Agenda packet — San Anselmo City Council, December 12, 2023 (part 4 of 7)

previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant; the Strategic Growth Council and HCD’s Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs; and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the Town will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the Town to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html.

HCD is committed to assisting the Town in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Fidel Herrera, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Proactive Housing Accountability Chief
Enclosure
Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
779
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 1 April 26, 2023

APPENDIX

TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO
The following changes are necessary to bring the Town’s housing element into compliance with Article 10.6 of the Government Code. Accompanying each recommended change, we cite the supporting section of the Government Code.

Housing element technical assistance information is available on HCD’s website at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/hcd-memos. Among other resources, the housing element section contains HCD’s latest technical assistance tool, Building Blocks for Effective Housing Elements (Building Blocks), available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/housing-elements/building-blocks and includes the Government Code addressing State Housing Element Law and other resources.

A. Housing Needs Resources and Constraints

1. Include an analysis of population and employment trends and documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality's existing and projected needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(1).)
Projected Extremely Low-Income (ELI) Households: While the element quantifies the existing housing needs of ELI) households, it must still quantify projected ELI housing needs. The projected housing need for ELI households can be calculated by using available census data to determine the number of very low-income households that qualify as ELI households or presume that 50 percent of very lowincome households qualify as ELI households.

2. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).) Approved/Pending Sites: The housing element relies on approved/pending projects to accommodate the Town’s regional housing need for lower-income households. The element should describe the status of the project, including any necessary approvals or steps prior to development, development agreements, conditions, or requirements such as phasing or timing requirements that impact development in the planning period; and the affordability of the project’s units based on anticipated rents, sales prices or other mechanisms (e.g., financing, affordability restrictions) ensuring their affordability.

Nonvacant Sites: The element must include an analysis demonstrating the potential for redevelopment of nonvacant sites. To address this requirement, the element describes in general the existing use of each nonvacant site for example “commercial improved, singlefamily improved, single-family unimproved or exemption improved.” This alone is not Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
780
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 2 April 26, 2023
adequate to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment in the planning period. The description of existing uses should be sufficiently detailed to facilitate an analysis demonstrating the potential for additional development in the planning period. In addition, the element needs to also analyze the extent that existing uses may impede additional residential development. The element can summarize past experiences converting existing uses to higher density residential development, include current market demand for the existing use, provide analysis of existing leases or contracts that would perpetuate the existing use or prevent additional residential development and include current information on development trends and market conditions in the Town and relate those trends to the sites identified. The element could also consider indicators such as age and condition of the existing structure expressed developer interest, low improvement to land value ratio, and other factors.

In addition, if nonvacant sites accommodate 50 percent or more of the lower-income need, the housing element must describe “substantial evidence” that the existing use does not constitute an impediment for additional residential use on the site. Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Realistic Capacity: The element provides assumptions of realistic capacity of 70 percent on nonvacant sites; however, it must also provide support for these assumptions. For example, the element should demonstrate what specific trends, factors, and other evidence led to the assumptions. The estimate of the number of units for each site must be adjusted as necessary, based on the land use controls and site improvements, typical densities of existing or approved residential developments at a similar affordability level in the Town, and on the current or planned availability and accessibility of sufficient water, sewer, and dry utilities. The element includes two project examples on page 130 to demonstrate realistic capacity; however, it is unclear if the two examples represent a trend for all developments at similar affordability levels in the Town. In addition, site 53 on Table

6.8, page 128 calculates realistic capacity at 115 percent of the maximum dwelling units per acre. The element should provide support for this assumption or revise the element as necessary.

Infrastructure: The element must demonstrate sufficient existing or planned water, sewer, and other dry utilities supply capacity, including the availability and access to distribution facilities to accommodate the Town’s regional housing need for the planning period. (Gov.

Code, § 65583.2, subd. (b).)
Environmental Constraints: The element should describe any known environmental constraints to the development of housing within the Town. Also, describe mitigation measures, if any, to the environmental constraints.

Replacement Housing Requirements: The sites inventory includes nonvacant sites that include single-family units. The element must identify whether the units are affordable to lower-income households or describe whether the additional residential development on the site requires the demolition of the existing residential use. For nonvacant sites with Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
781
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 3 April 26, 2023
existing, vacated, or demolished residential uses and occupied by, or subject to an affordability requirement for, lower-income households within the last five years there must be a replacement housing program for units affordable to lower-income households (Gov.

Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(3)). Absent a replacement housing program, these sites are not adequate sites to accommodate lower-income households. The replacement housing program has the same requirements as set forth in Government Code section. 65915, subdivision (c)(3). The housing element must be revised to include such analysis and a program, if necessary.

Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types:
• Manufactured Housing: Page 92 of the element states that manufactured housing is subject to the same standards and regulations that apply to other single-family homes. However, Per Table 4.4 manufactured homes are not allowed in the same zones where single-family homes are allowed. The housing element must demonstrate the Town's zoning code allows and permits manufactured housing in the same manner and in the same zone as a conventional or stick-built structures are permitted.
• Emergency Shelter: While housing element law does allow a jurisdiction to limit the number of beds or persons permitted to be served nightly by a facility, standards must be designed to encourage and facilitate the development of, or conversion to, an emergency shelter. The element must analyze the 17-bed limit as a potential constraint for the development of emergency shelters. Chapter 654, Statutes of 2022 (AB 2339), adds additional specificity on how cities and counties plan for emergency shelters and ensure sufficient and suitable capacity. While the element includes Program 7.5d to study potential residential zones to allow emergency shelters, this program in of itself does not satisfy these requirements, future submittals of the housing element may need to address these statutory requirements. For example, the program should identify the zones the town is considering and the potential capacity for emergency shelters in those zones. For additional information and timing requirements, please see HCD’s memo at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/ab2339- notice.pdf.

Electronic Sites Inventory: Pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, subdivision (b), upon adoption of the housing element, the Town must submit an electronic version of the sites inventory with its adopted housing element to [email protected]. Please note, the Town must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD when preparing the sites inventory. Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housing-element/index.shtml#element for a copy of the form and instructions. The Town can reach out to HCD at [email protected] for technical assistance.

3. An analysis of potential and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels, including the types of housing identified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (c), and for persons with disabilities as identified in the analysis pursuant to paragraph (7), including land use controls, building Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
782
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 4 April 26, 2023
codes and their enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions required of developers, and local processing and permit procedures... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(5).).

Land Use Controls: The element must identify and analyze all relevant land use controls impacts as potential constraints on a variety of housing types (e.g., multifamily rental housing, mobilehomes, transitional housing). The analysis must also evaluate the cumulative impacts of land use controls on the cost and supply of housing, including the ability to achieve maximum densities and cost and supply of housing. While Program 5.3.a commits to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District in the Zoning Code to incentivize the development of affordable housing by allowing greater building height, the element should clarify if three stories is allowed in multifamily zones.

Fees and Exaction: The element provides a cumulative analysis of fees on various housing types but should also list all the various planning and impact fees to better evaluate the impacts on housing development costs.

Processing and Permit Procedure: The element states that design review is required for multifamily residential projects and to construct new single-family residences. The element includes the findings for approval on page 102; however, the following findings should be analyzed as potential constraints on approval certainty and should include a program(s) to address or remove the identified constraints:
• Is functionally and aesthetically compatible with the existing improvements and the natural elements in the surrounding area;
• Provides for protection against noise, odors, and other factors which may make the environment less desirable;
• Will not tend to cause the surrounding area to depreciate materially in appearance or value or otherwise discourage occupancy, investment, or orderly development in such area;
• Will not create unnecessary traffic hazards due to congestion, distraction of motorists, or other factors and provides for satisfactory access by emergency vehicles and personnel;
• Will not unreasonably impair access to light and air of structures on neighboring properties;
Housing for Persons with Disabilities: The element notes group homes for seven or more persons are only permitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit. The element should analyze the process as a potential constraint on housing for persons with disabilities and add or modify programs as appropriate to ensure zoning permits group homes objectively with approval certainty. Secondly, it appears based on Table 4.4, page 91 that residential care facilities for six or fewer are not treated the same as single family. The element should ensure that residential care facilities for six or fewer are treated the same as singlefamily units and should include programs as necessary. Finally, the element states the Town has a reasonable accommodation procedure and lists the findings of approval; however, finding number five, “whether the requested reasonable accommodation would Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
783
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 5 April 26, 2023
adversely impact surrounding properties or uses” should be analyzed as a potential constraint on approval certainty and consistency with HUD guidance related to reasonable accommodation and should include a program(s) to address or remove the identified constraints.

Priority Water and Sewer: For your information, water and sewer service providers must establish specific procedures to grant priority water and sewer service to developments with units affordable to lower-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65589.7.) Local governments are required to immediately deliver the housing element to water and sewer service providers.

Zoning and Fees Transparency: The element must clarify its compliance with new transparency requirements for posting all zoning and development standards for each parcel on the jurisdiction’s website pursuant to Government Code section 65940.1(a)(1).

SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process: The element states that the Town has not adopted specific SB 35 regulations in the zoning code and follows State requirements to provide ministerial review of projects that meet SB 35 eligibility criteria. However, the element should add a program to identify and analyze written procedures for the SB 35 Streamlined Ministerial Approval Process.

4. Analyze any special housing needs such as elderly; persons with disabilities, including a developmental disability; large families; farmworkers; families with female heads of households; and families and persons in need of emergency shelter. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(7).)
Seniors: While the element includes a quantification of the senior population, it must also analyze their special housing needs. For a complete analysis, the element should discuss challenges faced by the senior population, the existing resources to meet those needs (availability senior housing units, # of deed restricted units, etc.,), an assessment of any gaps in resources, and proposed policies, programs, and funding to help address those gaps.

Persons with Developmental Disabilities: While the element includes a quantification of persons with developmental disabilities, it must also include a qualitative description of the need (including a description of the potential housing problems faced by the special needs group), a description of any existing resources or programs, and an assessment of unmet needs.

B. Housing Programs

1. Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
784
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 6 April 26, 2023
with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09. Sites shall be identified as needed to facilitate and encourage the development of a variety of types of housing for all income levels, including multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobilehomes, housing for agricultural employees, supportive housing, single-room occupancy units, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(1).) As noted in Finding A2, the element does not include a complete site analysis; therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the Town may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised as follows:

Rezone Program for Adequate Sites: The element appears to rely on rezoning of sites (Program 5.7) to accommodate the regional housing need, including for lower-income households; however, rezoning programs to accommodate the RHNA must identify the shortfall of sites, minimum acreage to be rezoned, candidate sites for rezoning and completion dates. Rezoning programs to accommodate the RHNA for lower-income households must meet all requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i). Examples include nondiscretionary approval, requiring minimum densities, permitting at least 16 units per site and residential performance standards.

2. The Housing Element shall contain programs which assist in the development of adequate housing to meet the needs of extremely low-, very low-, low- and moderate-income households. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(2).)
Assist in Development Programs: The element must include specific actions to assist in the development of ELI households and persons with special needs including farmworkers, homeless, and persons with disabilities, including developmental. The element includes several programs for lower income but should also include extremely low income and special needs.

Affordable Housing Overlay Zone: The element appears to rely on Program 5.3 to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District in the Zoning Code to incentivize the development of affordable housing by allowing greater building height, density, and floor area ratio and by reducing parking requirements for multifamily and mixed-use developments that provide a specified percent of units as affordable to low and very lowincome households. The element should also specify where the overlay will be applied, describe the permitting procedures that will apply to the residential development in the overlay and describe incentives to encourage and facilitate the development of housing affordable to lower-income households. In addition, the element should list and evaluate the objective design and development standards that will be applied.

3. Address and, where appropriate and legally possible, remove governmental and nongovernmental constraints to the maintenance, improvement, and development of housing, including housing for all income levels and housing for persons with disabilities.

The program shall remove constraints to, and provide reasonable accommodations for Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
785
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 7 April 26, 2023
housing designed for, intended for occupancy by, or with supportive services for, persons with disabilities. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(3).)
As noted in Finding A3, the element requires a complete analysis of potential governmental constraints. Depending upon the results of that analysis, the Town may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints.

4. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
While Table 7.37 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Implementation Matrix includes contributing factors, and geographic targeting, the Program actions do not include metrics. Table 7.37 should be revised to include metrics with clear commitments.

In addition, goals and actions must specifically respond to the analysis and to the identified and prioritized contributing factors to fair housing issues and must be significant and meaningful enough to overcome identified patterns and trends. Actions must have specific commitment, metrics, milestones and geographic targeting; and, as appropriate must address housing mobility enhancement, new housing choices and affordability in higher opportunity or higher income areas; place-based strategies for community preservation and revitalization and displacement protection. The element acknowledges that Racially Concentrated Areas of Affluence (RCAA) exists within the Town, and that the Town is predominantly in the high resource category according to TCAC/HCD Opportunity Maps and is predominantly higher income, the Town must include a significant and robust suite of actions (not limited to the RHNA) to promote housing mobility and improve new housing opportunities throughout the Town for existing residents and the broader region.

5. Develop a plan that incentivizes and promotes the creation of accessory dwelling units that can be offered at affordable rent, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code, for very low, low-, or moderate-income households. For purposes of this paragraph, “accessory dwelling units” has the same meaning as “accessory dwelling unit” as defined in paragraph (4) of subdivision (i) of Section 65852.2. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(7).)

While the element includes Programs 6.1 and 6.2 to promote the construction and affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units, the programs should include metrics and geographic area.

C. Quantified Objectives

Establish the number of housing units, by income level, that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time frame. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (b)(1 & 2).)

Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
786
Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle Draft Housing Element Page 8 April 26, 2023
The element must include quantified objectives estimating the number of housing units by income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time period. This requirement could be addressed by utilizing a matrix like the one illustrated below:

Income
New Construction
Rehabilitation
Conservation/
Preservation
Extremely LowVery LowLowModerateAbove ModerateTOTAL Item 2.5 - Attachment 3
787
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
August 1, 2023
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director
Town of San Anselmo
525 San Anselmo Ave.

Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a telephone conversation on July 19, 2023 with you, Lindsey Klein, Senior Planner and consultants Jackie Berg and Robert Klain.

The revised draft element addresses most statutory requirements in HCD’s April 26, 2023; however, additional revisions are necessary to substantially comply with State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq) as follows:

1. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).)
Nonvacant Sites: As noted on the previous review the element must include an analysis demonstrating the potential for redevelopment of nonvacant sites. To address this requirement, the element describes in general the existing use of each nonvacant site for example “commercial improved, single-family improved, singlefamily unimproved or exemption improved.” This alone is not adequate to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment in the planning period. Appendix B provides a picture of the sites but does not provide any description of the existing uses. The description of existing uses should be sufficiently detailed to facilitate an analysis demonstrating the potential for additional development in the planning period.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 4
788
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 2 ends

In addition, for methodology to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment of nonvacant sites the element was revised to include how sites were selected. If a site met at least three of the factors, then they were selected; however one of the factors included is if the opportunity site is subject to the Town’s Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS). While having objective standards is critical for removal of governmental constraints, it is unclear how this factor demonstrates the redevelopment potential of the selected sites in the inventory. As you are aware there are several sites that do not meet the Town’s methodology threshold of meeting at least three factors if the ODDS factor is not considered. The element must clearly demonstrate the methodology, including selection factors, supports potential residential development of nonvacant sites within the planning period.

Furthermore, if nonvacant sites accommodate 50 percent or more of the lowerincome need, the housing element must describe “substantial evidence” that the existing use does not constitute an impediment for additional residential use on the site. Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Realistic Capacity: As noted on the previous review the element provides assumptions of realistic capacity of 70 percent on nonvacant sites. To provide support for these assumptions the element includes two project examples in the Town, one in Sausalito and the other in Larkspur. The element states the developments were approved between 2016 and 2023; however it is unclear if the four examples represent a trend for all developments at similar affordability levels in the Town, Sausalito, and Larkspur. The element should provide support for this assumption or revise the element as necessary. Please see HCD’s prior review for additional information.

2. Include a program which sets forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for implementation, which may recognize that certain programs are ongoing, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period, that the local government is undertaking or intends to undertake to implement the policies and achieve the goals and objectives of the Housing Element through the administration of land use and development controls, the provision of regulatory concessions and incentives, and the utilization of appropriate federal and state financing and subsidy programs when available. The program shall include an identification of the agencies and officials responsible for the implementation of the various actions. (Gov.

Code, § 65583, subd. (c).)
Program 5.3a should be revised to include specific metrics and objectives, quantified where appropriate (e.g., facilitate how many affordable housing units).

Item 2.5 - Attachment 4
789
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 3 ends

3. Promote and affirmatively further fair housing opportunities and promote housing throughout the community or communities for all persons regardless of race, religion, sex, marital status, ancestry, national origin, color, familial status, or disability, and other characteristics... (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(5).)
While programs identified in Table 7.37 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Implementation Matrix were revised to include metrics as noted on the previous review goals and actions must specifically respond to the analysis and to the identified and prioritized contributing factors to fair housing issues and must be significant and meaningful enough to overcome identified patterns and trends. The element should include additional commitments for new housing choices and affordability in higher opportunity or higher income areas. In addition, while no areas have been identified as sensitive communities at risk of displacement. The element should still include actions to protect existing residents from displacement. For example, including actions for first right of return to existing residents and policies that include moving expenses; rent stabilization programs beyond what is required by California Civil Code 1946.2; and just cause eviction or other efforts improving tenant stability beyond what is required by California Civil Code 1946.2.

Based on email communication with you it appears the Town has approved the rezonings associated with the Housing Element Opportunity Sites. A copy of the resolution or ordinance should be transmitted to HCD for review. Please note, pursuant to AB 1398, a jurisdiction that failed to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline cannot be found in compliance until rezones pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c)(1) and 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed including all the by-right requirements.

Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the Town should continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available and considering and incorporating comments where appropriate.

Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.

Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs, and the Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Item 2.5 - Attachment 4
790
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 4 ends

Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the Town will meet housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.

HCD appreciates your diligent efforts and cooperation provided during the review. We are committed to assisting the Town in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Fidel Herrera, of our staff, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Proactive Housing Accountability Chief
Item 2.5 - Attachment 4
791
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
October 26, 2023
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director
Town of San Anselmo
525 San Anselmo Ave.

San Anselmo, CA 94960
Dear Heidi Scoble,
RE: Town of San Anselmo’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the Town of San Anselmo (Town) revised draft housing element received for review on August 30, 2023, along with revisions received on October 19, 2023. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by a telephone conversation on October 10, 2023 with you, Lindsey Klein, Senior Planner and consultant Jackie Berg.

The revised draft element addresses most statutory requirements in HCD’s August 1, 2023; however, additional revisions are necessary to fully comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code) as follows:

1. An inventory of land suitable and available for residential development, including vacant sites and sites having realistic and demonstrated potential for redevelopment during the planning period to meet the locality’s housing need for a designated income level, and an analysis of the relationship of zoning and public facilities and services to these sites. (Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (a)(3).) Identify actions that will be taken to make sites available during the planning period with appropriate zoning and development standards and with services and facilities to accommodate that portion of the city’s or county’s share of the regional housing need for each income level that could not be accommodated on sites identified in the inventory completed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) without rezoning, and to comply with the requirements of Government Code section 65584.09.

Nonvacant Sites: As noted on previous reviews the element must include an analysis demonstrating the potential for redevelopment of nonvacant sites. To address this requirement, several opportunity sites such as opportunity sites 7, 8, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 31, 53, 55, 56, 58 and 60 say “commercial building,” “commercial structure,” “aging commercial structure,” Item 2.5 - Attachment 5
792
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 2 ends

“aging retail buildings” or “partly vacant commercial structures.” This alone is not adequate to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment in the planning period.

The description of existing uses in Appendix B should be sufficiently detailed to facilitate an analysis demonstrating the potential for additional development in the planning period. Secondly, other opportunity sites such as sites 6, 12, 15 and 54 have a gas station or auto repair shop. The element should clarify if there are any environmental issues associated with these sites.

In addition, as mentioned on previous reviews the element needs to analyze the extent that existing uses may impede additional residential development. The element can elaborate on current information regarding development trends in the Town and nearby communities and should include market conditions and trends that demonstrate redevelopment potential and relate those trends to the sites identified. For example, the element could relate the characteristics of examples of recently redeveloped properties to the characteristics of the sites identified in the inventory. The element could also discuss how market conditions on Francis Drake boulevard relates to the redevelopment potential of the identified sites.

Absent trends, the Town should include strong programs directly related to facilitating the redevelopment of sites identified in the inventory. For example, as the element relies on consolidated sites to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA), particularly for lower-income households, it should amend Action 5.2e to include additional commitments to facilitate lot consolidation. For example, the program could commit to (1) granting density bonuses above state density bonus law (Gov. Code, § 65915.); (2) deferring fees specifically for consolidation; (3) expediting permit processing; (4) identifying and targeting specific financial resources; and, (5) modifying development standards.

Furthermore, as nonvacant sites accommodate 50 percent or more of the lowerincome need, the housing element must describe “substantial evidence” that the existing use does not constitute an impediment for additional residential use on the site. Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the RHNA.

Action 5.2a and 5.7a: Based on ordinance number 1179 it appears the Town has approved the rezonings associated with the Housing Element Opportunity Sites.

However, it is unclear if the rezones include all the by-right requirements pursuant to Government Code sections 65583, subdivision (c)(1) and 65583.2, subdivisions (c), (h), and (i). For example, rezone sites to accommodate lower income must have minimum density of 20 units per acre. However, the Town’s rezones to accommodate lower income currently have minimum densities of 13 to 30 units per acre. This is inconsistent with minimum rezoning requirements to Item 2.5 - Attachment 5
793
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 3 ends

rezone at a density of 20 units per acre, and inconsistent with the Town’s commitment on Action 5.2a and 5.7a to include residential units by-right at a minimum density of 20 units per acre and a maximum density of up to 30 units per acre. A copy of the revised resolution or ordinance should be transmitted to HCD for review.

For your information, pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), as the Town failed to adopt a compliant housing element within 120 days of the statutory deadline (January 31, 2023), rezones to accommodate the RHNA must be completed no later than one year from the statutory deadline. Otherwise, the local government’s housing element will no longer comply with State Housing Element Law, and HCD may revoke its finding of substantial compliance pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i) including all the byright requirements. If the Town fails to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline, the element cannot be found in substantial compliance until rezones to accommodate a shortfall of sites pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c), paragraph (1), subparagraph (A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed.

Programs: As stated above, the element does not include a complete site analysis, therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established.

Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the Town may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 5
794
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director

Page 4 ends

HCD appreciates the cooperation provided during the review. We are committed to assisting the Town in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Fidel Herrera, at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Proactive Housing Accountability Chief
Item 2.5 - Attachment 5
795

SAN ANSELMO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-18

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF SAN ANSELMO

RECOMMENDING THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL ADOPT THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL

PLAN AND MAKE THE ASSOCIATED CEQA FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the California Legislature has found that “California has a housing supply and affordability crisis of historic proportions. The consequences of failing to confront this crisis effectively and aggressively are hurting millions of Californians, robbing future generations of the chance to call California home, stifling economic opportunities for workers and businesses, worsening poverty and homelessness, and undermining the State’s environmental and climate objectives.” (Government Code section 65589.5); and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has further found that “Among the consequences of those actions are discrimination against low-income and minority households, lack of housing to support employment growth, imbalance in jobs and housing, reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.” (Government Code section 65589.5); and WHEREAS, the Legislature has adopted the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) which states that “In 2018, California ranked 49th out of the 50 states in housing units per capita…California needs an estimated 180,000 additional homes annually to keep up with population growth, and the Governor has called for 3.5 million new homes to be built over 7 years.”; and WHEREAS, State Housing Element Law (Government Code section 65580 et seq.) requires that the Town of San Anselmo (“Town”) adopt a Housing Element for the eight-year period of 2023- 2031 to accommodate the Town’s regional housing need allocation (“RHNA”) of 833 housing units comprised of 253 very-low income units, 145 low-income units, 121 moderate-income units, and 314 above moderate-income units; and
WHEREAS, State Housing Element law and General Plan law requires consistency among the Housing Element and other Elements in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, to comply with State Housing Element Law, the Town has prepared and posted the 2023-2031 Housing Element (“Housing Element”) in compliance with State law and has identified housing sites that can accommodate the Town’s RHNA including a buffer amount exceeding the Town’s RHNA; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of a Housing Element constitutes a General Plan Amendment pursuant to Government Code section 65350 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 65352 – 65352.5 the Town sent notice to all requesting California Native American tribes and no California Native American tribe requested consultation; and
WHEREAS, the preparation, adoption, and implementation of the Housing Element requires a diligent effort to include all economic segments of the community and take actions to affirmatively further fair housing; and
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
796
WHEREAS, the Town has conducted extensive community outreach to ensure robust public participation of all segments of the community in the development of the Housing Element and received direction from Town public officials related the Housing Element Update, beginning in June 2022 including: two public workshops on July 21, 2022 and August 25, 2022; seven Housing Element Advisory Committee meetings on July 11, 2022, July 25, 2022, September 9, 2022, November 3, 2022, December 15, 2022, May 15, 2023, and May 31, 2023; three Planning Commission meetings on December 19, 2022, May 15, 2023, and July 17, 2023; five Town Council meetings on June 4, 2022, October 11, 2022, January 10, 2023, May 23, 2023, and July 25, 2023; and
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2022, the Town Council appointed a Housing Element Advisory Committee (“HEAC”), that held public meetings and workshop sessions from July 2022 through May 2023; and
WHEREAS, on December 12, 2022, the Draft Housing Element was published and released for public review and comment consistent with Government Code section 65585, made accessible on the Town’s website, and a town-wide postcard was mailed to all residents giving information about the Housing Element and how public comment may be made; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2022, the HEAC conducted a public meeting on the Draft Housing Element to receive a staff presentation, accept public comment, and make a recommendation to the Town Council; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a public meeting on the Draft Housing Element to receive a staff presentation, accept public comment, and make a recommendation to the Town Council, at which time the Planning Commission unanimously recommended Town Council adoption of the Draft Housing Element; and WHEREAS, on January 10, 2023, the Town Council conducted a public hearing on the Draft Housing Element, at which time it voted unanimously to submit the Draft Housing Element to HCD; and
WHEEAS, after the required 10-day noticing period, the Town submitted the Draft Housing Element to HCD on January 26, 2023; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2023, the Town received a review letter from HCD indicating revisions and clarifications that, in the opinion of HCD, are necessary to meet the requirements of State law, Government Code section 65585(b); and
WHEREAS, on May 15, 2023, the Planning Commission and the HEAC held a joint public meeting and unanimously recommended revisions to the Housing Element in response to HCD’s April 26, 2023 comment letter; and
WHEREAS, on May 23, 2023, the Town Council held a public meeting to consider revisions to the Draft Housing Element in response to HCD’s April 26, 2023 comment letter, at which time the Council unanimously voted to approve said revisions and direct submission of a revised Draft Housing Element to HCD; and
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
797
WHEREAS, on May 25, 2023, a revised Draft Housing Element was released for public review; and WHEREAS, on May 31, 2023, the HEAC held a public meeting and unanimously recommended approval of the revised Draft Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, on June 2, 2023, following the required 7-day review period after release of the revised Draft Housing Element, the Town submitted said Draft to HCD; and WHEREAS, on August 1, 2023, the Town received a second review letter from HCD indicating revisions and clarifications that, in the opinion of HCD, are necessary to meet the requirements of State law, Government Code section 65585(b); and
WHEREAS, on August 22, 2023, a revised Draft Housing Element was released for public review; and
WHEREAS, on August 30, 2023, following the required 7-day review period after release of the revised Draft Housing Element, the Town submitted said Draft to HCD; and WHEREAS, on October 26, 2023, the Town received a third review letter from HCD indicating revisions and clarifications that, in the opinion of HCD, are necessary to meet the requirements of State law, Government Code section 65585(b); and
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2023, a revised Draft Housing Element was released for public review, posted for the required 7-day review period, and subsequently submitted to HCD for a third informal review; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines for the Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, during the CEQA review process, it was determined that the environmental potential impacts would be less than significant without the implementation of mitigation measures to reduce or eliminate any potentially significant project-related impacts and therefore a Negative Declaration was appropriate; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the CEQA, a Notice of Intent to adopt a Negative Declaration was prepared for public comment related to the Housing Element Update and related General Plan Land Use Element and Zoning Code text and map amendments, submitted to the State Clearinghouse (SCH# 2023060315) on June 12, 2023, and included a 30-day public review period is from June 12 through July 10, 2023; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”)(Public Resources Code Sections 21000 through 21189.3) and its implementing regulations (the “CEQA Guidelines”) (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 through 15387), on August 22, 2023, the Town Council certified the Initial Study and Negative Declaration at a public hearing upon consideration of written information and testimony received during a portion of the public comment period regarding the adoption of the Initial Study and Negative Declaration, which analyzes the environmental effects of the proposed amendment and finds no significant impacts; and
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
798
WHEREAS, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no supplemental or subsequent negative declaration for adoption of the Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element is required because none of the circumstances requiring supplemental or subsequent negative declarations exist; and WHEREAS, Government Code section 65353 requires a Planning Commission to hold at least one public hearing prior to approving the recommendation of a General Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is responsible for providing recommendations to the Town Council for proposed amendments to the Town’s Zoning Code pursuant to Government Code section 65853 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2023, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to take public testimony and consider the Housing Element Amendment contained herein and associated Negative Declaration; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED based on substantial evidence in the record that the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated as findings herein.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the Town of San Anselmo does hereby recommend that the Town Council find that the amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the General Plan including the following goals, policies, and objectives:

1. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the community and sustainability goals in the General Plan, as the identification of housing opportunity sites and implementation of associated programs will support the efficient utilization of land within the existing Town boundaries in connection with existing services, infrastructure, employment, and other amenities. An adequate supply of housing at all income levels is an essential element of environmental and community sustainability. The Housing Element promotes compatible infill development consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.

