit developers by January 2026.
If the Town receives appropriate responses to the RFP, then it will take these two steps:
▪ Target Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by Winter 2027. ▪ Target land use entitlements issuance by Spring 2028.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Meet with Ladera Church in June 2024. Begin site planning process and outreach with affordable housing developers in May 2025. Issue Request for Proposals to affordable housing developers by January 2026. Fifty very lowincome units developed.
Geographic Targeting: Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space and Ladera Church sites.
Time Frame: Issue RFP by January 2026.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund Program 3-21: Provide technical assistance to nonprofits/religious institutions to develop their sites with affordable housing.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
152 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Establish monthly meetings with Town staff and/or consultants for technical assistance. Include Planning, Building and Town Geologist when the program starts. On a quarterly basis, evaluate the effectiveness of the meetings and adjust format and staffing as necessary.
▪ When meeting with non-profits and religious institutions, encourage participation in the Affiliated Housing Program.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Provide monthly meetings for technical assistance starting September 2024. Construct 3948 units (including 8 22 very-low, 2 low-, 5 moderate-, and 1924 above moderate-income units) by end of planning period. Target assistance to at least three additional nonprofits and/or other partners.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Initiate monthly meetings by September 2024. Review effectiveness quarterly. Construct at least 3948 units by January 2031.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
GOAL 2: Elimination of Government Constraints. Removal of governmental policies or regulations that unnecessarily constrain the development, improvement, or conservation of market-rate or affordable housing.
Policy 4: Revise standards and approval process to reduce cost and uncertainty for affordable housing and lower cost market rate housing.
Program 4-1: Create new parking requirements for multi-family housing based on best practices, local conditions and number of bedrooms per unit (e.g., one space for a studio unit) including but not limited to mirroring the State Density Bonus Law (including zero parking spaces per unit for 100% supportive housing projects). The Town will ensure new parking requirements will not act as a potential constraint to new development.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendments.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Adopt by March 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 4-2: Provide additional flexibility on development standards for affordable housing through State Density Bonus Law or the Affiliated Housing Program.
▪ Review changes to State Density Bonus Law annually and adopt Municipal Code Amendments as necessary.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 153 ▪ Include the Affiliated Housing Program in the Zoning Code in the form of a combining district (overlay zone). Provide a process for applicants to request flexibility on development standards without requiring a variance.
▪ If Affiliated Housing sites are not producing the expected number of units, review the process to further facilitate projects, alter development standards, or provide incentives.
Incentives may include additional technical assistance or waiver of permit fees. The Town may consider other assistance
requested from applicants in the Affiliated Housing Program.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Annual assessment of Density Bonus Law. Regular reviews of Affiliated Housing Program.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Starting in 2024, annual assessment of Density Bonus Law. Starting in 2025, annual assessment of Affiliated Housing Program to evaluate progress and implement additional incentives.
If by 2028, the Affiliated Housing sites are not producing, the town will implement additional incentives or other efforts which may include rezoning additional sites to provide adequate capacity throughout the planning period.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and potentially the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
Program 4-3: Ensure the permitting process for modular and manufactured homes is clear and does not include any disincentives to using these building methods. Evaluate existing zoning code language and building permit process and make any necessary modifications Develop informational materials to assist applicants with zoning and building requirements.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Quantified Objective/Metric: Evaluate existing policies and adopt code amendments if necessary.
Time Frame: Begin evaluation in January 2027 and complete code amendments (if needed) by September 2027. Complete
informational materials by December 2027.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 4-4: Establish and implement an Affordable Housing Fund Policy.
Moneys in the Fund may be used to: 1) Increase and improve the supply of affordable housing, or 2) Cover reasonable administrative expenses not reimbursed through processing or other fees.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Quantified Objective/Metric: Support construction of at least 50 very-low and low-income units.
Time Frame: Establish policy in December 2023.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
154 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: All fees collected pursuant to inclusionary housing in-lieu fee regulations and other monies controlled by the Town for affordable housing shall be deposited in the Fund.
Program 4-5: Allocate funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) to support the development of 100% affordable housing projects. The NOFA will include incentives for identified Housing Element sites, with additional funding available for sites with significant development and infrastructure constraints, including the Skyline Open Space site, such as increased per unit subsidies.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Quantified Objective/Metric: Publish at least one NOFA and provide funding assistance for affordable housing projects on Housing Element sites, as funding is available.
Time Frame: Publish initial NOFA by August 2026 and continue the program on an ongoing basis until available funds are exhausted.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: Affordable Housing Trust Fund
Program 4-65: The Town will ensure ongoing compliance with transparency laws by listing all fees, as well as all zoning and development standards, and other requirements for each parcel on the Town’s website pursuant to Government Code section 65940.1(a)(1).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: To be completed by August 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Policy 5: Improve the development review process to reduce uncertainty and encourage development that fits with the Town’s objective standards while preserving rural character.
Program 5-1: Review Municipal Code standards and procedure documents and update as necessary so that they are more concise and
understandable.
▪ For applications that require review by Woodside Fire Protection District.
▪ For applications that require Site Development Permits (Town term for grading permits).
▪ Create handouts in plain language for property owners and technical language for design professionals.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Evaluate existing Municipal Code and procedure documents, adopt code amendments as needed, and 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 155 make revised handouts available on the Town’s website and at the Town Hall and library.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: For applications that require review by Woodside Fire Protection District, complete evaluation and make necessary amendments by December 2024. For applications that require Site Development permits, complete evaluation and make necessary amendments by December 2028. Starting in 2025, update handouts annually in September.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 5-2: Review use of consultants, staffing pattern, and fee schedules for ways to improve efficiency.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Evaluate workflow and processing timelines annually and determine if changes are needed. Provide summary report to Town Council as part of budget process.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Annual review linked to Budget process.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 5-3: Facilitate and support pipeline projects during the planning period by working with applicants to ensure reviews are done in a timely manner and technical assistance is provided as needed and public meetings limitations are followed, as required by SB 330. And as needed, provide incentives or additional assistance like expediting project review, supporting funding applications, and working to avoid unnecessary delays in processing of the applications.
Quantified Objective/Metric: 50 units (including 15 low-, 7 moderate-, and 28 above-moderate income units) constructed by end of planning period.
Geographic Targeting: Stanford Wedge Pending Project and Willow Commons Approved Project
Time Frame: Ongoing; 50 units constructed by January 2031.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 5-4: The Town shall initiate a standard operating procedure wherein the Planning & Building Director determines if a project is exempt from CEQA within 30 days after deeming a development application complete. The 30-day timeframe is required by Public Resources Code 21080.2. In the event a project is found to be exempt from CEQA, then provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act shall apply, and the application shall be processed within 60 days (Gov. Code 65950(a)(5)).
Quantified Objective/Metric: Continue to track project processing to ensure that an environmental determination is made pursuant to Public Resources Code 21080.1, within the timeframes of the Public 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
156 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Resources Code 21080.2 and Gov. Code 65950(a)(5) (e.g., State law).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Ongoing
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
GOAL 3: Resilient Housing. Manage wildfire vulnerability through design and policy strategies.
Policy 6: Continue to refine fire resistant building standards and land use policies to ensure they utilize the most up to date science in preparation for wildfire resiliency.
Program 6-1: As part of the regular three-year cycle to update the building code, evaluate the code and include latest best practices for fire resiliency in collaboration with Woodside Fire Protection District.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendments as needed.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Evaluate code and incorporate best practices every 3 years.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-2: Evaluate the Town’s landscaping regulations and guidelines and update with science-based best practices with respect to fire safety and water usage in collaboration with the Town’s Wildfire Preparedness Committee, Sustainability Committee and
Conservation Committee
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt amendments to regulations and guidelines.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Committees begin evaluation and public process leading to adoption by December 2024.
Responsible Agency: Wildfire Preparedness Committee,
Sustainability Committee, Conservation Committee, Planning & Building Department, and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-3: Vegetation management is a priority for wildfire resilience and additional programs will be developed in collaboration with Woodside Fire Protection District. (These programs cannot be included in detail because the best practices are evolving.) ▪ Continue regular meetings between the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, Town Manager, and Planning and Building Director
▪ Ask the Fire Marshal to make an annual report to the Town Council on vegetation management efforts and make
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 157 recommendations on how to improve effectiveness. Include discussion about supportive programs to assist households.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Annually evaluate best practices in vegetation management.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Annual starting in 2023.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council in consultation with Woodside Fire Protection District Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-4: Review and adopt, as appropriate, fire hazard maps developed by the Woodside Fire Protection District and/or CalFire once they are available. In light of new fire maps, reevaluate housing sites with the Fire Marshal or other qualified professional to determine if any new/replacement sites are needed or if additional fire prevention measures are needed.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adoption of a new fire hazard map, review of housing sites in light of new maps, make any changes that are needed.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Adoption of Safety Element policies in 2024. Consider code amendments when maps are available.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council in coordination with Woodside Fire Protection District Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-5: Once new fire hazard maps are available from Woodside Fire Protection District and/or CalFire and adopted by the Town, evaluate ADU and Senate Bill 9 ordinances to determine if any new fire prevention measures are needed.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendments if necessary.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Analysis conducted within 6 months of maps being available and code amendments adopted 3 months after that.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-6: Work with local fire officials to educate homeowners and landlords through community meetings, mailers, and participation in community events on how to reduce fire risk to structures and landscaping as wildfire risk continues to increase due to climate change.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Hold two community events annually, publish tips quarterly, and send mailers to all households once annually.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Ongoing beginning in 2024.
Responsible Agency: Wildfire Preparedness Committee and Town Manger in Coordination with Woodside Fire Protection District 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
158 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Financing Source: General Fund
Program 6-7: The Town has had a number of regulations that encourage energy conservation for years. These include permitting solar installations, utilizing subdivision regulations that protect solar access, and supporting energy efficient design. In addition, most new development is clustered, which reduces impacts on the land. The Town also requires native landscaping, which reduces the need for both water and energy. All of these policies and regulations will continue.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Continue existing green and energy conservation measures, revise them when necessary, and
implement new programs in accordance with the Sustainability Element and the town’s future Climate Action Plan.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Ongoing
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
GOAL 4: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing. Promote equal opportunity for all residents to reside in the housing of their choice regardless of their special characteristics as protected under State and Federal fair housing law.
Policy 7: Promote ADU/JADU construction and affordability and encourage programs that would increase the diversity of ADU occupants.
Program 7-1: Improve public information on the ADU application and permit process so it is clear and comprehensive. Create new informational materials on JADUs, recognizing their benefits related to affordability, use of existing building areas, and environmental benefits. Track ADUs and JADUs separately to help analyze how well each program is working.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Construct at least 102 ADU/JADU dwelling units during the planning period.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Make informational packets available by October 2024, and Track ADUs and JADUs throughout planning period (ongoing).
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 7-2: Create an amnesty program for existing, unpermitted ADUs to obtain permits to legalize the ADUs during the 2023-2031 planning period. The amnesty program would provide property owners the opportunity to formally legalize existing unpermitted ADUs and thereafter draw building permits for improvements to legalized ADUs.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Permit 15 existing dwelling units during the planning period.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 159 Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Establish amnesty program by May 2025.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 7-3: Provide direct assistance from the Building Division for property owners interested in making minor changes to accommodate a JADU. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Construct at least 102 dwelling units during the planning period.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Begin monthly office hours in June 2024. Monitor participation quarterly and increase hours if needed.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 7-4: Establish staff and consultant ADU office hours so that applicants can ask questions of subject matter experts. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Construct at least 102 dwelling units during the planning period.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Initiate monthly office hours by September 2024.
Monitor usage and adjust frequency and staffing if needed.
Responsible Agency: Town Staff, Town Geologist, Engineering Consultant
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 7-5: Develop and run a survey of ADU owners in Portola Valley to determine how ADUs are being used in the community and how much they are contributing to the housing stock and affordable housing.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Continue to update ADU database for the Town. Survey all property owners with ADUs/JADUs.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Conduct survey in 2026 and 2030.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 7-6: Develop an affordable ADU rental program that matches lowincome tenants who have experienced displacement from areas outside of Portola Valley due to increasing rents with Portola Valley ADU owners willing to rent ADUs at below market rates. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
160 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Assess every two years if the number of very low- and low-income ADUs is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, provide the following incentives:
▪ Provide incentives to homeowners to rent to Housing Choice Voucher Program (previously Section 8) and low-income
households (like waiving fees or offering another financial incentive).
If trends indicate a potential substantial shortfall in meeting the estimated ADUs in the sites inventory, consider additional efforts to incentivize ADU production and reassess and revise the overall sites strategy for the RHNA by 2027 through adjusting ADU capacity assumptions with actual permitted units, and/or identifying additional sites for consideration to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Reach out to HIP Housing to match displaced tenants located outside of Portola Valley. Develop at least 28 ADUs as affordable to “very low-income” households and another 28 as affordable to “low-income” households. Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years. If not meeting RHNA goals, provide additional incentives.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Develop program by September 2024. Assess ADU production every 2 years in March beginning in 2026.
Responsible Agency: Town staff
Financing Source: Affordable Housing Trust Fund
Program 7-7: Prepare pre-approved preliminary plans for ADUs and JADUs that are made available to property owners. These pre-approved plans would only require minimal additional engineering to account for the unique topography of sites and would significantly decrease the level of effort required of property owners in designing and permitting a JADU or ADU.
Assess every two years if ADU and JADU production is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, offer expedited plan check for ADU and JADU applications and organize a meeting with property owners that have constructed ADUs and interested property owners to understand the challenges and provide additional resources, as feasible to encourage ADU/JADU applications.
If trends indicate a potential substantial shortfall in meeting the estimated ADUs in the sites inventory, consider additional efforts to incentivize ADU production and reassess and revise the overall sites strategy for the RHNA by 2027 through adjusting ADU capacity assumptions with actual permitted units, and/or identifying additional sites for consideration to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Establish pre-approved ADU and JADU plans. Develop at least 28 ADUs affordable to “moderate-income” 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 161 households and 18 ADUs to “above moderate-income” households.
Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years. If not meeting RHNA goals, provide expedited plan check and meet with property owners two times per year.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: Initiate process in October 2024. Establish plans by January 2025. Assess ADU/JADU production every 2 years in March beginning in 2026.
Responsible Agency: Town staff
Financing Source: Affordable Housing Trust Fund
Program 7-8: Update Town’s ADU ordinance regularly to comply with State law.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Town’s ADU ordinance remains in compliance with state law.
Geographic Targeting: Low-density neighborhoods
Time Frame: First update 6 months after HCD’s ADU findings letter is received; review annually thereafter and update within 6 months of review.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund
Policy 8: Encourage and support the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and in the sale or rental of housing.
Program 8-1: To comply with State law (SB 520), the Town adopted written Reasonable Accommodation Procedures within Chapter 18.11 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances. The Town will review approval findings for objectivity and make any necessary revisions with other zoning code amendments and rezonings in March 2024. Specifically, the Town will revise the zoning code to remove approval finding #5 and #6, related to impacts on surrounding uses, neighbors and the Town. The Town will continue to analyze existing land use controls, building codes, and permit and processing procedures to determine constraints they impose on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities. The Town hands out informational brochures and includes information on the Towns website to inform residents of the Reasonable
Accommodation Procedures.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Maintain up-to-date Reasonable Accommodation Procedures
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Review and revise approval findings for objectivity in March 2024. Evaluate regulations every 3 years, beginning in 2026.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
162 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Program 8-2: Due to clarifications of California law relative to transitional and supportive housing, the Town’s municipal code needs to be amended so that it is fully compliant. In order to comply, the new multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts need to allow supportive housing by-right in zones where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, pursuant to Government Code Section 65651 (SB 745 and AB 2162).
Quantified Objective/Metric: N/A
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Completed in December 2022.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-3: To comply with State Law AB 2339, the definition for emergency shelters in the municipal code will be amended to include other interim intervention, including, but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care. The new multi-family district and mixed-use districts will allow emergency shelters by right. The zoning code will be amended to allow emergency shelters by right in religious institutions and include the following objective standards:
▪ Shelters may serve up to 10 individuals.
▪ The shelter shall be available to individuals for no more than 60 days. Extensions up to a total stay of 180 days may be
permissible if no alternative housing is available.
▪ On-site management shall be provided during the hours of shelter operation.
▪ Emergency shelters may include common space for the
exclusive use of the guests, and office and meeting space for the exclusive use of emergency shelter staff.
▪ On-site parking shall be provided to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter at any given time and shall be no more than other uses in the same zones.
▪ Lighting as described in the Portola Valley Municipal Code.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt Code Amendment
Time Frame: Complete by March 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-4: Incentivize developers through development standards concessions or fee waivers/reductions to increase the number of accessible units beyond the federal requirement of 5% for subsidized developments.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Increase accessible units beyond 5% for subsidized developments.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Incentives developed by May 2026.
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 163 Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-5: Rezone properties in Town to allow multi-family housing with a range of affordability levels and deed restrictions to ensure affordability over time. Affirmatively market the housing to households that are under-represented in Town including Black and Hispanic households. Address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing, and a lack of moderate- and high-density development.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendments and facilitate construction of 253 units. Affirmatively market to underrepresented households using the strategies described in Program 1-3: Opt-in, Program 1-5: Home Sharing, and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete rezoning by March 2024. Complete
marketing materials to be sent at time of project approval.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-6: Through collaboration with local service providers, convene a discussion of populations that are experiencing comparatively high rates of cost burden to discuss solutions for relief. Consider a rental assistance program tailored to extremely high cost-burdened residents. This may be in coordination with ADU/JADU programs.