2. The amendments to Housing Element are consistent with the Land Use Element’s goals, policies, and objectives, because they guide development of additional housing units at density levels that facilitate feasible infill development consistent with the character of the Town and existing infrastructure, and near employment and businesses, while preserving the Town’s open space and environmental setting. - Land Use Element Goal C.1: Maintain the economic viability of the Town’s commercial core.
- Land Use Element Goal C.3: New developments shall be integrated harmoniously into San Anselmo’s existing neighborhoods and commercial areas. - Land Use Element Goal C.5: Accommodate the housing needs of a socially and economically diverse population.
- Land Use Objective 1: To manage future growth to ensure the orderly development of the community, the logical extension of urban services, Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
799
preservation of the area’s natural and cultural resources, and protection of the area’s environmental setting.
- Land Use Objective 2: To preserve and enhance the unique natural and urban characteristics of the community while accommodating suitable new growth. - Land Use Objective 3: To establish residential densities which are compatible with the environmental constraints of the area, and sensitive to adjacent land uses. - Land Use Objective 7: To protect and preserve those areas of unique natural and visual resources within the planning area.
- Land Use Objective 8: To limit future annexations to lands within the urban service area.

3. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Circulation Element’s goals, policies, and objectives because they guide development of additional housing as infill development with easy access to public transportation.

Some opportunity housing sites are located on main thoroughfares (such as Sir Francis Drake Boulevard) with access to main roadways and public transportation. - Circulation Element Objective 1: To maintain and enhance the residential quality and character of all streets in San Anselmo, with the exception of Red Hill Avenue and portions of Sir Frances Drake Boulevard, Greenfield Avenue, and San Anselmo Avenue.

4. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Open Space Element’s goals, policies, and objectives because they guide development of housing as infill development without encroaching on the Town’s Open Space, preserving the open space for the enjoyment and recreation of the community. - Open Space Element Goal C.2: Protect ridgelines, including the ridge zone, and preservation of the natural features of hillside lands. - Open Space Element Goal C.3: Protect highly visible hillside slopes and ridges from development, and maintain the visual presence of woodlands, riparian areas, and stream courses which are found on, or traverse, identified open space lands. - Open Space Element Goal C.4: Provide recreational areas for Town residents. - Open Space Element Objective 1: To protect from development those open space parcels which contribute directly to the Town’s identity, its sense of separate place in relation to other communities, and the quality of life in the community. - Open Space Element Objective 4: To provide and maintain a system of trails which will provide nonintrusive access from residential areas for open space and park lands.

5. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Conservation Element’s goals, policies, and objectives because they facilitate infill development of a variety of housing types within the existing areas of the Town, thereby protecting and conserving Open Space and park areas.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
800
- Conservation Element Goal A.1: Minimize environmental harm and the disruption of natural features, particularly in hillside and unstable soil areas. - Conservation Element Goal A.4: Preserve and protect significant habitats for fish, wildlife, and flora.

6. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Parks, Recreation, and Public Facilities Element’s goals, policies, and objectives because they facilitate and encourage infill housing development within the Town’s existing neighborhoods.

The Town has a large number of parks and public facilities that are integrated in the community and accessible from all neighborhoods, including (but not limited to) Creek Park, Landsdale Park, and Memorial Park. The Town’s public facilities include outdoor sports facilities such as tennis courts, children’s play areas, a dog park, and soccer and baseball fields. Given the Town’s existing parks and facilities, the additional housing units and residents that may be developed will be well-served by existing facilities and there is no anticipated need for additional parks or other recreation facilities.
- Parks, Recreation, and Public Facilities Element Goal A: Provide recreational areas for the residents.

7. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Noise Element as there will be no impacts related to noise. The Town’s Noise Ordinance, San Anselmo Municipal Code section Title 4, Chapter 7, must be complied with.

8. The amendments to the Housing Element are consistent with the Scenic Highways (Parkway) Element because they facilitate and encourage infill housing development.

In recent years, the Town has accomplished significant landscaping and signage improvements to the Town’s entryways. Some housing opportunity sites are located on Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and otherwise near the Town’s entryways and highways. These housing sites will blend well with the existing improvements and scenic highways, are appropriate for the areas, and will aesthetically improve these areas of the town.
- Scenic Highways (Parkway) Element Goal: Improve the appearance and aesthetic quality of the planning areas’ main thoroughfares, especially the entryways to the community.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the Town of San Anselmo does hereby adopt a resolution recommending that the Town Council adopt the Housing Element as attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference.

RESOLUTION PASSED AND ADOPTED, at the regular meeting of the San Anselmo Planning Commission on the 4th day of December, 2023 by the following vote:

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
801
AYES: Heiman, Asselstine, Pipkin, Chair Tunny
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: Strauss, Smith, Koblick de Leon
RECUSED: None
ATTEST: _______________________________
Heidi Scoble, Planning Director
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
802

EXHIBIT A
2023-2031 Housing Element
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
803
Town of San Anselmo
December 2023
Final Draft
Revision No. 6
For HCD Review
2023-2031

HOUSING ELEMENT
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
804
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
805
Section 1: Introduction 005
Section 2: Housing Needs and Constraints Executive Summary 055 Section 3: Housing Needs 059
Section 4: Housing Constraints 095
Section 5: Housing Resources 127
Section 6: Housing Opportunities 133
Section 7: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 175
Section 8: Policies, Programs, and Actions 293
Appendix A: Public Participation
Appendix B: Map Book

TABLE OF CONTENTS
B-001
A-001
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
806
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
807
1 INTRODUCTION
005 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
808
2 INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Housing Element
The Housing Element of the Town of San Anselmo General Plan will facilitate future housing growth intended to meet the needs of the community, along with the State’s housing goals as set forth in Article 10.6 of the California Government Code. All jurisdictions in the State of California are required to update their housing element every eight years in response to evolving housing needs. This Housing Element has been prepared to respond to current and near-term future housing needs in San Anselmo. It contains updated information and strategic directions (goals, policies, and action programs) that the Town is committed to undertaking to address local housing needs.

The Town of San Anselmo borders the City of San Rafael, the largest city and county seat of Marin County. It also borders two other towns, Fairfax to its north and Ross to its south. It is one of the San Francisco Bay Area's smallest jurisdictions in size (2.68 square miles) and population (12,775 in 2020). San Anselmo Creek and Sleepy Hollow Creek carves through the Town's urbanized area and thus, historically subject the Town to catastrophic flooding, with the latest occurring in 2005. The Town's planning area includes Sleepy Hollow, an unincorporated jurisdiction of the County of Marin. San Anselmo, sometimes referred to as the “Hub City”, is at the juncture of not only rivers but several roads leading connecting it to Bay Area and Marin County urban centers and West Marin’s bucolic agricultural and coastal communities.

Over the past thirty years housing costs have skyrocketed out of proportion beyond many residents' ability to afford housing; and interest rates, construction costs and high land costs all contribute to the ultimate cost of housing. This has several implications as it becomes more difficult to fill vacant jobs; traffic increases due to workers commuting from other cities; and many young families, and longtime residents are forced to relocate because they can no longer afford to live in the community.

This Housing Element builds upon the goals, policies, and implementing programs contained in the Town’s 2015-2023 Housing Element, which was certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and adopted on May 12, 2015.

State Law Requirements
State law requires each municipality to adopt a general plan containing at least eight elements, including a housing element. Regulations regarding Housing Elements are found in the California Government Code Article 10.6 Sections 65580-65589.11. Although the Housing Element must follow State law, it is a local document by nature. The Housing Element focuses on the needs, desires, and vision of San Anselmo residents as it relates to housing in the community. In accordance with State law, the Housing Element must:
• Provide goals, policies, quantified objectives, and scheduled programs to preserve, improve and develop housing. • Identify and analyze existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community. • Identify adequate sites that will be zoned and available (prior to Housing Element adoption) within the eight-year housing cycle to meet the Town’s fair share of regional housing needs at all income levels.

State Housing Element law recognizes that in order for the private sector to address housing needs and demand, local governments must adopt land-use plans and implementing regulations that provide opportunities for housing development without unduly constraint.

The housing action program must also identify adequate residential sites available for a variety of housing types for all income levels; assist in developing adequate housing to meet the needs of lower and moderate-income households; address governmental constraints to housing maintenance, improvement, and development; conserve and improve the condition of the existing affordable housing stock; and promote housing opportunities for all persons.
006 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
809
3 General Plan Consistency
The Town of San Anselmo General Plan serves as the ‘constitution’ for development in the Town of San Anselmo. It is a long-range Planning and Building document that describes goals, policies, and programs to guide decision-making. Once the General Plan is adopted, all developmentrelated decisions in the Town must be consistent with the Plan. If a development proposal is not consistent with the Plan, it must be revised or the Plan itself must be amended. State law requires a community’s General Plan to be internally consistent. This means that the Housing Element, although subject to special requirements and a different schedule of updates, must function as an integral part of the overall General Plan, with consistency between it and the other General Plan elements.

The Land Use, Circulation and Open Space Elements of the Town’s current General Plan were adopted in 1988. The Open Space Element was amended in 2019. The 2015 Housing Element was adopted consistent with the General Plan. The development projected under the updated Housing Element is consistent with the other elements in the Town’s current General Plan. Pursuant to SB 379 (2015), the Town's Safety Element is being updated concurrently with the Housing Element.

The current General Plan supports achieving many housing needs in concert with other community goals. The General Plan also supports infill development at densities of 30 dwelling units per acre through the designation of housing opportunity areas (“Housing Opportunity Areas/ Apartments (14-28 Units/Gross Acre”), as the Town intends to provide an incentive for low- and moderate-income housing.

The 2015-2023 Housing Element includes policy H.5 Equal Housing Opportunity, which ensures individuals and families who are seeking housing are not discriminated against on the basis of various identities, consistent with the Fair Housing Act. In response to federal rollback of HUD’s 2015 Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Final Rule, California passed AB 686 in 2018 to ensure AFFH remained an integral part of the housing legislation. AB 686 requires all public agencies to administer housing and community development programs and activities to affirmatively furthers fair housing and to take no action that is inconsistent with this obligation. This means “taking meaningful actions, in addition to combating discrimination, that overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities.” All municipalities must conduct an analysis on their existing and future policies, plans, programs, rules, practices, and related activities, identify impediments to fair housing, and make proactive changes to promote more inclusive communities.
007 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
810
4 Definitions of Key Housing Terms
In the context of housing elements, “affordable housing” generally focuses on housing for extremely low, very low-, low- and moderate-income households, but may also address housing for above moderate-income households. Generally, housing that costs no more than 30 percent of household income is considered affordable. This is especially true for lower income families. So how much do extremely low, very low-, low- and moderate-income households earn and who are they? The definitions below are used throughout this Housing Element. • Accessible Housing: Units accessible and adaptable to the needs of the physically disabled. • Emergency Shelter. Emergency shelter means housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay. • Housing Affordability: The generally accepted measure for determining whether a person can afford housing means spending no more than 30 percent of one’s gross household income on housing costs, including utilities, principal, and interest. For example, a teacher earning $50,000 per year can afford $1,250 per month for housing. A police officer or fire fighter earning $60,000 can afford up to $1,500 per month. • Housing Density: The number of dwelling units per acre of land. Gross density includes all the land within the boundaries of a particular area and excludes nothing. Net density excludes certain areas such as streets, open spaces, easements, water areas, etc. • Income Categories: Household income classifications, defined as a percentage of area median household income, as follows:

Table 1.1 Marin County Income Limits
Family Size Acutely Low
Income
Extremely Low
Income
Very Low
Income
Low
Income
Median
Income
Moderate
Income
1 $17,450 $39,150 $65,250 $104,400 $116,200 $139,450
2 $19,900 $44,750 $74,600 $119,300 $132,800 $159,350
3 $22,400 $50,350 $83,900 $134,200 $149,400 $179,300
4 $24,900 $55,900 $93,200 $149,100 $166,000 $199,200
5 $26,900 $60,400 $100,700 $161,050 $179,300 $215,150
6 $28,900 $64,850 $108,150 $173,000 $192,550 $231,050
7 $30,900 $69,350 $115,600 $184,900 $205,850 $247,000
8 $32,850 $73,800 $123,050 $196,850 $219,100 $262,950
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, State Income Limits for 2022 ◦ Acutely Low-Income Households: Acutely low-income households earn between 0-15 percent of the area median income (AMI).

According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, an acutely low-income family of four in Marin County would earn up to $24,900. ◦ Extremely Low-Income Households: Government Code Section 65583(a) requires local Housing Elements to provide “Documentation of projections and a quantification of the locality’s existing and projected housing needs for all income levels, including extremely low-income households (GC 65583 (a)(1)).” Extremely low-income is a subset of the very low-income regional housing need and is defined as households earning between 15-30 percent of AMI. According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, an extremely low-income family of four in Marin County would earn up to $55,900. ◦ Very Low-Income Households: Very low-income households earn between 30-50 percent of AMI. According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, a very low-income family of four in Marin County would earn up to $93,200. Low-Income Households: Low-income households earn between 50-80 percent of AMI; the term may also be used to mean 0-80 percent of AMI. According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, a low-income family of four in Marin County would earn up to $149,100. ◦ Median Household Income (MFI): The middle point at which half of the municipality's households earn more, and half earn less.

California law and State Income Limits reference the Area Median Income (AMI) pursuant to Health & Safety Code 50093(c), which states the MFI means “persons and families whose income does not exceed the area median income, as adjusted by the department 008 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
811
5 for family size in accordance with adjustment factors adopted and amended from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937.” In addition, MFIs are calculated by family rather than per person, as is done for income limits. Because the average family size is over 3, HUD equates the median family income for an area with a four-person family to calculate State income limits. According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, the MFI for a family of four in Marin County is $166,000.
◦ Moderate-Income Households: Moderate-income households earn between 80-120 percent of AMI. According to HCD’s 2022 income limits, a moderate-income family of four in Marin County would earn up to $199,200. ◦ Above Moderate-Income Households: Defined as households earning over 120 percent of the median household income. A moderate-income family of four in Marin County would earn more than $199,200. • Income Limits: Each year, HCD publishes income limits for households according to income categories and household sizes. With a median income of $166,000 in 2022, Marin County has one of the highest median household incomes in the state (Santa Clara County leads the state with $168,500 in median income). Income limits, adjusted according to family size, are shown below. HCD’s state income limits are based on federal income limits published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HCD limits were last published on May 13, 2022. Due to adjustments made by HCD to the HUD schedule, HCD income limits are higher than HUD income limits in 2022. HCD limits are used in this housing element, but certain funding programs may require HUD, or other income limit schedules, to be used. For additional information, see
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/docs/grants-and-funding/inc2k22.pdf • Jobs/Housing Balance: The relationship of the number and types of jobs in a community with the amount and affordability of housing. An appropriate balance is commonly thought to be 1.5 jobs for every one housing unit. A balance between the number of jobs and employed residents can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, freeway congestion, and fuel consumption as well as improve air quality. However, a one-to-one balance of jobs to housing does not guarantee a reduction in commute trips, especially if low-wage jobs require workers to commute to San Anselmo from lower-cost areas and high housing costs require existing residents to commute to other job centers for higher paying jobs.
• Persons per Household: Average number of persons in each household. • Senior Housing: Defined by California Housing Element law as projects developed for, and put to use as, housing for senior citizens.

Senior citizens are defined as persons at least 62 years of age. • Supportive Housing: Supportive housing is permanent rental housing linked to a range of support services designed to enable residents to maintain stable housing and lead fuller lives. This type of housing has no limit on length of stay, is occupied by the target population (such as low-income persons with disabilities and certain other disabled persons) and is linked to onsite or offsite services that assist the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community.
• Transitional Housing: Transitional housing and transitional housing development mean rental housing operated under program requirements that call for the termination of assistance and recirculation of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at some predetermined future point in time, which shall be no less than six months. Transitional housing is a type of supportive housing used to facilitate the movement of homeless individuals and families to permanent housing. A homeless person may live in a transitional apartment for up to two-years while receiving supportive services that enable independent living. • Workforce Affordable Housing: Housing that is affordable to the workforce in the community. 009 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
812
6 Sources of Housing Data
The main sources of data used to prepare the Housing Element were the 2020 U.S. Census and the 2019 American Community Survey (five- year estimates). The Census remains the most comprehensive and widely accepted source of information on demographic characteristics, and provides consistency with other regional, State and federal housing plans. The American Community Survey (ACS) is an ongoing statistical survey that samples a small percentage of the population every year. The ACS survey can have wide margins of error, especially for small communities, but the survey collects information that is not covered by the decennial Census. All ACS figures reported in this Housing Element should be regarded as estimates and not definitive numbers.

Data sources included:
• The Town of San Anselmo project staff and department websites • Population projections and housing counts from the California State Department of Finance; • The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2020 document provides population, household and employment projections; • Household income and affordability data by type of household is derived from the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) prepared by HUD utilizing 2017 American Community Survey 5-year estimates; • Housing market information is updated through Marin County Assessor sales data, and internet real estate listings and sales data; • ABAG’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area 2023-2031 provides information on existing and projected housing needs;
• Information from the Marin Housing Authority; and
• Wage data is from the State of California Economic Development Department. 010 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
813
7 Public Participation Overview
The Town of San Anselmo conducted a robust public engagement campaign to build community consensus and ensure transparency throughout the Housing Element update process. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Orders, the majority of Housing Element outreach was conducted virtually. Despite these limitations, the Town devised a multi-faceted approach which involved the establishment of a Housing Element Advisory Committee, a series of public meetings and elected and appointed official updates, one-on-one meetings with potential opportunity site property owners, a project website, online questionnaires, e-newsletters, community-wide survey and mailings, two community pop-up informational events, and announcements in the Town’s weekly newsletter.

Housing Element Advisory Committee
A seven-person ad-hoc committee was formed to advise the Town of San Anselmo staff on the Housing Element update. The Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC) was comprised of Town residents with a broad range of perspectives, ages, abilities, and backgrounds. The HEAC met six times throughout the course of the update process and provided invaluable feedback that was integral to the development of this document. Additional details on the purpose, process, and outcomes of the HEAC meetings are included in the following pages. Full summaries — as well as links to meeting recordings, agendas, and other materials —are included in the Public Outreach Appendix. 011 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
814
8 HEAC Meeting 1
Purpose
The first HEAC Meeting was held to introduce the HEAC and their role during the Housing Element update process. The meeting also provided meeting participants with an overview of the RHNA and the statewide Housing Element update process and guidance on the Town’s path to Housing Element adoption. The meeting aimed to gain an initial understanding of HEAC perspectives about San Anselmo and new housing in the community.

Process
The meeting was attended by 14 participants which included HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

HEAC Meeting 1 started off with introducing Town staff, the Consultant Teams, and the HEAC members, followed by an opportunity for public comment. The information discussed at the meeting included an overview of the HEAC member roles and responsibilities, an overview of the Housing Element update and RHNA process, and an opportunity for question-and-answer. The meeting also included an interactive poll where the HEAC members responded to questions, as summarized in the outcomes section below. After the poll questions were answered, the meeting included an introduction to the upcoming Town Hall Meeting, and a second question-and-answer opportunity. The meeting concluded with an overview and timeline of the next steps, how HEAC members can spread the word on the Housing Element update and upcoming public meetings, and lastly, a third question-and-answer opportunity.

Outcomes
The HEAC members were asked to answer general poll questions regarding the Housing Element update. Below are the key themes from the poll questions. A full summary of the poll is available in the Public Outreach Appendix.

What do you like most about living in San Anselmo?
The Town’s open space and natural features received the most votes, with 50 percent of HEAC members choosing this topic. The remaining topics which were proximity to amenities, sense of community, sense of safety and security, and other (walk/bike to restaurants and shops), received an equal number of votes with 12.5 percent of members choosing each of these topics.

As the Town seeks to meet the state mandate to plan for 1,000 new housing units at all levels of affordability, which housing types do you feel are most appropriate for San Anselmo? Participants were given the opportunity to select multiple responses for this question.

Medium density multifamily housing (5-15 units/site) received the most votes, with 16 percent of HEAC members choosing this housing type.

Smaller single-family homes on smaller lots, low density multifamily housing (duplex, triplex, quadplex), accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units, and mixed income senior housing received the second most votes with about 15 percent of HEAC members each choosing these housing types.

How can San Anselmo address housing affordability within Town limits? Participants were given the opportunity to select multiple responses for this question.

The allowance for an increase in density received the most votes, with 21 percent of HEAC members choosing this option. Incentives for private developers to build more affordable housing received the second most votes with 18 percent of HEAC members choosing this option.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 1.2c, Action 2.2b, Action 3.1a, Action 4.3b, Action 5.1a, Program 5.2, Action 5.6, Program 5.7, and Policy 6.
012 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
815
9 Public Outreach Overview
Surveys
Public outreach survey (in English and Spanish) on SurveyMonkey • Nextdoor, 3/3/22
• University of the Redlands
• San Anselmo Chamber of Commerce
• Youth (via schools)
• Ross Valley Seniors
• Cedars of Marin
• Local agencies and nonprofits (list attached for mailing or emailing flyer with dates) ◦ Public housing authority
◦ Housing providers
◦ Advocacy groups
• Email link to survey to Town business license email list and San Anselmo Chamber of Commerce and encourage employers to share with business’ employees
• Hard copy surveys at select locations
• Ross Valley Seniors
Public outreach survey regarding ADU’s July 2022: 127 respondents. • Instagram, 7/11/22, Housing Element linked in Bio
• On Town website & Town Manager weekly Newsletter
Housing Opportunity Interest Form (google forms): 174 respondents • On Town website & Town Manager weekly Newsletter
Public Draft Released for public comment on December 12, 2022 (start of: 30 day public comment period) • Publicize on Town website & Town Manager weekly Newsletter with links to document • Hard copies available in Town public library
• Postcard mailed to 11,600 residents and property owners • Public Comment portal open for written comments
Community Workshops • July 21, 2022 – Community Workshop – info session #1 • August 25, 2022 – Community Workshop – info session #2 Town CouncilMeeting Agenda Item/Presentation – zoom/in-person • January 25, 2022 - Housing Element Update and Overview Presentation • May 10, 2022 - Approval of Housing Element Consultant • June 14, 2022 - Establish the Housing Element Advisory Committee • June 28, 2022 - Confirm Appointments to Housing Element Advisory Committee • October 11, 2022 – Present Housing Element Update and Confirm Housing Opportunity Sites • January 10, 2023 – Review Draft Housing Element & approved via motion the submittal of the Draft to CA HCD 013 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
816
10 Planning Commission Meetings
• December 19, 2022 – Review Draft Housing Element, receive comments and recommendations • May 15, 2023- Reviewed Revised Draft Housing Element, receive comments and recommendations Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC)
• July 11, 2023- HEAC Kick-off Meeting
• September 21, 2022- Discussed Housing Opportunity Sites • November 3, 2023- Discussed Housing Opportunity Sites and Site Suitability • December 15, 2023- Reviewed policies, programs, and actions • January 17, 2023- Reviewed Draft Housing Element to be submitted to the HCD. • May 15, 2023- Reviewed Revised Draft Housing Element, receive comments and recommendations for proposed policy changes • May 31, 2023- Reviewed Revised Draft Housing Element, receive comments and recommendations for proposed non-policy changes Community Event Pop-ups
• October 14, 2022 “Live On the Avenue” Pop-Up (estimated 300+ people attending) • October 31, 2022 “Goblin Spooktacular” Town event Pop-up and Feedback forms in English and Spanish. To date: 16 responses from the forms. (estimated 700+ people attending)
Community Engagement Methods and Reach
Every meeting publicized on/in:
• Town Manager email newsletter (d)
◦ - Distributed weekly
◦ Initial Housing Element content: January, April, May 2022 ◦ Housing Element content every week: June 11, 2022 - present ◦ Subscribers: 5,599, open rate: 50%
• Town Manager – Special Edition newsletter (b)
◦ Distributed for special notice (of HEAC or Town Council meetings pertaining to the Housing Element) ◦ Housing Element special updates: 7/20/22, 8/23/22, 9/22/22, 10/10/22, 11/2/22 ◦ Subscribers: 56, open rate: 75-83%
• https://www.townofsananselmo.org/list.aspx - staff promotes email list on all mailed public notices by Planning Department • Next Door (a) - 10,000 members, 21 neighborhoods
• Instagram (c) - 1800 followers
• Spotlight on home page of Town website: https://www.townofsananselmo.org/ (e) • Town website calendar and Legistar/Granicus meeting agenda calendar: https://sananselmo-ca.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx (e) • Town Housing Element Update webpage – updated weekly: (e) • https://www.townofsananselmo.org/1517/Housing-Element-Update • Town Housing Element Advisory Committee webpage – updated as needed: (e) • https://www.townofsananselmo.org/1555/Housing-Element-Advisory-Committee-HEAC • Email town business email list and encourage employers to share with business’ employees • Posted notices on Town Bulletin Boards: 805 San Anselmo Avenue (Quick N Easy Market), Memorial Park and Town Hall 014 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
817
11 • Written materials and notices at Town Library
• Posted laminated notices at Hub bus station, near public transportation • Email to community-based organizations including San Anselmo churches and schools • Mailed postcard to all San Anselmo residents when draft element available for public comment, and highlighting Planning Commission and Town Council hearings – 11,600 residents and property owners • Email notices to Patch and Marin Independent Journal for inclusion in their upcoming event calendars 015 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
818
12 Public Outreach During Housing Element
Development
Town Council Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of the Town Council Meeting was to introduce the Consultant Team, provide the requirements of the Housing Element update, introduce the purpose of the HEAC, and provide a brief overview of a tentative project timeline.

Process
The meeting began with the Consultant Team introduction followed by an explanation of the goals and requirements of the Housing Element. The meeting then outlined the purpose and roles of the HEAC and provided a tentative project timeline of key milestones during the housing element update process. Opportunities for question-and-answer sessions were provided before the meeting adjourned.

Outcomes
The Town Council Introduction meeting resulted in the initial introduction of the Housing Element update process and public awareness of the process. The outcomes described above did not influence any policies, programs, or actions of this Housing Element. 016 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
819
13 Town Hall Meeting 1
Purpose
The first Town Hall Meeting was a Housing Element Update information session held to provide the community with an overview of the RHNA and statewide Housing Element update process, provide guidance on local application of statewide requirements, and to introduce Town staff, HEAC members, and the consultant team. The workshop was aimed to collect stakeholder and resident feedback on potential Town-specific approaches to meet the local RHNA and to gain insight on the greatest housing challenges and opportunities that face San Anselmo.

Process
Thirteen residents participated in the meeting, as well as Town staff and members of the Consultant Team.

The meeting began with a brief introduction on the purpose of the meeting and Housing Element, followed by introducing the HEAC members and the Consultant Team. The meeting included a detailed description of the RHNA and Housing Element Update process and discussed the Town’s path to Housing Element adoption. The meeting then transitioned to poll questions, where participants were asked questions about potential strategies to meet the Town’s RHNA and community values. The meeting concluded with an overview of project next steps, information about how participants can stay informed throughout the Housing Element process and spread the word, and a question-and-answer opportunity. Additionally, question-and-answer segments were conducted throughout the workshop in which attendees could provide written input through the Zoom chat feature.

Outcomes
Results from the poll are discussed below.

What do you like most about living in San Anselmo?
The Town’s open space and natural features received the most votes, with 64 percent of participants choosing this topic. The Town’s sense of community received the second most votes, with 14 percent of the participants choosing this topic. Sense of safety and security, proximity to amenities and “other” each received seven percent of the votes. The participant who voted for “other” specified in the chat that they favor the ability to walk and bike to shops and restaurants.

Low density multifamily housing received the most votes with 77 percent of participants choosing this housing type. Townhomes received the second most votes with 62 percent of participants choosing this housing type How can San Anselmo address housing affordability within Town limits? Participants were given the opportunity to select multiple responses for this question.

The allowance for an increase in density received the most votes with 64 percent of participants choosing this option. Streamlining the residential approval process (ADRB) received the second most votes with 50 percent of participants choosing this option.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 3.1a, Action 4.3b, Action 5.1a, Program 5.2, Action 5.6, and Action

5.7a.
017 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
820
14 HEAC Meeting 2 Summary
Purpose
HEAC Meeting 2 was held to discuss potential housing opportunity sites and gain insight from HEAC members on preferred locations to develop new housing. The meeting also aimed to review poll results from HEAC Meeting 1 and the Town Hall Meeting 1 to compare the results.

Process
The meeting was attended by 11 participants which included members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

HEAC Meeting 2 began with a vote to modify the meeting agenda. The motion passed. The meeting then opened for public comment. One community member commented. The Town Attorney then provided an overview of the Brown Act, followed by a question-and-answer opportunity.

The meeting then transitioned into an overview of the poll results from HEAC Meeting 1 and Town Hall Meeting 1, followed by a second questionand-answer opportunity. The next part of the meeting included a mapping exercise to gain insight into preferred housing locations using map. social, an interactive online mapping tool. HEAC members were able to use map.social to visualize and discuss potential housing opportunity sites in San Anselmo in an effort to establish the Housing Element’s sites inventory. The meeting concluded with administrative updates, public comment, a final question-and-answer opportunity, project next steps, and information about future opportunities for input.

Outcomes
Following the map.social exercise, staff received direction to further refine the sites.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 2.1b, Program 3.3, Action 5.2e, Program 5.3, Action 5.6b, and the Sites Inventory Analysis.
018 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
821
15 Town Hall Meeting 2
Purpose
The second Town Hall Meeting was held to update residents and receive feedback on the refined list of opportunity sites. The meeting also reintroduced the HEAC and the consultant team and provided the community with an overview of the RHNA and statewide Housing Element update process.

Process
The meeting was attended by 29 participants which included members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

The meeting began with introductions from the Town staff, the HEAC, and the Consultant Team and an overview of the meeting agenda. The meeting included a detailed description of the RHNA and the statewide Housing Element update process, an introduction to possible housing opportunity sites and suitability factors, and the weights assigned to each factor. A mapping exercise followed to guide the housing opportunity sites discussion, and a poll was taken. The meeting concluded with an overview of the project's next steps, information about future opportunities for input, and an opportunity for public comment.

Outcomes
Community members were asked poll questions regarding the site suitability analysis. Poll responses are listed below. A full summary of the meeting is available in the Public Outreach Appendix. This feedback was used to further refine the list of opportunity sites.

The appropriate amount of weight was given to each site suitability factor. • 7 participants answered I don’t know.
• 8 participants disagreed.
• 4 participants agreed.

The appropriate site suitability factors were considered in the analysis of housing opportunity sites. • 3 participants responded I don’t know.
• 3 participants disagreed.
• 8 participants agreed.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 2.1b, Program 3.3, Action 5.2e, Program 5.3, Action 5.6b, the Sites Inventory Analysis, and the methodology to identify site suitability. 019 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
822
16 HEAC Meeting 3 Summary
Purpose
HEAC Meeting 3 was held to provide HEAC members with a recap of Town Hall Meeting 2 and to discuss community member input regarding site suitability factors and housing locations in San Anselmo. Staff also provided information and sought input on housing unit yields from opportunity sites within different zoning districts and direction on density and development standards in each zoning district.

Process
The meeting was attended by 16 participants which included members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

HEAC Meeting 3 began with a welcome from staff and then opened for a public comment opportunity. The meeting included a summary of the Town Hall Meeting 2 and poll results for the site suitability analysis, and a summary regarding feedback on locating housing in commercial corridors. The HEAC member discussion included multiple comments about the implications of additional housing in the commercial corridors and the surrounding neighborhoods. The HEAC also discussed housing opportunity sites and the yields associated with each site. HEAC Meeting 3 concluded with a final question-and-answer opportunity, project next steps, public comment, and information about future opportunities for input.

Outcomes
Following the overview of feedback and preferences on possible housing sites, staff received direction to further refine sites.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 2.1b, Program 3.3, Program 5.2, Program 5.3, Action 5.6b, Action 5.7c, Action 5.7d, Action 7.2d, the Sites Inventory Analysis, and the methodology to identify site suitability. 020 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
823
17 HEAC Meeting 4 Summary
Purpose
HEAC Meeting 4 was held to review, discuss, and gain consensus on the refined housing opportunity sites and the associated yields analysis.

Staff informed HEAC members about the zoning amendments needed to accommodate the appropriate density on housing opportunity sites .

HEAC Meeting 4 also included a mapping exercise to provide HEAC members with an understanding of the site suitability analysis.

Process
The meeting was attended by 21 participants which included members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

HEAC Meeting 4 began with a welcome from staff and the opportunity for public comment. The meeting included an in-depth discussion regarding housing opportunity sites yield analysis, site suitability analysis, and refinements to the final housing opportunity sites and the yields analysis. The HEAC member discussion included a request to ensure geographic dispersion of affordable housing and zoning changes. The meeting concluded with a HEAC recommendation to the Town Council to confirm the final list of housing opportunity sites, a request for the ability to consider and include additional sites, at a later date, in addition to information regarding the next steps, and an overview of the project timeline.

Outcomes
The final opportunity sites were reviewed by HEAC members and recommended to Town Council.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 1.1b, Action 1.2b, Policy 2, Action 2.1b, Program 3.1, Program 3.3, Action 3.3b, Action 4.2a, Program 5.1, Program 5.2, Program 5.3, Program 5.6, Action 5.6b, the Sites Inventory Analysis, and the methodology to identify site suitability.
021 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
824
18 HEAC Meeting 5 Summary
Purpose
HEAC Meeting 5 was held to review, discuss, and gain consensus on the policy programs and actions of the draft Housing Element. The meeting objective was to receive feedback from the HEAC on the various policies, programs, and actions that will facilitate housing development.

Process
The meeting was attended by 12 participants which included members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the Consultant Team.

HEAC Meeting 5 began with a welcome from staff and then opened for a public comment opportunity. The meeting included a discussion of the draft policies, programs, and actions. The HEAC members had the opportunity to provide feedback and ask questions after each policy, program, and action was presented. The meeting concluded with project next steps, information about upcoming meetings, an overview of the project timeline, and an opportunity for public comment.

Outcomes
The draft policies, programs, and actions were reviewed and refined by HEAC members.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Program 5.6, Program 5.7, Program 5.8, Program 5.9, Action 6.3a, Action

6.3b, and Action 7.4b
022 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
825
19 Community Feedback Form
Purpose
The Community Feedback Form was intended to solicit feedback about local housing needs and priorities and identify the community’s preferences to meet the Town’s RHNA. The input gathered from the Community Feedback Form has served as the foundation of the Town’s strategy to meet its RHNA requirement. The form was made available on the project website ( https://www.townofsananselmo.org/1517/HousingElement-Up- date), and hard copies were made available as flyers from October 29th through November 7th, 2022 at various community events such as the Goblins’ Spooktaculatar on October 28th. A total of 35 responses were received.

Outcomes
Highlights from the Community Feedback Form are included below. A full summary of the results of the Community Feedback Form is included in the Public Outreach Appendix.

Where do you live?
“In San Anselmo” received the most votes with 94 percent of participants choosing this option. “Not in San Anselmo but in Marin County” and “Outside Marin County” both received the second most votes, with three percent of participants each choosing these options.

Where do you work?
“I do not work, (retired, unemployed, or other)” received the most votes with 56 percent of participants choosing this option. “In San Anselmo (including remote work)” received the second most votes, with 29 percent of participants choosing this option.

If you work in San Anselmo, how long is your commute?
“Less than 20 minutes” received the most votes with 58 percent of participants choosing this option. “60-75 minutes” received the second most votes, with 29 percent of participants choosing this option. “30-40 minutes” received the least number of votes, with 13 percent of participants each choosing this option.

What is your housing situation?
“I own my home” received the most votes with 85 percent of participants choosing this option. “I rent my home” received the second most votes, with 12 percent of participants choosing this option. “I live with family/ friends (I do not own nor rent)” received the least number of votes, with three percent of participants choosing this option.

What type of housing do you live in?
“House/duplex” received the most votes with 91 percent of participants choosing this option. “Apartment” received the second most votes, with six percent of participants choosing this option. “Townhome” received the least number of votes, with three percent of participants choosing this option.

What is your age?
“65 years and over” received the most votes with 65 percent of participants choosing this option. “46-64” received the second most votes, with 21 percent of participants choosing this option. “26-45 years” received the least number of votes, with 15 percent of participants each choosing this option.

Which bracket best describes your household income?
“$125,000 or more” received the most votes with 45 percent of participants choosing this option. “Less than $40,000” and “$65,000 to $99,000” 023 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
826
20 both received the second most votes, with 19 percent of participants each choosing these options.

Race and Ethnicity.
“White” received the most votes with 79 percent of participants choosing this option. “I prefer not to say” received the second most votes, with 9 percent of participants choosing this option.

What do you think are the most critical housing issues in San Anselmo? “Availability of housing that is affordable to moderate, low, and very low-income residents” received the most votes with 50 percent of participants choosing this option. “Number of new housing units getting built” and “Availability of housing for young families (e.g., 2+ bedrooms)” received the second most votes, with 11 percent of participants each choosing these options.

Have you ever faced discrimination in renting or purchasing housing? “No” received the most votes with 90 percent of participants choosing this option. “Yes” received the second most votes, with seven percent of participants choosing this option.

What do you think are the housing types most needed in San Anselmo? “Housing affordable to middle-income households” received the most votes with 37 percent of participants choosing this option. “Housing affordable to low-income households” received the second most votes, with 33 percent of participants choosing this option.

What are the most important considerations to address when planning new housing in San Anselmo over the next 10 years? “Energy efficient design and construction” and “New buildings designed to fit into the surrounding context” both received the most votes with 16 percent of participants choosing each of these options. “Walkability to schools, businesses, and services” received the second most votes, with 14 percent of participants choosing this option.

How well does your current housing meet your needs (choose all that apply)? “I am satisfied with my housing” received the most votes with 86 percent of participants choosing this option. “My housing/unit is too small for my household” received the second most votes, with nine percent of participants choosing this option.

Please identify any barriers to affordable housing (choose all that apply). “Limited availability to affordable units” received the most votes with 61 percent of participants choosing this option. “Lack of resources to help find affordable housing” received the second most votes, with 21 percent of participants choosing this option.

Please provide any additional comments below (e.g., if you have any suggestions for how to solicit additional feedback about the Housing Element Update?)
Below are common themes established from the 14 responses received for Question 15. • Consider building or approving plans on underutilized sites such as run-down malls or obsolete shopping centers prior to redeveloping single-family parcels.
• Provide subsidies for teachers, police, firefighters, Town staff, and others, so they can live in San Anselmo.
• Home ownership is hard to obtain in Marin County unless it was inherited or interested buyers have a very high-paying job (tech, finance etc.).
• Create incentives for homeowners to build
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), which could provide more housing in San Anselmo or keep multi-generational families together on one parcel.
024 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
827
21 • Consider the impacts induced by new housing, such as traffic and resources.
• Focus on smaller, affordable units rather than traditional single-family homes.
• Reduce parking standards and add bicycle parking
minimums for apartment/multifamily developments.
• Focus diversity and strategies to engage those who don’t live in San Anselmo but would want to if issues were addressed.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 1.1b, Program 3.1, Program 3.2, Program 3.3, Program 4.1, Program

4.5, Policy 5, and Policy 9
ADU Questionnaire
Purpose
The purpose of the ADU Questionnaire was to obtain local input on ADU development. The questionnaire was broken into three parts to target different demographics. The first segment posed questions to current ADU owners, the second segment targeted homeowners interested in building an ADU on their property, and the third segment addressed homeowners not interested in building an ADU on their property. This questionnaire was published online through ArcGIS Survey123 on July 15, 2022 and closed on September 1, 2022. A total of 320 responses were collected.

Outcomes
Key themes that emerged from the Current ADU Owner Questionnaire responses include:
• Approximately 48 percent of respondents intend for their ADU to be occupied by a renter. • Respondents indicated that monthly rent varied from no charge up to $2,075. • The Town should consider revising the permitting and planning process to be more affordable and user friendly, providing outreach to clarify the planning process, and easing zoning standards were cited as ways that the Town could encourage property owners to build an additional ADU.

Key themes that emerged from the Prospective ADU Owner Questionnaire responses include:
• Approximately 47 percent of respondents would intend for their ADU to be occupied by a family member, and 34 percent would intend for their ADU to be occupied by a renter.
• Respondents indicated that monthly rent ranging from no charge up to $2,075. • The Town should consider waiving or reducing planning and permit fees, streamlining the permitting process, providing outreach to clarify and simplify the planning process, providing financial incentives, and easing zoning and parking standards to encourage prospective ADU owners to build an ADU.
• Some participants shared that there was nothing the Town could do to encourage ADU construction because they do not need an ADU or there is a lack of space on their property. Additionally, participants raised concerns about:
◦ The Town’s water supply and parking capacity to support additional households; ◦ ADUs may be turned into Airbnbs rather than long-term housing stock; and ◦ There are not enough wildfire evacuation routes to support densification in the town’s existing hillside neighborhoods.

The outcomes described above influenced the inclusion of Action 5.1a, Program 6.1, Program 6.2, Action 6.3a, and Action 6.3b. 025 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
828
22 Public Outreach After Housing Element Development
HEAC Meeting 6
Purpose
The purpose of HEAC Meeting 6 was to provide an overview of the Housing Element Update purpose and process including a review of milestones and outreach opportunities, as well as the draft Housing Element made available for public review to the HEAC and the public with the goal of easing the review process to ensure public comment is received.

Process
Ten participants attended the meeting, including members of the public, HEAC members, Town staff, and the consultant team.

HEAC Meeting 6 began with a staff welcome, an opportunity for public comment, and a detailed description of the RHNA and Housing Element Update process. The meeting transitioned to review the Public Review Draft Housing Element. This portion of the meeting conveyed the focus of each public meeting conducted during the Housing Element process thus far, along with a description of the purpose of each of the Draft Housing Element's sections. The presentation then reviewed the opportunity sites, policies, programs, and actions proposed in the Draft Housing Element.

An opportunity for questions and comments followed the presentation. Multiple HEAC members provided questions and comments, which Town staff and the consultant team addressed. One member of the public asked a question, and Town staff and the consultant team responded. The meeting concluded with an overview of the project's next steps and an opportunity for public comment.

Outcomes
The outcome of the meeting was a greater understanding of the public review draft Housing Element. No recommendations for revisions to the draft were made.
026 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
829
23 Planning Commission Meeting Summary
Purpose
The purpose of the presentation of the Housing Element at the Planning Commission Meeting was to provide an overview of the Housing Element Update purpose and process including a review of milestones and outreach opportunities, as well as the draft Housing Element made available for public review to the Planning Commission and the public.. The goal of the meeting was to request comments from the Planning Commission on the Draft Housing Element, mainly focused on the Housing Plan chapter, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing chapter, and the effectiveness of the Town’s implementation of the 5th Cycle Housing Element. Public comments on the Draft Housing Element were also encouraged.

Process
Town staff began the Housing Element presentation with a detailed description of the RHNA and Housing Element Update process. Similar to the HEAC Meeting 6, the discussion transitioned to review the Public Review Draft Housing Element. This portion of the meeting conveyed the focus of each public meeting conducted during the Housing Element process thus far, along with a description of the purpose of each of the Draft Housing Element's sections. The presentation reviewed the opportunity sites, policies, programs, and actions proposed in the Draft Housing Element. An opportunity for questions from the Planning Commission followed the presentation. Multiple Planning Commissioners provided questions and comments about how the Town could gain more input from populations with special housing needs, re-zoning impacts, unit yield from opportunity sites, and consequences that would result if that Town did not comply with the Housing Element requirements.

Outcomes
The Planning Commission made no actions or recommendations. 027 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
830
24 Town Council Meeting Summary
Purpose
The purpose of the presentation of the Housing Element at the Town Council Meeting was to provide an overview of the Housing Element Update purpose and process including a review of milestones and outreach opportunities, as well as the draft Housing Element made available for public review to the Planning Commission and the public.

The goal of the meeting was to request comments from the Planning Commission on the Draft Housing Element, mainly focused on the Housing Plan chapter, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing chapter, and the effectiveness of the Town’s implementation of the 5th Cycle Housing Element.

Public comments on the Draft Housing Element were also encouraged.

Process
Town staff began the Housing Element presentation with a detailed description of the RHNA and Housing Element Update process. Staff then reviewed the Public Review Draft Housing Element. This portion of the meeting conveyed the focus of each public meeting conducted during the Housing Element process thus far, along with a description of the purpose of each of the Draft Housing Element's sections. The presentation reviewed the opportunity sites, policies, programs, and actions proposed in the Draft Housing Element. The last part of the presentation informed meeting participants of how the Town will address public comments and how they will influence the Housing Element. An opportunity for questions and comments followed the presentation. Questions and comments from Town Council members and members of the public were about environmental review factors, the project timeline, and the consequences that would result if the Housing Element process were delayed. There was also concern that opportunity sites in the downtown will affect density and building height. Staff and the Town Attorney addressed the comments and concerns. Staff recommended that the Town Council approve the Draft Housing Element as is.

Outcomes
The town council approved the Draft Housing Element to be submitted to HCD. 028 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
831
25 Review of Past Performance
The following section summarizes the results and outcomes of the 2015-2023 Housing Element’s goals, objectives, policies, and programs throughout the 5th cycle planning period. During the 5th Cycle Housing Element, the Town of San Anselmo implemented programs that facilitated development of new housing, supported residents to avoid being evicted during the COVID-19 pandemic, and supported upgrades to improve energy efficiency and quality in many existing housing units.

The Town adopted new regulations and policies to facilitate the by-right development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The Town also adopted a new process to allow greater flexibility in application of zoning regulations; updated the Town’s fee schedule to waive building permit fees for deed-restricted affordable units; and partnered with other Marin County jurisdictions to create a colorful new website and handbook for homeowners seeking to construct ADUs. The Town has approved 90 ADUs and has issued building permits for 59 ADUs since 2015, during the 5th cycle planning period.

The Town also adopted regulations to implement State and local greenhouse gas reduction goals and climate adaptation strategies including water efficient landscape requirements, new green building regulations, and requirements for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.

Several multifamily structures were approved resulting in six new deed-restricted very low- and low-income units. The Town found that the Zoning Code encouraged these market rate developers to include deed-restricted affordable housing in their projects to obtain density incentives and concessions. Without the Town’s existing development standards, the applicants would have proposed 100 percent market rate development at a smaller scale. Two multifamily projects approvals were appealed to the Town Council. One was a legal nonconforming three-unit project on a single-family lot. The Planning Commission originally denied the project due to the Variance requests. The applicant appealed the project and the Town Council upheld the appeal. The other was a 6-unit project that was appealed by neighbors. The item was continued by the Town Council and the appeal was withdrawn. Table 1.2 shows the Town's RHNA progress from 2015 until June 30, 2022.

Table 1.2: Regional Housing Needs Allocation Progress - Permitted Units Issued by Affordability Income Level
RHNA
Allocation
by Income
Level
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
Total Units
to Date (all
years)
Total
Remaining
RHNA by
Income Level
Very Low
Deed
Restricted 33 N/A 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
20 13 Non-Deed
Restricted N/A 2 N/A 1 N/A N/A 3 3 8 N/A
Low
Deed
Restricted 17 N/A N/A 2 2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
26 N/A Non-Deed
Restricted N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A 3 9 9 N/A
Moderate
Deed
Restricted 19 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
63 N/A Non-Deed
Restricted N/A 2 1 4 7 7 5 26 11 N/A
Above
Moderate N/A 37 1 4 5 5 3 1 5 0 N/A 44 N/A
Total RHNA 106
Total Units 5 6 12 37 10 12 43 28 N/A 153 13
Source: Town of San Anselmo
029 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
832
26 2021 Household Income Limits and Maximum Housing Costs The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) annually estimates the Area Median Income (AMI) for Marin County and sets income limits for housing programs. ¹ In 2022, HUD estimated Marin County’s AMI was $166,000. Census data indicates that San Anselmo’s median income is higher than Marin County as a whole. ²
1 The basis for HUD’s median family incomes is data from the 2018 American Community Survey, table B19113 Median Family Income In The Past 12 Months. A Consumer Price Index (CPI) forecast is used to bring the 2018 data forward to 2021.
2 $128,212 vs. $110,843 based on 2019 American Community Survey Data 3 Based on 2021 Income Limits for Marin County and using HUD Guideline of 30 percent of household income available for monthly rent and utilities.

Table 1.3: 2021 Household Income Limits
Income Category Income Range
Acutely Low-Income
(0-15% of Area Median Income)
1 person household: $0-$ 17,450
4-person household: $0-$ 24,900
Extremely Low-Income
(15-30% of Area Median Income)
1 person household: $17,451-$39,150
4-person household: $24,900-$55,900
Very Low-Income
(30%-50% of Area Median Income)
1 person household: $39,151-$65,250
4-person household: $55,901-$93,200
Low-Income
(50-80% of Area Median Income)
1 person household: $65,251-$104,400
4-person household: $93,201-$149,100
Median-Income 1 person household: $104,401-$116,200
4-person household: $149,101-$166,000
Moderate-Income
(80-120% of Area Median Income)
1 person household: $116,201- 139,450or more
4-person household: $166,001-199,200
Source: HUD
Table 1.4: Maximum Housing Costs
Income Level Maximum Housing Cost
1-to-4-person household³
Acutely Low-Income $393 - $561
Extremely Low-Income $960 - $1,370
Very Low-Income $1,599 - $2,284
Low-Income $2,561 - $3,659
Median-Income $2,618 - $3,740
Moderate-Income $3,141 - $4,488
Source: HUD
030 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
833
27 Accessory Dwelling Units
Accessory dwelling units (ADU) make up most of the new housing units in the town and are responsible for most of the affordable housing units.

The number of annual ADU applications has more than doubled since 2020 when new State law eliminated floor area limits, lot coverage limits, and parking requirements for most ADUs. These applications increased with minimal promotion of the Town’s ADU incentives.

ADU Applications
30 27
25 20
15 10
5 0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
ADU Applications
The Town partnered with other County jurisdictions to launch a website (https://adumarin.org/) promoting ADUs and providing development information to property owners. The website includes a cost calculator and a colorful workbook available for download.

ADUs are allowed on all multifamily sites in accordance with State law, but no ADUs have been created on any multifamily sites to date. Staff believe more units can be created on these sites with promotion of the Program 6.2, such as mailed information to property owners. ADUs remain an important source of affordable housing in the town, and their development can be increased in the 6th housing element cycle via implementation of Policy 6.

Multifamily
Multifamily housing, particularly those units available for rent, have remained a source of affordable housing in San Anselmo. About 17 percent of San Anselmo housing units are located within triplexes, fourplexes, or larger developments. Apartments add to the inventory of housing that can be accessible to renters and their preservation and development is encouraged in the Housing Element Update. Staff have noted that the most expensive apartments are in larger (15+ unit) apartment developments with more amenities, such as the 70- unit Parkside Apartments on Sunny Hills Drive and 15-unit apartment complex on 35 Tamalpais Avenue. Apartment rental prices continue to increase, as do housing costs across all housing types. 22 10 10 10
5 5
2 Table 1.5: Multifamily Rental Units
Number of Units Total Sites Total Units
More than 4 units 70 757
4 Units 21 84
3 Units 41 123
2 Units 352 704
Single-family 3,922 3,922
Total Units 5,590
Source: Town of San Anselmo
031 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
834
28 Single-Family Units
Rent prices of single-family units vary greatly based on the home size, number of bedrooms, and construction year. Based on units advertised since 2015, over half of the single-family homes for rent in San Anselmo were affordable to low- and moderate-income families. On the higher end, one newly constructed three-bedroom house was advertised for rent at $9,000 per month in 2021.

Table 1.6: Monthly Homeownership Costs
1 Bedroom
Condo
1 Bedroom
Single-Family
2 Bedroom
Condo
2 Bedroom
Single-Family
Median
Single-Family 2020
Unit price $650,000 $740,000 $800,000 $1,150,000 $1,362,500 Mortgage (3% to 3.38%) $2,192 $2,496 $2,698 $3,941 $4,819 Insurance $42 $275 $42 $275 $275
HOA Dues $450 N/A $600 N/A $ -
Taxes $875 $964 $1,027 $1,376 $1,605
Total $3,559 $3,735 $4,367 $5,592 $6,699
Source: Town of San Anselmo
In 2020, 160 single-family homes were sold with a mean price of $1,523,090 and median price of $1,362,500. Nine condominium and townhome units were sold with a mean price of $1,145,000 and a median price of $1,400,000. Condominium and townhome units were not more affordable than conventional detached single-family residences.

Table 1.6 lists typical monthly costs for more affordable San Anselmo ownership properties for-sale compared with a median-priced single-family residence. When compared to Table 1.4, Table 1.6 indicates that there are still opportunities for moderate-income families to purchase small residences in San Anselmo. However, lower income residents must overpay to afford the monthly costs of home ownership. 4 Marin County Assessor Data https://www.marincounty.org/depts/ar/divisions/assessor/sales 032 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
835
29 Review of Past Performance
The following pages review the 2015-2023 Housing Element goals, policies, and programs and include Town Staff recommendations regarding continuing, modifying, or deleting the programs. The Town Council and public are invited to comment on this document, which will be incorporated as an appendix in the next housing element.

Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
GOAL 1 — BUILD LOCAL GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY AND MONITOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO EFFECTIVELY RESPOND TO HOUSING NEEDS.

Policy H1.7 Organizational Effectiveness. In recognition that there are limited resources available to the Town to achieve housing goals, the Town will seek ways to organize and allocate staffing and community resources effectively and efficiently to implement the programs of the Housing Element.

H1.A Create a Housing Element Implementation
Subcommittee. The Town
will create a Housing
Element Implementation
Subcommittee of the
Planning Commission to
work with the staff, the
community and non-profits to implement Housing
Element programs and to be
available for future updates
of the Housing Element.

Responsibilities of the
Subcommittee include:

Assist in implementing
Housing Element programs.

Establish Subcommittee
in 2015 and develop work
program in 2015
This program is no longer appropriate. In 2016, two
Planning Commission
members were appointed to the subcommittee. The
subcommittee met only
once. Instead, the 7-member
Planning Commission
served this role by reviewing
proposed regulations. The
Town Council, through
recommendations by staff,
prioritized Housing Element
programs to implement as
Town Council work plan
priorities.

Delete this program. The
Planning Department has
inadequate staff to support
a sixth committee. Continue
to have Town Staff present
annual report to Planning
Commission and Town
Council and review progress
on Housing Element
programs. Annually prioritize
programs to implement and
consider when the Town
budget is considered.
a. Participate in the annual
review of the Housing
Element.

The Town Council reviews
Housing Element progress
annually.
b. Develop an annual
work program to assist in
implementing Housing
Element programs for review
with the Town Council.

The Town Council, with
advice of staff, develops
work program priorities and budget and has included
Housing Element programs
to implement.
c. Review options for funding affordable housing.

No general review of funding sources has taken place.

The Planning Commission
has considered an
inclusionary housing fee
that the Town Council and
Planning Commission are
scheduled to consider in
2023 after workshops with
developers.

Add new program (See
Action 1.2b) to retain
consultant with expertise in
affordable housing funding
to present options for
funding affordable housing
in the town.
d. Make recommendations
to the Planning Commission
and Town Council on
strategies for housing
opportunity sites and for
funding.

Not completed by subcommittee.

Delete. Staff would be more
effective by continuing
to work with housing opportunity site owners and
bring projects before the full
Planning Commission.
e. Conduct community outreach and provide
community information
materials through an open
and non-advocacy process.

Not completed by
subcommittee. Planning
Commission meetings are
used for open discussion on
housing issues and
publicized to the community. Town Staff engages
property owners to identify
opportunities for
Delete. Community outreach
will take place with Housing
Element Update and specific programs will provide
community information
materials.
033 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
836
30 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
f. Engage property owners
in identifying opportunities
for the construction of
affordable housing.
affordable housing. Planning Commission members could
have a conflict of interest
if the project ever comes
before them for review.

Delete. Housing owners are
contacted and engaged as
part of the Housing Element
Update.
g. Pursue unique opportunities where the
Town can participate in the
construction of affordable
housing, either on Town- owned sites, or through
funding or regulatory
means. (For example, the
Subcommittee will review
Town-owned sites and
recommend a program for
development for review with
the Town Council).

Town Staff has pursued
potential affordable housing
projects for Town-owned
sites and has included all
relevant staff (Building,
Public Works, and Fire
Departments), which would
be complicated to organize
with a subcommittee of
Planning Commissioners.

Any potential projects would
be brought to the Town
Council to consider.

Modify by combining this
with the new program
(See Action 1.2b) to have
a consultant assist with
development of funding
options and development
program for affordable
housing on Town owned
sites.
h. Review funding options as part of the annual
Housing Element review
and support funding
applications as opportunities
are available and undertake
other actions (such as
modifications to parking
requirements and granting
concessions and incentives)
to assist in the development of housing for extremely
low-income households.