Include Black, Indigenous and people of color in these
conversations. Address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Decrease cost burden in Portola Valley by assisting 15 extremely high cost-burdened residents (through the strategies described in Program 1-3: Opt-in, Program 1-5: Home Sharing, and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Convene discussion by June 2024. Town Council consideration of a rental assistance program by December 2024.
Responsible Agency: Town Staff and Race and Equity Committee Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-7: Collaborate with other cities/towns and Project Sentinel, or another similar organization, to perform fair housing training for property owners, real estate agents, and tenants across the region. The training would include information on reasonable accommodation and source of income discrimination, as well as other fair housing information with emphasis on certain topics driven by housing complaint data and information from stakeholders. Participation in fair housing training will be required for approval of landlords’ business licenses. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
164 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT discrimination and reasonable accommodations, with the goal of improving knowledge about how to recognize and challenge discrimination in order to increase loans to people of color and persons with disabilities. Address fair housing contributing factors related to existing patterns of higher loan denial rates for people of color, and a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Establish a list of property owners and real estate agents connected with the lease of multifamily housing and ADUs/JADUs. Provide written materials annually. Conduct two workshops. Connect at least 60 residents with fair housing resources and information (through the outreach strategies described in Program 1-3: Opt-in, Program 1-5: Home Sharing, and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Establish list by May 2024. Issue written materials annually thereafter. Conduct a first workshop by 2026, and a second workshop by 2030.
Responsible Agency: Town Staff and Race and Equity Committee Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-8: Create a webpage specific to fair housing including resources for residents who feel they have experienced discrimination, information about filing fair housing complaints with HCD or HUD, and information about protected classes under the Fair Housing Act.
Address fair housing contributing factors related to a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Increase participants in fair housing programs. Connect at least 60 residents with fair housing resources and information (through the strategies described in Program 1-3:
Opt-in, Program 1-5: Home Sharing, and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7).
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Establish webpage by May 2024.
Responsible Agency: Town Staff
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-9: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the Municipal Code to ensure there are no regulatory constraints (actual or perceived) to reasonable accommodation and providing housing for persons with disabilities. Address fair housing contributing factors related to a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Increase participants in fair housing programs. Connect at least 60 residents with reasonable accommodation and fair housing resources and information (through the strategies described in Program 1-3: Opt-in, Program 1-5: Home Sharing, and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7).
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW 165 Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete analysis by January 2027; amend code to remove constraints, if found, by September 2027.
Responsible Agency: Town Staff
Financing Source: General Fund
Program 8-10: Update the Municipal Code to comply with State law and the HCD Group Home Technical Advisory (December 2022):
▪ Group homes that operate as single-family residences and that do not provide licensable services should be allowed in singlefamily neighborhoods, subject only to the generally applicable, nondiscriminatory health, safety, and zoning laws that apply to all single-family residences. This includes homes that have more than six residents. Because these homes are not providing licensable services, they should be treated the same as other residences.
▪ Group homes that operate as single-family residences and that provide licensable services to six or fewer residents should be allowed in single family neighborhoods, subject only to the generally applicable, nondiscriminatory health, safety, and zoning laws that apply to all single-family residences. ▪ Group homes operating as single-family residences that provide licensable services to more than six residents may be subject to conditional use or other discretionary approval processes. The Town will provide flexible and efficient reasonable
accommodations in these permitting processes. The Town will allow for exceptions to permitting processes to be resolved through reasonable accommodation procedures instead of
conditional use procedures. In addition, any substantive requirements for these group homes will comply with the Town’s obligations to remove constraints on housing for persons with disabilities, affirmatively support it, and prevent discrimination against it.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Adopt code amendment.
Geographic Targeting: Townwide
Time Frame: Complete Municipal Code Amendments by March 2024.
Responsible Agency: Planning & Building Department and Town Council
Financing Source: General Fund
Policy 9: Assist in the development of housing for persons with developmental disabilities.
Program 9-1: Work with owners of 4394 Alpine or supportive housing nonprofits to support the development of housing that serves developmentally disabled persons.
▪ The owner of the 4394 Alpine Housing Inventory Site has requested greater certainty for applicants of private affordable 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
166 AMENDED DRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT housing projects seeking to secure grants under the Affordable Housing Fund. This could include, but not be limited to, specific qualifying criteria, applications and application checklists, and benchmarks for allocation of funds based on unit size and/or affordability level. The owner requests that criteria is in place within 180 days of Housing Element adoption. The Town will seek to meet this timeline to the extent feasible.
▪ Create a policy for fee waivers that expressly supports Supportive Housing Projects.
▪ Explore assistance in facilitating infrastructure permitting, including coordination with external agencies (including PGE, WestBay Sanitation, and CalWater) for supportive housing projects.
▪ Rezone 4388 Alpine as mixed-use so long as the Willow Commons entitlements are considered vested and/or exempted from any conflicting provisions.
Quantified Objective/Metric: Develop policy for use of Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Receive housing development applications from nonprofit builders and/or market rate builders that include units dedicated to housing persons with disabilities. Six units developed by 2031.
Geographic Targeting: 4394 Alpine Road
Time Frame: Begin outreach to property owner of 4394 Alpine in June 2023. Adopt policy for use of Affordable Housing Trust Fund by June 2024.
Responsible Agency: Town Council and Planning & Building Department
Financing Source: General Fund and Affordable Housing Trust Fund
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Table 7-1 includes the implementation timing for each proposed program. 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 167 TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other GOAL 1:Expand the types of housing allowed in the community.
Policy 1: Allow for new housing through new General Plan land use classifications for multifamily and mixed-use districts, an opt-in housing program, and other programs. 1-1a: Create a new “Gateway” land use classification in the General Plan that allows affordable housing, recreation and open space. Include the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site as well as the Ladera Church site in the new “Gateway” land use classification. This program helps to address fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent of or more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards.
Amended
Land Use
Element
Construct 50 verylow and 10 lowincome units by
January 2031
1-1b: Create two new zoning districts that allow for multi-family housing at 2 to 4 du/acre and 20 to 23 du/acre to provide for development of housing at lower-income levels. Create multi-family development standards in the new zoning district to allow for greater intensity, including floor area, height limits, minimum lot or unit sizes, and allowable dwelling units per acre. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent ofor more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of moderate- and high-density development.) March
(Rezonings and
Amend Zoning
Code for M-U
District 3 to 6
du/ac)
Rezonings and
Amend Zoning
Code for M-U-HD
District 20 to 25
du/ac
Construct 26
units by January
2031
Construct 26 units
by January 2031
1-1c: Create Objective Design Standards for the new multi-family zoning districts to regulate building form and architectural details to create greater certainty in the design review process. As part of developing objective design standards, these standards will be used for the Affiliated Housing Program among other entitlement pathway under which objective design standards are required by law, and the Town will ensure they promote certainty and objectivity, and be limited to health, safety, and objective design standards. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of moderate- and high-density development.)
March (Adopt
Design
Standards)
1-2a: Create twoa new zoning districts that allows for mixed-use residential development with 3 to 6 du/ac and 20 to 25 du/acre and would allow for up to 100% of building floor area to be dedicated to residential uses. Create mixed-use development standards in the new zoning district to allow for greater intensity, including floor area, height limits, minimum lot or unit sizes, and allowable dwelling units per acre. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of moderateand high-density development.) March
(Rezonings and
Amend Zoning
Code for M-U
District 3 to 6
du/ac)
Rezonings and
Amend Zoning
Code for M-U-HD
District 20 to 25
du/ac
Construct 7115 units
by January 2031
1-2b: Create Objective Design Standards for the new mixed-use zoning districts to regulate building form and architectural details to create greater certainty in the design review process. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of moderate- and high-density development.) March (Adopt
Design
Standards for MU District 3 to 6
du/ac)
Adopt Design
Standards for MU-HD District 20
to 25 du/ac
1-3: Create a new Opt-In Housing Diversification Program that allows property owners with sites 1 acre or greater to develop up to six dwelling units per lot, assuming they meet the following safety criteria:
▪ Accessible to two ways of ingress and egress,
▪ Located on a slope less than 30%,
June (Adopt Design
and Development
Standards)
Evaluate
program
effectiveness
Evaluate
program
effectiveness
Evaluate
program
effectiveness
Evaluate
program
effectiveness
Evaluate
program
effectiveness
Construct 3 low-,
6 moderate-, and
12 above-moderate
income units by
January 2031
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
168 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other ▪ Outside of a very high fire hazard severity zone,
▪ Outside of a fault zone, and
▪ Outside of areas identified with unstable soils or at risk of landslide or liquefaction.
Properties may utilize SB 9 or the Opt-in Program, but not both. Properties that apply the Opt-in Program are not eligible to further subdivide the site under SB 9. The Town commits to developing and implementing processes, procedures, and marketing information to facilitate the implementation of this program. Interested property owners would go before Planning Commission to demonstrate all safety criteria would be met. Subsequently, the Architectural Site Control Commission (ASCC) would review the planning application for compliance with a set of objective design and development standards. The Town will establish objective development and design standards that will encourage and facilitate the development of up to 6 units per lot and ensure that these standards do not preclude an eligible project from achieving the allowed number of units. The Town will evaluate the effectiveness of this program by mid-cycle, including making modifications to encourage and facilitate the units, and whether the program has achieved or is making progress towards supporting construction of 3 low-, 6 moderate-, and 12 above-moderate income units to address AFFH goals. Opt-in units will be affirmatively marketed to households with disproportionate housing needs, including renters, low-income households, and seniors on fixed incomes and persons from these populations that do not currently live in Portola Valley. This would include identifying underserved populations in the area and special outreach efforts such as marketing to local employees, translating materials and sharing information with community organizations that serve these populations, such as legal service or public health providers. All marketing plans would include strategies to reach groups with disproportionate housing needs.
September (Develop
procedures and
processes)
1-4: Currently the Affiliated Housing Program is implemented through the Housing Element. With this update, the Municipal Code will be updated to further incentivize use of this program to provide affordable workforce housing and to establish the parameters and process for the Affiliated Housing Program, including objective development standards, objective findings for approval, and affordability requirements. To facilitate development under the Affiliated Housing Program, the Town will work with property owners and maintain at least quarterly communication with program members to assess their progress and provide technical assistance. By mid-way through the RHNA cycle (2027), if trends indicate a potential shortfall in meeting the estimated units in the Sequoia Housing Site and, Ladera Church Site, and Christ Church Site, the Town will consider additional efforts to incentivize the Affiliated Housing Program to accommodate the RHNA or may include identifying additional sites for rezoning.
March (Zoning
Code
amendments to
codify program)
Conduct midcycle review Construct 339 units
by January 2031
1-5: Participate in HIP Housing’s “Home Sharing Program” as a way to improve housing opportunities for lower-income seniors and low-income Portola Valley residents.
Work with HIP Housing, which serves residents throughout San Mateo County. The Home Sharing program matches persons needing housing with homeowners who have available space. The Town will explore the feasibility of engaging HIP Housing to start a comparable program in Portola Valley.
Implementing this program will support the Town’s housing mobility efforts to increase access to high-resource neighborhoods in Portola Valley for low-income households in Portola Valley and from other areas of San Mateo County that otherwise could not afford to live in Portola Valley, for example seniors on fixed incomes or persons with physical or developmental disabilities. This program can also include working with HIP Housing to market units resulting from the Opt-in Housing Diversification Program 1-3 and ADU Programs 7-6 and 7-7.
December
(Connect with
HIP Housing)
June (Develop
outreach program)
1-6: Rezone sites as identified within Section 6, Adequate Sites to accommodate 272 residential units, representing the Town’s RHNA of 253 units and an 8 percent buffer to allow for compliance with No Net Loss Provisions of SB 166. The City Town has a shortfall of 73 units including 44 units for March
(Rezone
73.621.16 acres
(Rezone 19.15
acres to allow for
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 169 TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other the lower-income RHNA. Rezoning through Programs 1-1a through 1-2a will comply with Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as applicable. This includes permitting by-right (without discretionary action) for housing developments in which 20 percent orf more of the units are affordable to lower income households and requiring a minimum density of 20 units per acre. The ASCC will review the design for consistency with the objective development standards. The rezonings will support housing development at the following income levels:
▪ VLI: 86
▪ LI: 45
▪ MI: 42
▪ AMI: 99
This program is in compliance with Govt Code Section 65583.2 (H) and (I). to allow for
41272 residential
units)
56 residential
units)
Policy 2: Create a well-managed affordable housing program that preserves affordability in perpetuity.
2-1: Amend the Municipal Code to establish inclusionary housing requirements for new multifamily housing developments to complement existing inclusionary requirements for projects with subdivisions. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.) September
(Adopt
amendments)
2-2: Develop a program to manage new affordable housing units in the town. Consider including the following:
▪ Maintain affordability restrictions for 99 years or in perpetuity. ▪ Prioritize affordable housing for residents, former residents or those who work, or used to work in the town.
▪ Use a small percentage of a future housing trust fund to pay for housing staffing. ▪ Join with other cities in San Mateo County to share qualified housing staff to support the housing program.
(Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.) Initiated September
(Implement)
2-3: Establish a more proactive and continual evaluation of housing needs beyond what is required for Housing Element certification.
▪ Create an accessible web-based repository of information from the Housing Element Update process including: analyses of sites that were not included in the current Element and reasons why they were omitted; potential sites for future development; and the process and discussion of the Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee.
▪ Begin tracking existing or newly identified sites, noting any legal, safety, or other impediments to including such sites in future Housing Element updates. ▪ Establish a working group or ad hoc committee to focus on conducting community discussion of longer-term Town housing needs outside of the Housing Element update cycle. ▪ Utilize existing ADU working group to promote new ADU/JADU opportunities, especially ones for very low-income tenants/workers.
To the extent additional housing opportunity sites are identified through this program, the development of such sites should be prioritized above the use of the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site.
December
(Repository)
May
(Working Group)
2-4: The Town understands the need to encourage and facilitate housing development for households earning 30% or less of the median family income. The Town will encourage development of housing for extremely low-income households through a variety of activities that include:
▪ Reach out to affordable housing developers.
▪ Reduce development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Fund, if necessary and as available).
January
(Outreach to
affordable
housing
developers)
Ongoing
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
170 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other ▪ Provide priority processing.
▪ Assist applicants with identifying grant and funding opportunities. ▪ Provide technical assistance to the extent possible.
2-5: The Town will seek funding sources every 2 years and provide information regarding the availability of rehabilitation programs, including those through the Santa Mateo County, to targeted groups such as very low-, low- and moderate-income homeowners, owners of older residences, and owners of units occupied by lower-income seniors, and those on fixed incomes through an annual newsletter. Share information on the Town’s Home Sharing Program (see Program 1-5).
Assess funding
sources
Assess funding
sources
Assess
funding
sources
Ongoing (Assess
funding sources
every 2 years and
throughout planning
period)
Policy 3: Develop housing on town or non-profit owned parcels where feasible. 3-1: Initiate a site planning process for the sites in the new “Gateway” land use classification to make the most efficient use of the property and preserve open space. Pursue an affordable housing project on the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space site in partnership with an affordable housing developer.
▪ Maintain compliance with provisions of the Surplus Land Act (Assembly Bill 1486- Ting, 2019) throughout the Housing Element period.
▪ Establish and implement incentives to facilitate housing development including outreach with affordable housing developers, reduced development fees (partially using the Town’s existing Affordable Housing Fund, if necessary), and priority processing. ▪ Potentially ground lease the site to the housing developer at a nominal rate. ▪ Consider improvements to the baseball field as part of the site planning process. ▪ Consider collaboration with Ladera Church to integrate their site into the Town’s affordable housing project.
▪ Establish an RFP process and solicit developers by January 2026. ▪ If the Town receives appropriate responses to the RFP, then it will take these two steps:
▪ Target Exclusive Negotiating Agreement by Winter 2027. ▪ Target land use entitlements issuance by Spring 2028.
June (Hold
discussions with
Ladera Church)
May (Site planning/
outreach affordable
house developers)
January
(Issue RFP)
January 2031
(Develop 50 very
low-income units)
3-12: Provide technical assistance to nonprofits/religious institutions to develop their sites with affordable housing.
▪ Establish monthly meetings with Town staff and/or consultants for technical assistance. Include Planning, Building and Town Geologist when the program starts. On a quarterly basis, evaluate the effectiveness of the meetings and adjust format and staffing as necessary. ▪ When meeting with non-profits and religious institutions, encourage participation in the Affiliated Housing Program.
September
(Initiate
meetings)
January 2031
(Construct
3948 units)
GOAL 2:Elimination of Government Constraints
Policy 4: Revise standards and approval process to reduce cost and uncertainty for affordable housing and lower cost market rate housing.
4-1: Create new parking requirements for multi-family housing based on best practices, local conditions, and number of bedrooms per unit (e.g., one space for a studio unit) including but not limited to mirroring the State Density Bonus Law (including zero parking spaces per unit for 100% supportive housing projects). The Town will ensure new parking requirements will not act as a potential constraint to new development.