The Planning Commission
has discussed a potential
inclusionary housing fee.

The Town Council adopted regulations for single room
occupancy units in 2018,
including modifications
to parking standards for
extremely
low-income units (Ordinance 1126).

Modify by combining this
with the new program
(See Action 1.2b) to have
a consultant assist with
development of funding
options and development
program for affordable
housing on Town owned
i. Develop an incentive
program for affordable
housing, including adoption
of an Affordable Housing
Overlay Zone and allowing
housing as a “use-by-right” on key sites.

State law provides ample
incentives for development
of affordable housing,
including significant density
bonuses and parking
waivers. The Town will
consider by-right housing as
part of the Housing Element
Update process.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an
Affordable Housing Overlay
District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.
j. Develop ongoing and
annual outreach and
coordination with non- profit housing developers
and affordable housing
advocates to participate in
Subcommittee meetings
and provide advice and
comment on proposed
zoning and other program
implementation.

Town Staff have conducted
outreach to non-profit housing developers and
have met with three.

Modify. Staff should continue
outreach to non- profit housing developers to
facilitate development of
Town-owned sites and other
Town sites that become
available for development.
k. Work with infill property owners in the Downtown
and adjacent areas by
conducting outreach with
property owners in 2015, as
part of the Subcommittee
tasks, and to identify specific incentives for property owners to develop their
properties with housing,
including the identification
of incentives the Town can
utilize to encourage lot
consolidation to achieve
economies of scale in site
development.

Town Staff met with property owners at two workshops
held in November 2021 to
discuss housing incentives
(i.e., objective design
standards) and solicit
comments.

Modify by combining this
with the new program
(See Action 1.2c) to work with non-profit developers and affordable housing advocates to solicit feedback
on zoning amendments and
program implementation
034 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
837
31 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
l. Revisit the Visioning
process conducted for
Lower San Anselmo
Avenue and conduct
outreach to property owners to effectuate changes
consistent with the Vision.

Staff have had contact
with the property owner
of largest site in the area
and have discussed three
development proposals.

Delete. Staff has actively
communicated with Lower
San Anselmo Avenue
property owners as part
of the Housing Element
Update to inform them of
rezoning and incentives
proposed as part of the
Housing Element Update.
m. Eliminate residential
density in prescribed infill
areas, such as along
Greenfield, in the
Downtown and along Lower
San Anselmo Avenue, to
encourage new residential
uses. Allow residential uses
by-right, subject to design review, as long as parking, setbacks and building height standards are met in the
development).

The Town has found that
having specific density
limits aid in certainty for
developers and ease in
implementation of the State
Density Bonus Law to
encourage development of
affordable units. Town will
be considering adoption of
objective design standards
and by-right zoning in 2023.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an
Affordable Housing Overlay
District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.

Policy H1.3 Neighborhood Responsibilities within San Anselmo. The Town will seek ways, specific to each neighborhood, to provide additional housing as part of each neighborhood’s fair share responsibility and commitment to help achieve community-wide housing goals. This may include in-lieu fees, second units, infill housing, mixed-use, or other new housing construction.

No programs corresponded to this policy. The Town will continue this policy in the 6th cycle Housing Element as part of the effort to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing and provide housing opportunities in all neighborhoods.

Policy H1.8 Housing Element Monitoring, Evaluation and Revisions. The Town will establish a regular monitoring and update process to assess housing needs and achievements, and to provide a process for modifying policies, programs and resource allocations as needed in response to changing conditions.

H1.B Review the Housing Element Annually. As
required by State law,
the Town will review the
status of Housing Element
programs by April of
each year. To maintain
consistency between the
Housing Element and the
other General Plan
Elements and the policies and programs, as portions
of the General Plan are
amended in the future,
this Housing Element will
be reviewed to ensure
that internal consistency
is maintained. In addition,
a consistency review will
be implemented as part of
the annual general plan
implementation report
required under Government
Code Section 65400.

Review and monitoring of Housing Element
implementation; submittal
to HCD
Annually by April 1st
In accordance with State
requirements, the Town
prepares Housing Element
Annual Progress Reports
after each calendar year.

The program implementation
has been successful, and
the Town has reviewed
the Housing Element on an
annual basis and
submits Annual Progress
Reports to HCD annually.

Modify. The annual report is
required by State law.

The Town will develop
new programs for effective
monitoring and reporting
on the status of housing in
the Town in ways that go
above and beyond State
requirements.

H1.I Update the Housing Element. Update the San
Anselmo Housing
Element pursuant to State
law requirements. Upon
adoption, the Town will
submit the updated Housing
Element to the Marin
Municipal Water District,
the Central Marin Sanitation
Agency, and the Ross Valley Sanitary District.

Consistency with Housing Element law Update the Housing Element by 2023 The Town is in the process of updating the Housing
Element.

Delete. This is a State law
requirement and does not
need to be an
implementation program in
the Town’s Housing Element
to be reviewed annually.
035 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
838
32 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H1.5 Equal Housing Opportunity. To the extent possible, the Town will ensure that individuals and families seeking housing in San Anselmo are not discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, marital status, disability, age, sex, family status (due to the presence of children), national origin, or other arbitrary factors, consistent with the Fair Housing Act.

H1.C Publicize Fair Housing Laws and Respond to
Discrimination Complaints.

Promote fair housing
opportunities for all people
and support efforts of Town,
County, State and Federal
agencies to eliminate
discrimination in housing
by continuing to publicize
information on fair housing
laws and State and federal
anti-discrimination laws.

The Director of Planning
is the designated Equal
Opportunity Coordinator in
San Anselmo with
responsibility to investigate and deal appropriately with complaints. Discrimination
complaints will be referred
to the Fair Housing of
Marin, the Marin Housing
Authority, HUD, or the
California Department
of Fair Employment and
Housing, as appropriate.

Information regarding the
housing discrimination
complaint referral process
will be posted on the Town’s website
and available consistent with
Program H1.D.

Obtain and distribute
materials (see Program
H4.D) and respond to
complaints
Ongoing and in response to
complaints
This program is appropriate to disseminate information
on fair housing. Town Staff
did not receive any fair
housing complaints directly.

The Town posted links to
Fair Housing of Marin, Marin
Housing Authority, Legal
Aid, and Marin Mediation
Services on the Town
website and obtained and
makes fair housing literature
available including flyers in
multiple languages.

HUD Region 9 reported two
(2) Fair Housing inquiries for San Anselmo between
01/01/2013 – 03/19/2021
(one for sex and one for
disability). While these aren’t
official cases, there is still
value to identify concerns
that residents have about
possible discrimination.

These
inquiries may not have been
pursued by the resident for any number of reasons.

The Town Council has
promoted fair housing by
proclaiming April to be Fair
Housing Month every year
and reviewing a report on
complaints received.

On 12/11/18, the
Town Council adopted Ordinance 1131 to prohibit discrimination based on source of income.

Modify this program to
eliminate the completed
website work.
036 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
839
33 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
H1.D Provide Information
on Housing Programs.

The Town will promote the availability of Marin County programs for housing construction, homebuyer
assistance, rental
assistance, and housing
rehabilitation through
the following means: (a)
Creating a link on the Town’s
website that describes
programs available in the
Town of San Anselmo
and provides direct links to
County agencies that
administer the programs; (b) Including contact information on County programs in
Town newsletters and other
general communications
that are sent to residents;
with the Maintaining
information on programs at
the Town’s public counter;
(d) Training selected Town
Staff to provide referrals;
and (e) Distributing
information on programs
at public locations (library, schools, etc.) Examples of specific information would include:

1. Fair Housing Laws;

2. Rehabilitation loan
programs; 3. Housing
Authority information; 4.

Housing programs; 5. Code
enforcement; 6. Homebuyer assistance; 7. Information
about affordable housing.

Update website and provide
information to residents
Review and update
website links by September 2015; distribute and post
information at least once
annually
This program is effective.

The Town receives
information from the
Marin Housing Authority
on affordable housing
availability and shares
this information by email
and bulletin boards. Town
Staff provide informational
handouts at Town Hall and
on the Town website.

The Town promoted the
COVID-19 emergency rental assistance program
administered by the County
in 2021. Information was
included in the Town’s email
newsletter and business
newsletter. Letters were
mailed to all renters and
owners of multifamily
property. As of January
2022, the County had
received 135 applications
from San Anselmo residents
and paid 40 cases.

Staff promote a County
program that offers loans to
owners that will create units
available to those using
Housing Choice Vouchers
and other incentives.

Modify this program to
delete the portions that
have been implemented
and define specific goals for
public outreach.

Policy H1.2 Community Participation in Housing and Land Use Plans. The Town will undertake effective and informed public participation from all economic segments and special needs groups in the community in the formulation and review of housing and land use policy issues.

Continue Policy.

Policy H1.4 Neighborhood Meetings. Developers will be encouraged to have neighborhood meetings with residents early in the process to undertake problem solving and facilitate more informed, faster and constructive development review.

H1.E Community Outreach
when Implementing
Housing Element Programs.

Coordinate
with local businesses,
housing advocacy groups,
neighborhood groups, and
the Chamber of Commerce
to build public understanding
and support for workforce,
special needs housing
and other issues related
to housing, including the
community benefits of
affordable housing, mixed- use and pedestrian-oriented
development. The Town will
notify a broad representation of the community to solicit ideas for housing strategies
when they are discussed
at Planning Commission
or Town Council meetings. Specific outreach activities
include:

Conduct outreach and
distribute materials
Consistent with
implementing programs
In 2019, the Town
considered a draft ordinance
to require parties to meet
and confer prior to appealing decisions to the Town
Council, but it was not
adopted.

The Town now requires
applicants to review plans with neighbors prior to
submitting for planning
entitlements.

Modify to indicate that the
Town will use best practices for outreach that encourage community involvement
from all segments of the
community, rather than
engaging in performative
outreach efforts. The new
programs will use a variety
of outreach methods to
reach different populations
of the Town.
037 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
840
34 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
a. Maintain the Housing
Element mailing list and
send public hearing notices
to all interested public, non- profit agencies and affected property owners.

The mailing list for the
Housing Element Update
started in 2021 and was
advertised on every mailed
notice sent out by Planning
Department during the
Housing Element Update,
estimated at 200 per month,
and posted on website.

Continue
b. Post notices at Town Hall,
the library, and the Post
Office.

All notices are posted at
Town Hall, which is
immediately adjacent to the
library. There is no place
to post a flyer at the Post Office
Modify, see Program H1.E
above.
c. Publish notices in the
local newspaper.

Notices are published in
the newspapers as required
by law.

Modify, see Program H1.E
above.
d. Post information on the
Town’s website.

All agendas are posted on
the Town website for any
meetings by the Town.

Modify, see Program H1.E
above.
e. Conduct outreach
(workshops, neighborhood
meetings) to the community as Housing Element
programs are implemented.

No neighborhood meetings were conducted. Modify, see Program H1.E above.
f. Assure that Housing
Element Implementation
Subcommittee meetings
are publicized and
provide opportunities for
participation from housing
experts, affordable housing
advocates, special needs
populations, and the
community as a whole.

The subcommittee only
met once, and it was not
to consider any programs,
and it was not noticed to the
public.

Modify, see Program H1.E
above.
038 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
841
35 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H1.6 Local Funding for Affordable Housing. The Town will seek ways to reduce housing costs for lower income workers and people with special needs by developing ongoing local funding resources and continuing to utilize other local, state and federal assistance to the fullest extent possible.

H1.G Establish an
Affordable Housing Fund.

Establish an Affordable
Housing Fund to increase
below market rate affordable
housing opportunities in
San Anselmo. Specific
uses of the fund, operating
procedures/criteria, sources
of funding, decisions
on accepting funding or donations, actions tied
to obtaining funds, etc.,
would be developed by
the Housing Element
Subcommittee and staff,
and approved by the Town
Council.

Potential sources of funds
could include, but would
not be limited to: a. Marin
Workforce Housing Trust;
b. Marin Community
Foundation; c. Federal
Grants; d. Transportation
Authority of Marin; e. In- lieu fee payments under
inclusionary requirements,
including consideration of in- lieu fees beginning at 2 unit for-sale developments — assuring that the payment
of in-lieu or housing impact fees are reasonable and
not punitive; f. Voluntary
donations (such as
bequeaths, trusts, donations
of land and buildings, etc.);
g. Affordable Housing
Impact Fee on larger single- family homes. (For example, consider Marin County’s
sliding scale housing impact fee on larger homes over
2,000 square feet in size).

Accumulation of funds for
affordable housing 2015
This program has not yet been implemented. The
funding source identified
was the General Fund. The
Town has not allocated any funding for development
of affordable housing,
and there is no source of
revenue for an affordable
housing fund.

The Town considered an in- lieu housing fee in 2009 but the ordinance did not move
forward. The Town Council
considered a Development
Agreement Ordinance in
2019, but it did not move
forward.

In 2019 the Town received
SB 2 grant funds for an
in-lieu housing fee study and housing trust fund. The
study was completed in
2021, and the Town will
consider the in-lieu housing fee in 2022.

Modify to combine this
program and with other
programs noted above (to
create Action 1.2b) to retain
a consultant to provide
information on
potential funding sources for
an affordable housing fund.
039 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
842
36 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H1.1 Local Government Leadership. Affordable housing is an important Town priority, and the Town will take a proactive leadership role in working with community groups, other jurisdictions and agencies, non-profit housing sponsors, and the building and real estate industry in following through on identified Housing Element implementation actions in a timely manner.

H1.F Work with the
Marin Housing Authority. Continue to implement the agreement with the Marin Housing Authority (MHA)
for management of the
affordable housing stock in
order to ensure
permanent affordability, and
implement resale and rental
regulations for very low, low
and moderate-income units,
and assure that these units
remain at an affordable price
level.

Implement agreements to
maintain affordability Ongoing
Marin Housing Authority
(MHA) continues tomanage three below market rate
ownership units in San
Anselmo at Sohner Court
and at Willow Glen.

MHA assisted the Town
with an agreement for two
affordable rental units at 1
Lincoln Park in 2018, and
MHA manages the units.

Continue. The Town needs
assistance to manage
affordable housing stock and
will continue to use MHA, as
they are the most accessible
and knowledgeable resource
available to manage deed
restricted affordable housing
developments in San
Anselmo.

H1.H Work with Non-Profits
on Housing. The Town
will work with non-profits to assist in achieving the
Town’s housing goals and
implementing programs.

Coordination should occur
on an ongoing basis and as
special opportunities arise
as the Housing Element is
implemented. Participation
of non-profits in an advisory role to the Town’s Housing Element Implementation
Subcommittee (see Housing
Element Program H1.A)
would be desirable in
understanding the needs
and opportunities for non- profit housing development
in the community.

Working relationship with
non-profit housing sponsors
As development proposals are submitted and as other
opportunities arise
Town Staff has met
with non- profit housing developers
to review Town-owned
affordable housing sites
and discuss strategies for development of the sites.

Continue, but modify to have
more specific actions and
timelines for communication
with non-profits (see Action 1.1c).

GOAL 2 — MAINTAIN, PROTECT AND ENHANCE EXISTING HOUSING, AND BLEND WELL-DESIGNED NEW HOUSING INTO THE COMMUNITY.

Policy H2.1 Housing Design. The Town will review proposed new housing in order to achieve excellence in development design in an efficient process.

Continue Policy.

Policy H2.2 Design that Fits into the Neighborhood Context. The Town will encourage innovative design that creates housing opportunities that are complementary to the location of the development. It is the Town’s intent to enhance neighborhood identity and sense of community by ensuring that all new housing will (1) have a sensitive transition with the surrounding area, (2) avoid unreasonably affecting the privacy of neighboring properties, or (3) avoid impairing access to light and air of structures on neighboring properties.

H2.D Implement Effective Design Review. The Town
will continue to conduct
design review to assure
excellence of design in new
development.

Implement Design Review Ongoing
The Town conducted design review for commercial
and residential projects.

The Town reorganized the
design review regulations
and lowered the threshold
for design review to require review of all upper-level
additions.

The Town is considering
objective design standards
for all housing types in 2023.
(See Action 3.1b) Modify this
program to reflect that
change. Discretionary design review is required for housing development projects, which
may be a barrier to housing
development. The adoption of objective design standards for all housing types is
intended to reduce these
constraints to housing
development.

H2.E Amend Zoning to Provide for Single Room
Occupancy Units. Amend the
Zoning Ordinance to
establish development
standards for residential
buildings containing single- room occupancy (SRO) units and allow SROs as a
conditionally permitted use in
commercial zoning districts.

Facilitate housing for
extremely low-income
individuals
2015 Completed. Ordinance 1126
adopted on 9/11/2018.

Delete, as this program was
completed. Consider a new
program to encourage development of housing for
lower-income households,
including SROs (See
Actions 3.3.c, 5.3a, and

6.2a).
040 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
843
37 041 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 844
38 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H2.3 Preservation of Residential Units. In order to protect and conserve the housing stock, the Town will, to the extent permitted by law, limit the conversion of residential units to other uses and will regulate the conversion of rental developments to non-residential uses unless there is a clear public benefit or equivalent housing can be provided.

No associated programs. Continue this policy and modify it to be more general and address the loss of residential units, as some property owners remove residential units and do not replace them with any other use. The Town should consider programs for preservation of “naturally affordable” housing that could be lost when a property is sold or when units are remodeled. The Town considered regulating short-term rentals but found that few units have been lost to short-term rentals. Local regulations prevent new ADUs from being converted to short-term rentals. Seven single- family dwelling units were approved for demolition without replacement units. The Town adopted a requirement for a demolition permit in 2020 and a policy in the Municipal Code to discourage projects from reducing the number of housing units in the town, whether involving the demolition of a single unit with no replacement unit or the demolition of multiple units with fewer replacement units. The Town will implement a new program to ensure no net loss of affordable housing occurs during the 6th cycle planning period (See Action 1.3a).

Policy H2.4 Condominium Conversions. Except for limited equity cooperatives and other innovative housing proposals which are affordable to lower income households, the Town will conserve its existing multiple family rental housing supply by prohibiting conversions of rental developments to condominium ownership unless the proportion of multifamily rental units exceeds 25 percent of the total number of housing units in the Town, or, if the proportion of multifamily units exceeds 20 percent but is less than 25 percent, the tenant is granted a right to continued tenancy for five years at the same rental rate, adjusted for inflation.

This policy has been codified in the Municipal Code. Continue (see Action 4.2a).

Policy H2.5 Protection of Existing Affordable Housing. The Town will strive to ensure that affordable housing provided through government incentives, subsidy or funding, and deed restrictions remains affordable over time, and the Town will intervene when possible to help preserve such housing.

H2.A Monitor “At Risk”
Units. The Town will
establish regular contact
with the owners of potential “at risk” units to assure
long-term coordination. If the
units appear to be in danger
of conversion or being lost
as affordable housing, the
Town will establish contact
with public and non-profit agencies who may be
interested in managing
or purchasing the units to
inform them of the project’s
status and inform tenants of
any assistance available. In
working with other agencies, the Town will ensure
that funding sources are
identified and timelines for
action are executed.

Establish regular contact
with owners of at-risk units
to preserve affordable units Annually
The Town General Plan
identifies no units at risk
of conversion during the
housing element cycle
(see page 42 of Housing
Element).

Continue. As of 2022, the
Town has 13 units at risk of
conversion during the next
housing element cycle.

Conditions of approval for
the 13 units of low-income
housing at 27 Mariposa (the
only applicable at-risk units) would require the units to be turned over to the Town
if converting during the 7th
Housing Element Cycle.

Modify to include a program to assess and identify
ways to maintain naturally
affordable housing at risk of
conversion to market rate
housing (See Action 4.1a).

Add a program to
proactively monitor “at
risk” units tomaintain the
affordability of the
units (See Action 4.1d).
042 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
845
39 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H2.6 Maintenance and Management of Quality Housing and Neighborhoods. The Town will encourage good management practices, rehabilitation of viable older housing, and long-term maintenance and improvement of neighborhoods.

H2.B Implement Rehabilitation and Energy
Loan Programs. Coordinate
with the Marin Housing
Authority, PG&E, Marin
Clean Energy, and other
organizations to publicize
available loan programs to
eligible property owners.

Promote programs in Town
e-newsletters and on the
Town’s website.

Loans provided to
rehabilitate or improve
energy efficiency of housing
(8 Residential Rehabilitation
loans to very low-income
households and 20 PACE
loans)
Ongoing
The Town has met the goal
for 20 Property Assessed
Clean Energy (PACE) loans.

The Town has infrequently
promoted the programs and
information is not readily
available on the Town
website.

The Town could better
publicize information on
energy loan programs,
including PACE and Energy Upgrade California Loans,
provided to rehabilitate or
improve energy efficiency of
housing.

The Planning Department
requested, but did not
receive, data on the number
of Residential Rehabilitation
Loan that have been issued
by the Marin Housing
Authority to San Anselmo
property owners in this
Housing Element cycle.

In 2012 the Town Council
approved the Property
Assessed Clean Energy
(PACE) program. It permits residents and
multifamily property owners
to participate in PACE
programs. PACE programs
allow property owners to
finance energy and water
efficiency projects and
solar installations on their
property tax bills. In 2015,
the Town Council expanded the program. Through
2017: 25 Energy Efficiency
Projects, Financed $682,148
three Renewable Energy
Projects, Financed $71,530
one Water Conservation
Project, Financed $54,220
BayREN Home Upgrades
through June 2017:
16 Projects, 3,465 sumof
Total kWh Savings, 1,833 Sum of Total Therms
Savings
Continue and set an
objective to update the
website on a defined
timeline and for new Town
Communications staff and
Climate Action Commission
to publicize the program a
certain number of times per
year (see Action 4.3a).

H2.C Conduct Home
Presale Inspections.

The Town will continue
to inspect and report on
all residential units prior
to resale, with the report indicating previous Planning discretionary approvals and Building permits, zoning,
current use, flood zone,
zoning violations, and work
performed without permits
Conduct presale inspections Ongoing
The Town Building
Department continues to
conduct an average of
180 physical inspections
of residential sites prior to
resale every year to identify health and safety hazards, work performed without
permits, and recommended
safety corrections. Contract
code enforcement staff
contact property owners to
correct life/safety hazards
identified. Year/Number of
inspections:
2015/180
2016/153
2017/157
2018/179
2019170
2020/194
2021/226
Delete. There is no need
to have the program in the
Housing Element as the
Town has been conducting resale inspections since
1969.
043 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
846
40 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
GOAL 3 — USE OUR LAND EFFICIENTLY TO MEET HOUSING NEEDS, AND TO IMPLEMENT ‘SMART’ AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES.

Policy H3.1 Housing for Local Workers. The Town will strive to provide an adequate supply and variety of housing opportunities to meet the needs of San Anselmo’s workforce and their families, seeking to match housing types and affordability with household income.

Policy H3.2 Variety of Housing Choices. In response to the broad range of housing needs in San Anselmo, the Town will strive to achieve a mix of housing types, densities, affordability levels and designs. The Town will work with developers of non-traditional and innovative housing approaches in financing, design, construction and types of housing that meet local housing needs. Housing opportunities for families with children should not be limited because necessary facilities are not provided on site.

Modify by combining Policy H3.1 and Policy H3.2 and add new programs to implement them in this Housing Element Update The Town programs in the 5th housing element cycle resulted in application for and approval of 157 new housing units between 1/1/14 and 12/31/21 (See Program 5.1 and the associated actions).

Tiny homes are allowed in the Town with adoption of 2018 International Residential Code Appendix Q. New regulations also allow trailers to be used for housing after disasters and during housing construction. No tiny homes or trailer applications were received during the 5th housing element cycle.

These were a variety of unit types in all areas of Town:

Type of Unit [For H3.2 - Delete this after placing in] New Units Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit 1
Duplex structure 2
Apartment added to existing multifamily 3
Townhomes/Condo: 6-unit, 4 unit 8
Single-Family Residence 9
New apartment building: 12-unit, 16-unit 445
Each project has 2 units of deed restricted very low- or low-income housing Accessory Dwelling Unit 90
Total 157
Policy H3.3 Mixed-use Infill Housing. The Town will encourage well-designed mixed-use developments (residential mixed with other uses) where residential use is appropriate to the setting and development impacts can be mitigated. The Town will develop incentives to encourage mixed-use development in appropriate locations, such as in and near the downtown, that are in proximity to transit and services and would support Downtown businesses.

No mixed-use projects were developed or requested. 100% residential projects were proposed on commercially zoned sites in commercial areas near downtown (1 Lincoln Park, 754 Sir Francis Drake).

H3.A Modify Development Standards to Encourage
Infill Housing. Review
and modify the following
development standards
based on the most up- to- date empirical studies to
allow exceptions and
incentives for infill housing located close to transit and services.

Provide flexibility in the
application of development
standards fitting the location
and type of development,
consistent with community
goals
2016
Since 2017, the Town has
implemented California
Government Code Section
65913.4 that allows for
streamlined review of infill
development projects
and eliminates parking
requirements (2017 SB
35). One duplex was
approved pursuant to these
regulations in 2018.

The Town Council adopted
an ordinance to implement
California Government Code
Sections 65852.21 and
66411.7 (2021 SB 9) and
allowmulti-unit development in single-family zoning districts on 12/14/21. This allows expedited review,
reduced parking, and
increased density in infill
areas.

The Town follows State law
requirements for expedited
review of projects under the
Permit Streamlining Act and
specific sections related to
housing, such as State ADU
regulations.

The Town will be considering objective design standards for housing in 2023 that will
address parking standards,
funded by SB 2 grant.

Modify to adopt objective
design standards for all
housing types (See Action

3.1b).
044 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
847
41 San Anselmo Housing Element | Introduction
Prepared by Houseal Lavigne
Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
a. Variable Density Standards. Establish unit
densities for studio and
one-bedroom units based
on “density unit
equivalents” or the size of
the unit.

Variable density has not
been considered.

Consider this as part of the
programto create objective design standards for all
housing types (See Action

3.1b).
b. Reduce Parking Standards for Senior and
Affordable Housing. Provide
reduced parking standards
to support affordable and
senior housing development.

Consider this as part of the
programto create objective design standards for all
housing types (See Action

3.1b).
c. Flexible Parking Strategies. Provide for more
flexible parking requirements
that help to facilitate infill,
affordable, transit-oriented
and mixed- use development, while at the same time
avoiding off- site parking impacts. Examples include
joint use parking, off-site
parking (currently allowed),
allowances for reduced
standards depending upon
location (such as near
transit), parking stall
dimensions, “grandfathering”
non-compliant buildings and
uses, etc.

See above regarding State
parking law. Objective
design standards for
multifamily housing will be
under consideration in 2022
and include flexible parking
strategies.

Consider this as part of the
program to create objective design standards for all
housing types (See Action

3.1b).
d.Modify Parking Standards
for Mixed-Use Housing. Adopt as appropriate
modified parking standards
for mixed-use development in the commercial zoning
districts in order to facilitate
development of affordable
housing. See above.

Consider this as part of the
programto create objective design standards for all
housing types (See Action

3.1b). Modify. Add a new
program to review fees for
multi- family housing projects (See Action 5.2f). Analyze fees collected for recent
multifamily housing against
actual time for plan check
and inspections by staff and
outside consultants.
e. Expedited Review and
Fee Waivers or Reductions.

Provide expedited review of desired housing
developments and waivers or
reductions of development
fees where feasible.
f. Parcel Consolidation.

Promote parcel
consolidation for the
assembly of new housing
sites to ensure minimum
densities are achieved and
integrated site planning
occurs by (1) identifying
priority sites for lot
consolidation where
common ownership occurs,
(2) contacting property owners of contiguous vacant
and underutilized sites,
(3) conducting outreach to affordable housing
developers, and (4) offering
the incentives listed above
to promote lot consolidation.

Town Staff follow the
expedited review required
under State law for housing development projects. In
2020, the Town Council
waived building permit fees
for ADUs deed-restricted for
affordable housing. No one
has applied for the fee waiver
as of 11/28/22. A limited
number of multifamily sites
have been on the market.

Staff have contacted property
buyers and/or adjacent
property owners when they
may have interest in sites on
the market. One property
was purchased by an
adjacent property owner in
2021. Few sites had common
ownership during the 5th
housing element cycle. Staff
have alerted affordable
housing developers to sites
that are on the market. This
has not resulted in the
purchase of any sites or
development of affordable
housing.

Continue this program.
045 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
848
42 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
g. Work with Property Owners. Conduct outreach
with property owners in 2015
to identify specific incentives
for property owners to
pursue parcel consolidation
and develop their properties
with housing.

Town Staff held two
public workshops in
November 2021 via Zoom.

Notice was emailed to
the Town’s business list
(which includes property
owners of commercial/
rental sites) and mailed to
downtown property owners.

Incentives that will be under
consideration for housing
were discussed, and the
Town solicited comments on
other incentives
Delete. Incorporate the
content of this program into
the program to promote lot
consolidation (See Action

5.2e).

Policy H3.4 Redevelopment of Commercial Shopping Areas and Sites. The Town will encourage the development of housing in conjunction with the redevelopment of commercial shopping areas and sites when it occurs.

Continue this policy
Policy H3.5 High Potential Housing Opportunity Areas. Given the diminishing availability of developable land, the Town will identify housing opportunity areas and sites where a special effort will be made to provide workforce and special needs affordable housing. The Town will take specific actions to promote the development of affordable housing units on these sites (identified in the Implementing Programs).

H3.B Adopt Standards for
an “Affordable Housing
Overlay Zone.” Amend
the San Anselmo Zoning
Ordinance to establish
specific standards and
incentives
for an affordable housing
overlay zone. Specific
standards include densities,
development standards
incentives, parking, building
heights, specified level of
affordability, etc.

Provide flexibility in the
application of development
standards for affordable
projects
2016
The Town has hired a
consultant to draft objective
design standards for all
housing types, and adoption
is expected in 2023.

State density bonus law
allows significant density
incentives, exceptions, and
concessions to development regulations for projects that include affordable housing
at specified levels.

Modify and continue to
reflect changes to best
practices since adoption of the 5th cycle Housing Element. (See Action 5.3a).

H3.E Work with Non-Profits
and Property Owners on
Housing Opportunity Sites.

Work with non-profits and property owners to
seek opportunities for
an affordable housing
development on either the
Sunnyhills site or the
former Redhill School site.

Undertake the following
actions to encourage
development of multifamily,
affordable housing at
Housing Opportunity Sites:

Development of affordable
housing
Undertake items a-d, during 2015. Undertake rezoning,
environmental review and
other actions during 2016
See below.

Modify and continue (See
Action 1.1c). Sunny Hills
Services has been renamed
to Side by Side.
046 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
849
43 San Anselmo Housing Element | Introduction
Prepared by Houseal Lavigne
Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
a. Work closely with non- profit housing developers
(EAH, NPH, others) and
property owners to identify housing development
opportunities, issues and
needs.

Town Staff have met with
Homeward Bound, Habitat
for Humanity, and EAH
Housing, all nonprofit
housing developers.

Property owners were not
interested in the
development of affordable
housing at Side by Side
(formerly known as Sunny
Hills) and Red Hill School
(owned by Ross Valley
School District) during 5th Housing Element cycle.

EAH Housing interested in
partnering with the Town to
develop 50 units of
affordable housing at Isabel
Cook Community Center site. However, the Town
would need to fund
reconstruction of the
community center and
offices. Nonprofits were not interested in Town parking lot sites as they are too small to be feasible for
affordable housing
development. One nonprofit
suggested that the Town
sell the Town-owned site
located above Loma Robles
for market rate housing to
fund development of
affordable housing on parking lot sites.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an Affordable Housing Overlay District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.
b. Select the most viable
site or sites. See above. See above.
c. Conduct a rezoning study with the intent to rezone at least one of these properties
to a zoning district that will
enable affordable housing to
be built at 20 or more units
per acre.

Both sites are zoned
SPD, Specific Planned
Development District,
which allows flexibility in
development standards,
including density of 20 or
more units per acre.

Delete. The Town will rezone
adequate parcels to meet
the RHNA as part of this
Housing Element Update,
which will include increases
in density at 20 units per
acre.
d. Undertake community outreach as part of the
rezoning and, as appropriate, in coordination with the
potential developer and property owner.

See above. See above.
e. Undertake environmental
review as part of rezoning to
address on-and off- site
issues so that future
affordable housing
proposals can be processed
expeditiously.

The Town has not conducted
environmental review due to
limited staff and resources.

Delete. Significant funding
is necessary to implement
this program, and the Town
intends to promote housing through more effective,
efficient allocation of limited
resources.
f. Use the affordable
housing overlay zone (when adopted — see Program H3.B) to incentivize affordable housing to be
applied to High Potential
Housing Opportunity Sites
and areas in the Downtown.

The Town has not adopted an affordable housing
overlay zone due to limited
staff time and resources.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an
Affordable Housing Overlay
District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.
g. Complete site planning studies, continue community
outreach, and undertake
regulatory approvals in
coordination with the
development application.

No development application was submitted.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an
Affordable Housing Overlay
District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.
047 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
850
44 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
h. Facilitate development through regulatory
incentives, including the
establishment of housing
as a “use by-right,” the reduction or waiver of
Town fees, fast-track
processing, use of
affordable housing funds,
implementation of Housing
Element Programs H3.A
and H3.B, and assistance
by Town Planning staff in
development review.

The Town has hired a
consultant to draft objective
design standards and will be
considering by-right uses for sites in 2023.

Combine this as part of the program to create objective design standards for all
housing types (See Action 3.
i. Target sites in Downtown
and surrounding infill areas
and, especially properties
where lot consolidation is
possible, and provide incentives for lot
consolidation and property
redevelopment with housing.

Same as above.

Modify by combining this
with the new program (See Action 5.3a) to adopt an
Affordable Housing Overlay
District to incentivize the
development of affordable
housing.

Policy H3.6 Density Bonuses and Other Incentives for Affordable Housing Developments. The Town will use density bonuses and other incentives to help achieve housing goals while ensuring that potential impacts are considered and mitigated. This will include provisions consistent with State Density Bonus Law.

The Town has successfully implemented local development standards and the Density Bonus Law to encourage development of deed-restricted affordable housing units:
1 Lincoln Park site was limited to two stories and the applicant agreed to restrict two of the 16 units for deed-restricted Low-Income housing in order to build a 3-story structure. If the Town had a 3-story height limit, the applicant would have constructed only market rate units. 754 Sir Francis Drake was limited to 100% floor area ratio and 2 stories. The Town’s two-story limit and floor area ratio limit were an incentive for the developer to include 2 units deed-restricted for Very Low-Income housing. 600 Red Hill the applicant deed-restricted 2 units for Low-Income housing in order to gain additional market rate units at the site.

Policy H3.7 Retention and Expansion of Multifamily Sites at Medium and Higher Density. The Town will strive to protect and expand the supply and availability of multifamily and mixed-use infill housing sites for housing. The Town will not re-designate or rezone residential land for other uses or to lower densities without re-designating equivalent land for higher density multifamily development.

No multifamily or mixed-use infill housing sites were redesignated or rezoned for other uses or lower densities. Due to SB 330, this policy is now applied at the state level, and the Town will remove this policy to prevent duplication with State-level legislation.

Policy H3.8 Long-Term Housing Affordability Controls. The Town will apply resale controls and rent and income restrictions to ensure that affordable housing provided through incentives and as a condition of development approval remains affordable over time to the income group for which it is intended. Inclusionary units shall be deed-restricted to maintain affordability on resale to the maximum extent possible (at least 55 years).

Six units of housing for the very low and low-income were approved that will have 55-year deed restrictions. Modify to indicate that the Town will adopt an inclusionary housing ordinance to ensure that affordable housing is provided in new development in San Anselmo (See Action 5.7f). 048 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
851
45 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H3.9 Inclusionary Housing Approach. To increase affordable housing construction, the Town will require residential developments to provide units for very low-, low- and moderate-income housing on a sliding scale or an in-lieu fee related to the size of the new main dwelling on the particular site. The units provided through this policy are intended for permanent occupancy and must be deed-restricted, including, but not limited to, single-family housing, multifamily housing, condominiums, townhouses, or land subdivisions. In addition, the Town will require larger non-residential developments, as job generators, to participate in addressing housing needs in the community.

H3.C Adopt Inclusionary Housing Regulations and
Establish Housing Impact
Fees. Amend the Zoning
Ordinance to require
residential developments
to provide affordable units
for very low, low and/or
moderate-income housing, pay an in-lieu fee, or pay a
housing impact fee. The
ordinance should include
specific definitions for
affordability tied to Area
Median Income (AMI), and
should cover participation
from larger non-residential
developments. As part of
the annual review of the
Housing Element there will
be a review as to whether
this program has been
effective in encouraging
very low and low-income
housing. The program will
be revised if it is deemed
to be ineffective. In
undertaking the work, the
ordinance will be
evaluated as a potential
constraint to the provision
of housing. This would
include analysis of the
policy’s implementation framework, levels of
mandated affordability,
and a description of the types of options and incentives the Town offers to encourage and facilitate
compliance with the
inclusionary requirements.

The Town will also
engage the development
community to facilitate this
analysis. Inclusionary
requirements and/or
housing impact fees will
be based on the following
considerations:

Provide housing for very low-, low- and moderate- income households 2016
An ordinance was
considered in 2009 but did
not move forward.

The Town received an SB 2
grant to conduct an in-lieu
housing study in 2020, in
coordination
with other Marin County
jurisdictions. The study was
completed and presented to
the Planning Commission
in 2021.

Staff received the first draft
of regulations in December
2021.

Staff worked with other
Marin County jurisdictions to
hold outreach workshops in
Spring 2022 with developers and coordinate standards.

Continue (See Action 5)
a. The number of inclusionary units required based on project size, such as: 3-10 units — 10%; 11-20 units — 15%; 21+ units — 20%. b. Inclusionary zoning requirements or housing impact fees will address the need for very low and low-income rental units and moderate-income ownership units.
c. The primary intent of the inclusionary requirement is the construction of new units on site. d. The focus is on multifamily housing developments with deed restrictions to support long periods of affordability. e. Second priority for meeting inclusionary requirements is the construction of units off site or the transfer of land and sufficient funding to develop the number of affordable units required.
f. If these options are not practical, then other alternatives of equal value such as in-lieu fees, housing impact fees, transfer of land and/or dedication of units, or rehabilitation of existing units may be considered. g. Fees paid in-lieu of providing units on site or housing impact fees shall be of a value proportionally equivalent to the number of units in the project. The amount of the fee shall be established by a schedule that is periodically reviewed and updated by the Town Council. h. Establish incentives as part of an ordinance whereby the Council would decide the standards in the public review process when considering an actual ordinance. Standards include parking exceptions, increased height, mixed- use, and reduced setbacks. 049 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
852
46 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H3.10 Second Dwelling Units. The Town will encourage the construction of well-designed new second units and the legalization of existing second units as an important way to provide affordable housing.

The Town approved 90 Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and adopted objective design standards for ADUs.

H3.D Junior Second Units.

Review and adopt as
appropriate standards to
allow the creation of junior
second units. Standards
to review should include,
but not be limited to, the
following:
a. Conversion of existing bedroom required – no
building expansion;
b. Maximum unit size;
c. Limitation on kitchen size
and appliances;
d. Bathroom requirement;
e. Internal and external
access;
f. Parking;
g. Owner occupancy requirement.
18 new second units,
including junior second
units, by October 2022
Consider adoption of
standards in 2015
Completed. Final occupancy was granted for 39 new
ADUs, including one junior
accessory dwelling unit
(JADU) as of 12/31/21. Town
ADU regulations allowed for
development of JADUs prior to the 5th cycle Housing Element. Town regulations were updated in 2019-2020
to develop requirements for
JADUs when State law
required that the Town
approve JADUs and
distinguished between ADUs
and JADUs. Staff believe
there are a limited number of
JADU applications because
there are fewer restrictions
for ADUs, such as no size
limit and owner occupancy requirement.

Delete, as this program has
been completed.

The Town will work with
special districts to reduce or
waive fees for junior second units.

In 2017, the Town Council
wrote a letter to the Ross
Valley Sanitary District to
request elimination of
connection fees. State law
eliminated connection fees
for ADUs.

Delete, as this program has
been implemented.

GOAL 4 — PROVIDE HOUSING FOR SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS THAT IS COORDINATED WITH SUPPORT SERVICES.

Policy H4.1 Special Needs Groups. The Town will actively promote the development and rehabilitation of housing to meet the needs of special needs groups, including the needs of seniors, people living with disabilities, the homeless, people with HIV/AIDS and other illnesses, people in need of mental health care, single-parent families, large families, and other persons identified as having special housing needs.

There are no associated programs. Modify this policy and create specific programs to implement this policy in the Housing Element Update (See Policy 7 and associated programs). In the 5th cycle planning period, the Town has made the following accomplishments related to special needs housing:
• The Town adopted strategies to house special needs populations including objective standards for single room occupancy housing and prohibited housing discrimination based on source of income. • In 2021, the Town adopted temporary moratoriums on rent increases and evictions due to the financial impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Town promoted the Marin County emergency rental assistance grant program on social media, the Town email list, and by mailings to property owners and tenants of multi-unit properties. As of January 7, 2022, the County has received 135 applications for emergency rental assistance and paid 40 cases in San Anselmo. • Many new rental housing units affordable to lower income households were constructed. New affordable units had up to two bedrooms and, therefore, were not appropriate for several large households in San Anselmo that are overpaying for housing. • The Town approved one 16-unit senior apartment building that was completed in 2022. Two of the 16 units are set aside for low-income senior households.
• The Town approved five requests for reasonable accommodations to allow residents with disabilities to remain in their homes, including two setback and noise limit exceptions for generators to power air conditioning equipment and refrigeration, one exception to allow a parking area for ADA accessibility, and two exceptions for access ramps. Several sidewalk ramps were installed and improved in residential neighborhoods to assist people with disabilities. • The Town adopted an Administrative Citation program to assist in the enforcement of housing regulations and safety standards. • To assist female-headed households and many families in the town, one new preschool was approved on Greenfield Avenue, which will accommodate up to 118 students. The town lost Village Preschool on Jones Street, which had a capacity for 30 students. The Town modified the Zoning Code to allow neighborhood family childcare centers by-right.

Policy H4.2 Health and Human Services Programs Linkages. As appropriate to its role, the Town will assist service providers to link together services serving special needs populations to provide the most effective response to homelessness or persons at risk of homelessness, youth needs, seniors, persons with mental or physical disabilities, substance abuse problems, HIV/AIDS, physical and developmental disabilities, multiple diagnoses, veterans, victims of domestic violence, and other economically challenged or underemployed workers.

Modify this policy and add supportive programs based on the feedback received through outreach to these service providers as part of the Housing Element Update (See Program 7.1).

Policy H4.3 Density Bonuses for Special Needs Housing. The Town will use density bonuses to assist in meeting special housing needs and housing for lower income elderly and the disabled, consistent with roadway capacity and considering parking needs and neighborhood scale.

A 16-unit senior housing development was approved at 1 Lincoln Park on a commercially-zoned site next to a residential neighborhood. A density bonus allowed the project to be up to three stories and resulted in two units of deed-restricted housing for low-income households. Elevator access and a community gathering space are provided, along with an outdoor garden area. The one-bedroom units each have one parking space and are walking distance to shopping, restaurants, services, and transit. Modify to address reasonable accommodation requirements (See Action 9.1e). 050 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
853
47 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H4.4 Adaptable/Accessible Units for the Disabled. The Town will ensure that new multifamily housing includes units that are accessible and adaptable for use by disabled persons in conformance with the California Building Code. This will include ways to promote housing design strategies to allow seniors to “age in place.”
Modify this policy. The Town implements the current California Building Code, which includes requirements for accessible units. Add programs to support this policy that allow seniors to “age in place.” Modify to address reasonable accommodation requirements (See Action 9.1e).

Policy H4.5 Transitional and Supportive Housing. The Town of San Anselmo recognizes the need for and desirability of transitional and supportive housing and will treat transitional and supportive housing as a residential use that will be subject only to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone.

Continue Policy.

Policy H4.6 Rental Assistance Programs. The Town will continue to publicize and create opportunities for using available rental assistance programs, such as the project-based Section 8 program and tenant-based Housing Choice Voucher program, in coordination with the Marin Housing Authority (MHA). The Town will also continue to support the use of Marin Community Foundation funds for affordable housing and continue to participate in the Housing Stability program administered through MHA.

Continue Policy.

Policy H4.7 Emergency Housing Assistance. Participate and allocate funds, as appropriate, for County and non-profit programs providing disaster preparedness and emergency shelter and related counseling services.

H4.A Use of Rental
Assistance Programs.

Continue to publicize and
participate in rental
assistance programs such
as the Housing Choice
Voucher program and other
available rental programs.

Publicity of Housing Choice
Vouchers Ongoing
Staff publicized the rental
assistance program to
property owners via social
media posts and a mailer. In
2015, there were 122
Housing Choice Vouchers in
use in San Anselmo. In
2022, there are 106 Housing
Choice Vouchers in Census
tracts within the Town limit,
making up less than 10 percent of renter occupied
housing units. Links to
information are provided on
the Town website. Due to
limited staff time, publicity
was limited, and program
was not considered
successful due to the
decrease in use of the
Housing Choice Vouchers
over time. The Town Council
established protections for
tenants in 2021 during the Covid 19 pandemic by
freezing rent increases and
prohibiting evictions
(Ordinances 1154 and 1155).

Staff mailed notices of
supportive programs to all
multifamily property owners
and tenants in 2021. The
Planning Department staff
received one email inquiry
about the program from a
property owner seeking to
return to San Anselmo to a
rental unit. The Town
publicized the Marin County
Covid 19 pandemic
Emergency Rental
Assistance Program to property owners and tenants
via social media and a mailer
in 2021. The County
received 135 applications
from San Anselmo residents
and has paid 40 cases in San
Anselmo as of 1/7/22. Town
publication of the rental
assistance program
appeared to be successful,
based on number of
applications received.

Modify this program to
include timelines for
program publicity. Use the
Town Communications staff
to promote program (See
Action 7.3b).
051 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
854
48 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
Policy H4.8 Coordination with Other Agencies in Housing the Homeless. The Town will actively engage with other jurisdictions in Marin to support long-term housing solutions for homeless individuals and families in Marin County, and to implement the Marin County Continuum of Care actions in response to the needs of homeless families and individuals. The Town will allocate funds, as appropriate, for County and non-profit programs providing emergency shelter and related support services.

Continue Policy.

Policy H4.9 Local Approach to Housing for the Homeless. The Town of San Anselmo recognizes the need for and desirability of emergency shelter housing for the homeless and will allow a year-round emergency shelter as a permitted use in the Limited Commercial, General Commercial, and Public Facilities zoning districts. Designated site(s) must be located within one-quarter mile of a transit stop, since this could be considered a reasonable distance for a person to walk to/from a transit stop to/from a facility. In addition, the following would apply:
a. The Town will encourage a dispersion of facilities to avoid an over-concentration of shelters for the homeless in any given area. An overconcentration of such facilities may negatively impact the neighborhood in which they are located and interfere with the “normalization process” for clients residing in such facilities.
b. The Town will encourage positive relations between neighborhoods and providers of permanent or temporary emergency shelters. Providers or sponsors of emergency shelters, transitional housing programs and community care facilities shall be encouraged to establish outreach programs within their neighborhoods and, when necessary, work with the Town or a designated agency to resolve disputes. c. It is recommended that a staff person from the provider agency be designated as a contact person with the community to review questions or comments from the neighborhood. Outreach programs may also designate a member of the local neighborhood to their Board of Directors. Neighbors of emergency shelters shall be encouraged to provide a neighborly and hospitable environment for such facilities and their residents. d. Development standards for emergency shelters for the homeless located in San Anselmo will ensure that shelters would be developed in a manner which protects the health, safety and general welfare of nearby residents and businesses, while providing for the needs of a segment of the population as required by State law. Shelters shall be subject only to development, design review and management standards that apply to residential or commercial development in the same zone, except for the specific written and objective standards as allowed in State law.

The population of people experiencing homelessness rose, and no extremely low-income housing was created during the 5th cycle planning period. A point-in-time count of people experiencing homelessness in vehicles in San Anselmo decreased from 15 people in 2019 to seven people in 2021.

Modify and continue to create supportive actions to implement the intent of this program (See Program 7.1).

Unsheltered Homeless Sheltered Homeless Total for San Anselmo 2015 2017 2019 2015 2017 2019 2015 2017 2019
13 2 20 0 0 0 13 2 20
052 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
855
49 Table 1.7: Review of Past Performance
Implementation
Program
Implementation
Objective
Timeline in Housing
Element
Appropriateness,
Effectiveness,
and Progress in
Implementation
Continue, Modify or
Delete
H4.B Investigate Possible Multi-Jurisdictional
Emergency Shelter. As the
opportunity arises, the Town
will consider participation
in a multi-jurisdictional emergency shelter, should
one be proposed in the
future.

Construction of homeless
facility (if determined
feasible)
As the opportunity arises
The Town has not funded
any multi-jurisdictional project for an emergency
shelter. On October 1,
2017, the County of Marin
and local homeless service
providers launched a
“Coordinated Entry System” for providing people experiencing homelessness with housing and services and have housed
approximately 330 people who had been experiencing
chronic homelessness. On
July 27, 2021, the Town
contributed $55,299 to a
pool of local city and town
resources to create a new
“city-funded case
management” option, that
provides additional case
management support for
people experiencing chronic
homelessness and allows
the Town to prioritize the
most high-needs people for
permanent supportive housing. On April 28, 2015, the Town contributed $14,145 to a joint fund with
all the cities and towns of
Marin County, to fund a
rotating homeless winter
emergency shelter program
known as the Rotating
Emergency Shelter Team
(REST). REST was run by San Anselmo churches and
community volunteers with
the Marin Organizing
Committee from November
15 through April 15 from
2015 to 2018, when the
program was discontinued.

The program served up to
40 homeless men at rotating
congregations, including
First Presbyterian Church
of San Anselmo, and 20
homeless women housed
at the County Wellness
Center and served by
congregations. Although
successful, the program
provided temporary housing
during five winter months
only. San Anselmo staff and
residents participated in
working at the San Anselmo
shelter and a San Anselmo
church participated by
providing the facility.

Modify this program to
define what “participation”
entails and to create more
specific project goals (See
Action 7.4a).

All emergency shelters in
Marin County are open to
all individuals experiencing
homelessness, including
those from San Anselmo.

Therefore, any Marin County
emergency shelter is a
multi- jurisdictional shelter. There
is opportunity to contribute
to the development of
emergency shelters that are
planned or currently under
construction in San Rafael.
5 One project included conversion of two existing units to deed-restricted affordable housing. Those two units are not included here since they were existing. 053 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
856
50 This page left intentionally blank
054 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
857
51 2

HOUSING NEEDS

AND CONSTRAINTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
055 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
858
52 Summary of Housing Needs and Constraints
The housing crisis in the Bay Area has been an evolving phenomenon over the past 40 years as high demand has continually exceeded housing supply and affordability. There has been a substantial movement in the Bay Area, intensified by concerns about climate change, to prioritize sustainable growth. The movement seeks to encourage regional development patterns that are more compact, transit-oriented, pedestrian-oriented, well-designed, and highly livable. A central focus of this movement — the very foundation for achieving a more sustainable and livable Bay Area — is rethinking the way in which we plan, design, rehabilitate, preserve, and manage housing in conjunction with transportation systems, jobs, and services.

Under state housing element requirements, housing needs are broken down into three categories: existing needs, projected needs over the housing element planning period, and the specific needs of special groups identified in San Anselmo. In opposition, constraints to the production of housing hinder the Town’s ability to meet these three types of housing needs. Below are key findings of the San Anselmo housing needs analysis that summarize important trends and considerations for the Housing Element:

Housing Needs
• The population of San Anselmo has remained relatively stable over the past several decades. As of 2020, the town’s population is 12,757 residents and 5,224 households.
• Approximately 62 percent of households are one- to two-bedroom households, which could indicate a higher demand for smaller housing units such as single room occupancy (SRO) units, studio/efficiency units, and one-bedroom units. • Countywide, the agricultural and natural resources, construction and manufacturing, wholesale, and transportation industries combined employ approximately 14 percent of the population. This low percentage could be indicative of a lack of housing affordable to households employed in these sectors in both the county and town.
• San Anselmo’s vacancy rate was 4.2 percent compared to 6.5 percent countywide in 2020, which suggests that San Anselmo’s housing market is tighter than Marin County, and that additional housing is needed in the community. • A large portion of the housing stock in San Anselmo is more than 30 years old. Therefore, the town could see an increase in redevelopment in the coming years, especially once the Town updates the Zoning Code to allow more than one unit on a lot, improving the return on redevelopment for homeowners.
• There has been a decline in the number of lower-income households in San Anselmo, but the Town’s overall population has remained stable.

Therefore, it appears that household incomes have risen rather than lower income households have been pushed from the community. The increased number of residents who attained a bachelor's degree between 2010 and 2020 could support this statement. In 2010, 49 percent of residents achieved a bachelor's degree or higher compared to 84 percent in 2020. This data could explain the increase in median income from $92,260 in 2010 to $146,179 in 2020.
• In 2020, San Anselmo single-family home sale prices were six percent lower than the countywide median. San Anselmo condominium sales prices were 50 percent higher than the countywide median. This difference could be indicative of a high demand for condominiums in the community.
• There is a lack of large units affordable to low-income households, indicating that the Town should incentivize this type of housing as a part of the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 5.3). This overlay zone will be applied in addition to the rezonings proposed for the housing opportunity sites as stipulated under Action 5.7a, and it is not necessary to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Rather, the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will serve as an additional tool to enhance the development of affordable housing in San Anselmo. • The low number of rental units with three or more bedrooms is likely leading to the 17 percent of large households that are cost burdened. To address this, the Town will incentivize this type of housing as a part of the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 5.3). • San Anselmo’s population is aging as younger adults are moving out of the community. This could be attributed to the rising cost of housing in the community, or younger people are seeking other types and locations of housing based on lifestyle preferences (or a combination of these factors).
• The proportion of senior residents is projected to increase to 22 percent of the population by 2040, increasing the demand for assisted living and senior residential facilities.

San Anselmo Housing Element | Introduction
Prepared by Houseal Lavigne
056 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
859
53 Housing Constraints • Two main factors contribute to the high cost of land in Marin County: the county’s desirability as a place to live and the lack of remaining vacant land suitably zoned for residential development.
• Over the past year, mortgage rates for conventional 30-year fixed rate loans have increased dramatically from less than three percent to more than seven percent, making homeownership increasingly unattainable for low- and moderate-income households. • Community opposition to affordable housing is prevalent in Marin County. However, architectural design plays a critical role in creating new developments that blend into the existing neighborhood, especially in higher density developments that might otherwise appear visually incompatible with existing surrounding development. In order to clarify design requirements to the development community and streamline the development approval process, the Town will adopt objective design standards for all housing types (Action 3.2a) as well as adopt pre-approved plans for missing middle housing (Action 3.1c) and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) (Program 6.1). • Recognizing that additional density is needed throughout the community to accommodate additional housing, the Town will amend the Zoning Code to allow up to 12 dwelling units per acre in the R-2 district and 30 dwelling units per acre in the R-3, C-L, C-3, and SPD districts (Program

5.7).
• To better accommodate the densities needed to construct affordable housing development, the Town will establish an affordable housing overlay district that will allow greater building height, density, and floor area ratios for multifamily and mixed-use developments that provide a specified percent of units as affordable to low- and very low-income households (Program 5.3). This overlay zone will be applied in addition to the rezonings proposed for the housing opportunity sites as stipulated under Action 5.7a, and it is not necessary to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Rather, the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will serve as an additional tool to enhance the development of affordable housing in San Anselmo.
• San Anselmo does not allow overnight street parking in the town aside from a few exceptions. To improve the flexibility of the Town’s parking standards the Zoning Code will be amended to eliminate minimum parking requirements for new development and redevelopment within a halfmile of public transit in accordance with AB 2097 (Action 5.2c) as well as allow reductions in areas outside of a half-mile of public transit under certain circumstances (Action 5.2d).
• The Town has included three programs and 14 actions in the Policies, Programs, and Action section of this Housing Element to promote the construction and affordability of ADUs and JADUs (Policy 6). • The San Anselmo Zoning Code establishes provisions for SRO units to establish standards for these units and provide opportunities for the development of permanent, affordable housing in close proximity to transit and services for small households and people with special needs. In order to make SROs more widely available throughout the community, the Town will amend the Zoning Code to allow residential buildings containing the units as a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district (Action 3.3c). • The Town complies with the Employee Housing Act. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5, the Town deems any employee housing providing accommodations for 6 or fewer employees as a single-family structure. To ensure that the Town is not responsible for any barriers to the establishment of employee housing, the Town will amend the Zoning Code for compliance with the Employee Housing Act, as needed, to accommodate future updates to State law (Action 5.8c). • Since the Town has few remaining vacant lots suitable for development, all infrastructure (i.e., curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streets, and utilities) is in place. To ensure that required site improvements are not a barrier to development, the Town will evaluate local requirements to determine what on- and off-site improvement requirements could be minimized or eliminated in order to reduce construction financing costs for affordable housing development projects (Action 5.4b).
• Town fees comprise 15 percent of the cost of development of a single-family home and 4 percent of the cost of development of a multifamily development. To ensure that planning and/or building permit fees are not a barrier to the development of affordable housing in the community, San Anselmo will waive a percentage of project review, permit, and impact fees based on level of affordability, up to a maximum of 50 percent for 100 percent affordable housing development projects (Action 5.4a). • To further streamline the approval process for new housing, the Town will adopt objective design standards for all housing types (Action 3.2a), pre-approved plans for missing middle housing types (Action 3.1c), and pre-approved ADU plans (Program 6.1).