March (Amend
Zoning Code)
4.-2: Provide additional flexibility on development standards for affordable housing through State Density Bonus Law or the Affiliated Housing Program.
▪ Review changes to State Density Bonus Law annually and adopt Municipal Code Amendments as necessary.
January (Density
Bonus Law)
June (Affiliated
Housing Program)
Annual assessment
of Density Bonus
Law starting in 2024,
Annual assessment
of Affiliated Housing
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 171 TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other ▪ Include the Affiliated Housing Program in the Zoning Code in the form of a combining district (overlay zone). Provide a process for applicants to request flexibility on development standards without requiring a variance.
▪ If Affiliated Housing sites are not producing the expected number of units, review the process to further facilitate projects, alter development standards, or provide incentives. Incentives may include additional technical assistance or waiver of permit fees. The Town may consider other assistance requested from applicants in the Affiliated Housing Program.
Program starting in
2025
4-3: Ensure the permitting process for modular and manufactured homes is clear and does not include any disincentives to using these building methods. Evaluate existing zoning code language and building permit process and make any necessary modifications. Develop informational materials to assist applicants with zoning and building requirements.
January (Begin
evaluation)
September
(Complete
process, adopt
amendments if
necessary)
4-4: Establish and implement an Affordable Housing Fund Policy. Moneys in the Fund may be used to: 1) Increase and improve the supply of affordable housing, or 2) Cover reasonable administrative expenses not reimbursed through processing or other fees.
December
(Establish
policy)
4-5: Allocate funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund through a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) to support the development of 100% affordable housing projects. The NOFA will include incentives for identified Housing Element sites, with additional funding available for sites with significant development and infrastructure constraints, including the Skyline Open Space site, such as increased per unit subsidies.
Publish initial
NOFA by August
4-65: The Town will ensure ongoing compliance with transparency laws by listing all fees, as well as all zoning and development standards, and other requirements for each parcel on the Town’s website pursuant to Government Code section 65940.1(a)(1) August (Update
website)
Policy 5: Improve the development review process to reduce uncertainty and encourage development that fits with the Town’s objective standards while preserving rural character. 5-1: Review Municipal Code standards and procedure documents and update as necessary so that they are more concise and understandable.
▪ For applications that require review by Woodside Fire Protection District. ▪ For applications that require Site Development Permits (Town term for grading permits). ▪ Create handouts in plain language for property owners and technical language for design professionals.
December
(Evaluate apps
for review by
WFPD)
December
(Evaluate Site
Development
permits)
Update handouts
annually in
September starting
in 2025
5-2: Review use of consultants, staffing pattern, and fee schedules for ways to improve efficiency. Annual review linked to Budget process
5-3: Facilitate and support pipeline projects during the planning period by working with applicants to ensure reviews are done in a timely manner and technical assistance is provided as needed and public meetings limitations are followed, as required by SB 330. And as needed, provide incentives or additional assistance like expediting project review, supporting funding applications and working to avoid unnecessary delays in processing of the applications.
Ongoing
(Develop 50 units by
January 2031)
5-4: The Town shall initiate a standard operating procedure wherein the Planning & Building Director determines if a project is exempt from CEQA within 30 days after deeming a development application complete. The 30-day timeframe is required by Public Resources Code 21080.2. In the event a project is found to be exempt from CEQA, then provisions of the Permit Streamlining Act shall apply, and the application shall be processed within 60 days (Gov. Code 65950(a)(5)).
Ongoing
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
172 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other GOAL 3:Resilient Housing
Policy 6: Continue to refine fire resistant building standards and land use policies to ensure they utilize the most up to date science in preparation for wildfire resiliency. 6-1: As part of the regular three-year cycle to update the building code, evaluate the code and include latest best practices for fire resiliency in collaboration with Woodside Fire Protection District.
Evaluate code and
incorporate best
practices every
3 years
6-2: Evaluate the Town’s landscaping regulations and guidelines and update with science-based best practices with respect to fire safety and water usage in collaboration with the Town’s Wildfire Preparedness Committee, Sustainability Committee and Conservation Committee.
December
(Evaluate/
Adopt)
6-3: Vegetation management is a priority for wildfire resilience and additional programs will be developed in collaboration with Woodside Fire Protection District. (These programs cannot be included in detail because the best practices are evolving. ▪ Continue regular meetings between the Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, Town Manager, and Planning and Building Director
▪ Ask the Fire Marshal to make an annual report to the Town Council on vegetation management efforts and make recommendations on how to improve effectiveness. Include discussion about supportive programs to assist households.
June Annually evaluate
best practices,
beginning June 2023
6-4: Adopt fire hazard maps developed by the Woodside Fire Protection District and/or CalFire once they are available. In light of new fire hazard maps, reevaluate housing sites with the Fire Marshal or other qualified professional to determine if any new/replacement sites are needed or if additional fire prevention measures are needed.
Adopt Safety
Element policies
Adopt code
amendments when
maps are available
6-5: Once new fire hazard maps are available from Woodside Fire Protection District and/or CalFire and adopted by the Town, evaluate ADU and Senate Bill 9 ordinances to determine if any new fire prevention measures are needed.
Analysis conducted
within 6 months of
maps being available
and code
amendments
adopted 3 months
after that
6-6: Work with local fire officials to educate homeowners and landlords through community meetings, mailers, and participation in community events on how to reduce fire risk to structures and landscaping as wildfire risk continues to increase due to climate change.
Initiate Ongoing, beginning
2024
6-7: The Town has had a number of regulations that encourage energy conservation for years.
These include permitting solar installations, utilizing subdivision regulations that protect solar access, and supporting energy efficient design. In addition, most new development is clustered, which reduces impacts on the land. The Town also requires native landscaping, which reduces the need for both water and energy. All of these policies and regulations will continue.
Ongoing
GOAL 4:Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Policy 7: Promote ADU/JADU construction and affordability and encourage programs that would increase the diversity of ADU occupants.
7-1: Improve public information on the ADU application and permit process so it is clear and comprehensive. Create new informational materials on JADUs, recognizing their benefits related to affordability, use of existing building areas, and environmental benefits. Track ADUs and JADUs separately to help analyze how well each program is working.
October (Make
information
packets
available)
Ongoing (Track
ADUs & JADUs)
7-2: Create an amnesty program for existing, unpermitted ADUs to obtain permits to legalize the ADUs during the 2023-2031 planning period. The amnesty program would provide property May (Establish)
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 173 TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other owners the opportunity to formally legalize existing unpermitted ADUs and thereafter draw building permits for improvements to legalized ADUs.
7-3: Provide direct assistance from the Building Division for property owners interested in making minor changes to accommodate a JADU. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.)
June
(Initiate office
hours)
7-4: Establish staff and consultant ADU office hours so that applicants can ask questions of subject matter experts. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.)
September
(Initiate office
hours)
7-5: Develop and run a survey of ADU owners in Portola Valley to determine how ADUs are being used in the community and how much they are contributing to the housing stock and affordable housing.
2026
(survey)
2030
(re-run survey)
7-6: Develop an affordable ADU rental program that matches low-income tenants who have experienced displacement from areas outside of Portola Valley due to increasing rents with Portola Valley ADU owners willing to rent ADUs at below market rates. Assess every two years if the number of very low- and low-income ADUs is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, provide the following incentives:
▪ Provide incentives to homeowners to rent to Housing Choice Voucher Program (previously Section 8) and low-income households (like waiving impact fees or offering another financial incentive).
▪ Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.
If trends indicate a potential substantial shortfall in meeting the estimated ADUs in the sites inventory, consider additional efforts to incentivize ADU production and reassess and revise the overall sites strategy for the RHNA by 2027 through adjusting ADU capacity assumptions with actual permitted units, and/or identifying additional sites for consideration to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA.
September
(Develop)
March (Assess) Assess progress March
(Assess)
March
(Assess)
March 2026, 2028
and 2030 (Assess)
7-7: Prepare pre-approved preliminary plans for ADUs and JADUs that are made available to property owners. These pre-approved plans would only require minimal additional engineering to account for the unique topography of sites and would significantly decrease the level of effort required of property owners in designing and permitting a JADU or ADU.
Assess every two years if ADU and JADU production is meeting the Town’s 6th cycle RHNA goals. If not, offer expedited plan check for ADU and JADU applications and organize a meeting with property owners that have constructed ADUs and interested property owners to understand the challenges and provide additional resources, as feasible.
If trends indicate a potential substantial shortfall in meeting the estimated ADUs in the sites inventory, consider additional efforts to incentivize ADU production and reassess and revise the overall sites strategy for the RHNA by 2027 through adjusting ADU capacity assumptions with actual permitted units, and/or identifying additional sites for consideration to expand site capacity to the extent necessary to accommodate the RHNA.
October (Initiate) January (Establish) March (Assess) Assess progress March (Assess)
March
(Assess)
March 2026, 2028
and 2030 (Assess)
7-8: Update Town’s ADU ordinance regularly to comply with State law. First update 6 months after
receiving HCD’s
ADU findings;
review annually
thereafter and
update within
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
174 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other 6 months of
review
Policy 8: Encourage and support the enforcement of laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination in lending practices and in the sale or rental of housing. 8-1: To comply with State law (SB 520), the Town adopted written Reasonable Accommodation Procedures within Chapter 18.11 of the Town’s Code of Ordinances. The Town will review approval findings for objectivity and make any necessary revisions with other zoning code amendments and rezonings in March 2024. Specifically, the Town will revise the zoning code to remove approval finding #5 and #6, related to impacts on surrounding uses, neighbors and the Town. The Town will continue to analyze existing land use controls, building codes, and permit and processing procedures to determine constraints they impose on the development, maintenance, and improvement of housing for persons with disabilities. The Town hands out informational brochures and includes information on the Towns website to inform residents of the Reasonable Accommodation Procedures.
March (Review
and revise
approval findings
for objectivity)
Evaluate
regulations
Evaluate
regulations
Maintain up-to-date
information in
brochures and on
website
8-2: Due to clarifications of California law relative to transitional and supportive housing, the Town’s municipal code needs to be amended so that it is fully compliant. In order to comply, the new multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts need to allow supportive housing by-right in zones where multi-family and mixed uses are permitted, pursuant to Government Code Section 65651 (SB 745 and AB 2162).
Completed
December 2022
prior to adoption
8-3: To comply with State Law AB 2339, the definition for emergency shelters in the municipal code will be amended to include other interim intervention, including, but not limited to, navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care. The new multi-family district and mixeduse districts will allow emergency shelters by right. The zoning code will be amended to allow emergency shelters by right in religious institutions and include the following objective standards:
▪ Shelters may serve up to 10 individuals.
▪ The shelter shall be available to individuals for no more than 60 days. Extensions up to a total stay of 180 days may be permissible if no alternative housing is available. ▪ On-site management shall be provided during the hours of shelter operation. ▪ Emergency shelters may include common space for the exclusive use of the guests, and office and meeting space for the exclusive use of emergency shelter staff. ▪ On-site parking shall be provided to accommodate all staff working in the emergency shelter at any given time and shall be no more than other uses in the same zones. ▪ Lighting as described in the Portola Valley Municipal Code.
March
(Complete)
8-4: Incentivize developers through development standards concessions or fee waivers/reductions to increase the number of accessible units beyond the federal requirement of 5% for subsidized developments.
May (develop
incentives)
8-5: Rezone properties in Town to allow multi-family housing with a range of affordability levels and deed restrictions to ensure affordability over time. Affirmatively market the housing to households that are under-represented in Town including Black and Hispanic households. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing, and a lack of moderate- and high-density development.)
March
(Complete
rezoning)
8-6: Through collaboration with local service providers, convene a discussion of populations that are experiencing comparatively high rates of cost burden to discuss solutions for relief. Consider a rental assistance program tailored to extremely high cost-burdened residents. This may be in coordination with ADU/JADU programs. Invite Black, Indigenous and people of color to participate in these conversations. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors relating to a lack of affordable housing.)
June (convene)
December
(consider
program)
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 175 TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other 8-7: Collaborate with other cities/towns and Project Sentinel, or another similar organization, to perform fair housing training for property owners, real estate agents, and tenants across the region. The training would include information on reasonable accommodation and source of income discrimination, as well as other fair housing information with emphasis on certain topics driven by housing complaint data and information from stakeholders. Participation in fair housing training will be required for approval of landlords’ business licenses. Focus enforcement efforts on race-based discrimination and reasonable accommodations, with the goal of improving knowledge about how to recognize and challenge discrimination, in order to increase loans to people of color and persons with disabilities. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors related to existing patterns of higher loan denial rates for people of color, and a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.)
May (Establish
list of attendees)
May (One
training
workshop)
May
(One
training
workshop)
8-8: Create a webpage specific to fair housing including resources for residents who feel they have experienced discrimination, information about filing fair housing complaints with HCD or HUD, and information about protected classes under the Fair Housing Act. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors related to a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.)
May
8-9: Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the Municipal Code to ensure there are no regulatory constraints (actual or perceived) to reasonable accommodation and providing housing for persons with disabilities. (Addresses fair housing contributing factors related to a lack of knowledge of fair housing laws and rights in tenants and owners.)
January
(Analysis);
September
(Amend code,
if necessary)
8-10: Update the Municipal Code to comply with State law and the HCD Group Home Technical Advisory (December 2022):
▪ Group homes that operate as single-family residences and that do not provide licensable services should be allowed in single-family neighborhoods, subject only to the generally applicable, nondiscriminatory health, safety, and zoning laws that apply to all single-family residences. This includes homes that have more than six residents. Because these homes are not providing licensable services, they should be treated the same as other residences. ▪ Group homes that operate as single-family residences and that provide licensable services to six or fewer residents should be allowed in single family neighborhoods, subject only to the generally applicable, nondiscriminatory health, safety, and zoning laws that apply to all singlefamily residences. ▪ Group homes operating as single-family residences that provide licensable services to more than six residents may be subject to conditional use or other discretionary approval processes. The Town will provide flexible and efficient reasonable accommodations in these permitting processes. The Town will allow for exceptions to permitting processes to be resolved through reasonable accommodation procedures instead of conditional use procedures. In addition, any substantive requirements for these group homes will comply with the Town’s obligations to remove constraints on housing for persons with disabilities, affirmatively support it, and prevent discrimination against it..
March
Policy 9: Assist in the development of housing for persons with developmental disabilities. 9-1: Work with owners of 4394 Alpine or supportive housing nonprofits to support the development of housing that serves developmentally disabled persons. ▪ The owner of the 4394 Alpine Housing Inventory Site has requested greater certainty for applicants of private affordable housing projects seeking to secure grants under the Affordable Housing Fund. This could include, but not be limited to, specific qualifying criteria, applications and application checklists, and benchmarks for allocation of funds based on unit size and/or June (Initiate
and continue
with quarterly
outreach
attempts)
June (Adopt
policy)
Six units developed
by 2031
7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
176 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE 7-1: PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX
Goal/Policy/Program 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Other affordability level. The owner requests that criteria is in place within 180 days of Housing Element adoption. The Town will seek to meet this timeline to the extent feasible. ▪ Create a policy for fee waivers that expressly supports Supportive Housing Projects. ▪ Explore assistance in facilitating infrastructure permitting, including coordination with external agencies (including PGE, WestBay Sanitation, and CalWater) for supportive housing projects. ▪ Rezone 4388 Alpine as mixed-use so long as the Willow Commons entitlements are considered vested and/or exempted from any conflicting provisions. 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW 177 2023-2031 QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES
Table 7-2 summarizes the quantified objectives for the 2023-2031 planning period.
TABLE 7-2: QUANTIFIED OBJECTIVES FOR PORTOLA VALLEY
New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation
Extremely and Very Low-Incomea 86 0 0
Low-Income 458 0 0
Moderate-Income 3541 7 0
Above Moderate-Income 91 8 0
Total 25766 15b 0
a Extremely low-income assumed to be 50% of very low-income allocation. b Assumes the rehabilitation of 15 ADUs through the proposed amnesty program. 7 | GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS
178 AMENDEDDRAFT#2 FOR PUBLICREVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT This page intentionally left blank
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-1 APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT INPUT
Community engagement is a fundamental ethos of the Town of Portola Valley. Since the Town was incorporated in 1964, the community has prioritized resident participation in the development of public policy. The Town has an extensive resident committee system that makes recommendations to the Town Council on a broad range of issues. That approach has been applied to the Housing Element update. The update process is an opportunity to address what has happened before and look to the future to decide how the community will change throughout the 8-year RHNA cycle.
In addition to conversations focused on Portola Valley, the 21 Elements working group provided additional opportunities for community input. 21 Elements is a multi‐year, multi‐ phase collaboration between all San Mateo County jurisdictions, along with partner agencies and stakeholder organizations, which aims to support jurisdictions in developing, adopting, and implementing local housing policies and programs. Let's Talk Housing is a collaborative effort between all 21 jurisdictions in San Mateo County focused on increasing awareness of and participation in the Housing Element update process. The 21 Elements working group organized an additional series of introductory meetings about the Housing Element update attended by more than 1,000 community members countywide, an All About RHNA webinar, four Stakeholder Listening Sessions that convened more than 30 groups, and a four-part Creating an Affordable Future webinar series to help educate community members about local housing issues.