San Anselmo Housing Element | Introduction
Prepared by Houseal Lavigne
057 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
860
54 This page left intentionally blank
058 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
861
55 3

HOUSING NEEDS
059 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 862
56 HOUSING NEEDS
Population, Housing and Jobs Trends
Population Growth and Trends
Demographic changes, such as population growth or age structure fluctuations, affect the type and amount of housing needed in a community. As shown in Table 3.1, San Anselmo’s population has remained relatively stable from 1990 to today. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Plan Bay Area 2040 growth projections forecast limited growth in San Anselmo through 2040. Over the next decade and a half, the growth rate is projected to rise to an average annual growth rate of 0.3 percent per year. The population is projected to increase from 12,757 people in 2020 to 13,625 in 2040.

Table 3.1: Population Growth Trends 1990 - 2040 in San Anselmo Year Population Numerical
Change
Percent
Change
Annual Average
Growth Rate
1990 11,735 N/A N/A N/A
2000 12,378 643 5% 0.5%
2010 12,336 -42 -0.3% 0.0%
2020 12,757 494 4% 0.4%
2030 13,205 375 3% 0.3%
2040 13,625 420 3% 0.3%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments
Table 3.2: Population Growth Trends 1990 - 2040 in Marin County Year Population Numerical
Change
Percent
Change
Annual Average
Growth Rate
1990 230,096 N/A N/A N/A
2000 247,289 17,193 7% 0.8%
2010 252,409 5,120 2% 0.2%
2020 260,831 8,422 3% 0.3%
2030 274,530 13,699 5% 0.5%
2040 282,670 8,140 3% 0.3%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments
In 2020, the Marin County population was 260,831, up by five percent from 247,289 in 2000. As shown in Table 3.2 above, the Marin County population is projected to increase to 282,670 by 2040. Over the next two decades, the annual growth rate is expected to decrease from an average of 0.5 percent per year between 2020 and 2030, to 0.3 percent per year between 2030 and 2040 (ABAG 2017). 060 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
863
57 061 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 864
58 Age Characteristics
Age characteristics are an important factor to consider when evaluating current and future housing needs. Typically, distinct lifestyles, family types and sizes, incomes, and housing preferences vary by age group. As people age, housing needs and preferences change. For example, young householders with children often have different housing preferences than senior householders living alone.

As shown in Table 3.3, the number of seniors aged 65-74 increased by 115 percent from 2000 to 2020 in San Anselmo. Adults aged 55-64 grew by 71 percent from 2000 to 2020. In contrast, the population of adults aged 35-44 declined by 39 percent between 2000 to 2020, and the population of young adults aged 25-34 decreased by 36 percent during the same timeframe. The senior population aged 75-84 has remained relatively stable over the past 20 years, while the number of seniors over age 85 decreased by 24 percent. Between 2000 and 2020, the number of children four years old or younger decreased by 22 percent, children between five and 14 years old have increased by 19 percent, and youth aged 15-24 increased by 35 percent.

Table 3.3: Age Group Trends in San Anselmo, 1990-2020
2000 2010 2020 2000-2020 % Change
Age Group Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Percent Change 2000-2010
Percent Change
2010-2020
Percent Change
2000-2020
0 - 4 725 6% 740 6% 565 4% 2% -24% -22%
5 - 14 1,519 12% 1,673 14% 1,813 14% 10% 8% 19%
15 - 24 994 8% 966 8% 1,338 11% -3% 39% 35%
25 - 34 1,351 11% 875 7% 864 7% -35% -1% -36%
35 - 44 2,541 21% 1,929 16% 1,543 12% -24% -20% -39%
45 - 54 2,591 21% 2,365 19% 2,208 17% -9% -7% -15%
55 - 64 1,255 10% 2,127 17% 2,147 17% 69% 1% 71%
65 - 74 678 5% 1,018 8% 1,458 12% 50% 43% 115%
75 - 84 540 4% 432 3% 547 4% -20% 27% 1%
85+ 184 1% 211 2% 140 1% 15% -34% -24%
Total 12,378 100% 12,366 100% 12,623 100% 0% 2% 2%
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments
062 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
865
59 The California Department of Finance predicts significant increases in Marin’s elderly population as the baby boomer generation ages. While the total countywide population is expected to increase by eight percent between 2020 and 2040, the number of seniors over age 65 is projected to increase by 64 percent. Figure 3.2 shows how each age group in San Anselmo will change if countywide projections apply in San Anselmo. The population of residents under 19 will decrease by 11 percent, and the population of adults aged 20-64 will decrease by seven percent, while the proportion of seniors will increase to comprise 22 percent of the population by 2040. As shown in Figure 3.1, the aging population is expected to increase the demand for assisted living and senior residential facilities in the county.

Population Growth Trends 1990 - 2020
135
130
125
120
115
110
105
100
Index
San Anselmo
Index
Marin County
Index
Bay Area
Figure 3.1 Population Growth Trends in San Anselmo, 1990 - 2020 Index (Year %s = Index 100) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020 063 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
866
60 3,000
The aging population increased the median age of San Anselmo residents from 41.3 years in 2000 to 46 years in 2020. In 2020, San Anselmo’s median age is lower than the Marin County median age (47.1 years) but higher than the California and national median age (36.7 and 38.2 years, respectively). Figure 3.2 below displays the age group trends in San Anselmo over the past 30 years.

Age Group Trends in San Anselmo, 1990-2020
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 0 - 4 5 - 14 15 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 85+ 2000 2010 2020
Figure 3.2 Age Group Trends in San Anselmo, 1990-2020 Population 725 740 565 15191,6731,813 994 966 1,338 1351
875
864
2541
1,929
1,543
2591
2,365
2,208
1255
2,127
2,147
678
1,018
1,458
540
432
547
184
211
140
064 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
867
61 Employment Characteristics
An assessment of community needs should consider the occupational profile of residents. Incomes associated with different jobs and the number of workers in a household determines the housing type and size affordable to each household. In some cases, the types of jobs held by residents can also affect housing needs and demand (such as teachers or service workers). In San Anselmo, 33 percent of the working population is employed in the financial and professional services industry and 34 percent is employed in the health and educational services industry.

Approximately 67 percent of San Anselmo’s working population is employed in management, business, science, and arts occupations, as shown in Table 3.4 and Figure 3.3 below. In particular, biomedical and software engineering companies employ many residents in San Anselmo.

Table 3.4: Resident Employment by Occupation
Geography
Management,
business,
science, and arts
occupations
Service
occupations
Sales and
office
occupations
Natural resources,
construction, and
maintenance
occupations
Production,
transportation, and
material moving
occupations
San Anselmo 4,763 685 1,251 197 218
Marin County 73,706 18,306 24,881 6,950 6,195
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2020
Resident Employment by Occupation
100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
San Anselmo Marin County
Management, business, science, and arts occupations Service occupations Sales and office occupations Natural resources, construction, andmaintenance occupations Production, transportation, and material moving occupations Figure 3.3 Resident Employment by Occupation Share of Employed Residents 065 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
868
62 Blue collar industries employ a relatively small percentage of those that live in Marin County and San Anselmo. Generally, it is desirable to have a balance of jobs and workers, to enable workers to live in the communities they work in, reducing commute times, freeway congestion, and greenhouse gas emissions. It is generally considered ideal to have a range of 1.0 to 1.5 jobs per household in a jurisdiction. The jobs/housing ratio in San Anselmo was 1.47 in 2018, meaning that the number of jobs available in the community is proportional to the number of households. San Anselmo is expected to add 330 jobs (or 10 percent) to the local employment base between 2010 and 2040, as shown in Table 3.5. This is similar to the countywide job growth rate projection. In 2018, San Anselmo had a job-to-worker ratio of 0.86 for wage groups making less than $1,250 per month, 0.88 for wage groups making between $1,250 and $3,333 per month, and 0.40 for wage groups making more than $3,333 per month. This indicates the number of jobs available to each worker in their respective age group. Table 3.6 below displays the mean annual salary for various occupations in Marin County in 2022, with the mean salary at $77,267.

Table 3.5: Projected Jobs 2015-2050
Geography 2010 2015 2020 2030 2040 2050
Marin County 115,885 129,565 129,900 133,480 134,960 146,000 San Anselmo 3,090 3,205 3,215 3,350 3,420 N/A
Source: Association of Bay Area Governments
Table 3.6: Mean Annual Salary in Marin County (1st quarter 2022)
Occupation Mean Wages
Management Occupations $147,143
Business and Financial Operations Occupations $101,518
Computer and Mathematical Occupations $123,986
Architecture and Engineering Occupations $113,254
Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations $104,860 Community and Social Service Occupations $72,835
Legal Occupations $136,647
Educational Instruction and Library Occupations $77,625 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations $89,900 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations $140,211 Healthcare Support Occupations $45,752
Protective Service Occupations $88,459
Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations $42,422 Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance Occupations $46,376 Personal Care and Service Occupations $49,027
Sales and Related Occupations $55,594
Office and Administrative Support Occupations $58,607
Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations $48,444
Construction and Extraction Occupations $74,104
Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations $65,393 Production Occupations $54,577
Transportation and Material Moving Occupations $49,224
All Occupations $77,267
Source: California Employment Development Department 2022 1 ABAG Plan Bay Area Projections 2017.
066 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
869
63 100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Household Characteristics
The Census defines a household as all persons who occupy a housing unit. This definition includes single persons living alone, families related through marriage or blood, and unrelated individuals living together. Persons living in retirement or convalescent homes, dormitories, or other group living situations are not considered households.

According to the U.S. Census, there were 5,224 households in San Anselmo in 2020. As shown in Figure 3.4 and Table 3.7 below, approximately 27 percent of those households were comprised of single person households, while 55 percent were comprised of married-couple family households. An additional four percent were comprised of male headed households, eight percent were comprised of female headed households, and seven percent were comprised of other non-family households. In Marin County, just over half of the households consisted of married-couple family households.

Householder by Type
Marin County San Anselmo
Married-Couple Family Households Male Headed Family Households Female Headed Family Households Single Person Households Other Non-Family Household
Figure 3.4 Householder by Type
Table 3.7: Householder by Type
San Anselmo Marin County San Anselmo Marin County
Household by Type Number Number Precent Precent
Married-Couple Family Households 2,848 53,710 55% 51%
Male Headed Family Households 200 3,727 4% 4%
Female Headed Family Households 416 8,664 8% 8%
Single Person Households 1,411 30,769 27% 29%
Other Non-Family Household 349 8,030 7% 8%
Total 5,224 104,900 100% 100%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2020) 8664
51%
3727
55%
200
416
8% 8%
27% 29%
067 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
870
64 In San Anselmo, most households are small: 27 percent of households are comprised of one person households and 35 percent are two person households. As shown in Figure 3.5, households with three persons totaled 17 percent of the population, households with four persons totaled 13 percent, and large households with five or more people comprised eight percent of the population. The average household size in San Anselmo is

2.4 persons (U.S. Census, 2020).
2,000
1,800
Household Size
1,816
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person 5+ Persons
Figure 3.5 Household Size
1,411
912
668
417
Households
068 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
871
65 100.0%
Tenure
Housing tenure refers to whether a housing unit is owned or rented. Tenure influences residential mobility, as owner-occupied units generally experience lower turnover rates than rental units. In 2020, there were over 104,900 households in Marin County. Approximately 64 percent of households lived in owner-occupied units while the remaining 36 percent of households rented, as shown in Figure 3.6. Of San Anselmo’s 5,224 households in 2020, 66 percent were owner occupied while 34 percent were renter occupied, similar to Marin County’s housing tenure makeup.

Household Tenure (2020)

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Figure 3.6 Household Tenure 2020
San Anselmo
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Marin County
34% 36%
Percent
66% 64%
of Households
069 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
872
66 7,000
Housing Stock Characteristics
Figure 3.7 displays housing production in San Anselmo compared to neighboring cities and Marin County. Since 2010, San Anselmo’s housing stock lost 20 units, while neighboring Larkspur gained 83 units and Corte Madera gained 148 units. Fairfax lost 115 housing units and Ross lost four units. Countywide, the housing stock increased less than one-half percent over the 10-year period.

Regional Housing Growth Trends
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0 San Anselmo Fairfax
2010
Ross
2020
Larkspur Corte Madera
Figure 3.7 Regional Household Growth Trends
6,376 6,484
5,538 5,567
4,026 4,233
3,585 3,605
884 899
Housing Units
070 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
873
67 In Marin County, new housing construction continues to exacerbate the high proportion of detached, single-family housing. In 2020, 96 percent of construction permits issued countywide were for single-family units. As shown above, in 2020, 61 percent of existing residential buildings are single-family detached units in Marin County. In 2015 and 2017, 100 percent of construction permits issued were for single-family homes, making the 2020 figure of 96 percent the third highest in proportion of single-family unit construction permits issued in the last seven years, but the greatest number of permits in a year is consistently issued for the construction of this type of housing.

Although the demographic trends in San Anselmo indicate that future housing supply is needed to support smaller household sizes and an older population, the predominant housing type continues to be the single-family detached homes, which comprise 76 percent of the housing stock (Department of Finance, 2020). As shown in Table 3.8 below, single-family attached units and small, multifamily complexes (2 to 4 units) comprise 11 percent of San Anselmo’s housing, and larger multifamily complexes (5+ units) comprise 12 percent. Countywide single-family detached units comprise 61 percent of the housing stock and multifamily units (2+ units) comprise 27 percent.

Table 3.8: Housing Type
San Anselmo Marin County
Housing Type Number Percent Number Percent
Single-Family Detached 4,174 76% 68,012 61%
Single-Family Attached 266 5% 11,266 10%
Multifamily 2-4 Units 358 6% 8,349 7%
Multifamily 5+ Units 683 12% 21,957 20%
Mobile Homes 37 1% 1,980 2%
Occupied 5,225 95% 104,167 93%
Total 5,518 100% 111564 100%
Source: California Department of Finance
To meet the needs of current and future residents, Chapter 8 of the Housing Element contains several programs, policies, and actions aimed at facilitating the development of multifamily housing in the Town’s commercial corridors, missing middle housing in predominantly single-family detached neighborhoods, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) throughout the community. 071 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
874
68 7.0%
Vacancy Rates
The vacancy rate measures the overall housing availability in a community and is often a good indicator of how efficiently for-sale and for-rent housing units are meeting the current demand for housing. According to the California Department of Finance (DOF) and HCD, a vacancy rate of five percent for renter-occupied housing and 1.5 percent for owner-occupied housing is generally considered healthy and suggests that there is a balance between the supply and demand of housing. A vacancy rate of less than five percent for renter occupied households and less than 1.5 percent for owner occupied households may indicate that households are having difficulty finding affordable housing, which can lead to overcrowding or overpayment. A low vacancy rate or a particularly ‘tight’ housing market may also lead to high competition for units, which increases rental and for-sale home prices.

In 2020, 6.5 percent of all housing units were vacant in Marin County (Department of Finance, 2020). San Anselmo had a total vacancy rate of 4.2 percent in 2020, as shown in Figure 3.8 below. In August 2022 Realtor.com listed 22 properties for sale, which represents 0.6 percent of the estimated owner-occupied housing stock. There were 21 properties listed for rent on Zillow.com, representing 0.8 percent of the estimated renteroccupied housing stock.

Vacancy Rate

6.0%

5.0%

4.0%

3.0%

2.0%

1.0%

0.0%
Figure 3.8 Vacancy Rate
San Anselmo Marin County

6.5%

4.2%
Vacancy Rate
072 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
875
69 Housing Age and Condition
The age of a community’s housing stock can provide an indicator of overall housing conditions. Typically, housing over 30 years of age is likely to have rehabilitation needs that may include plumbing, roof, foundation work, and other repairs (HUD 2000). Figure 3.9 displays the age of San Anselmo’s occupied housing stock as of 2020. With 93 percent of San Anselmo’s housing stock built prior to 1989, a large majority of its housing has reached the 30-year benchmark. The Town processes over a thousand permits annually to update many of the aging homes, which will continue to be done during the 2021-2029 planning period.

Age of Housing Stock
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 2014 or
later
2010 - 20132000 - 20091990 - 19991980 - 19891970 - 19791960 - 19691950 - 19591940 - 1949 1939 or earlier
Figure 3.9 Age of Housing Stock
The Town of San Anselmo Planning Department performed a comprehensive survey of housing conditions in in the mid-1990’s that rated housing conditions on a scale from good to poor. The survey found that nearly all (99.1 percent) of San Anselmo homes are in good condition. A follow-up survey by staff in 2003 reconfirmed those results. A general review of neighborhoods in San Anselmo by Town Staff in 2014 also indicated that few houses are in need of repair, and the number of units in need of rehabilitation and/or replacement is estimated to be less than 30 units. In 2022, the San Anselmo Building Department received approximately 20 to 25 reports of substandard housing conditions related to illegal construction, rodents, mold, leaky roofs or windows, and substandard plumbing. Over half of the complaints received annually report illegal ADU construction (i.e., construction performed without appropriate permits). The Town has included several ADU-related programs and actions under Policy 6 in the Policies, Programs, and Actions section of this Housing Element to further streamline ADU permit approval and reduce barriers to legal ADU construction.

The Town continues to participate in the CDBG Rehabilitation Loan Program. Specific programs include single-family home repair loans, emergency repair and accessibility grants, exterior enhancement rebates, weatherization and home security grants for seniors, and a multifamily rehabilitation loan program. Town policies continue to support and expand these efforts. 1,590
1,049
854
721
581
256
161 181
7 15
Housing Units
073 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
876
70 100.0%
Overcrowding
The U.S. Census Bureau considers a household overcrowded when there is more than one person per room (excluding bathrooms, hallways, and kitchens). Aunit with more than 1.5 people per room is severely overcrowded. Overcrowding often increases health and safety concerns by inducing overuse and stress on housing infrastructure. Figure 3.10 shows the incidence of overcrowding in San Anselmo as estimated by HUD’s 2013-2017 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. Approximately 0.6 percent of owner-occupied units were overcrowded, and two percent of rental units were overcrowded. This low percentage of overcrowded households suggests that the number of units available in the community are adequate to meet the housing needs of San Anselmo residents. To ensure that the Town is not responsible for barriers to housing creation that induce overcrowding, the programs and actions under Policy 3, Policy 5, and Policy 6 will minimize barriers to housing development.

Overcrowded Households by Tenure

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Not Overcrowded Overcrowded Severely Overcrowded
Figure 3.10 Overcrowded Households by Tenure
99% 98%
Percent of Households
074 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
877
71 4,000
Household Income
Household income is one of the most important factors affecting housing opportunity because it determines a household’s ability to balance housing costs with the other necessities. Higher-income households have more discretionary income to spend on housing, whereas lower-income households are limited to the types of housing that they can afford. Income as reported by the U.S. Census and the American Community Survey includes wage or salary income; self-employment income; interest, dividends, net rental income, royalty income and income from estates and trusts; social security income; supplemental security income and public assistance income; retirement, survivor, and disability income; and other income including unemployment compensation, alimony, and child support. Income does not include capital gains, money from an inheritance or sale of a home, or money spent from savings accounts.

Between 2010 and 2020, the median household income in San Anselmo grew from $92,760 to $ 146,179 (adjusted to inflation), increasing by 37 percent. The median household income in San Anselmo is above Marin County’s median income, which was $ 121,671 in 2020. Figure 3.11 presents the distribution of household income in San Anselmo by income levels. Households earning above $100,000 comprise 66 percent of the households in San Anselmo. The proportion of lower-income households earning less than $50,000 per year in San Anselmo declined from 26 percent in 2010 to 17 percent in 2020.

Household Income
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 <$25,000 $25,000 $35,000 $50,000 $75,000 ≥$100,000
- $34,999 - $49,999 - $74,999 - $99,999
Figure 3.11 Household Income
2010 2020
Households
0 459
251
109
266
292
763
443
635
474
0 3447
075 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
878
72 4,500
Figure 3.12 shows the income level of San Anselmo residents by household tenure. According to HUD’s 2013-2017 CHAS data, a significantly higher percentage of renter households (56 percent) were lower-income, compared to residents that owned their homes (24 percent). However, because the majority of households in San Anselmo are homeowners, the actual number of lower-income homeowners (955) is higher than the number of lower-income renters (700).

Income Category by Tenure
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0 Extremely Low (<30%
AMI)
Very Low (30-50%
AMI)
Low (50-80% AMI) Moderate and Above
(80% AMI +)
Total
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Note: AMI is an abbreviation for Area Median Income.

Figure 3.12 Household Income Category by Tenure
Extremely low-income households earn annual incomes that are 30 percent or less of the area median income. In 2017, there were 335 extremely low-income owner households and 285 extremely low-income renter households in San Anselmo, making a total of 620 households (CHAS, 2017).

According to California Government Code Section 65583(a)(1), the Town may “presume that 50 percent of the very low-income households qualify as extremely low-income households.” For this reason, the number of very low-income units provided in the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) number has been split equally between these two income categories; HCD projects the need for housing to support 127 extremely low income households. Extremely low-income households typically need targeted programs to provide affordable housing solutions, including deep rent subsidies, housing with supportive services, single room occupancy units, and shared housing. Chapter 5 Housing Resources outlines the services and support available to extremely low-income households in San Anselmo. In Chapter 8, Policies, Programs, and Actions, Actions

1.1b, 5.3a, 5.3b, 6.2a, and 7.1c enact the Town to meet special housing needs through incentives and zoning standards and work with housing providers.
3,965
3,015
1,250
285 240 380
555
280 135
Households
076 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
879
73 Housing Costs and Affordability
Housing affordability in San Anselmo can be assessed by comparing market rents and sales prices with the amount that households of different income levels can afford to pay for housing. This information reveals which households can afford available housing in San Anselmo and indicates the households that would most likely experience housing cost burden. This section summarizes the cost and affordability of the housing stock in San Anselmo.

Rental HousingMarket
According to the 2020 ACS, rental prices countywide
increased by 32 percent between 2010 and 2020. In
recent years, rents have increased relatively quickly, by about ten percent between 2018 and 2020. Since 2020,
rent has increased by 43 percent, and the average rent for all available rental units on Zillow in San Anselmo was $3,591 as of August 2022. In Marin County, rental rates increased by 29 percent between 2010 and 2020, as
shown in Table 3.9. In recent years, rents increased by eight percent between 2018 and 2020. In August 2022,
the average monthly rent in Marin County was $4,018.

Ownership Housing Market
Between 2010 and 2021, single-family home sales in San Anselmo ebbed to a low of 115 sales in 2011 and then rebounded, nearly reaching the high set in 2013. As shown in Figure 3.13, ten condominiums and 280 single-family homes were sold in 2021.

Real Estate Volume
250
200
150
100
50 0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Single-family Detached Condominiums
71 San Anselmo Housing Element | Housing Needs
Figure 3.13 Real Estate Volumes Prepared by Houseal Lavigne 208
197
166
155 160
151 149 152
141
132
124
115
11 10
Units Sold
Table 3.9: Rental Rates
Year San Anselmo Marin County
2010 $1,309 $1,446.00
2011 $1,402 $1,475.00
2012 $1,403 $1,491.00
2013 $1,463 $1,520.00
2014 $1,427 $1,561.00
2015 $1,494 $1,587.00
2016 $1,565 $1,686.00
2017 $1,649 $1,781.00
2018 $1,724 $1,881.00
2019 $1,820 $1,968.00
2020 $1,911 $2,047.00
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2010-2020) 077 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
880
74 Median Sales Price
From 2010 to 2011, the median sales price for a single-family home in San Anselmo dropped to a low of $700,000, and then began to increase steadily through 2021 where the median sales price was $1,600,000. As shown in Figure 3.13, condominium sales prices dropped to a low of $295,000 in 2011. Sales prices have ebbed and flowed since 2011 and peaked in 2020, where the median condominium sales price of $1,400,000.

Condominium sales prices have since decreased in 2021 where the median sales price was $805,000. $1,800,000
San Anselmo Median Sales Price
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
$-
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Single-family Detached Condominiums
Figure 3.13 San Anselmo Median Sales Price
078 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
881
75 Tables 3.10 and 3.11 show how San Anselmo real estate sale prices compare to other Marin County communities over the past five years. In 2020, San Anselmo single-family home sale prices were six percent lower than the countywide median. San Anselmo condominium sales prices were 50 percent higher than the countywide median.

Table 3.10: Single-Family Median Sale Prices in Marin County, 2015-2020 Geography 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Belvedere $ 3,695,000 $ 3,175,000 $ 3,985,000 $ 3,250,000 $ 3,540,000 $ 4,500,000 Corte Madera $ 1,275,500 $ 1,317,500 $ 1,446,000 $ 1,450,000 $ 1,527,557 $ 1,550,000 Fairfax $ 810,000 $ 827,000 $ 880,000 $ 920,000 $ 901,000 $ 1,005,000 Larkspur $ 1,622,500 $ 1,690,000 $ 1,800,000 $ 1,835,000 $ 1,878,000 $ 2,115,375 Mill Valley $ 1,700,000 $ 1,700,000 $ 1,742,500 $ 1,812,425 $ 1,875,000 $ 2,143,750 Novato $ 800,000 $ 850,000 $ 860,500 $ 945,000 $ 913,000 $ 980,000 Ross $ 2,754,500 $ 2,812,500 $ 2,637,500 $ 2,530,000 $ 3,454,000 $ 3,605,000 San Anselmo $ 1,007,000 $ 1,051,000 $ 1,190,000 $ 1,260,000 $ 1,297,000 $ 1,362,500 San Rafael $ 949,000 $ 1,011,500 $ 1,100,000 $ 1,179,500 $ 1,190,000 $ 1,325,000 Sausalito $ 2,000,000 $ 1,983,250 $ 1,805,500 $ 1,988,000 $ 1,923,750 $ 1,950,000 Tiburon $ 2,381,250 $ 2,250,000 $ 2,700,000 $ 2,652,500 $ 2,687,500 $ 3,150,000 Unincorporated $ 1,200,000 $ 1,240,000 $ 1,334,000 $ 1,405,000 $ 1,400,000 $ 1,600,000 Countywide $ 1,100,000 $ 1,165,000 $ 1,235,000 $ 1,345,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,450,000 Source: County of Marin Assessor-Recorder-County Clerk
Table 3.11: Condominium Median Sale Prices in Marin County, 2015-2020 Geography 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Belvedere $ 1,016,000 $ 1,100,000 N/A $ 1,680,000 N/A N/A Corte Madera $ 745,000 $ 790,000 $ 800,000 $ 882,500 $ 930,000 $ 949,000 Fairfax $ 494,500 $ 592,500 $ 590,000 $ 650,000 $ 643,545 $ 643,000 Larkspur $ 605,000 $ 623,850 $ 685,500 $ 675,000 $ 743,000 $ 740,000 Mill Valley $ 811,500 $ 765,000 $ 800,000 $ 763,500 $ 800,000 $ 950,000 Novato $ 443,500 $ 505,000 $ 470,000 $ 515,000 $ 537,000 $ 541,750 Ross N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
San Anselmo $ 373,625 $ 675,000 $ 530,000 $ 790,000 $ 475,000 $ 1,400,000 San Rafael $ 532,000 $ 507,000 $ 519,512 $ 649,000 $ 600,000 $ 692,000 Sausalito $ 807,500 $ 860,000 $ 765,000 $ 1,028,000 $ 855,000 $ 1,042,250 Tiburon $ 935,500 $ 960,000 $ 1,373,750 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,352,500 $ 1,212,000 Unincorporated $ 635,000 $ 721,500 $ 700,000 $ 780,000 $ 785,000 $ 858,000 Countywide $ 580,000 $ 596,000 $ 542,250 $ 675,000 $ 660,000 $ 700,000 Source: County of Marin Assessor-Recorder-County Clerk
079 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
882
76 Housing Affordability
Income limits are developed by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) in order to calculate housing affordability. Income limits are expressed as a percentage of Area Median Income (AMI) and calculated by household size. Table 3.12 lists the income levels by household size for Marin County as defined by HCD. The median income for a four-person household in Marin County is $166,000.

Table 3.12: 2022 Marin County Income Limits
Family
Size
Acutely
Low
Income
Extremely
Low
Income
Very Low
Income
Low
Income
Median
Income
Moderate
Income
1 $17,450 $39,150 $65,250 $104,400 $116,200 $139,450
2 $19,900 $44,750 $74,600 $119,300 $132,800 $159,350
3 $22,400 $50,350 $83,900 $134,200 $149,400 $179,300
4 $24,900 $55,900 $93,200 $149,100 $166,000 $199,200
5 $26,900 $60,400 $100,700 $161,050 $179,300 $215,150
6 $28,900 $64,850 $108,150 $173,000 $192,550 $231,050
7 $30,900 $69,350 $115,600 $184,900 $205,850 $247,000
8 $32,850 $73,800 $123,050 $196,850 $219,100 $262,950
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, Rent Limits Renter Affordability
Table 3.13 compares the maximum affordable rent (i.e., 30 percent of household income) for the various income categories to median rental prices in Marin County. This analysis indicates that there are no market rate rentals in San Anselmo affordable to households that fall into the very lowincome bracket or below. The San Anselmo rental market offers one- and two-bedroom units that low-income households can afford. However, a larger low-income household would not be able to find an affordable unit that meets their space needs. The Housing Element includes Program

5.3 to encourage the construction of affordable and special needs housing by providing incentives and amending zoning regulations to increase housing available to all income levels.