The Town held many public meetings to discuss various aspects of the Housing Element Update (to date, 15 Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee meetings, two Focus Group meetings, two Community-wide meetings, two Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees meetings, 10 Planning Commission meetings, and 11 Town Council meetings). During the Housing Element update process, the Town posted information on the Town’s website, social media, distributed information through the Town’s e-Notification system with over 450 subscribers and posted information on the Portola Valley Forum, an active list serve with over 3,600 members. Public meetings related to the Housing Element Update included the following:
▪ April 13, 2021 | Countywide Community Meeting
▪ April 22, 2021 | Countywide Community Meeting
▪ August 16, 2021 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #1: What is A Housing Element and Why is it Important?
▪ September 20, 2021 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #2:
Existing Housing Element Organization, Housing Affordability Income Categories, Demographic and Housing Trends, Values, and Decorum
▪ September 27, 2021 | 21 Elements Countywide Listening Session #1 (Fair Housing) APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-2 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ October 14, 2021 | Portola Valley Community Meeting #1 ▪ October 18, 2021 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #3: Sites Selection Possible Scenarios
▪ October 18, 2021 | 21 Elements Countywide Listening Session (Housing Advocates) ▪ November 1, 2021 | 21 Elements Countywide Listening Session (Builders/Developers) ▪ November 15, 2021 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #4: ADU Presentation
▪ October-December 2021 | 21 Elements 4-part Let’s Talk Housing Webinar ▪ January 11, 2022 | Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees: Housing Element Update ▪ January 18, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #5: Wildfire Resilience with Guest Speakers
▪ January 31, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #6:
Affiliated Housing Discussion and SB 9 Ordinance
▪ February 22, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #7:
Housing Sites Inventory and Woodside Fire Protection District Discussion ▪ February 28, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #8:
Housing Element Survey Summary and Sites Inventory Discussion ▪ March 21, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #9: Policies and Programs Discussion
▪ March 23, 2022 | Town Council Meeting: Workplan, Priorities, Timing ▪ April 18, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #10:
Constraints, Sites Inventory, and AFFH Policies and Programs ▪ April 19, 2022 | Portola Valley ADU Focus Group
▪ April 21, 2022 | Portola Valley Opt-In Site Selection Focus Group ▪ May 2, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #11: Sites Inventory Discussion
▪ May 9, 2022 | Portola Valley Community Meeting #2
▪ May 16, 2022 | Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees: Housing Element Update Process ▪ May 24, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #12: Review Partial Draft Housing Element Update
▪ June 15, 2022 | Planning Commission Meeting: Review Draft Housing Element Update ▪ June 20, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #13: Review Draft Housing Element
▪ June 29, 2022 | Planning Commission Study Session: Review Draft Housing Element ▪ July 13, 2022 | Town Council Meeting: Review Draft Housing Element APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-3 ▪ August 15, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #14: Review Draft Housing Element
▪ October 19, 2022 | Planning Commission Study Session: Review Proposed Zoning Code Amendments to Implement the Housing Element Part 1
▪ November 2, 2022 | Planning Commission Study Session: Review Proposed Zoning Code Amendments to Implement the Housing Element Part 2
▪ November 10, 2022 | Portola Valley Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meeting #15:
Review Draft Housing Element
▪ November 16, 2022 | Planning Commission Meeting: Review Comments in IS/MND ▪ November 30, 2022 | Planning Commission Meeting: Housing Element Update and Implementing Actions and Draft Zoning Code Amendments Part 3 ▪ December 7, 2022 | Planning Commission Meeting: Housing Element Update and Implementing Actions and Draft Zoning Code Amendments Part 4 ▪ December 14, 2022 | Town Council Meeting: Housing Element Update ▪ January 24, 2023 | Planning Commission Meeting: Housing Element Update and Associated Actions
▪ January 25, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Housing Element Update and Schedule of Associated Zoning Code Amendments
▪ February 8, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Sunrise Provision of Housing Element ▪ February 15, 2023 | Planning Commission Meeting: Adoption of Resolution Providing a Recommendation that the Town Council Adopt the Housing Element IS/MND ▪ March 6, 2023 | Planning Commission Meeting: Adoption of Resolution Providing a Recommendation that the Town Council Adopt the Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments
▪ March 15, 2023 | Town Council Study Session: Housing Element Draft #3, Conforming General Plan Amendments and IS/MND
▪ March 22, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Resolution Adopting the Housing Element IS/MND and MMRP
▪ March 29, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Resolution Adopting the Housing Element IS/MND and MMRP
▪ May 10, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Adopt Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments
▪ August 9, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Update on Housing Element Status and Next Steps
▪ September 6, 2023 | Planning Commission Meeting: Update on Housing Element Status and Next Steps
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-4 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ September 13, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Update on Housing Element Status and Next Steps
▪ October 10, 2023 | Town Council Meeting: Update on Housing Element Status and Next Steps
▪ December 20, 2023 | Planning Commission Meeting: Adoption of Resolution Providing a Recommendation that the Town Council Adopt the Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments
▪ January 10, 2024 | Town Council Meeting: Update on Housing Element Status and Next Steps
▪ January 24, 2024 | Town Council Meeting: Adopt Housing Element and Conforming General Plan Amendments
In 2020, the Town updated the Planning & Building Department section of the Town’s website to include a page with basic information about Housing Elements and the Town’s timeline and an invitation for people to sign up for a notification list to stay involved. In 2021, the Town added a new Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee page under Town Committees where all meeting minutes and agendas related to the Housing Element update are posted. The website is available here: https://www.portolavalley.net/government/town-committees/housingelement-committee. The website includes links and information regarding the project timeline, link to subscribe to updates, links to related documents and related websites, agenda packets and meeting minutes, zoom recordings, and Housing Element FAQ.
Approximately 5,000 mailers/postcards were distributed Town-wide in both March and June 2022 to encourage community involvement in
the housing element update process and to
provide comments on the Draft Housing
Element.
The Public Review Draft Housing Element was
posted on the Town’s website and distributed
broadly on June 8, 2022 for a 30-day review
period. During this time, the draft Housing
Element was advertised for public review and
comment.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-5 21 ELEMENTS / LET’S TALK HOUSING
21 Elements organized a Let’s Talk Housing series of countywide meetings about the Housing Element update and provided community members with an introduction of the Housing Element update and why it matters. More than 1,000 community members attended these meetings. Additionally, Let’s Talk Housing held an All About RHNA webinar and a countywide four‐part webinar series to help educate and inform San Mateo County residents and stakeholders on regional and local housing issues. The four‐part series took place on Zoom in fall of 2021, focusing on the following topics and how they intersect with the Bay Area’s housing challenges and opportunities:
▪ Why Affordability Matters
▪ Housing and Racial Equity
▪ Housing in a Climate of Change
▪ Putting it All Together for a Better Future
The series included speaker presentations, audience Q&A, breakout sessions for connection and debrief discussions. The sessions were advertised and offered in Spanish, Mandarin, and Cantonese, though participation in non‐English channels was limited.
Housing Element Update Webpage
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-6 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT The main takeaways identified during the Let’s Talk Housing dialogues are listed below:
Topic(s)
Housing affordability is a public health issue: Where we live impacts our health, economic equity, environmental and racial justice
The Three S’s: Supply, Stability and Subsidy: Increase housing supply, protect renters and vulnerable households by providing stability, fill the gaps with subsidies Implement strategies to promote climate‐ready housing
Source: 21 Elements.
In addition, Let’s Talk Housing sponsored four “listening sessions” with city and county staff and key stakeholders that convened more than 30 organizations and groups with regional experience. By focus area, the listening sessions included presentations and resources from the following:
Topic Organizations
Building market-rate or
affordable housing
▪ Center for Independence of Individuals with Disabilities ▪ Community Legal Services of East Palo Alto
▪ Housing Equality Law Project
▪ Legal Aid for San Mateo County
▪ Project Sentinel
▪ Housing Choices
▪ Root Policy Research
Addressing fair housing issues
▪ Housing Leadership Council
▪ Faith in Action
▪ Greenbelt Alliance
▪ San Mateo County Central Labor Council
▪ Peninsula for Everyone
▪ San Mateo County Association of Realtors
Advocating for affordable
housing
▪ MidPen Housing
▪ HIP Housing
▪ BRIDGE Housing
▪ Mercy Housing
▪ Habitat for Humanity – Greater SF
▪ Eden Housing
▪ Affirmed Housing
▪ The Core Companies
Providing housing services
▪ Daly City Partnership
▪ HIP Housing
▪ LifeMoves
▪ Mental Health Association of San Mateo County
▪ National Alliance on Mental Illness
▪ Ombudsman of San Mateo County
▪ Samaritan House San Mateo
▪ Youth Leadership Institute
▪ Abode Services
Source: 21 Elements.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-7
COMMUNITY-WIDE MEETINGS
In order to engage directly with the community, the Town held two (2) virtual community meetings on October 14, 2021, and May 9, 2022, as well as two (2) resident focus groups on April 19 and 21, 2022. In addition, the Town held multiple committee meetings open to the public for the Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee and Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees, as described below.
During the Housing Element update process, the Town posted information on the Town’s website, social media, distributed information through the Town’s e-Notification system with over 450 subscribers and posted information on the Portola Valley Forum, an active list serve with over 3,600 members. The Town also circulated flyers to local employers requesting they let their employees know of the community meetings and opportunities to provide input during the Housing Element update process.
COMMUNITY MEETINGS
In addition to the distribution networks described above, the Town distributed flyers containing the meeting registration link and a QR code, as well as information on joining the meeting by phone.
Community Meeting #1
The first community meeting occurred on October
14, 2021, from 6:00 to 7:30 pm on Zoom.
Participants were asked to pre-register through
EventBrite in order for staff and consultants to
anticipate attendance; the meeting link was
distributed to anyone interested in attending. In
total, 120 individuals pre-registered, and
approximately 70 attended the virtual workshop.
These numbers exclude staff, consultants, and
elected and appointed officials.
The meeting used breakout rooms and small inperson group discussions to gather community feedback. During breakout rooms discussions,
participants were encouraged to give feedback on
Portola Valley’s key housing needs and potential
solutions through the site inventory and new
policies and programs.
Councilmember Jeff Aalfs welcomed participants and provided a brief introduction to the project. Laura Russell (Planning & Building Director) walked attendees through the meeting program and shared a Zoom poll to collect anonymous demographic information. The demographic information is solely used to understand which members of the community are being reached, and who may be missing from participation. Of the 30 Zoom poll participants, APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-8 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT the majority were White (77%), between 50-69 years of age (60%), owned a home (83%), and had lived in Portola Valley for over 21 years (53%).
The consultant team then described the background and context for the Housing Element Update during the first half of the workshop. The presentation compared the state, county, and town’s demographics and housing needs; described State housing legislations; and provided an overview of the contents and requirements of the Housing Element. Attendees learned about the State mandate for the Town to plan for approximately 253 new housing units and understand criteria for selection of new housing sites. Following the presentation, Town staff and consultants facilitated six, 30-minute breakout groups of approximately 10 to 12 participants. Staff prepared four (4) questions to guide the breakout group discussions:
1. What are some of the Town’s key housing needs and challenges?
2. What ideas, policies, programs and suggestions do you have to meet the Town’s housing needs?
3. Would you rather see new units (aside from ADUs) spread throughout the Town or fewer projects in more concentrated locations?
4. Imagine it’s the year 2031. What does success look like with this Housing Element update? What words describe the housing in your community now?
After the breakout rooms convened, each facilitator gave a summary of their group’s discussion. Refer to the Community Meeting Comments Attachment #1 below, which includes a compilation of the feedback received from residents in response to the questions listed above. The PowerPoint presentation, recording, and meeting summary was also made available on the Town’s website: https://www.portolavalley.net/departments/planningbuilding-department/housing-element-update-for-2023-2031.
Community Meeting #2
The second community meeting occurred on May 9,
2022 from 7:00 to 8:30 pm on Zoom. While attendees
were initially asked to pre-register on Zoom, later
publication for the meeting provided the meeting link
to remove barriers to participation. The meeting was
attended by 139 participants, excluding staff,
consultants, and elected and appointed officials.
Community Meeting #2 summarized previous
community outreach and provided updates on the
selection of potential housing sites under the sites
inventory process. After a brief introduction from
Councilmember Jeff Aalfs, Laura Russell (Planning &
Building Director) walked attendees through the
meeting program and shared a Zoom poll to collect
anonymous demographic information. Of the 84
Zoom poll participants, the majority were White
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-9 (70%), between 50-69 years of age (56%), owned a home (93%), and lived in Portola Valley for over 21 years (55%). However, compared with the first meeting, there were more young people that attended and slightly more diverse attendees in terms of race and ethnicity (as shown in Table A-1).
TABLE A-1: COMMUNITY-WIDE MEETINGS DEMOGRAPHIC COMPARISON Demographic Information
Community Meeting #1
October 14, 2021
(30 Responses)
Community Meeting #2
May 9, 2022 (84 Responses)
What is your living situation?
Own 26 87% 78 93%
Rent 3 10% 2 2%
Live w/Friends or Family 1 3% 1 1%
Other 0 0% 3 4%
How long have you lived in Portola Valley?
0-5 years 5 17% 10 12%
6-10 years 2 7% 7 8%
11-20 years 6 20% 16 19%
21+ years 16 53% 46 55%
Don’t live here 1 3% 5 6%
What is your age?
18-29 0 0% 1 1%
30-49 2 7% 11 13%
50-69 18 60% 47 56%
70+ 10 33% 18 21%
Decline to Respond 0 0% 7 8%
Race and Ethnicity
Asian 0 0% 4 5%
Hispanic/Latino/x 0 0% 1 1%
White 23 77% 59 70%
Middle Eastern 1 3% 0 0%
Decline to Respond 6 20% 20 24%
Urban Planning Partners Zoom Poll Data, 2021 and 2022.
The consultant team then provided an overview of the Housing Element Update and summarized findings from previous community outreach and public meetings, including detailed feedback on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), based on community interest. The consultant team further described both the sites inventory process leading up to Community Meeting #2 and identified sites recommended by Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-10 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT Following the presentation, Town staff and consultants facilitated nine, 45-minute breakout groups of approximately 10 to 12 participants. Staff prepared four (4) questions to guide the breakout group discussions:
1. The Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee’s main priorities in site selection included:
▪ Safety criteria.
▪ Dispersing sites throughout the Town.
▪ Providing a voluntary/opt-in approach for rezoning single-family properties. ▪ Creating opportunities for affordable housing.
▪ Preserving existing businesses.
With these in mind, do you think these sites accomplish these priorities?
2. The Committee supports voluntary upzoning of single-family properties for up to 6 dwelling units/acre. What design features do you think would make a development compatible with the surrounding area?
3. For new multi-family development along Alpine Road in the scenic corridor, new zoning standards will be established. What specific things should be considered as they’re developed?
4. For ADUs/JADUs, what other improvements would you suggest? What other assistance would help you through the process? Current improvements under consideration include:
▪ Town revise handouts and create office hours.
▪ Establish easy process for JADUs.
▪ Match low-income renters with owners.
▪ Amnesty program.
After the breakout rooms convened, each facilitator gave a summary of their group’s discussion. Refer to the Community Meeting Comments Attachment 1, below, that includes a compilation of the feedback received from residents in response to the questions listed above.
The PowerPoint presentation, recording, and meeting summary was also made available on the Town’s website: https://www.portolavalley.net/departments/planning-buildingdepartment/housing-element-update-for-2023-2031.
FOCUS GROUPS
The AHHEC held two focus groups to explore strategies for housing production that community members had expressed interest or support in.
The first focus group, on April 19, 2022, included approximately 66 participants who were interested in or had experience building ADUs/JADUs in Portola Valley. The Town advertised the focus group by direct mail, eNotifications, and the Town newsletter. Any participants interested in attending were allowed to join. In breakout groups, participants were asked about potential barriers and solutions for ADU projects, and how ADUs were intended to be used.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-11 The second focus group, on April 21, 2022, asked approximately 72 participants to provide feedback on a proposed strategy to voluntarily upzone individual properties. The Town advertised this focus group by sending physical mailers to owners of properties potentially eligible for such a strategy (i.e., greater than 1 acre, not located in VHFHSZs, access to adequate evacuation routes)—in total, 594 parcels. The focus groups started with a brief presentation on the Housing Element and density and ended with an open Q&A. Participants who provided their emails were later sent an online survey to gauge their level of interest in a potential upzoning process for their property.
The agendas and recordings for these two focus group meetings were made available on the Town’s website: https://www.portolavalley.net/housingelement
COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee Meetings
The Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee (AHHEC) was formed to provide recommendations to the Town Council on the Housing Element Update, explore options to minimize the impacts of additional housing units, maximize public participation, and communicate information on the Committee’s progress and recommendations to residents. AHHEC members included representatives from the Town Council; Planning Commission; Race and Equity Committee; Architectural and Site Control Commission; and community members.
From August 2021 to December 2022, the AHHEC met at least monthly for approximately 3-6 hours. Meetings were open to the public, and an opportunity for public comment was provided. An average of 40 to over 150 attendees participated at each meeting. Members of the public provided many comments during oral communications and related to the specific topics discussed.
Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees Meetings
According to Town Council direction issued at its April 28, 2021 meeting, planning staff invited committees interested in participating in the Housing Element Update to delegate one to two members to join an Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees. The purpose of the Ad Hoc Committee was to provide topical comments and questions throughout the Housing Element Update process. Ad Hoc Committee members included members of the Sustainability; Parks and Recreation; Trails and Paths; Conservation; Bicycle, Pedestrian and Traffic Safety; Wildfire Preparedness; and Emergency Preparedness Committees.
The Ad Hoc Committee of Town Committees held two meetings on January 11 and May 16, 2022, both of which had public participation. Meetings included staff updates on the Housing Element’s progress and opportunities for Committee member feedback and public comment, lasting approximately 2.5 hours.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-12 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
AFFH COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INPUT
A resident survey was conducted by Root Policy Research for the jurisdictions in San Mateo County to support the AFFH analysis of Housing Elements. It explores residents’ housing, affordability, and neighborhood challenges and experiences with displacement and housing discrimination. See Section 3, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing and Appendix C, Portola Valley Fair Housing Assessment, for a discussion of the survey findings.
The Town received feedback from the 21 Elements Equity Advisory Committee and incorporated policies aimed at populations that have been historically underrepresented in Town. Additionally, the Town made a direct effort to solicit comments from employees that work in the community for the survey (discussed below), community meetings, and to comment on the Draft Housing Element.
HOUSING PREFERENCES AND PRIORITIES SURVEY
The Community Housing Survey, opened from February 10, 2022, until February 21, 2022, allowed the Town to gain a better understanding of community values and priorities.
Feedback from the survey served as a foundation for future conversations about possible solutions and housing policies and helped the Town identify housing preferences, needs, and future housing opportunities in the city.
In total, the Town received 707 responses from both property owners and employees (see Attachment #2 for survey results). When asked about home types to meet the RHNA target, participants overwhelming preferred single family homes, ADUs, and clusters of small cottages, and generally supported population- or purpose-specific housing as well.
Townhomes received modest support, and multi-family received the lowest level of support.
When asked about factors to consider in planning for multi-family housing, participants supported: avoiding areas of high fire and geologic risk; prioritizing affordable housing; and providing incentives for ADUs and rezoning at institutions and businesses.
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT COMMENTS SUMMARY
In December 2025, the Town published a subsequent revised Housing Element for public review on the Town's website from December 23, 2025, through January 14, 2026. The Town held a Town Council Meeting on December 4, 2025, a Planning Commission meeting on January 7, 2026, and another Town Council meeting on January 14, 2026, to receive comments from the public and decision-makers. During these meetings, oral and written comments were submitted. Below is a summary of key public comments and concerns:
▪ Support removing Dorothy Ford Field housing site and replacing it with the three new sites of Village Square, Christ Church, and Skyline Open Space. ▪ Support keeping Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space as its originally intended use. ▪ Support to increase the Mixed-Use High Density Residential designation and zoning district density range from 20 to 23 du/ac to 20 to 25 du/ac.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-13 ▪ Concern of the Village Square site and potential future development impacting existing local businesses on the site or neighboring residential units. ▪ Concern of the Skyline Open Space site related to its feasibility. ▪ Recommendation to address certain grammar and spelling errors.
These comments were discussed at both the Planning Commission meeting and Town Council meetings. Below is a summary of changes based on these comments:
▪ Updated the Mixed-Use High Density Residential designation and zoning district density range from 20 to 23 du/ac to 20 to 25 du/ac.
▪ Addressed grammar and spelling errors.
In December 2023, the Town published a subsequent revised Housing Element for public review on the Town's website from December 4 through December 11, 2023. The purpose is to allow expedited review of the Housing Element prior to hearings by the Planning Commission and Town Council prior to the January 31, 2024 deadline. This will allow the Commission and Council to know if the proposed changes to the Housing Element fully address the comments in the July 25, 2023 letter submitted to the Town by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) that are necessary to bring the HE into substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law. The Town held a Planning Commission meeting on December 20, 2023, and two Town Council meetings on January 10 and 24, 2024 to receive comments from the public and decision-makers. Any comments received during this review period will be submitted to HCD and summarized in the final Housing Element. Below is a summary of changes based on these comments:
▪ Section 4. Constraints:
o Update the Town’s environmental review process to issue formal determinations of CEQA exemptions within 30 days of an application being deemed complete effective immediately
o Adding a statement about a draft Joint Work Plan “7+13” with the Woodside Fire Protection District.
▪ Section 6. Adequate Sites:
o Update status of EIR for the Standford Wedge Project
o Change the designation and number of residential units for the 4394 Alpine Road Housing Site to be Mixed-Use and at least two residential units at the lower-income level.
▪ Section 7. Goals, Policies, and Programs:
o Update Program 1-1c with alternate language around the Affiliated Housing Program and objective design standards.
o Update Program 1-3, Opt-in Housing Diversification Program to allow up to six (6) dwelling units per parcel (previously only up to four (4) were permitted) APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-14 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT In March 2023, prior to resubmitting to the HCD,
the revised Housing Element was available for the
required 7-day public review period on the Town’s
website and in person beginning March 2, 2023.
The Town held a Planning Commission meeting on
March 6, 2023 and two Town Council meetings on
March 15 and 29, 2023 to receive comments from
the public and decision-makers. Below is a
summary of changes based on these comments:
▪ Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space:
o Replace all references to Dorothy Ford Field
and Open Space with Dorothy Ford Park
and Open Space.
o Change proposed rezoning classification of
Vacant Portion of Dorothy Ford Park and
Open Space housing site to “General Plan
Amendment to Gateway Classification.”
o Change proposed zoning classification and
density from Multi-Family 5-20 du/ac to
Gateway Multi-Family 3-20 du/ac.
o Revision to density of 4394 Alpine Road site from 5-20 du/ac to 3-20 du/ac. ▪ Revision of development standards for the Ladera Church housing site. ▪ Strengthen setback language for ephemeral creek/drainage for 4370 Alpine Road housing site.
▪ Opt-In Housing Diversification program:
o Change all references from Opt-In housing Program to Opt-In Housing Diversification Program.
o Additional language added to clarify desired project types. ▪ Additional development standards added to 4394 Alpine Road housing site. ▪ Three additions to clarify the Gateway land use classification and the “sunset” concept for the Dorothy Ford Park and Open Space housing site. Includes a new Housing Element program to implement Topic #1 (Housing Site Inventory Follow Up) from the Hasko and Taylor Preliminary Post-Adoption Plan.
Consistent with State law, a public review of the first draft of Portola Valley’s Housing Element was made available to the public on the Town’s website and in person beginning June 8, 2022.
The 30 day-public review period ended July 8, 2022. During this review period, a Town-wide mailer was distributed to all residents to encourage public comments on the Draft Housing Element and participation at the upcoming Planning Commission and Town Council meetings.
During these meetings and 30-day review period, a total of 87 oral comments were provided APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-15 and 121 written comments were submitted. Below is a summary of key public comments and concerns:
▪ Protect existing open space and parks, including the Dorothy Ford Field housing site. ▪ Remove the Opt-in Rezoning Program.
▪ Preserve the Equestrian Center and remove the Glen Oaks housing site. ▪ Protect the Town’s scenic corridor.
▪ Create a new “Gateway” district for the Dorothy Ford Field and Open Space site and adjacent Ladera Church site (located across the street). ▪ Include a “sunrise provision” so that development of the Dorothy Ford Field and Glen Oaks sites are a last resort if the Town is not meeting their RHNA. ▪ Increase the ADU/JADU target levels and put a greater emphasis on JADUs in the Housing Element.
▪ Reduce the Town’s proposed RHNA buffer.
These issues were discussed at length during the Town Council meeting on July 13 and ultimately the Council kept the projected number of ADU/JADUs as proposed in the Draft Housing Element and modified the Opt-in Rezoning Program. They also recommended developing a Gateway land use classification for the Dorothy Ford Field and Open Space site and the Ladera Church site. The site will be planned with an overall view towards preserving the Town’s gateway feeling and scenic corridor, maintaining the baseball field, and preserving the two large Oak trees if possible.
A subcommittee of the Town Council was formed to further discuss whether the recommended RHNA buffer could be adjusted and to explore the possibilities for keeping some equestrian uses at Glen Oaks while accommodating housing. After discussions with Stanford (the property owner) and the Equestrian Center about feasible development of the site, the subcommittee decreased the number of proposed units on the Glen Oaks site from 29 to 16 units (by removing 14 above moderate units) which reduced the overall buffer from 21% to 16%.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-16 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ATTACHMENT 1: COMMUNITY MEETING COMMENTS
Community Meeting #1
Breakout Room Discussion Icebreaker Question: What is one thing you value/love about Portola Valley?
▪ Rural open space
▪ Low density/lots of trees and open
space
▪ Natural beauty, excellent school
system and proximity to peninsula
▪ Echo all these sentiments and
recognize that we have some real
challenges that we need affordable
housing
▪ Knowing my neighbors and having
relationships to talk through problems
▪ Natural environment; environment
comes first
▪ Hiking
▪ Neighbors
▪ Rural quality
▪ Quiet
▪ Great place for family
▪ Open spaces
▪ Peace and calm
▪ Nature revived with COVID
▪ Rural nature/accessibility to outdoors
▪ PV is convenient to PA and MP
▪ Sense of community
▪ Sense of community
▪ Uniqueness of the area within Silicon
Valley but close amenities
▪ Natural beauty
▪ Hiking and bike trails
▪ Schools
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-17 Question 1: What are some of the Town’s key housing needs and challenges? ▪ Access to Housing
o Overall lack of affordable housing
o People that work in PV should be able to live here; applaud Woodside Priory’s housing efforts; increasing housing for seniors, interested in other ways to increase housing for people who contribute
o Very little affordable housing for all but the most wealthy, difficult for people who work in town, younger families and seniors with fixed incomes to live here o Fire fighters/teachers/grocery store workers
o Like to see firefighters to be able to live in PV
o Want to know if town continues to support programs for teachers/public safety workers to live here
o Often some lower wage workers don’t want to live here – younger people want more active area – we don’t necessarily want to adjust housing o Key needs: teachers
o used to have teachers/fire fighters living here, but have created an unfair labor market – do these people want to live in PV anyway?
o Need housing for populations with special needs
o Concern about the cost of housing for young families, firefighters, teachers and other essential workers
o Housing for seniors to age in place that is affordable and allows to remain in PV o School district helped people buy homes
o Housing needs are key – folks that work at the Sequoias have to drive a great distance to PV b/c there is no housing they can afford close by. This contributes to the traffic. o One group member said she wouldn’t be able to afford to live in PV without living with family. We need housing to be inclusive and accessible. o Finding existing homes that are accessible are hard to find o Need a place for people to live for those that work in PV (especially given our lack of public transportation)
▪ Concerns about Infrastructure/Resources
o If there’s no vacant land, how will we provide new housing? o With this much housing, when will it reach capacity?
o Infrastructure needs/issues like water, evacuation routes, and more schools all cost money
▪ Environmental Hazards
o PV is in a high fire danger area. #1 priority is for people to be safe for residents APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-18 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT o Fire dangers, limited amount of available land given scenic corridors, cost of building in this area
o Drought, fire danger
o Challenges: safety issues – fire safety/don’t have fixed evacuation plan – has to be included
o Demands for housing. The challenge is the state telling us what to do especially with SB 9 & SB 10, safety, and wildfire concerns and any density o Worried about getting out of Town in case of wildfire – especially worried about how Stanford Wedge project will exacerbate the problem because of added traffic o Concerned about adding new housing in general and traffic impacts – believes housing should be dispersed throughout the Town
o Fire safety – lives on north side of Town, really only one way out in case of a wildfire ▪ Community Character
o Environmental constraints are a challenge – how can we meet our RHNA and maintain everything we love about PV?
o Want to not impact rural nature of the area
o SF has been essential even though has history of discrimination ▪ Opportunities for ADUs
o Tried to house adult daughter in ADU who worked nearby, but were too short on minimum lot area required by Town – should consider on case-by-case basis to facilitate more housing
o Should not isolate the lower income housing to only one area – should be disbursed o Increasing density hasn’t been tracked by town – need to be able to count ADUs toward RHNA – town said they couldn’t count them – concerned we have added a lot of ADUs, but we don’t track them; some were illegal and now have become legal o Was planning to do ADU and asked how many had been built but couldn’t get an answer – Town needs to figure this out
o It’s clear from the data that providing for ADUs is relatively easy way to build some extra housing, but the regulations are very excessive and inconsistent with process and follow through. Working on this would be a way to have lesser impact on meeting housing needs or demands, right now is very difficult.
▪ Access to Transportation
o Lack of public transportation
o Transportation – only 2 roads in an out, makes getting out a little more challenging o Transportation – no/little public transportation; 1 bus/day o Don’t support public buses coming through – PV was envisioned as a different type of community – almost no places like it left
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-19 ▪ Feedback on Housing Element Process
o Addressing housing needs will be a slow process, but believes we’ll be able to meet the challenge
o Building more housing doesn’t mean the cost of housing will go down o Had at least 3 meetings about housing – have been discouraged – what residents said wasn’t property communicated to Council –
o It’s not the residents who decide who should live in PV o Never had a discussion of what has happened
o Challenge = fighting state’s socialistic agenda
o Ladera (outside PV) had discriminatory effects
o How do we assess what our housing needs actually are? Do we respond to the affordability levels the State wants without knowing who wants to live here? o Disagree entirely with RHNA and it should have been challenged by the Town; biggest concern is safety and geological and RHNA; the denser the housing, the more susceptible we are to wildfire danger
Question 2: What ideas, policies, programs and suggestions do you have to meet the Town’s housing needs?
▪ Multi-Family/Affordable Housing
o Can’t meet RHNA without multi-family zoning
o Would love small MF housing – at churches
o Create another group living situation or extend the Sequoias (very successful example in PV)
o More affordable housing programs
▪ Opportunities for ADUs
o Provide pre-approved plans and don’t make it so ADUs have to match the character of the primary residences. Also make it easier to remove a tree by requiring the homeowner to put money in the bank for planting future trees. o ADUs help! Need to help streamline the permit process. New construction will help – need to fast track the process and make redevelopment more flexible. o Question about how do you make ADU’s affordable?
o Discussion that ADU’s have been hard to build in Town. Also noted, that built a home office and the Town required verification that it would not be used an ADU o ADU’s are helpful to achieve RHNA but not necessarily to achieve affordable housing o ADU what are actual numbers that could meet RHNA requirements o Much more interested in using ADUs to meet this demand, housing is extremely expensive and many of the properties have several acres to utilize o Figure out how many ADUs have been built
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-20 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT o ADUs – people can’t get permits/inspections
o Agree – don’t understand why ADUs aren’t added
o We want to upgrade the ADU that came with the house, but was told we need to wait until 2023
▪ Environmental Hazards/Safety
o Updating the Safety Element where we could provide input on evacuation routes and guide where we could put houses and high fire. There’s nowhere to build right now o Addressing wildfire and water needs first. There needs to be more discussion combining the two
o Stanford wedge project – great deal of danger because parcel is so steep; story poles didn’t show all the buildings
o In high fire danger area
o Fire safety – most people lost their insurance because the Town didn’t…. ▪ Feedback on Housing Element Process
o Form a coalition with other similar towns such as Mill Valley and present ideas to help educate lawmakers in Sacramento
o Get the state out of planning housing as a whole. Don’t think there’s a shortage. o Disappointed in today’s presentation – didn’t hear about disadvantages of building – such a one-sided event
o Does HE have to make sure units get built?
o What came out in PV forum – we were only town in SM county that didn’t ask for any relief from RHNA – all others asked for reduced numbers. o Town didn’t address issue with the state at all – PV is along many miles of parkland o Town isn’t providing realistic approaches
o Town is being sneaky
o Have met total RHNA, but not specific categories –
o Town has spent so much money with HIP and HEART – many are renting a room o Very frustrating
Question 3: Would you rather see new units (aside from ADUs) spread throughout the Town or fewer projects in more concentrated locations?
▪ Mix of Both
o This depends on the demographic we are trying to cater to. Woodside Priory (?) is a good example
o Look at both options – some concentrated housing and others spread out. More senior housing is needed. The Sequoias has about 200 units. We need more “affiliated housing” for care workers at the Sequoias.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-21 o Spread out personally, but for safety: everything new would be concentrated near exit routes
▪ More Concentrated
o Fewer locations and close to the exit routes
o Concentrated for walkability and proximity to transit o Would like PV to be more walkable with mixed-use buildings with retail on the bottom.
More opportunities to walk and bike are needed.