Table 3.13: Maximum Affordable Rents
Income Level Studio
(1 Person)
1 Bedroom
(2 Persons)
2 Bedrooms
(3 Persons)
3 Bedrooms
(4 persons)
Acutely Low-Income $ 436.25 $ 497.50 $ 560.00 $ 622.50
Extremely Low-Income $ 978.75 $ 1,118.75 $ 1,258.75 $ 1,397.50 Very Low-Income $ 1,631.25 $ 1,865.00 $ 2,097.50 $ 2,330.00 Low-Income $ 2,610.0 $ 2,982.50 $ 3,355.0 $ 3,727.50
Median-Income $ 2,905.0 $ 3,320.0 $ 3,735.0 $ 4,150.0
Moderate-Income $ 3,486.25 $ 3,983.75 $ 4,482.50 $ 4,980.0 Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development, Rent Limits Homeowner Affordability
Table 3.14 below estimates the maximum affordable purchase price for moderate-income households in Marin County. To calculate the maximum affordable purchase price the following assumptions were made:
080 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
883
77 • Down Payment: $50,000
• Loan Term: 30 years
• Interest Rate: 6.9%
• Debt to Income Ratio: 36%
• Housing Ratio: 28%
• Annual Property Tax: $6,000
• Annual Homeowners Insurance: $2,000
The median sales price for a San Anselmo condominium in 2020 was $1,400,000, which is not affordable to moderate-income households.

This represents an affordability gap between the sales price and price affordable to moderate-income households of about $67,000 for a onebedroom condominium and $14,000 for a two-bedroom condominium. As is true for many other Bay Area communities, home sales prices in San Anselmo are not affordable for moderate-income households.

Housing Cost Burden
Housing that accounts for 30 percent or less of household income is considered affordable. Households paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing are considered to be cost-burdened. For homeowners, housing costs include mortgage costs, taxes, utilities, and insurance.

Rental housing costs include rent and utilities. The impact of high housing costs is most severe on households with less disposable income available such as extremely low, very low- and low-income households, especially renters. Higher income households may voluntarily choose to spend more than 30 percent of their income for housing, but lower income households may need to overpay due to the lack of housing affordable to their incomes.

Cost Burden Households by Tenure
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0 Extremely Low (<30%
AMI)
Very Low (30-50% AMI) Low (50-80% AMI) Moderate and Above (80% AMI +)
Total
Figure 3.14 Cost Burdened Households by Tenure
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
1375
690
515
235 225
290
160 120 145
25 Number of Households
Table 3.14:Maximum Affordable
Purchase Price
Family
Size
Moderate
Income
Maximum Affordable
Purchase Price
1 $139,450 $396,357.00
2 $159,350 $444,561.00
3 $179,300 $506,441.00
4 $199,200 $568,165.00
5 $215,150 $617,637.00
6 $231,050 $666,955.00
7 $247,000 $716,427.00
8 $262,950 $765,900.00
Source: Department of Housing and Community Development 081 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
884
78 Approximately 36 percent of San Anselmo households spend 30 percent or more of their household income on housing. As shown in Figure 3.14, the incidence of housing cost burden increases as the household’s income falls. It is estimated that there are 955 lower income owner-occupied households and 700 lower income renter households that are housing cost burdened in San Anselmo, for a total of 1,655 households. Extremely low-income households earn up to 30 percent of the Area Median Income. This group is considered a special needs group because of the limited housing options available to them. Extremely low-income households also tend to include a higher proportion of seniors or disabled persons. Of the lower income owner-occupied households, about 41 percent, or 390 households, spend more than half of their income on housing, making them extremely cost burdened, while approximately 49 percent of the lower income renter households, or 340 households, spend more than half of their income on housing.

Balance of page is intentionally blank.
082 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
885
79 Special Housing Needs
Housing element law requires local governments to include an analysis of persons and households with special housing needs and to address resources available to address those needs. This population often spends a disproportionate amount of their income to secure safe and decent housing and are sometimes subject to discrimination Table 3.15 summarizes the number of households with special housing needs in San Anselmo.

Table 3.15: San Anselmo Special Housing Needs Populations Special Needs Groups Persons Households Percent
Seniors (65+)
Total 2,145 N/A 17%
With a Disability 371 N/A 17%
Independent Living Difficulty 94 N/A 25%
Ambulatory Difficulty 165 N/A 44%
Self Care Difficulty 55 N/A 15%
Senior Households
Total 1,379 N/A 26%
Renter 365 N/A 26%
Owner 1,014 N/A 74%
Seniors Living Alone
Total N/A 240 8%
Persons with Disability
Total 932 N/A 7%
Persons without a disability
Independent Living Difficulty 217 N/A 23%
Ambulatory Difficulty 294 N/A 32%
Cognitive Difficulty 395 N/A 42%
Self Care Difficulty 190 N/A 20%
Female-Headed Households
Total N/A 416 8%
Below the poverty line N/A 32 8%
with related children under 18 years (total) N/A 32 8%
Above the Poverty line N/A 384 92%
with related children under 18 years (total) N/A 287 69% Large Households
Total N/A 417 8%
Renter N/A 30 7%
Owner N/A 387 93%
Farmworkers
Total N/A N/A N/A
Total Persons/Households
Total 12,586 5,224 100%
Note: Individuals experiencing homelessness are considered a special needs group but are not counted in the American Community Survey (ACS) due to the fact that ACS data collection is residence-based. Italicized numbers reflect the percentage within the special needs group, not the percentage of the total Town population or household. 083 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
886
80 Seniors
Approximately 17 percent of San Anselmo’s population, or 2,145 residents, are 65 years or over. Approximately 26 percent of the town’s households have a senior head-of-household, and the vast majority (74 percent) of these householders own their homes. Tables 3.16 and 3.17 and Figure 3.15 display the number of senior households by income and tenure and the cost burden on those households. Approximately 43 percent of San Anselmo’s senior households qualify as lower income households (less than 80 percent AMI), and 299 seniors have incomes which fall below the level of poverty (less than 30 percent AMI). Needs for seniors with disabilities include smaller and more efficient housing, barrierfree and accessible housing, and housing with health care and/or personal care for daily living. Such specific housing needs can drive up the cost of suitable housing, resulting in a higher housing cost burden for seniors.

Table 3.16: Cost-Burdened Senior Households by Income Level Income Group 0%-30% of Income Used for
Housing
30%-50% of Income
Used for Housing
50%+ of Income
Used for Housing
Total
0%-30% of AMI 80 40 179 299
31%-50% of AMI 75 30 115 220
51%-80% of AMI 125 90 45 260
81%-100% of AMI 114 60 60 234
Greater than 100% of AMI 700 65 20 785
Total 1,094 285 419 1,798
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release Seniors often express concern for their ability to pay for necessities. The 2012-2016 Marin County Aging Area Plan found that 17 percent of senior homeowners in Marin County had trouble paying for home repairs over the past year. Affording home repairs is the most reported housing issue for seniors who had been in their homes for more than 30 years. While most seniors prefer to stay in their homes, some may find that property maintenance costs make it difficult to age in place. In San Anselmo, approximately 545 lower-income senior households own their own home and 234 lower-income senior households rent. In 2017, approximately 28 percent of senior households were housing cost burdened.

Table 3.17: Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Income Group Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
0%-30% of AMI 235 64
31%-50% of AMI 120 100
51%-80% of AMI 190 70
81%-100% of AMI 220 14
Greater than 100% of AMI 710 75
Total 1,475 323
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) ACS tabulation, 2013-2017 release 084 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
887
81 Figure 3.15 Senior Households by Tenure and Income
Disabilities and limited mobility can create additional special housing needs for seniors. Approximately 17 percent of senior residents in San Anselmo have some type of disability, which may limit their access to housing. An estimated 94 seniors have independent living difficulty, 55 have a self- care difficulty, and 165 have an ambulatory difficulty. The proportions of seniors with different disabilities are displayed in Table 3.18 below.

Housing with enhanced accessibility features can support independent living for seniors as they continue to age.

Table 3.18: Disability by Type - Seniors (65 and over)
Civilian noninstitutionalized population 65 years and over with a disability Percent With an ambulatory difficulty 11.8%
With a hearing difficulty 9.9%
With a vision difficulty 7.9%
With an independent living difficulty 7.3%
With a cognitive difficulty 5.6%
With a self-care difficulty 4.6%
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Note: Some residents may have more than one disability, and the data in this table is not representative of the total people with disabilities.

The County’s Division of Aging and Adult Services supports a variety of services that are provided to a network of local nonprofit organizations and governmental agencies throughout Marin County. Marin County’s Aging and Adult Services office acts as the Area Agency on Aging for Marin County, and publishes an Area Plan every four years. The Area Plan involves qualitative and quantitative research on the demographics, experiences, and perspectives of older adults in their service area of Marin County. The Age-Friendly County of Marin Action Plan (2020) examined the County’s role in supporting a rapidly aging community. Through the public outreach for this plan, which included surveys, interviews and focus groups, the primary housing challenges emerged regarding older adults: lack of affordable housing and limited accessible housing stock. The Housing Element includes Program 7.1 to assist service providers in linking seniors with appropriate housing resources and Program

7.2 to ensure that new multi-family housing units are accessible and support aging in place. In addition, the Town will seek to meet 79%
55%
73%
94% 90%
21%
45%
27%
6% 10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0%-30% of AMI 31%-50% of AMI 51%-80% of AMI 81%-100% of AMI Greater than 100% of AMI
Percent of Households
Senior Households by Income and Tenure
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
085 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
888
82 special housing needs through a combination of regulatory incentives and zoning standards, including Actions 5.7a through 5.7 g, 5.3a, and 6.2c identified in Chapter 8, Policies, Programs, and Actions.

According to the California Department of Social Services, there are 50 licensed residential care for the elderly (RCFEs) in the county with a total capacity of 2,180 persons. Two RCFEs are in the Town of San Anselmo – Bello Gardens and Tam House – with a total capacity of 31 persons.

The County of Marin Department of Health and Human Services maintains an online portal for senior community resources. The online portal lists more than 50 senior housing resources located throughout Marin County, and Table 3.19 highlights key senior housing services available.

Table 3.19: Senior Housing Services
Name Description
Fair Housing Advocates of
Northern California
Fair Housing Advocates provides free comprehensive fair housing counseling, complaint investigation, and assistance in filing housing discrimination complaints with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH).

Bello Gardens Assisted Living
(formerly McGarr House I)
Bello Gardens is steps away from historic Downtown San Anselmo. The facility offers a variety of daily activities including exercise, arts and crafts, bingo and therapy pet visits.

Ross Valley Ecumenical
Housing Association (Tam
House)
Ross Valley Ecumenical Housing Association owns two houses with 21 private rooms in San Anselmo for fully independent seniors 63 and over. This is shared, communal, cooperative housing open to those who can contribute to the house. Section 8 accepted.

Marin Housing Authority:

Seniors/Disabled Housing
Owns and operates apartment complexes for low-income seniors/disabled: Casa Nova in Novato; Golden Hinde and Homestead Terrace in San Rafael; Kruger Pines and Venetia Oaks in Mill Valley.

Villa Marin Villa Marin is an on-site medical facility that is staffed with Registered Nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants 24 hours a day, and physicians who are always on call and offer residents both assisted living and skilled nursing. Villa Marin offers a full range of therapies, including physical therapy, speech therapy, and occupational therapy. Condos range from studio to 3-bedroom layouts with living spaces offering 660 to 2,254 square feet.

Safe Senior Options - Senior
Placement Services
Assist families in locating safe and appropriate Assisted Living and Memory Care Facilities throughout Northern California.

Homeward Bound of Marin-Mill
Street Center (MSC)
The point of entry to Homeward Bound’s ADULT Services Program. Mill Street Center is a year-round emergency shelter for individuals experiencing homelessness in Marin County with a robust array of housing-focused services to help people secure stable housing. Mill Street accommodates 55 people per night in a dormitory-style setting. Staff supports residents wishing to end their homelessness with around-the-clock counseling. As space becomes available, committed residents 'graduate' to New Beginnings Center.

Consumer Credit Counseling
Services: Housing Counseling
HUD approved counseling non-profit agency covering San Francisco, Napa, Marin, Mendocino and Sonoma counties.

Counseling in all areas relating to the home: home buyer, default and loss, reverse mortgages, volunteer credit counseling services. Reverse mortgages enable senior homeowners with paid off or low mortgages to draw income from their home equity.

Marin County Department of
Health and Human Services
Division of Aging and Adult
Services: Long Term Care
Ombudsman
The Ombudsman staff monitors the care of people in long-term residential care homes or nursing facilities. They are trained advocates who are authorized by State and Federal laws to visit nursing homes, residential care and assisted living facilities to ensure that quality care is given to residents and that they are being treated with dignity and respect.

Additionally, Ombudsman staff are educated in the rights, issues and needs of long-term care facility residents and the state and federal regulations which govern those facilities. There is no fee for this service.

Source: https://www.marinhhs.org/resources/Housing/Senior-Housing The Town has adopted reasonable accommodation procedures to provide individuals with disabilities with exceptions to Town regulations.

However, Finding 5 under the reasonable accommodation procedure is not consistent with State law. Therefore, Action 9.1e will amend these procedures to remove remaining constraints to the Town’s reasonable accommodation ordinance and provide relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures. Chapter 5, Housing Resources, provides further discussion on the Town’s resources available to house and care for its seniors as well as evaluation of potential gaps. In addition, the Town proposes the following policies, programs, and actions to remove barriers to adequate housing for seniors:
• Program 7.2 ensures that new multifamily housing is accessible to disabled persons, and Action 7.2b will enact the Town to work with local non-profits to create a day where volunteers provide free services such as home repairs and renovations for low-income elderly and disabled homeowners.
• Program 9.1 enacts the Town to eliminate discrimination in housing based on age, race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, or occupation, and Action 9.1e requires amendments to the Zoning Code to remove barriers for the approval of requests for reasonable accommodation.
086 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
889
83 • Action 5.1a explores ways in which the Town can work with neighboring jurisdictions to explore the feasibility of establishing a renter match program for ADU owners and prospective tenants. • Policy 6 includes Programs 6.1 and 6.2 and Actions 6.1a, 6.1b, 6.1c, 6.2a, 6.2b, 6.2c, 6.2d, 6.2e, and 6.2f which will further enable ADU development and affordability.

Persons Living with Disabilities
A disability is a long-lasting condition (more than six months) that impairs an individual’s mobility, ability to work, or ability to care for themselves.

Persons with disabilities include those with physical, mental, or emotional disabilities. Disabled persons often have special housing needs with regards to location, transportation, and accessibility. Furthermore, people with disabilities may rely on fixed incomes, which further limits their ability to afford adequate housing. Table 3.20 and Figure 3.16 below displays the types of disabilities within the adult population in San Anselmo. Approximately 42 percent of disabled residents have a cognitive difficulty, 32 percent have an ambulatory difficulty, 20 percent have a self-care difficulty, and 23 percent have an independent living difficulty.2 Approximately 17 percent of seniors in San Anselmo suffer from some type of disability.

Table 3.20: Disability by Type
Civilian noninstitutionalized population 18 years and over with a disability
Percent
With an ambulatory difficulty 3.4%
With a hearing difficulty 3.0%
With a cognitive difficulty 2.7%
With an independent living difficulty 2.2%
With a vision difficulty 2.1%
With a self-care difficulty 1.3%
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Figure 3.16 Adult Population in San Anselmo with a Disability by Disability Type 2 categories are not mutually exclusive

3.4%

3.0% 2.7%

2.2% 2.1%

1.3%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%
With an
ambulatory
difficulty
With a hearing
difficulty
With a cognitive
difficulty
With an
independent living
difficulty
With a vision
difficulty
With a self-care
difficulty
Proportion of Adult Population Reporting
Disability Type
Adult Population with a Disability by Type
087 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
890
84 In 2019, approximately 953 San Anselmo residents (seven percent) suffer from one or more disabilities, as shown compared to Marin County and the Bay Area in Table 3.21 and Figure 3.17 below.

Table 3.21: Disability by Type
Jurisdiction No disability With a disability
San Anselmo 11,534 953
Marin County 232,075 23,346
Bay Area 6,919,762 735,533
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San
Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Figure 3.17 Comparative Disability by Type Within the Adult Population The living arrangements for persons with disabilities depend on the severity of the disability. Many people live independently at home with the help of family members. To maintain independent living long-term, disabled persons may require other types of assistance which may include special housing design features for the physically disabled, income support if they are unable to work, and in-home supportive services for persons with medical conditions. In order to support people with disabilities in San Anselmo, Action 7.1c will enact the Town to work with housing providers to ensure that housing needs for special needs groups, including persons with disabilities, are addressed and the Town will seek regulatory incentives to meet special housing needs. Action 7.2a will amend the Zoning Code to allow residential care facilities in all multifamily and commercial districts that would result in a substantial increase in zoning capacity for housing supported by services appropriate for persons with disabilities. In addition, Action 5.8a and Action 5.8f will amend the Zoning Code to comply with the Lanterman Disabilities Services Act. Through Action 9.1e, the Town will remove barriers to requests for reasonable accommodation by amending the Zoning Code to be consistent with State law. Furthermore, Action 9.1f will provide maximum flexibility in development through establishment of an administrative process to ministerially approve minor variances for the development of housing for persons with physical disabilities and developmental disabilities. In addition, Actions 7.2b and 9.2a call for the Town to remove barriers to accessible, affordable housing options for persons living with disabilities in San Anselmo. 92% 91% 90%
8% 9% 10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
San Anselmo Marin County Bay Area
Percent of Non-institutionalized population
Comparative Disability by Type
No disability With a disability
088 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
891
85 Persons Living with Developmental Disabilities
Federal law defines developmental disability as a severe, chronic disability that:
• Is attributable to a mental or physical impairment or a combination of both. • Is manifested before the individual is 22 years old.
• Is likely to continue indefinitely.
• Substantially limits functions to three or more of the following areas of major life activities: self-care, receptive and express language, learning, mobility, self-direction, capacity for independent living, and economic self-sufficiency. • Reflects the individual's need for a combination and sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services, supports, or other assistance that is of lifelong or extended duration and is individually planned and coordinated, except that such term, when applied to infants and young children means individuals from birth to age 5, inclusive, who have substantial developmental delay or specific congenital or acquired conditions with a high probability of resulting in developmental disabilities if services are not provided.

Senate Bill 812, which took effect January 2011, amended State law to require the analysis of the special housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities. This analysis must include an estimate of the number of persons with developmental disabilities, an assessment of the housing need, and a discussion of potential resources.

Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work independently within a conventional housing environment. More severely disabled individuals require a group living environment where care is provided. The most severely affected individuals may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are available. Since developmental disabilities exist before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for the developmentally disabled is the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to the appropriate level of independence as an adult.

The California Department of Disability Services (DDS) reports that there are 55 developmentally disabled persons in the 94960 zip code, which includes San Anselmo and a portion of unincorporated Marin County, in 2020. As shown in Table 3.22 and Figure 3.18, there are approximately 17 children and 38 adults with developmental disabilities. According to the California DDS, 36 people with developmental disabilities reside with parents, family, or guardians, 17 people are in independent/supported living environments, and 4 people live in a community care facility. This information is displayed in shown in Table 3.23 and Figure 3.19 below. The Golden Gate Regional Center coordinates and contracts directly with service providers in Marin County that provide support for individuals with developmental disabilities to lead lives of liberty and opportunity while educating and informing community members about the value of those with developmental disabilities. The center offers in-home services to individuals with developmental disabilities in a variety of living arrangements that promote opportunities to reside in the least restrictive environment that is best suited to meet the individual’s needs.

Examples of these living arrangements include:
• Community Care Facilities
• Family Home Agencies
• Independent and Supported Living Services
• Intermediate Care Facilities
There are three intermediate care facilities in Marin County: Able and Nova House located in nearby San Rafael and Stonehaven located in Novato.

Policy 7 in Chapter 8, Policies, Programs, and Actions, identifies several programs and actions that provide housing and supportive services for special needs populations, including people with developmental disabilities. Action 7.2a will amend the Zoning Code to allow residential care facilities in all multifamily and commercial districts that would result substantial increase in zoning capacity for housing supported by services appropriate for persons with developmental disabilities. Actions 7.1c, 9.1e, and 9.2a also enact the Town to remove barriers to accessible, affordable housing options for persons living with developmental disabilities in San Anselmo. In addition, Action 5.8a and Action 5.8f will amend the Zoning Code to comply with the Lanterman Disabilities Services Act. Furthermore, Action 9.1f will provide maximum flexibility in development through establishment of an administrative process to ministerially approve minor variances for the development of housing for persons with physical disabilities and developmental disabilities. 089 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
892
86 Table 3.22: Population with Developmental
Disabilities by Age
Age Group Number of People
Age 18+ 38
Age Under 18 17
Total 55
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
Figure 3.18 San Anselmo Population with Developmental Disabilities Table 3.23: Population with Developmental
Disabilities by Residence
Residence Type Number of People
Home of Parent /Family /Guardian 36
Independent /Supported Living 17
Community Care Facility 4
Other 0
Foster /Family Home 0
Intermediate Care Facility 0
Total 57
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
38 17
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 Age 18+ Age Under 18
Number of People
Population with Developmental
Disabilities
090 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
893
87 Figure 3.19 San Anselmo Population with Developmental Disabilities by Residence Large Households
Large households consist of five or more persons and are considered a special needs population due to the typically limited availability of affordable and adequately sized housing. In San Anselmo, large households comprise just eight percent of total households. Of the Town’s 417 large households, 30 households are renters. Households with five or six members typically require a home with three or more bedrooms. The American Community Survey estimates that San Anselmo contains 328 rental units and 2,714 owner units with three or more bedrooms. The 328 rental units with three or more bedrooms are sufficient to accommodate the 30 renter households with five or more people. In addition, the 2,714 owner units with three or more bedrooms are adequate to accommodate the 387 owner households with five or more people in San Anselmo. Therefore, the town has sufficient housing stock to meet the needs of larger families and households. Action 5.3b requires the Town to increase incentives for the development of affordable units with three or more bedrooms to ensure large households are not overpaying on housing costs in order to live in a unit that meets their space needs.

Female-Headed Households
Female-headed households typically have special needs for affordable housing, accessible childcare and health care, among other supportive services. Female-headed households, especially those with young children, face additional challenges as the sole income earner, particularly if they must expend income on childcare or adequate housing.

In 2020, there were 416 female-headed households in San Anselmo, comprising eight percent of total households. Of these female-headed households, 77 percent had children (319 households). Approximately 32 female-headed households in San Anselmo (comprising about one percent of all households and eight percent of all female-headed households) have incomes below the poverty line. Those households with children may need assistance with housing subsidies, as well as accessible and affordable day care. Actions 3.1a through 3.1c, 5.1b, 5.3a, and 7.1c require the Town to encourage a variety of housing types at different income levels and provide housing programs that ensure housing needs for special needs groups, including female-headed households, are met.

Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose primary incomes are earned through seasonal agricultural work. In many parts of Marin County, agriculture production is an important contribution to local economies. However, the Town of San Anselmo has no agricultural zone or uses. While 30 residents are employed in the agriculture and natural resources industry, all employed residents hold managerial, sales, or office positions. There is no documented need for farmworker housing in San Anselmo. Regardless, the Town will update the Zoning Code, as 36 17
4 0 0 0
0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 Home of Parent
/Family /Guardian
Independent
/Supported Living
Community Care
Facility
Other Foster /Family
Home
Intermediate Care
Facility
Population
Population with Developmental Disabilities by
Residence
091 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
894
88 needed, to comply with the State Employee Housing Act (Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5, 17021.6, and 17021.8 (Action 5.8c).

People Experiencing Homelessness
In June 2019, numerous stakeholders across the county, including the Marin Continuum of Care (CoC), referred to as the Homeless Policy Steering Committee (HPSC) during the planning process, participated in the visioning and drafting of the A Response to Homelessness in Marin County:

Assessing the Need and Taking Action Plan. The plan analyzes trends regarding the population of people experiencing homelessness in Marin County, uncovers gaps in Countywide resources for the homeless population, and offers solutions to respond to homelessness. Its four goals are:
1) end chronic and veteran homelessness in Marin County by 2022; 2) create additional permanent housing opportunities to address needs of the most vulnerable; 3) maintain and enhance fidelity to the principles of housing first and improve, and 4) expand data sharing capacity to provide comprehensive, coordinated care to persons experiencing homelessness. These goals established a strategic direction for the provision of homeless services and represented a broad, creative effort addressing homelessness and homelessness prevention.

Table 3.24: Marin County 2022 Point in Time Homeless Count Unsheltered Homeless Individuals 830
Sheltered Homeless Individuals 291
Total Individuals Experiencing Homelessness 1,121
Source: MTC/ABAG Data Needs Workbook for Town of San Anselmo; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
While the Marin CoC serves a crucial role in the coordination and provision of services and housing in the county, the Marin County Department of Health and Human Services oversees the annual CoC application to receive funding from HUD for homeless services to conduct an annual pointin-time count of people experiencing homelessness.

The Marin County 2022 Point-in-Time Homelessness Count (PIT) estimates the daily average number of people experiencing homelessness in the county. The 2022 PIT was conducted by the Marin County CoC in conjunction with Applied Survey Research, a social research firm, on the night of February 17, 2022. The 2022 PIT counted persons experiencing homelessness who are unsheltered (those living on the streets) and those who were sheltered (living in emergency shelters and transitional housing and other housing). Table 3.24 above shows the count identified 1,121 people experiencing homelessness in the county, 830 of whom met the HUD definition of unsheltered and in immediate need of housing. The total number of people experiencing homelessness accounted for less than one percent of the county’s total population. In 2020, 161,548 people in California were experiencing homelessness, which was less than one percent of the total population. In addition to the HUD-defined sheltered and unsheltered categories, Marin Health and Human Services identifies people experiencing homelessness in other settings not recognized by HUD, such as motels, jail, hospitals, and temporary residence with friends or family.

The one-day count does not include a breakdown of unsheltered people experiencing homelessness by jurisdiction, so it has become countywide practice to calculate the number of unsheltered people experiencing homelessness by jurisdiction proportional to each jurisdiction's share of the county-wide population. A homeless survey was not done in San Anselmo specifically, and there is not a known homeless contingency in San Anselmo due to the town’s limited transit routes and isolation from social service agencies that provide aid to people experiencing homelessness.

In order to identify the need for homeless services in the community, each Marin County jurisdictions agreed to plan for their per-capita share of the county-wide population of people experiencing homelessness, as determined by the PIT count. Based on San Anselmo’s population, the Town needs to plan for 54 unsheltered people experiencing homelessness. However, Marin County only has one emergency shelter located in Sa Rafael.

To address the needs of this population, the Town has included Program 7.4 and Program 7.5, and Action 5.8d in the Policies, Programs, and Actions section of this Housing Element. In addition, Actions 7.1a, 7.1b, 7.1c, 7.4a, 7.4b, 7.5a, 7.5b, 7.5c, and 7.5d enact the Town to support rehousing of people experiencing homelessness, work with surrounding jurisdictions to support long-term solutions for people experiencing homelessness and assist service providers in linking people experiencing homelessness with supportive services.

The Housing Element includes an inventory of the homeless housing resources available within the community, including emergency shelters, transitional housing and supportive housing. There are currently no supportive housing beds in San Anselmo. In the past, congregations throughout Marin County, including churches in San Anselmo, participated in a rotational, winter emergency shelter program, known as the Rotating Emergency Shelter Team (REST). REST provided temporary housing during winter months to individuals experiencing homelessness. Funding 092 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
895
89 for that program was re-allocated to housing-first strategies. Marin County, in partnership with local jurisdictions and non-profits, launched the Coordinated Entry system, where participants are connected to available housing and homeless services based on their needs. In addition, Homeward Bound of Marin, a local nonprofit, provides emergency shelters, supportive housing, and mental health services in Marin County. Other resources that serve Marin County are noted in Chapter 5, Housing Resources.

Assisted Rental Housing “At Risk” of Conversion
Government Code Section 65583(a)(9) requires each city and county to conduct an analysis and identify programs for preserving assisted housing developments. The analysis is required to identify any low-income units which are at risk of losing subsidies over the next 10 years (2023-2033).