▪ More Dispersed
o The condo building with 2 stories and 6 units in PV is a good example of more dense housing that fits in with the area
o Build more clustered/ranch style housing with shared facilities where vacant land is available (although it’s hard to find!). We don’t want anything to look denser than it is today
o No high-rise is desired
o Need to preserve scenic corridors
▪ Other Comments
o Teachers, firefighters, etc. need more options. In 1968, there were 900 children in PV and the population was mostly young families in the 1960s! o How does State law maintain/know the cost that landlords are charging? How will they know that landlords aren’t jacking up the prices? Deed restrictions? Question 4: Imagine it’s the year 2031. What does success look like with this Housing Element update? What words describe the housing in your community now? ▪ Community Character
o It looks like it does now
o New housing fits into the existing Town environment, it’s not too dense, less than four stories high
o Town’s parkland and recreation areas are intact
o New housing blends into the landscape and allows a good mix of people to live in Town
▪ Housing Location/Options
o Housing is built along Alpine and Portola roads, (location of Town’s flattest land and closest to public transit)
o Housing is located at the corner of Alpine and Portola roads to create more of a hub; there’s apartments or condos next to Roberts Market
o Community room for the elderly community, there are more places for seniors to meet, housing that’s walkable
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-22 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT o There’s housing that serves populations in need such as seniors, disabled people and staff housing because pure affordable housing projects are difficult o There’s a good variety of housing options to meet different needs o Hopes in light of SB9 and SB10 that common sense will prevail ▪ Safety
o It’s safer, with an emphasis on fire safety
o Wants new housing not to put new (or existing) residents in danger o Given fire danger, hopes the town is still standing; want to see infrastructure improvements
▪ Other Comments
o More public transportation
o Taken a fresh look at underutilized office space – made decisions based on what’s changed over the years and looked outside the box (especially in light of Covid, workfrom-home) Community Meeting #2
Question 1: The Ad Hoc Housing Element Committee’s main priorities in site selection included safety criteria, dispersing sites throughout the Town, providing a voluntary/opt-in approach for rezoning single-family properties, creating opportunities for affordable housing, and preserving existing businesses. With these in mind, do you think these sites accomplish these priorities? ▪ Comments on Site Selection
o The sites that have been chosen indeed meet all the criteria o Concerned about scenic/rural community
o Wants a longer-term approach to how we want our community to look and be, not just how to build more houses. Do we want to be more transit friendly? Pedestrian friendly?
o This seems like a fire drill to find more places for people to live o But we have the opportunity to make PV more of a 21st century community o Those who are most fearful of damage to their property/investment people are trying to restrict housing to only certain parts of town. The entire town needs to be considered. Baseball Field should not be eliminated or moved. Don’t like state mandates but does like having people of varying incomes living in the town. Need to look at good of town to people generations coming after. ▪ Comments on Site Distribution
o Want units spread more around town
o One person supported the dispersed approach to locating multi-family housing. o Agreed with dispersal of sites
o Concerns regarding dispersal
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-23 o Sites have been dispersed well
o Seems we rushed to a conclusion with the sites discussion starting in March. We could achieve more dispersal of sites.
▪ Comments on Opt-In Approach to Upzoning
o Speakers not in support of the single family upzoning o The opt-in program should be time limited
o Don’t agree with including voluntary or involuntary upzoned sites o One person felt the voluntary upzoning process felt ad-hoc and not well thought out.
Several people had concerns that the opt-in sites included too much wildfire risk. o Several speakers concerned about the Nathhorst site and Bear Gulch sites due to congestion in the area
o Opt in approach is spot zoning, R1 is single family and R3 is 20/acre. But what about R2 which is duplex? Wants small cottages around that area to not decimate the trees. o Opt in upzoning is concerning to some that these areas will pop up all over the place o Don’t agree with Upzoning at all or volunteer Upzoning which is spot zoning which can hurt the neighbors
o Not wanting Upzoning-- The buffer can go down to 15% yet we are bringing it to 20%, wants 15%
▪ Affordable Housing
o Creating opportunities for affordable housing
o Supportive of affordable housing in town
o General Plan says affordable housing is meant for seniors and workers within town, not others from outside community…
o When partnering with an affordable housing developer—are there assurances of amenities/services in what’s being developed? For example, afterschool activities, additional facilities. Is there a way to make sure these developments with amenities can be developed close other affordable housing so there’s a concentration of services and facilities people can take advantage of? Wants to make sure housing committee is thinking of this.
▪ ADUs
o Need to pursue more ADUs
o Are JADUs on our radar? Need to clarify methodology for the number of ADUs we are counting.
o Prefer approach to ADU / SB9 units (used Woodside/ Atherton – example) ▪ Town-Owned Properties
o Discussion of using the community center (public lands) as an option for housing o More Town-owned properties are needed
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-24 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Nathhorst
o The Nathhorst Triangle is too concentrated and those sites are too far into Town for evacuation.
o Several speakers concerned about the Nathhorst site and Bear Gulch sites due to congestion in the area
▪ Glen Oaks
o Intrigued by Glen Oaks
o Glenoaks would not be able to serve the teachers or firemen or police, would only be the staff of Stanford. Wants the goal to be for workforce ▪ Ford Field
o Several people cited concerns about evacuations if the Ford Field site were to be developed
o Ford Field is problematic if a fire comes from Ladera or 280. References Zeke's [wildfire consultant] presentation
o Ford Field seems like a good site. Hopes the Town will do less than 50 and keep one the oak trees. Maybe doable if they combine with the Ladera church property. o Some things like the oak trees and the green corridor are very important to the towns history and we shouldn’t shove aside, hope we can do both building housing including at Ford Field and keep the heritage trees
o Could we move the baseball field somewhere else so we can develop more housing there?
o Constraints were identified before determining 50 units can be built there. However, constraints are self-imposed. Town has control and can eliminate them or reduce such as the scenic corridor setback. Ford Field itself is deed restricted but Town can go to state arguing the housing affordability crisis as reason to make it developable if additional land is needed.
o Need to preserve the oak trees on Ford Field
▪ Parking/Traffic
o Several people noted Portola Valley already has more traffic than it used to, and in certain sections of town it can be hard for families during school pick-up and drop-off times
o Concerns about traffic associated with higher density o One person was concerned that the Stanford Wedge site would be developed without sufficient parking, and that residents/users would park in the Ford Field development (the implication being there wouldn’t be enough parking for both sites) o Concerned about the amount of density and not for the parking along the scenic corridor, put the parking in the back perhaps
o Not happy about parking spaces intruding into scenic corridor and wildlife APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-25 ▪ Safety
o Main priorities should be wildfire and soils
o School safety a key
o Fire is a concern either way. We don't want to create a bigger problem. Not convinced it is safe to add people.
o Committee is working with hands tied behind its back. Safety Element is incomplete o Concerns about safety especially as the fire map is old, and we don’t yet have the evacuation study available & we need to ensure everyone can get out in a state of emergency
o Concerns regarding safety criteria, awaiting fire maps, concerns regarding informed site choice property
o General concerns about fire risk and evacuation routes o How do we know safety criteria will be safe enough?
▪ Density
o One person hoped the committee would think holistically about the rezoning process and consider the entirety of the impact to the town
o 3.2-acre property in Westridge should be considered. A group needs to go in depth about density bonus. Letter from Don Bullard about density – increased density could lead to loss of life.
o Concerned about high density. Number of units seem drastically larger. Own remodel process was painstaking and there were various fire safety concerns. Hypocritical for town to have these discussions right now.
▪ Other
o Only need 253 units. 304 units have been identified without touching the Nathhorst triangle.
o Want to preserve Parkside Grille
o Wants the maps to be better with roads on them and with the sites next to the A, B, Cs
o Fan of economic diversity in town
o Structures need to have sprinkler systems installed. Committee is doing a commendable job.
Question 2: The Committee supports voluntary upzoning of single-family properties for up to 6 dwelling units/acre. What design features do you think would make a development compatible with the surrounding area?
▪ Comments on Opt-In Approach to Upzoning
o There was an off-topic conversation about why the committee was pursuing an opt-in approach to upzoning. Council member Jocelyn explained that the approach came out of feedback received from residents that they didn’t like the idea of parcels being APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-26 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT upzoned without the consent of landowners. A participant asked if the committee has considered any downsides to an opt-in approach. The council member didn’t know of any downsides.
o Opposed to the spot zoning, don’t want next door neighbor to spot zone and ignore what we want. Could bring down values of neighbor’s homes. Trees can’t cover that. o Need guardrails for upzoning. Is it for a certain size? Is every SF lot eligible? Which properties? Support if only certain properties/parcels. o Does this voluntary upzoning include mixed use? How do you deal with mixed use (for example in Nathhorst Triangle)? Would anyone want a saloon or Alpine in their backyard? Probably not. Don’t want SF being upzoned to mixed use. What control would town retain to peace of homes is preserved.
o We’re not against housing in town, we’re against voluntary upzoning, “rips apart community” “race to the bottom”
o Correction on chart: it is 4370 Alpine not Nathhorst
o Support for selected parcels. As long as it doesn’t violate safety. No problem with amount of sq footage allowed, basic safety protected. Community will be enriched. o Up zoning – “terrible thing”
o Voluntary up zoning needs to be removed
o If it can’t be removed, there needs to be a more thoughtful process for what sites gets to opt into this.
o First people to up zone make profit. Rest of the neighbors have to deal with the construction and sense of neighborhood. This will pit neighbor against neighbor o At this point it seems better to scrap it then rush it ▪ Comments on Proposed Density
o If upzoning to SF to 6 units per acre is allowed- what control do town/neighbors/ planning commission retain in terms of size, location, height, fire safety? Hard to answer this question in abstract without knowing the constraints. Do not want 6 DUs/acre as law without town having ability to control any variables that make the community nice.
o Wanted to know how many square feet new homes would be allowed to construct o 90 Bear Gulch should only have one additional home
o People that are coming to service the properties, more people coming into town with more dense housing
o Dense housing isn’t as peaceful
o Doesn’t think it matters if it’s 4 or 6
o 4 or 6 questions is relatively mute
o 6 dwellings on one acre are too many
o 6 units per acre too many for privacy and other reasons o Concern over 6 units/acre, consider 4
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-27 o Maybe there’s only 2 buildings on the acre, triplex
o Would people be more accepting of this if it’s six?
▪ Parking/Traffic
o Sites include parking
o Parking is an important thing to consider for these prospective developments o Cars are important to consider when development
o Adding 250 homes to the town will at least 500 more cars o Concern about parking and traffic
o Concerned about the number of cars. Shawnee pass is a narrow road. Concerned about egress... both parking and travel. Concerned about people being able to get out.
Took 20 minutes to get to her driveway. Can we add roads for egress? Are there options for additional lanes?
o Design feature suggestions: limiting number of driveways accessing road they’re coming off. Is it possible to design for 1 or two driveway entrances so all the homes come through this/these 1-2 driveways?
o Town is doing an evacuation traffic study
▪ Community Character
o Openness
o will seem unnatural to have density next to other properties o Unobtrusive to the neighbors
o People choose Portola valley because of the privacy/peace o Need to preserve the scenic corridor
o Appropriate landscaping to soften or hide the existing buildings – would help with the rural aspect and feeling of the community. Add trees, plants, etc. to shield the view from the neighbors and public would make the building features less important o new units look nice and fit in to the landscape
o Keep a rural community feel
▪ Typology
o Potentially townhouses
o Cottage/townhome style architectural preferred
▪ Height
o Single story
o Height should be kept to 2 stories
o Encourage 1-2 stories (especially If we are providing the RHNA buffer) o Keep heights low profile, consider flat roofs
o Two story limits
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-28 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Setbacks
o Strong setbacks from adjacent properties
o Keep buildings away from neighboring properties
o Is setback
▪ Building Material
o Need to be tasteful with color schemes and materials of future development o Natural, Building material usage
▪ Lighting
o Lighting. No street lights.
o Night sky ordinance
o No common/lighting
o Lighting should not impact neighbors
▪ Other Suggested Standards
o There’s only 1 front door on each door
o Separation of structures and sprinklers are necessary o Intact single unit?
o Signage
o Septic (up-zoning options), water
o Noise ordinance (how do these interplay)
o Non-shared
o lots of pervious surfaces
▪ Precedents
o Woodside priori project is good example
o Woodland commons (on alpine road)
▪ Unrelated Comments
o More control in the General Plan. We need to follow the General Plan and be strict with its implementation.
o Maybe considering Public Lands?
o We’ll be sharing these breakout notes with the committee o Consolidating housing: why do we need 2 baseball fields? What if we just consolidate 2 fields into 1?
o For Nathhorst, the 20 du/ac is inappropriate
o For Affordable Housing, Ford Field should take care of what is needed but Density Bonus could add more units on other sites!
o Ford Field, 2 cars per unit
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-29 Question 3: For new multi-family development along Alpine Road in the scenic corridor, new zoning standards will be established. What specific things should be considered as they’re developed? ▪ Comments on Site Selection
o Convos between town and property owners are private- doesn’t give neighbors opportunity to comment
o Cannot destroy value of lifetime of savings by people who’ve lived in town for only a few years
o Use town-owned land that is not immediately adjacent to SF o Ad-hoc Committee member or Councilor said it’s best to save Nealy property for next housing element round. Odd. Why? A lot of squeezing making people in room nervous.
Spring down farm.
o Prioritize old established planning
o General plan prohibits multi-family development along alpine road o Ford field site is open space (per advice); concern regarding it as open space o Concerned regarding general plan
▪ Scenic Corridor
o Are not happy with the decision to put more density in the corridor. Can’t hide huge buildings with trees they’ll be too small
o Setbacks from alpine road
o Scenic corridor and mf are contradictory
o Might have to be in scenic corridor because it’s most accessible place to build multifamily housing o Need to protect scenic corridor- Jon will offer lot to town o Scenic corridor
o How do we design and plan to make scenic corridor stay as lovely as possible? o Maintain the scenic corridor setbacks and use landscaping to hide some of the new development
o Buildings should be setback from the street and maintain scenic corridor requirements
o Want view protections and better understand what people will see ▪ Traffic/Parking
o Parking (located front/back/tuck under?)
o Cars are not attractive to see
o If you can develop up to 36 units- where will cars go? o No parking in the scenic corridor. Put parking underneath or behind development o Resident expressed that they don’t want to be looking at a parking lot from their home o Concern about traffic, ford field, major entry and exit. Will create a bottleneck.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-30 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ▪ Creek
o Setbacks from riparian corridor
o Urban water ways
o Development is next to a stream. It's really important not to pollute the stream.
Landscaping shouldn't pollute streams
▪ Setbacks
o Consider setbacks, how to make entrance into PV as attractive as possible o Setbacks
o At Ford Field one participant suggested the buildings be move forward toward Alpine Rd with parking in the back
▪ Lighting
o People were interested in continuing to enforce the dark skies ordinance that limits nighttime light pollution
o Lighting
o Lighting
o Parking lot won’t have lighting. Liability to have unlit parking lot. o Reminder that only dim light is needed for safety
o Consider lighting
▪ Trees
o Need landscaping
o More trees
o Adding trees to buffer won’t be enough because it will take a long time for them to grow
o Also maintain the heritage trees and the feeling of the community to maintain the rural atmosphere
▪ Screening
o Screening, particularly natural screening, is important o Trash and utilities should be screened or enclosed so as not to be visible from the street
▪ Other Suggested Standards
o Open space/landscaping/trails
o Materials
o Articulation
o Height
o Sit quietly in the landscape. Doesn't like 3 story buildings. Height or heft shouldn't be taller than existing buildings. Have architectural guidelines.
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-31 ▪ Safety
o Evacuation route
o Need to understand geologic issues with building on orchard land o Fire department is not equipped to extinguish a fire in multifamily housing. ▪ Other comments
o Ownership options (would like this for affordable solutions) o Resident expressed that they’d love to see more young families moving to Portola Valley
Question 4: For ADUs/JADUs, what other improvements would you suggest? What other assistance would help you through the process?
▪ Amnesty Program
o All (suggestions) good. We should be strongly encouraging them. Particularly amnesty program
o Make use of ADUs/JADUs as much as possible. Amnesty program is important. Can't rely on ADUs alone.
o Need more clarity with Amnesty Program. What are the requirements and what can we include in the RHNA?
o Amnesty program important
o Amnesty program
o Support for the amnesty program
o Amnesty program is important. Her home had problems with water flow when new housing was created. Why not legalize existing units. Town needs to help resolve these issues. Town General Plan needs to be followed.
o There was some conversation about amnesty programs. People had questions about whether the amnesty program could be used to legalize units that could count towards the town’s RHNA. There were questions about how residents could find out whether an existing JADU/ADU was legal and known about by the town. ▪ Informational Resources
o Have a designated person residents interested in ADU’s can speak with o Office hours won’t be enough
o Junior ADUs are great, need a marketing program for JADUs o A tool to help homeowners visualize what an ADU would look like on their property o Town revise handouts and create office hours
▪ Permitting Process
o Establish easy process for JADUs
o Process needs to be streamlined; it took two years to get an ADU approved o Need to support homeowners get through the process
APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-32 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT o More clarity for the process
o Flexibility in permitting
o Look back at comments from past ADU permits that held permit up (most seen city comments)
o Contract planners reviewing ADUs need to be designated (need uniformity in review) o Streamlined process
o Process is a huge barrier
o Residents expressed concerns the process of getting an ADU approved is long and expensive
▪ Support for Pre-Approved Plans
o A lot of support for pre-approved ADUs
o Pre-fab options would be good too
o Pre-approved plans
o Would like preapproved plans and pre-fab options
▪ Cost
o Need to think about whether or not to require sprinklers as that adds a lot of cost o Need help determining how much taxes will go up
o Incentives for homeowners – many people are house rich but cash poor o Programs that would reduce costs – one person pointed out that building an ADU in the town is expensive. Several people expressed interest in programs that would reduce costs.
▪ Utilities
o How can residents get information on sewer and septic tank hook ups? Can be cost prohibitive. Can town offer financial assistance?
o Facilitate to obtain the necessary info and pre-requirements for sewer hook-up and septic tanks.
o Consider ways to streamline horizontal utilities/infrastructure o Electrical panel upgrades
o Sewage/septic connections
o Septic approval process (with Westbay) makes the ADU build process painful ▪ General Comments on Housing Element
o Pointed out that he believes you can do a time limited deed restriction to have something count in the RHNA allocation.
o Deed restrictions can be time limited.
o Need a way of measuring how many ADUs we have already. o Need to disperse more housing through more ADUs/JADUs APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW A-33 o Encourage merging adjoining lots and then upzone (i.e., merge two one-acre lots, then build 10-15 units of senior or low-income housing)
o Wants a process that does not pit neighbor against neighbor (referring to housing in general not just ADU’s)
o We want more young families in our community
o Lots of houses are empty. Wants to see numbers of what’s been built, what is occupied. Etc.
▪ Other Ideas
o Look at Oakland for examples
o Match low-income renters with owners
Additional Comments
▪ Embarcadero findings, may not be 3.5m units needed for the state after all, might be less ▪ Thought only 63 attended the April 19th meeting, not 90 ▪ Need more in person meetings – felt more outreach necessary APPENDIX A | COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A-34 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT ATTACHMENT 2: HOUSING IN PORTOLA VALLEY SURVEY
RESULTS
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 1 / 12
85.15% 602
4.38% 31
13.72% 97
2.97% 21
21.36% 151
Q1 What is your connection to this Housing Element update survey? (select all that apply)
Answered: 707 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 707
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Live in
Portola Valley
Work in
Portola Valley
Live and work
in Portola...
Business owner
in Portola...
Interested in
Portola Vall...
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Live in Portola Valley
Work in Portola Valley
Live and work in Portola Valley
Business owner in Portola Valley
Interested in Portola Valley housing issues
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 2 / 12
85.80% 604
7.67% 54
2.98% 21
0.00% 0
3.55% 25
Q2 What is your living situation?
Answered: 704 Skipped: 3
TOTAL 704
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Own
Rent
Live with
Friends or...
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Own
Rent
Live with Friends or Family
Unhoused
Other (please specify)
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 3 / 12
14.35% 101
9.94% 70
20.60% 145
51.99% 366
3.13% 22
Q3 How long have you lived in Portola Valley?
Answered: 704 Skipped: 3
TOTAL 704
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
0-5 years
6-10 years
11-20 years
21+ years
Don’t live here
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
0-5 years
6-10 years
11-20 years
21+ years
Don’t live here
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 4 / 12
0.28% 2
1.84% 13
16.31% 115
46.95% 331
30.21% 213
4.40% 31
Q4 What is your age?
Answered: 705 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 705
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Under 18
18-29
30-49
50-69
70+
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-29
30-49
50-69
70+
Prefer not to answer
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 5 / 12
0.43% 3
4.26% 30
0.85% 6
1.84% 13
0.43% 3
0.14% 1
73.62% 519
18.44% 130
Q5 Race and Ethnicity
Answered: 705 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 705
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
American
Indian /...
Asian
Black
Hispanic /
Latino/x
Middle Eastern
Native
Hawaiian /...
White
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian / Alaskan Native
Asian
Black
Hispanic / Latino/x
Middle Eastern
Native Hawaiian / Pacific Islander
White
Prefer not to answer
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 6 / 12
1.28% 9
1.56% 11
4.40% 31
2.84% 20
4.82% 34
55.04% 388
30.07% 212
Q6 What is your total household income?
Answered: 705 Skipped: 2
TOTAL 705
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Up to $46,000
$46,000-$73,000
$73,000-117,000
$117,000-120,00
0 $120,000-144,00
0 $144,000 or
more
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Up to $46,000
$46,000-$73,000
$73,000-117,000
$117,000-120,000
$120,000-144,000
$144,000 or more
Prefer not to answer
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 7 / 12
61.29% 429
44.43% 311
30.29% 212
22.14% 155
16.14% 113
60.86% 426
40.43% 283
13.14% 92
Q7 As the Town works to identify parcels of land or “sites” for potential new homes to meet our housing mandate requirement, what are the preferred types of homes you would like to see built in Portola Valley? Choose all that apply
Answered: 700 Skipped: 7
Total Respondents: 700
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Single-Family
homes
Cluster of
small cottages
Townhomes
Multi-family
ownership ho...
Multi-family
rental homes...
Accessory
Dwelling Uni...
Homes targeted
for a specif...
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Single-Family homes
Cluster of small cottages
Townhomes
Multi-family ownership homes (condominiums)
Multi-family rental homes (apartments)
Accessory Dwelling Units (in-law apartments, second units) Homes targeted for a specific purpose or population, including seniors, the local workforce, people with disabilities, permanent supportive housing (for people experiencing homelessness, transitional housing, etc.).
Other (please specify)
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 8 / 12
Q8 There are many important factors to consider in our ability to meet the housing needs of our community. Identified below are some of the interests we have heard among the community. Please select the level (1-5) to which you agree, disagree, or are neutral on the following statements:
Answered: 706 Skipped: 1
Limit housing
development ...
Support fair
and equitabl...
Create
affordable...
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 9 / 12
Create new
housing...
Create housing
opportunitie...
Provided the
sites have b...
Concentrate
affordable...
Maintain the
T ’
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 10 / 12
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Strongly Ag… Agree Neutral Disagree
Strongly Di…
Town’s open...
Create
incentives t...
Increase the
maximum numb...
Rezone
properties...
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 11 / 12
62.87%
442
21.19%
149
9.53%
67 3.70%
26 2.70%
19 703 1.62
41.09%
286
22.56%
157
21.55%
150
6.03%
42 8.76%
61 696 2.19
33.86%
236
23.67%
165
24.10%
168
9.04%
63 9.33%
65 697 2.36
38.68%
270
29.94%
209
19.77%
138
6.59%
46 5.01%
35 698 2.09
36.27%
251
26.59%
184
20.66%
143
9.54%
66 6.94%
48 692 2.24
25.47%
176
20.12%
139
21.56%
149
14.91%
103
17.95%
124 691 2.80
25.36%
175
31.01%
214
24.20%
167
8.99%
62 10.43%
72 690 2.48
83.55%
584
11.44%
80 3.58%
25 1.29%
9 0.14%
1 699 1.23
32.81%
229
26.93%
188
21.06%
147
8.60%
60 10.60%
74 698 2.37
16.28%
113
20.89%
145
20.03%
139
14.99%
104
27.81%
193 694 3.17
26.33%
183
29.35%
204
19.86%
138
10.79%
75 13.67%
95 695 2.56
STRONGLY
AGREE
AGREE NEUTRAL DISAGREE STRONGLY
DISAGREE
TOTAL WEIGHTED
AVERAGE
Limit housing development in areas
with higher wildfire and geologic risk.
Support fair and equitable housing
opportunities to reduce housing
barriers related to race, color, sex,
national origin, religion, familial
status, household income and
disability.
Create affordable housing
opportunities that will allow younger
generations to stay and/or return to
Portola Valley.
Create new housing opportunities that
allow seniors to downsize and
continue to live in the community.
Create housing opportunities that are
affordable to the local workforce.
Provided the sites have been
analyzed for fire and geologic risk,
integrate affordable housing
throughout the community to create
more mixed-income neighborhoods.
Concentrate affordable housing in
areas with closer access to
commercial businesses and other
amenities.
Maintain the Town’s open spaces,
trails and recreational areas.
Create incentives to build and rent out
Accessory Dwelling Units to lower
income community members and
local workers.
Increase the maximum number of
homes allowed on properties along
Alpine Road and Portola Road.
Rezone properties occupied by
churches, institutions or businesses
to allow for new homes to be colocated on the property.
Share your Thoughts on Housing in Portola Valley SurveyMonkey 12 / 12
Q9 Are there other strategies that you believe the Town should consider? If yes, please provide examples or context of the strategy that should be considered to accommodate new housing in Portola Valley.
Answered: 269 Skipped: 438
APPENDIX B:
HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT:
PORTOLA VALLEY
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Summary of Key Facts...............................................................................................................1
2. Population, Employment, and Household Characteristics ...................................................4
2.1 Population..........................................................................................................................4
2.2 Age ......................................................................................................................................5
2.3 Race and Ethnicity .............................................................................................................7
2.4 Employment Trends..........................................................................................................8
2.4.1 Balance of Jobs and Workers ................................................................................8
2.4.2 Sector Composition..............................................................................................11
2.5 Extremely Low-Income Households .............................................................................12
2.6 Tenure ..............................................................................................................................15
2.7 Displacement...................................................................................................................18
3. Housing Stock Characteristics................................................................................................20
3.1 Housing Types, Year Built, Vacancy, and Permits........................................................20
3.2 Assisted Housing Developments At-Risk of Conversion.............................................23
3.3 Substandard Housing .....................................................................................................24
3.4 Home and Rent Values ...................................................................................................25
3.5 Overpayment and Overcrowding..................................................................................28
4. Special Housing Needs............................................................................................................36
4.1 Large Households ...........................................................................................................36
4.2 Female-Headed Households..........................................................................................37
4.3 Seniors..............................................................................................................................38
4.4 People with Disabilities...................................................................................................39
4.5 Homelessness..................................................................................................................41
4.6 Farmworkers....................................................................................................................47
4.7 Non-English Speakers.....................................................................................................48 APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-ii AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT List of Figures
Figure 1: Population Growth Trends ...........................................................................................................5 Figure 2: Population by Age, 2000-2019 .....................................................................................................6 Figure 3: Senior and Youth Population by Race.........................................................................................6 Figure 4: Population by Race, 2000-2019....................................................................................................7 Figure 5: Jobs in a Jurisdiction ......................................................................................................................8 Figure 6: Workers by Earnings, by Jurisdiction as Place of Work and Place of Residence ...................9 Figure 7: Jobs-Worker Ratios, By Wage Group.........................................................................................10 Figure 8: Jobs-Household Ratio..................................................................................................................11 Figure 9: Resident Employment by Industry ............................................................................................12 Figure 10: Households by Household Income Level .................................................................................13 Figure 11: Household Income Level by Tenure..........................................................................................14 Figure 12: Poverty Status by Race................................................................................................................15 Figure 13: Housing Tenure............................................................................................................................16 Figure 14: Housing Tenure by Race of Householder.................................................................................16 Figure 15: Housing Tenure by Age...............................................................................................................17 Figure 16: Housing Tenure by Housing Type .............................................................................................18 Figure 17: Households by Displacement Risk and Tenure .......................................................................19 Figure 18: Housing Type Trends...................................................................................................................21 Figure 19: Housing Units by Year Structure Built.......................................................................................21 Figure 20: Vacant Units by Type ...................................................................................................................22 Figure 21: Substandard Housing Issues......................................................................................................25 Figure 22: Home Values of Owner-Occupied Units ...................................................................................26 Figure 23: Zillow Home Value Index (ZHVI).................................................................................................27 Figure 24: Contract Rents for Renter-Occupied Units...............................................................................27 Figure 25: Median Contract Rent .................................................................................................................28 Figure 26: Cost Burden by Tenure ...............................................................................................................29 Figure 27: Cost Burden by Income Level.....................................................................................................30 Figure 28: Cost Burden by Race ...................................................................................................................31 Figure 29: Cost Burden by Household Size.................................................................................................32 Figure 30: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level..............................................................33 Figure 31: Overcrowding by Tenure and Severity......................................................................................34 Figure 32: Overcrowding by Income Level and Severity...........................................................................34 Figure 33: Overcrowding By Race ................................................................................................................35 Figure 34: Household Size by Tenure..........................................................................................................36 Figure 35: Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms ..................................................................................37 Figure 36: Household Type ...........................................................................................................................37 Figure 37: Female-Headed Households by Poverty Status ......................................................................38 Figure 38: Senior Households by Income and Tenure..............................................................................39 Figure 39: Disability by Type .........................................................................................................................40 Figure 40: Homelessness by Household Type and Shelter Status, San Mateo County........................42 Figure 41: Racial Group Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County ................43 Figure 42: Latinx Share of General and Homeless Populations, San Mateo County ............................44 Figure 43: Characteristics for the Population Experiencing Homelessness, San Mateo County ........45 Figure 44: Farm Operations and Farm Labor by County, San Mateo County........................................48 Figure 45: Population with Limited English Proficiency ............................................................................49 APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-iii List of Tables
Table 1: Population Growth Trends ...........................................................................................................4 Table 2: Housing Permitting......................................................................................................................23 Table 3: Assisted Units at Risk of Conversion.........................................................................................24 Table 4: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Age ...............................................................41 Table 5: Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence....................................................41 Table 6: Number of Unsheltered Individuals by San Mateo County Cities.........................................46 Table 7: Students in Local Public Schools Experiencing Homelessness .............................................47 Table 8: Migrant Worker Student Population.........................................................................................47 APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-iv AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-1
1. SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS
This section is a more in-depth version of Section 2. Housing Needs Assessment. The majority of this appendix comes from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)/Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Data Packets prepared for each jurisdiction in the Bay Area. ▪ Population – Generally, the population of the Bay Area continues to grow because of natural growth and because the strong economy draws new residents to the region. The population of Portola Valley increased by 3.2% from 2000 to 2020, which is below the growth rate of the Bay Area.
▪ Age – In 2019, Portola Valley’s youth population under the age of 18 was 1,050 and senior population 65 and older was 1,307. These age groups represent 22.9% and 28.5%, respectively, of Portola Valley’s population.
▪ Race/Ethnicity – In 2020, 82.3% of Portola Valley’s population was White while 0.4% was African American, 6.5% was Asian, and 6.7% was Latinx. People of color in Portola Valley comprise a proportion below the overall proportion in the Bay Area as a whole.1 ▪ Employment – Portola Valley residents most commonly work in the Financial & Professional Services industry. Since 2010, the number of jobs located in the jurisdiction increased by 30 (3.5%). Additionally, the jobs-household ratio in Portola Valley has increased from 0.6 in 2002 to
0.63 jobs per household in 2018.
▪ Number of Homes – The number of new homes built in the Bay Area has not kept pace with the demand, resulting in longer commutes, increasing prices, and exacerbating issues of displacement and homelessness. The number of homes in Portola Valley increased, 1.6% from 2010 to 2020, which is below the growth rate for San Mateo County and below the growth rate of the region’s housing stock during this time period.
▪ Home Prices – A diversity of homes at all income levels creates opportunities for all Portola Valley residents to live and thrive in the community.
o Ownership The largest proportion of homes had a value in the range of $2M+ in 2019.
Home prices increased by 148.6% from 2010 to 2020.
o Rental Prices – The typical contract rent for an apartment in Portola Valley was $2,940 in 2019. Rental prices increased by 47.1% from 2009 to 2019. To rent a typical apartment without cost burden, a household would need to make $117,760 per year.2 ▪ Housing Type – It is important to have a variety of housing types to meet the needs of a community today and in the future. In 2020, 81.1% of homes in Portola Valley were single-family 1 The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey accounts for ethnic origin separate from racial identity. The numbers reported here use an accounting of both such that the racial categories are shown exclusive of Latinx status, to allow for an accounting of the Latinx population regardless of racial identity. The term Hispanic has historically been used to describe people from numerous Central American, South American, and Caribbean countries. In recent years, the term Latino or Latinx has become preferred. This report generally uses Latinx, but occasionally when discussing US Census data, we use Hispanic or Non-Hispanic, to clearly link to the data source. 2 Note that contract rents may differ significantly from, and often being lower than, current listing prices.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-2 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT detached, 0.0% were single-family attached, 2.1% were small multi-family (2-4 units), and 16.8% were medium or large multi-family (5+ units). Between 2010 and 2020, the number of singlefamily units increased more than multi-family units. Generally, in Portola Valley, the share of the housing stock that is detached single-family homes is above that of other jurisdictions in the region.
▪ Cost Burden – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development considers housing to be affordable for a household if the household spends less than 30% of its income on housing costs. A household is considered “cost-burdened” if it spends more than 30% of its monthly income on housing costs, while those who spend more than 50% of their income on housing costs are considered “severely cost-burdened.” In Portola Valley, 12.9% of households spend 30%-50% of their income on housing, while 13.5% of households are severely cost burden and use the majority of their income for housing.
▪ Displacement/Gentrification – According to research from The University of California, Berkeley, 0.0% of households in Portola Valley live in neighborhoods that are susceptible to or experiencing displacement, and 0.0% live in areas at risk of or undergoing gentrification. 100.0% of households in Portola Valley live in neighborhoods where low-income households are likely excluded due to prohibitive housing costs. There are various ways to address displacement including ensuring new housing at all income levels is built. ▪ Neighborhood – 100.0% of residents in Portola Valley live in neighborhoods identified as “Highest Resource” or “High Resource” areas by State-commissioned research, while 0.0% of residents live in areas identified by this research as “Low Resource” or “High Segregation and Poverty” areas. These neighborhood designations are based on a range of indicators covering areas such as education, poverty, proximity to jobs and economic opportunities, low pollution levels, and other factors.3
▪ Special Housing Needs – Some population groups may have special housing needs that require specific program responses, and these groups may experience barriers to accessing stable housing due to their specific housing circumstances. In Portola Valley, 10.2% of residents have a disability of any kind and may require accessible housing. Additionally, 8.0% of Portola Valley households are larger households with five or more people, who likely need larger housing units with three bedrooms or more. 5.8% of households are female-headed families, which are often at greater risk of housing insecurity.
3 For more information on the “opportunity area” categories developed by HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, see this website: https://www.treasurer.ca.gov/ctcac/opportunity.asp. The degree to which different jurisdictions and neighborhoods have access to opportunity will likely need to be analyzed as part of new Housing Element requirements related to affirmatively furthering fair housing. ABAG/MTC will be providing jurisdictions with technical assistance on this topic this summer, following the release of additional guidance from HCD.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-3
NO TE O N DA TA
Many of the tables in this report are sourced from data from the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey or U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, both of which are samples and as such, are subject to sampling variability. This means that data is an estimate, and that other estimates could be possible if another set of respondents had been reached. Five-year releases get a larger data pool to minimize this “margin of error” but particularly for smaller cities, the data is based on fewer responses, and the information should be interpreted accordingly.
NO TE O N FI GU R ES
Any figure that does not specify geography in the figure name represents data for Portola Valley.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-4
2. POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSEHOLD
CHARACTERISTICS
2.1 POPULATION
The Bay Area is the fifth-largest metropolitan area in the nation and has seen a steady increase in population since 1990, except for a dip during the Great Recession. Many cities in the region have experienced significant growth in jobs and population. While these trends have led to a corresponding increase in demand for housing across the region, the regional production of housing has largely not kept pace with job and population growth. Since 2000, Portola Valley’s population has increased by 3.2%; this rate is below that of the region as a whole, at 14.8%. In Portola Valley, roughly 9.1% of its population moved during the past year, a number 4.3 percentage points smaller than the regional rate of 13.4%.
In 2020, the population of Portola Valley was estimated to be 4,607 (see Table 1). From 1990 to 2000, the population increased by 6.4%, while it decreased by 2.4% during the first decade of the 2000s. In the most recent decade, the population increased by 5.8%. The population of Portola Valley makes up 0.6% of San Mateo County.4
TABLE 1: POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS
Geography 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020
Portola Valley 4,195 4,372 4,462 4,523 4,353 4,582 4,607 San Mateo County 649,623 685,354 707,163 719,844 718,451 761,748 773,244 Bay Area 6,020,147 6,381,961 6,784,348 7,073,912 7,150,739 7,595,694 7,790,537 Universe: Total population
Note: For more years of data, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-01.
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series.
4 To compare the rate of growth across various geographic scales, Figure 1 shows population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the year 1990. This means that the data points represent the population growth (i.e., percent change) in each of these geographies relative to their populations in 1990.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-5 FIGURE 1: POPULATION GROWTH TRENDS
Note: For some jurisdictions, a break may appear at the end of each decade (1999, 2009) as estimates are compared to census counts. DOF uses the decennial census to benchmark subsequent population estimates.
Source: California Department of Finance, E-5 series Note: The data shown on the graph represents population for the jurisdiction, county, and region indexed to the population in the first year shown. The data points represent the relative population growth in each of these geographies relative to their populations in that year.
2.2 AGE
The distribution of age groups in a city shapes what types of housing the community may need in the near future. An increase in the older population may mean there is a developing need for more senior housing options, while higher numbers of children and young families can point to the need for more family housing options and related services. There has also been a move by many to agein-place or downsize to stay within their communities, which can mean more multi-family and accessible units are also needed.
In Portola Valley, the median age in 2000 was 47.2; by 2019, this figure had increased, landing at around 51 years. More specifically, the population of those under 14 has decreased since 2010, while the 65-and-over population has decreased (see Figure 2). 90 95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
Index (Year %s = Index 100)
Index
Bay Area
Index
San Mateo County
Index
Portola Valley
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-6 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 2: POPULATION BY AGE, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 SF1, Table P12; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001.
Looking at the senior and youth population by race can add an additional layer of understanding, as families and seniors of color are even more likely to experience challenges finding affordable housing. People of color5 make up 7.4% of seniors and 20.3% of youth under 18 (see Figure 3).
FIGURE 3: SENIOR AND YOUTH POPULATION BY RACE
Universe: Total population
Notes: In the sources for this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity, and an overlapping category of Hispanic / non-Hispanic groups has not been shown to avoid double counting in the stacked bar chart.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table B01001(A-G). 5 Here, we count all non-white racial groups.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-7
2.3 RACE AND ETHNICITY
Understanding the racial makeup of a city and region is important for designing and implementing effective housing policies and programs. These patterns are shaped by both market factors and government actions, such as exclusionary zoning, discriminatory lending practices and displacement that has occurred over time and continues to impact communities of color today. 6 Since 2000, the
percentage of residents in Portola Valley identifying as White has decreased—and by the same token the percentage of residents of all other races and ethnicities has increased—by 9.7 percentage points, with the 2019 population standing at 3,777 (see Figure 4). In absolute terms, the Other Race or Multiple Races, Non-Hispanic population increased the most while the White, Non-Hispanic population decreased the most.
FIGURE 4: POPULATION BY RACE, 2000-2019
Universe: Total population
Notes: Data for 2019 represents 2015-2019 ACS estimates. The Census Bureau defines Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity separate from racial categories. For the purposes of this graph, the “Hispanic or Latinx” racial/ethnic group represents those who identify as having Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and may also be members of any racial group. All other racial categories on this graph represent those who identify with that racial category and do not identify with Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Table P004; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015- 2019), Table B03002.
6 See, for example, Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law: a forgotten history of how our government segregated America. New York, NY & London, UK: Liveright Publishing.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-8 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT
2.4 EMPLOYMENT TRENDS
2.4.1 BALANCE OF JOBS AND WORKERS
A city houses employed residents who either work in the community where they live or work elsewhere in the region. Conversely, a city may have job sites that employ residents from the same city, but more often employ workers commuting from outside of it. Smaller cities typically will have more employed residents than jobs there and export workers, while larger cities tend to have a surplus of jobs and import workers. To some extent the regional transportation system is set up for this flow of workers to the region’s core job centers. At the same time, as the housing affordability crisis has illustrated, local imbalances may be severe, where local jobs and worker populations are out of sync at a sub-regional scale.
One measure of this is the relationship between workers and jobs. A city with a surplus of workers “exports” workers to other parts of the region, while a city with a surplus of jobs must conversely “import” them. Between 2002 and 2018, the number of jobs in Portola Valley increased by 8.2% (see Figure 5).
FIGURE 5: JOBS IN A JURISDICTION
Universe: Jobs from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files, 2002-2018.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-9 There are 1,702 employed residents, and 1,502 jobs7in Portola Valley - the ratio of jobs to resident workers is 0.88; Portola Valley is a net exporter of workers.
Figure 6 shows the balance when comparing jobs to workers, broken down by different wage groups, offering additional insight into local dynamics. A community may offer employment for relatively low-income workers but have relatively few housing options for those workers - or conversely, it may house residents who are low wage workers but offer few employment opportunities for them. Such relationships may cast extra light on potentially pent-up demand for housing in particular price categories. A relative surplus of jobs relative to residents in a given wage category suggests the need to import those workers, while conversely, surpluses of workers in a wage group relative to jobs means the community will export those workers to other jurisdictions.
Such flows are not inherently bad, though over time, sub-regional imbalances may appear. Portola Valley has more low-wage jobs than low-wage residents (where low-wage refers to jobs paying less than $25,000). At the other end of the wage spectrum, the city has more high-wage residents than high-wage jobs (where high-wage refers to jobs paying more than $75,000) (see Figure 6).8 FIGURE 6: WORKERS BY EARNINGS, BY JURISDICTION AS PLACE OF WORK AND PLACE OF RESIDENCE Universe: Workers 16 years and over with earnings
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data 2015-2019, B08119, B08519.
Figure 7 shows the balance of a jurisdiction’s resident workers to the jobs located there for different wage groups as a ratio instead—a value of 1 means that a city has the same number of jobs in a wage group as it has resident workers—in principle, a balance. Values above 1 indicate a jurisdiction 7 Employed residents in a jurisdiction is counted by place of residence (they may work elsewhere) while jobs in a jurisdiction are counted by place of work (they may live elsewhere). The jobs may differ from those reported in Figure 5 as the source for the time series is from administrative data, while the cross-sectional data is from a survey. 8 The source table is top-coded at $75,000, precluding more fine-grained analysis at the higher end of the wage spectrum.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-10 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT will need to import workers for jobs in a given wage group. At the regional scale, this ratio is 1.04 jobs for each worker, implying a modest import of workers from outside the region (see Figure 7).
FIGURE 7: JOBS-WORKER RATIOS, BY WAGE GROUP
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment Notes: The ratio compares job counts by wage group from two tabulations of LEHD data: Counts by place of work relative to counts by place of residence. See text for details.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs); Residence Area Characteristics (RAC) files (Employed Residents), 2010-2018.
Such balances between jobs and workers may directly influence the housing demand in a community. New jobs may draw new residents, and when there is high demand for housing relative to supply, many workers may be unable to afford to live where they work, particularly where job growth has been in relatively lower wage jobs. This dynamic not only means many workers will need to prepare for long commutes and time spent on the road, but in the aggregate, it contributes to traffic congestion and time lost for all road users.
If there are more jobs than employed residents, it means a city is relatively jobs-rich, typically also with a high jobs to household ratio. Thus, bringing housing into the measure, the jobs-household ratio in Portola Valley has increased from 0.6 in 2002, to 0.63 jobs per household in 2018 (see Figure 8).
0.30 0.50
0.70 0.90
1.10 1.30
1.50 Ratio
Wages $1,250-$3,333/Mo Wages Less Than $1,250/Mo
Wages More than $3,333/Mo
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-11 FIGURE 8: JOBS-HOUSEHOLD RATIO
Universe: Jobs in a jurisdiction from unemployment insurance-covered employment (private, state and local government) plus United States Office of Personnel Management-sourced Federal employment; households in a jurisdiction Notes: The data is tabulated by place of work, regardless of where a worker lives. The source data is provided at the census block level. These are crosswalked to jurisdictions and summarized. The ratio compares place of work wage and salary jobs with households, or occupied housing units. A similar measure is the ratio of jobs to housing units. However, this jobs-household ratio serves to compare the number of jobs in a jurisdiction to the number of housing units that are actually occupied. The difference between a jurisdiction’s jobs-housing ratio and jobs-household ratio will be most pronounced in jurisdictions with high vacancy rates, a high rate of units used for seasonal use, or a high rate of units used as short-term rentals.
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics, Workplace Area Characteristics (WAC) files (Jobs), 2002-2018; California Department of Finance, E-5 (Households).
2.4.2 SECTOR COMPOSITION
In terms of sectoral composition, the largest industry in which Portola Valley residents work is Financial & Professional Services, and the largest sector in which San Mateo residents work is Health & Educational Services (see Figure 9). For the Bay Area as a whole, the Health & Educational Services industry employs the most workers.
0.50 0.70
0.90 1.10
1.30 1.50
1.70 Ratio
San Mateo County Bay Area Portola Valley
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-12 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT FIGURE 9: RESIDENT EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY
Universe: Civilian employed population age 16 years and over Notes: The data displayed shows the industries in which jurisdiction residents work, regardless of the location where those residents are employed (whether within the jurisdiction or not). Categories are derived from the following source tables:
Agriculture & Natural Resources: C24030_003E, C24030_030E; Construction: C24030_006E, C24030_033E; Manufacturing, Wholesale & Transportation: C24030_007E, C24030_034E, C24030_008E, C24030_035E, C24030_010E, C24030_037E; Retail:
C24030_009E, C24030_036E; Information: C24030_013E, C24030_040E; Financial & Professional Services: C24030_014E, C24030_041E, C24030_017E, C24030_044E; Health & Educational Services: C24030_021E, C24030_024E, C24030_048E, C24030_051E; Other: C24030_027E, C24030_054E, C24030_028E, C24030_055E Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2015-2019), Table C24030.
For the data table behind this figure, please refer to the Data Packet Workbook, Table POPEMP-06.
2.5 EXTREMELY LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Despite the economic and job growth experienced throughout the region since 1990, the income gap has continued to widen. California is one of the most economically unequal states in the nation, and the Bay Area has the highest income inequality between high- and low-income households in the state.
9 In Portola Valley, 73.3% of households make more than 100% of the Area Median Income (AMI), 10 compared to 6.9% making less than 30% of AMI, which is considered extremely low-income (see Figure 10).
9 Bohn, S.et al. 2020. Income Inequality and Economic Opportunity in California. Public Policy Institute of California. 10 Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. Households making between 80 and 120 percent of the AMI are moderate-income, those making 50 to 80 percent are low-income, those making 30 to 50 percent are very low-income, and those making less than 30 percent are extremely low-income. This is then adjusted for household size.
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-13 FIGURE 10: HOUSEHOLDS BY HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVEL
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located. The data that is reported for the Bay Area is not based on a regional AMI but instead refers to the regional total of households in an income group relative to the AMI for the county where that household is located. Local jurisdictions are required to provide an estimate for their projected extremely low-income households (0-30% AMI) in their Housing Elements. HCD’s official Housing Element guidance notes that jurisdictions can use their RHNA for very low-income households (those making 0-50% AMI) to calculate their projected extremely low-income households. As Bay Area jurisdictions have not yet received their final RHNA numbers, this document does not contain the required data point of projected extremely low-income households. The report portion of the housing data needs packet contains more specific guidance for how local staff can calculate an estimate for projected extremely low-income households once jurisdictions receive their 6th cycle RHNA numbers.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In San Mateo County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $44,000 for a family of four. Many households with multiple wage earners—including food service workers, fulltime students, teachers, farmworkers, and healthcare professionals—can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.
Regionally, more than half of all households make more than 100% AMI, while 15% make less than 30% AMI. In Contra Costa County, 30% AMI is the equivalent to the annual income of $34,850 for a family of four. Many households with multiple wage earners – including food service workers, fulltime students, teachers, farmworkers, and healthcare professionals – can fall into lower AMI categories due to relatively stagnant wages in many industries.
HCD’s guidance notes that instead of using use U.S. Census data to calculate the percentage of very low-income RHNA that qualifies for extremely low-income households, local jurisdictions can presume that 50% of their RHNA for very low-income households qualifies for extremely low-income APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
B-14 AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT households. In Portola Valley, the RHNA for very low-income households is 73, which means that half, or 37 units, will qualify for extremely low-income households. Throughout the region, there are disparities between the incomes of homeowners and renters. Typically, the number of low-income renters greatly outpaces the amount of housing available that is affordable for these households.
In Portola Valley, the largest proportion of renters falls in the Greater than 100% of AMI income group, while the largest proportion of homeowners are found in the Greater than 100% of AMI group (see Figure 11).
FIGURE 11: HOUSEHOLD INCOME LEVEL BY TENURE
Universe: Occupied housing units
Notes: Income groups are based on HUD calculations for Area Median Income (AMI). HUD calculates the AMI for different metropolitan areas, and the nine county Bay Area includes the following metropolitan areas: Napa Metro Area (Napa County), Oakland-Fremont Metro Area (Alameda and Contra Costa Counties), San Francisco Metro Area (Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo Counties), San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara Metro Area (Santa Clara County), Santa Rosa Metro Area (Sonoma County), and Vallejo-Fairfield Metro Area (Solano County). The AMI levels in this chart are based on the HUD metro area where this jurisdiction is located.
Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release.
Currently, people of color are more likely to experience poverty and financial instability because of federal and local housing policies that have historically excluded them from the same opportunities extended to white residents.11 These economic disparities also leave communities of color at higher risk for housing insecurity, displacement or homelessness. In Portola Valley, American Indian or Alaska Native (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents experience the highest rates of poverty, followed by White (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic) residents (see Figure 12). 11 Moore, E., Montojo, N. and Mauri, N., 2019. Roots, Race & Place: A History of Racially Exclusionary Housing the San Francisco Bay Area. Hass Institute. 60
45 130
30 1,195
65 85
15 50
125
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
0%-30% of
AMI
31%-50% of
AMI
51%-80% of
AMI
81%-100% of
AMI
Greater
than 100% of
AMI
Households
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
APPENDIX B | HOUSING NEEDS DATA REPORT
PORTOLA VALLEY HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDEDDRAFT #2 FOR PUBLIC REVIEW B-15 FIGURE 12: POVERTY STATUS BY RACE
Universe: Population for whom poverty status is determined Notes: The Census Bureau uses a federally defined poverty threshold that remains constant throughout the country and does not correspond to Area Median Income (AMI). For this table, the Census Bureau does not disaggregate racial groups by Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity. However, data for the white racial group is also reported for white householders who are not Hispanic/Latinx. Since residents who identify as white and Hispanic/Latinx may have very different experiences within the housing market and the economy from those who identify as white and non-Hispanic/Latinx, data for multiple white sub-groups are reported here. The racial/ethnic groups reported in this table are not all mutually exclusive. Therefore, the data should not be summed as the sum exceeds the population for whom poverty status is determined for this jurisdiction. However, all groups labelled “Hispanic and Non-Hispanic” are mutually exclusive, and the sum of the data for these groups is equivalent to the population for whom poverty status is determined.