In 1989, a 22-unit condominium project (Sohner Court) was approved and built. Two of the 22 units were required to be sold as below market rate units. These units were placed under a 30-year agreement, with another 30-year roll over option, administered by the Marin Housing Authority. In 1994, Oak Hill Apartments received approval to construct 14 units in San Anselmo. Thirteen of the units housed very low-income developmentally disabled persons and a moderate-income unit was provided for the project manager. Funding sources included a Section 811 Capital Grant from HUD for the developmentally disabled, CDBG, HOME funds administered through CDBG, and private matching funds. Because of HUD requirements, the project must be used for people with developmental disabilities for 40 years. Upon approval of this project by the Town, the Town Council imposed a condition to ensure continued use for the developmentally disabled even after the 40 years has elapsed.

Other developments, such as Isabel Cook, Tam House I, and Tam House II have controls through ownership. There are no affordable units that are at risk of conversion to market rate housing in San Anselmo in the next ten years. There are however, 13 units in the Oak Hill Apartment complex that are at risk of conversion in 2037. Since the units are designated under the Section 811/PRAC program through HUD to serve developmentally disabled residents they are deemed at low risk for conversion. 093 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
896
90 This page left intentionally blank
094 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
897
91 HOUSING 4

CONSTRAINTS
095 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 898
92 Housing Constraints
Non-Governmental Housing Constraints
Government Code Section 65583(a)(5) requires that the Housing Element include an analysis of potential and actual constraints upon the maintenance, improvement, or development of housing for all income levels. Identification of these constraints helps the Town to create policies, programs, and actions that address these concerns and reduce impediments to housing production.

Cost of Land
Many factors determine the price of land in San Anselmo, including allowable density, housing type, the availability of public services and utilities, and the quality of nearby existing development. According to Zillow, there was one single-family lot for sale in San Anselmo according to a search completed in October 2022. The vacant lot, approximately 0.22 acres in area, was priced at $399,000 ($1,813,636 per acre). The price per acre is comparable to vacant lots for sale in other Marin County communities. San Rafael had two vacant lots for sale in October 2022, both zoned as single-family residential. One lot was 0.75 acres and priced at $699,000 ($932,000 per acre) and the other was 0.22 acres and priced at $350,000 ($1,590,909 per acre). There was only one vacant lot for sale in Larkspur zoned as low-density residential. The property was 2.9 acres and priced at $765,000 ($263,793 per acre). In Tiburon, there were two vacant lots for sale, both zoned as residential open. One lot was 0.26 acres and priced at $650,000 ($2,500,000 per acre) and the other was 3.32 acres and priced at $1,390,000 ($418,674 per acre). In Belvedere, there were two vacant lots for sale, both zoned as single-family residential. One lot was 0.21 acres and priced at $4,995,000 ($23,785,714 per acre) and the other was

0.62 acres and priced at $7,700,000 ($12,419,355 per acre).

However, the land cost per-unit in a multifamily development is less than the land cost per unit for single-family due to economies of scale resulting from the parcel costs split across many units. A recent multifamily project at 1 Lincoln Road in San Anselmo was approved on a 0.62-acre vacant parcel for $840,759 ($1,356,063 per acre), and another multifamily project at 600 Red Hill Avenue was approved on a 1.61-acre parcel that was purchased for $780,912 ($485,039 per acre). Based on a recent multifamily project in nearby Corte Madera, the estimated value of land zoned for multifamily housing was $3,300,000 per acre.

Construction Costs
Multifamily Developments
Construction costs include hard costs, such as labor and materials, and soft costs, such as architectural and engineering services, development fees, and insurance. According to local developers, hard construction costs (including site improvements) for a typical two- or three-story multifamily development average approximately $200 per square foot in Marin County. A 25-unit development with a gross building area of 21,000 square feet would have hard construction costs of approximately $4.2 million, or about $168,000 per unit. Soft costs typically add 45 to 50 percent to this base cost, yielding a per unit total construction cost of approximately $252,000. Projects receiving public subsidies, such as affordable housing developments, often must pay prevailing wages. This requirement can add 10 to 15 percent onto the hard costs of construction.

Single-Family Homes
According to local contractors and realtors, hard costs for single-family homes in Marin County vary between $200 and $250 per square foot for average construction but may exceed $500 per square foot for a high-end, custom-built single-family house. Soft costs typically increase these estimates by 35 to 40 percent. Construction costs can be higher if lots require substantial site work due to steep slopes, unstable soils, waterways, and other environmental concerns, which are factors impacting many San Anselmo neighborhoods. 096 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
899
93 Financing
Mortgage rates for conventional 30-year fixed rate loans in January 2023 are at their highest levels since the Great Recession. These conforming loans, which are backed by the federal government through the Federal Housing Administration and the Government Sponsored Entities of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are generally available to home buyers with good credit histories and adequate down payments.

Interest rates on non-conforming loans (also known as “jumbo” loans) for loan amounts over $625,500 (in Marin County) are about onequarter percentage point higher than conforming loan rates and are more difficult to secure. Tighter lending standards have made it harder to get a home loan, especially for those with poor credit scores, and it is rare for a borrower with undocumented income to obtain a home loan.

Small changes in the interest rate for home purchases significantly affect affordability. A 30-year home loan for $500,000 at three percent interest has monthly payments of roughly $2,108. The same loan at seven percent interest has monthly payments of approximately $3,326.

Rental developments tend to be easier to finance than for-sale developments, as there are more sources of funding available.

Affordable housing developments face additional constraints in financing. Though public funding is available, it is allocated on a highly competitive basis and developments must meet multiple qualifying criteria, often including the requirement to pay prevailing wages. Smaller developments have higher per-unit costs by nature. As a result, higher per-unit development costs result in a sales price above the affordability levels set by many programs. Additionally, smaller projects often require significant developer time and resources. Since smaller development budgets are more limited and fees are based on a percentage of total costs, the projects are often not feasible.

Community Resistance to New Housing
Community resistance to new development is another common constraint to housing production in Marin County. Several concerns are often expressed at meetings, including 1) new developments will cause increased traffic, 2) additional housing or density will adversely affect the community character, 3) affordable housing will impact property values, and 4) valuable open space will be lost. Regardless of the factual basis of the concern, vociferous opposition can slow or stop development.

Additionally, community resistance conflicts with community support to provide certain groups (such as nurses, teachers, or law enforcement) with preferential access to local affordable housing. In many cases, it is not possible to set aside housing, outside of groups with special housing needs, based on occupation or domicile. These concerns are often expressed during project review processes and can present significant political barriers to development. To address community resistance, the Housing Element includes Program 2.2 to encourage public engagement and facilitate building support for development.

To minimize community opposition and encourage the creation of new housing, it is important to identify sites for special needs and affordable housing that fit with community character and result in minimal impacts to existing conditions. Design plays a critical role in creating new developments that blend into the existing neighborhood, especially in higher density developments that might otherwise starkly contrast with the existing community character. Quality design can help ensure that high density developments are not bulky or out-of-scale. Using contextsensitive design, a building’s perceived bulk can be significantly reduced to create a development that blends with the existing character of the neighborhood. To clearly communicate Town design expectations to the development community, to streamline the development approval process, and to reduce costs, the Housing Element includes Action 3.2a related to the adoption of objective development design standards, Action 3.1c for the adoption of pre-approved missing middle housing plan, and Program 6.1 related to the adoption of pre-approved Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) plans.

Environmental Constraints
San Anselmo’s ability to grow outwards is constrained by environmental boundaries surrounding the town. San Anselmo has little remaining vacant land available for development, and existing vacant sites in the community are severely constrained by fire hazards, flood risks, and landslide hazards. Many areas are subject to the increased risk of multi-hazard phenomena such as earthquake-triggered landslides or increased runoff causing flooding following wildfires. Environmental constraints expected to affect future development in San Anselmo include:
097 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
900
94 • Geologic Hazards (Steep Hillsides, Landslides, Earthquake) • Flood Hazards (Storm Drainage, Dam Inundation)
• Wildfire
Due to these environmental constraints, most new housing in San Anselmo will be provided through infill development such as ADUs or redevelopment of existing properties at higher densities. The housing opportunity sites in the Housing Element were evaluated for potential environmental significance and natural hazard risks. The housing opportunity sites identified are most suitable for new housing given these environmental constraints and include non-vacant sites with redevelopment potential over sites with high environmental risks to prioritize human health and safety. In addition, mitigation strategies included in the Safety Element intend to reduce potential environmental impacts on existing and new developments in the town. The Town also has adopted several regulatory tools to minimize the risk to life posed by these hazards. The San Anselmo Municipal Code contains public safety regulations that address disaster response and fire safety (Title 3 – Public Safety), flood safety (Title 7, Chapter 11 Protection of Flood Hazard Areas), and earthquake safety (Title 9 – Building Regulations). Critical disaster and emergency planning and mitigation programs and actions are coordinated under the 2018 Marin County Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). As of 2023, the Town and other Marin County jurisdictions are coordinating an update to the MJHMP.

The following subsections summarize the constraints evaluated as part of the housing opportunity sites inventory. For a detailed discussion of environmental hazards and mitigation resources and strategies, please refer to the Safety Element.

Geologic Hazards
The primary geologic hazards in San Anselmo are earthquakes and landslides. Similar to other Bay Area communities, San Anselmo is at risk of suffering structural damage and loss of life during a significant earthquake. The town is located within 15 miles of four major faults, the San Andreas, San Gregorio, Hayward, and Rodgers Creek faults (all capable of generating a 7.0 earthquake or larger). While fault rupture is not a concern within the town, the presence of these faults close to the community indicates that strong seismic shaking poses an impact to existing and future development. The greatest concerns would be potential loss of life, damage to structures, destruction and/or interruptions to utilities infrastructure, interruption of evacuation routes, and the possible impediment of emergency vehicles and personnel. Structures with unreinforced masonry, soft-story, or non-ductile concrete construction that are located within the community are most vulnerable to seismic impacts. All development and major redevelopment is required to meet the minimum structural design requirements as stated in Chapter 16 of the California Building Code, whose provisions are incorporated into the Town’s Municipal Code under Title 9 – Building Regulations.

In addition, liquefaction risks are higher near the major creeks in Ross Valley, including the San Anselmo Creek and Sleepy Hollow Creek in San Anselmo. Roadways or structures located in or adjacent to these areas are at greater risk of liquefaction damage triggered by a large seismic shaking event.

According to the California Geological Survey (CGS), San Anselmo is also highly susceptible to landslides. Landslide susceptibility and slope stability are generally based on the steepness of slopes, type and density of vegetation, and strength of the underlying soils and rock formations.

CGS maps indicate that most of San Anselmo is designated as highly susceptible to deep-seated landslides. Seismic activity can also induce soil creep and shallow slope failure, particularly following heavy rain. Steep hillsides, creek beds, and drainage areas are at greatest risk of landslides where fast-moving water could erode or undermine properties and infrastructure.

Wildfire
San Anselmo is prone to wildfire hazards due to its proximity to the natural environment. Steep hillsides tend to promote increased wildfire risk, since vegetation management in these areas may be difficult and the vegetation types located within these areas may be highly flammable.

Fire suppression efforts tend to require more resources and increase response times due to sloped topography. In addition, high wind conditions during the dry summer months can propagate wildfires over longer distances.

Much of the town is located with the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), where residences (i.e., homes and structures) are adjacent to or intermixed with open space and wildland vegetation. The term “WUI” is not a designation of potential wildfire severity, but a defined description of an area 098 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
901
95 where urban development meets undeveloped lands at risk of wildfires. The WUI designation indicates that the town is highly susceptible to wildfires. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) identifies Moderate and High Fire Hazard Severity Zones immediately adjacent to the town limits in State Responsibility Areas, further compounding the danger of wildfire spreading into San Anselmo from other parts of Marin County. Development within WUI requires careful consideration, as vegetation, topography, and ember movement may increase the risk of wildfires. Despite the wildfire risk in some areas of San Anselmo, almost all housing opportunity sites are located outside the WUI and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, minimizing wildfire risks. A portion of land available for residential development in San Anselmo is located within the WUI, and California Building Code and Fire Code regulations require fire-safe designs for new construction in that area.

Flood Hazards
Flooding is a constraint that has the potential to affect existing and new development. FEMA flood hazard zones are located along the urbanized valleys and creek beds, and the topography of the community can cause localized flooding conditions. Most of San Anselmo lies within the Ross Valley Watershed which flows into San Francisco Bay. The principal waterway within the town is San Anselmo Creek, which periodically floods during rain events. According to historic records, heavy rains have caused San Anselmo Creek to flood up to four feet. Major floods of record were in 1925, 1940, 1963, 1982, and 2005, with the worst storm of record in 1982. During these flooding events, San Anselmo Creek will overflow and saturate the town’s main transportation corridor, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. The Town continues to cooperate with downstream communities (Marin County, adjacent jurisdictions, and individual homeowners) to mitigate flood hazards.

As development within the watershed intensifies, an increase in impervious surfaces may occur, increasing water runoff. Without proper mitigation, increased runoff could flood downstream areas and cause erosion. Two major evacuation routes, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and Center Boulevard, have multiple creek crossings, and flooding could impede evacuation efforts. New development in the town, especially if located adjacent to potential flood zones, is required to mitigate new project-induced runoff. In addition, dam inundation from the failure of Phoenix Lake Dam could affect a small southern part of San Anselmo where Ross Creek meets Corte Madera Creek. The Marin County MJHMP states that the current structures within this area include small commercial buildings and apartments.

The Town requires that all new housing be constructed above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) identified by FEMA to ensure that all new residential uses are protected from flood risk.

Working with Non-Profit Housing Developers
The key to the success of non-profit developers lies in three areas: (1) their ability to draw upon an array of funding sources and mechanisms to make their developments financially feasible; (2) their commitment to working cooperatively and constructively with the local community; and (3) their long-term commitment to ensuring excellence in design, construction, and management of the development, creating an asset that is valued by the development residents and their neighbors. The Housing Element includes Program 1.1 and corresponding Actions

1.1a-1.1c. to ensure the Town takes a proactive leadership role in working with community groups, other jurisdictions and public agencies, non-profit housing sponsors, and the building and real estate industry.

Infrastructure Capacity
The capacity of infrastructure can constrain development potential. The proximity, availability, and capacity of infrastructure helps to determine the suitability of water, sewer, dry utilities, and other services available to accommodate the housing needs during the planning period. In San Anselmo, development plans are coordinated with the Planning Department, Public Works Department, Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD), and Ross Valley Sanitary District (RVSD).

Water
MMWD covers approximately 147 square miles and has approximately 61,700 active service connections in eastern Marin County. According to the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), MMWD’s potable and raw water system includes 886 miles of water mains, 94 pump stations, and 121 treated water storage tanks with a storage capacity of 74.96 million gallons (MG) of water. Water is sourced from local 099 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
902
96 surface water stored at seven reservoirs throughout Marin County (which is the primary water supply), Sonoma County Water Agency, and recycled water. MMWD treats water at its three treatment plants: the Bon Tempe Treatment Plant in the Town of Ross, the San Geronimo Treatment Plant in unincorporated Marin County, and the Ignacio treatment facility in the City of Novato. MMWD’s treatment plants have a design capacity of 71 million gallons per day (MGD). In 2019, the total production of the district’s plants averaged 22.8 MGD. The daily average maximum flow is approximately 22.5 MGD.

MMWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) projects treated water demands out through 2045. Using these projections, MMWD prepared the 2023 Strategic Water Supply Assessment (SWSA) to anticipate four potential water scenarios and explore a range of plausible drought conditions derived from past and future climate information: current trends, short and severe drought, beyond drought of record, and abrupt distributions. All four scenarios resulted in a water supply deficit during extreme drought periods, but the 2023 SWSA provides water management strategies, which include a mix of short-term water supply strategies with pre-design work to support medium- and longer-term options, to mitigate dry period conditions for future population needs. Through adherence to the road map provided in the 2023 SWSA, MMWD anticipates meeting the population’s water supply needs through 2045.

Sewer
Ross Valley Sanitary District (RVSD) provides wastewater collection, treatment, and export for San Anselmo and the greater Ross Valley area.

RVSD maintains approximately 196 miles of mainline and trunk line sewers and 7.9 miles of force main pipelines, which convey wastewater to the Central Marin Sanitation Agency (CMSA) wastewater treatment plant in San Rafael. In addition, RVSD owns and operates five major pump stations and 14 minor pump stations and lift stations. Sewer laterals are owned and maintained by individual private property owners.

All the sites identified to meet the RHNA are within RVSD’s service areas and are readily served by RVSD wastewater infrastructure. Newly constructed residential units are charged connection fees and inspection fees to ensure wastewater systems are installed safely and operate properly.

The 2017 Facilities Master Plan from CSMA identifies that the current average dry weather flow (ADWF) is 6.5 MGD for the combined population of San Rafael, Larkspur, Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross, Kentfield, and Greenbrae. Influent flows and loads are anticipated to have a one percent annual growth rate over the next 25 years, resulting in an estimated ADWF of 8.34 MGD. CSMA’s wastewater treatment plan was designed in 1981 with an ADWF capacity of 10.0 MGD and a corresponding sustained peak secondary treatment capacity of 30.0 MGD. Since 1981, CSMA has continued to construct infrastructure improvements to improve efficiency of treatment during wet weather flows and upgrade existing systems. The system improvements planned for construction in the 2017 Facilities Master Plan will provide reliable wastewater treatment, plan for future regulations, and develop a prioritized and comprehensive Capital Improvement Program that addresses CSMA’s current and future needs. Given current system capacity and growth projections, CSMA has capacity to meet the needs of the projected population during the 6th cycle housing element planning period.

Electricity and Internet Service
The town is primarily served by Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and Marin Clean Energy (MCE) for electricity, and residents have many choices for internet providers, with main options including AT&T and Xfinity. Future housing development is anticipated in an area currently served or adjacent to areas served by electricity and internet service. Therefore, utility providers have the planning and capacity to serve future growth in the area.

Governmental Housing Constraints
The Town’s development standards and requirements are intended to protect the long-term health, safety, and welfare of the community. The Town charges fees and has several procedures and regulations that developers are required to follow. There are many locally imposed land use and building requirements that can affect the type, appearance, and cost of housing built in San Anselmo.

These local requirements are evaluated as potential constraints based on an analysis of zoning regulations, development fees, parking requirements, subdivision design standards, and permitting processes. 100 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
903
97 Land Use Regulations
San Anselmo’s land use regulations, including the subdivision ordinance and Zoning Code, are located in Title 10, Chapters 2 and 3 of the Municipal Code. Current zoning standards are displayed in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 on the following pages. Lot coverage, floor area ratio, building height, and allowable density all play an important role in enabling housing development.

Lot Coverage is the amount of lot surface area that can be developed on. Lot coverage can be an impediment to housing if the allowable surface available to develop on makes it infeasible to build higher density housing, however lot coverage also coincides with building height, floor area ratio, and allowable density. In San Anselmo, lot coverage for high and medium density housing is not an impediment to housing because the allowable densities can be optimized under the current standards.

Floor area ratio (FAR) is the ratio of the total lot area to the total area yielded from each floor of the building developed. Floor area ratio can be an impediment to housing as it can limit the size of the building relative to the lot, minimizing unit potential. In San Anselmo, FAR is not an impediment to housing as it is not applied to high and medium density housing. As part of Action 5.2b, the Town will increase the maximum FAR or remove the FAR requirements in the C-1, C-L, and C-3 zones to encourage development of housing in mixed-use and entirely residential projects.

Building height is the maximum vertical distance of a structure’s elevation from finish grade to the highest point. Building height can be an impediment to fair housing as it can limit the number of stories a structure can use to optimize its allowable density. If there are limitations to lot coverage and setbacks, restricting building heights may not be able to maximize the various Zoning Districts maximum floor area ratio. In San Anselmo, building heights for high and medium density housing are not an impediment to housing because the allowable densities can be optimized under the current standards. The Town currently allows 3 story buildings (up to 35 feet tall) in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 zones on properties with a building footprint average slope at or greater than 25% to support housing development on steeper lots. As part of Action

5.2b, the Town will increase the maximum height limit to 3 stories (up to 35 feet) in the C-L and C-3 zone to encourage the development of housing within walking distance of the Town's transportation corridors with access to nearby transit stops and amenities. Furthermore, the Affordable Housing Overlay District planned in Action 5.3a and the objective design and development standards listed in Action 3.1b will provide more flexible development standards, such as increased building height limits, for multifamily residential development. This overlay zone will be applied in addition to the rezonings proposed for the housing opportunity sites as stipulated under Action 5.7a, and it is not necessary to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Rather, the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will serve as an additional tool to enhance the development of affordable housing in San Anselmo.

Allowable density is the number of dwelling units that can be constructed on a lot. Allowable density can be an impediment to housing as it can significantly impact the number of units being constructed. While allowable densities for high and medium density housing are not an impediment to housing as a standard, the lack of land zoned for high and medium density is. This results in most of the land zoned as singlefamily residential, yielding a maximum of one unit for very low and conservation single-family, and six units for single-family residential. 101 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
904
98 Table 4.1: Existing Residential Zones
Development Standards
Zone R-1-H R-1-C R-1 R-2 R-3
Classification Very Low
Density
Residenti
al
Single- Family Residential- Conservation
Single- Family
Residenti
al
Medium
Density
Residential
High Density Residential
Minimum Lot
Area (Sq. Ft.) 43,560 43,560 7,500 7,500 7,500
Minimum Lot
Width (Feet) 60 60 60 60 75
Maximum
Density
(Units/Acre)1
1 1 6 12 20
Maximum Lot
Coverage N/A N/A 35% 35% 50%
Minimum Front
Setback (Feet) 20 20 20 20 20
Minimum Side
Setback (Feet)2 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12 8/12
Minimum Rear
Setback (Feet) 20 20 20 20 20
Maximum Floor
Area Ratio
(FAR)
See
Note See Note See
Note N/A N/A
Building Height
(Feet)3 30/35/18 30/35/18 30/35/18 30/35 30/35
Note: Residential properties located above 150’ Mean Sea Level have variable standards for maximum dwelling size (adjusted FAR) based on lot size. 1 As part of Program 5.7, the Town will amend the Zoning Code to adopt minimum densities for each residential zone, consistent with the minimum densities listed in the General Plan Land Use Element. 2 The setback depends on whether the property line fronts a street or another property. 3 The different values in the building height represent the maximum building height outside primary and secondary ridge zone for different slopes or locations above average grade. Residential properties on slopes above 25 percent have higher height limits to facilitate development. 102 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
905
99 Table 4.2: Existing Commercial and Professional Zones Development Standards
Zone P C-1 C-2 C-L C-3
Classification Professional Neighborhood
Commercial
Downtown
Commercial
Limited
Commercial
District
Commercial
District
Minimum Lot
Area (Sq. Ft.) 5,000 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minimum Lot
Width (Feet) 45 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Maximum
Density
(Units/Acre)
20 20 20 20 20
Maximum
Lot
Coverage
50% N/A N/A N/A N/A
Minimum
Front
Setback
(Feet)
20 0 0 0 0
Minimum
Side Setback
(Feet) 1
0/0/5/5/0 0/8/0/0 N/A N/A N/A
Minimum
Rear Setback
(Feet)
20 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Maximum
Floor Area
Ratio (FAR) 2
N/A 0.65 2 1 1
Building
Height (Feet) 30 30 30 30 30
1 The different values in the minimum side setback row represent minimum interior side and minimum street side for residential developments, and minimum interior side, minimum street side, minimum adjacent to “R” districts, minimum adjacent to “P” districts and minimum adjacent to “C” districts commercial developments.
2 As part of Program 5.7, the Town will amend the Zoning Code to remove or increase the maximum FARs in the C-L and C-3 zones in order to provide development flexibility. 103 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
906
100
The following is description of each zoning district that permits or conditionally permits housing.

1. R-1-H Very Low-Density Residential District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Very Low Density Residential," which allows a maximum density of one residential unit for each gross acre of land. This District is generally applied to the primary ridges and ridge zone land areas of the Town as identified by the General Plan Land Use and Open Space Elements. The purpose of this District is to preserve and maintain the natural landforms and vegetation of the Town's primary ridges and ridge zone areas by limiting development as defined by the Town's General Plan, to further the Town's open space objectives as described in the General Plan, and to recognize and work in concert with the environmental opportunities and constraints of these unique and sensitive areas.

2. R-1-C Single-Family Residential-Conservation District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Low Density Residential Conservation," which allows a maximum density of one residential unit for each gross acre of land. This District is generally applied to those developed and undeveloped lots ranging from one to two acres in size and located at or above one hundred fifty (150) feet above Mean Sea Level (see map under Available Land inventory) and excepting those areas designated as "Very Low Density Residential" by the General Plan Land Use Element. The purpose of this District is to (1) require design review for most exterior improvements; (2) limit the over- all density within the district to a maximum of one (1) residential dwelling unit per acre of land; and (3) maintain and enhance the natural land forms and vegetation of the Town's secondary ridgelines and hillside areas by limiting development density and through the careful review of architectural design and site development characteristics for new development on undeveloped land, for certain reconstruction of existing development, and for certain expansions of existing development.

3. R-1 Single-Family Residential District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Single-Family Residential," which allows a density range of between one and six residential units for each acre of land. The minimum lot area for R-1 lots is also regulated by the Town’s Slope Density regulations. This District is generally applied to established residential neighborhoods characterized by single-family detached residential units on conventional lots. Most of the land area in this District has previously been developed. Additionally, this District is applied to lots located at or above one hundred fifty (150) feet above Mean Sea Level which are further regulated through the requirement for the careful review of architectural design and site development characteristics for new development on undeveloped land, for certain reconstruction of existing development, and for certain expansions of existing development.

4. R-2 Medium Density Residential District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Medium Density Residential," which allows a density range of between six and twelve residential units for each acre of land. This District is generally applied to lands adjacent to Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and to land areas abutting or facing commercial land uses. Lots within the District would be developed with either duplex or triplex style development, although single-family detached residential units will also be permitted.

5. R-3 High Density Residential District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "High Density Residential," which allows a density range of between thirteen and twenty residential units for each acre of land. This District is generally applied to lands near commercial areas. Lots within the District would be developed with either apartment or condominium style development which reflects a compatibility with the Town's predominantly residential character.

6. C-2 Downtown Commercial District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Central Commercial," which allows a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 2.0. This District is generally applied to existing commercial areas along San Anselmo Avenue and Sir Francis Drake Boulevard between The Hub and Ross Avenue. The purpose of this District is to identify those areas which form the Town's central business district. The primary uses expected are businesses referred to as "primary attractors," which are those that draw most of their customers from outside the community. The second type of businesses expected in this District are those which rely upon pedestrian activity generated by the primary attractors. Mixed-uses, combining commercial, office, and residential uses are also allowed within this District, however, offices and residential uses are encouraged to locate above the ground floor to preserve the District's primary purpose of providing for commercial activities.

7. C-L Limited Commercial District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Limited Commercial," which allows a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 1.0. This District is generally applied to properties lining both sides of Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, west of The Hub, for approximately one-quarter (1/4) of a mile, ending at Bella Vista Avenue. The Land Use category was developed as part of the 1988 General Plan to allow only those commercial uses which will not result in the generation of traffic in volumes sufficient to disrupt the flow of vehicular traffic along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. Residential uses are allowed within this District which provide 104 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
907
101
mixed-uses, live/ work arrangements, and affordable housing that will not result in significant traffic disruption along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. Offices and residential uses are encouraged to be located above the ground floor to preserve this District's primary purpose for providing for commercial activities. Multifamily uses are encouraged to provide incentives for mass transportation use.

8. C-3 Commercial District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "General Commercial," which allows a maximum Floor Area Ratio of 1.0. This District is generally applied to those areas along Redhill Avenue, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, and the eastern end of San Anselmo Avenue. The purpose of this District is to identify those areas of Town which will afford opportunities for various commercial activities to serve the needs of the community as well as the needs of surrounding communities. Residential uses are allowed within this District which provide mixed-uses, live/work arrangements, and affordable housing that will not result in significant traffic disruption along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. Offices and residential uses are encouraged to be located above the ground floor to preserve this District's primary purpose for providing for commercial activities. Multifamily uses are encouraged to provide incentives for mass transportation use.

9. PF Public Facilities District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Public Facility." This District is generally applied to all existing major public land uses, including the Town Corporation Yard, Town Hall, the Police Department, the Public Library, the Fire Service buildings, public parking lots, parks, and public schools.

10.PPD Preliminary Planned Development District. The Preliminary Planned Development District is not specifically reflected on the General Plan Land Use Map but is intended to serve as an "overlay" District to all land areas within the Town. The purpose of this District is to provide opportunities to allow development on land areas within the Town which because of size, hillside location, unusual topography, natural re- sources, or aesthetic appeal cannot be developed through adherence to rigid development standards. The characteristics of these land areas require a flexible approach to provide logical and orderly development while promoting and protecting the public's health, safety, and general welfare. A PPD District is a designation established upon property which may only be developed pursuant to a Town approved specific plan.

11.SPD Specific Planned Development District. The Specific Planned Development District is not explicitly displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map but is intended to serve as an "overlay" District to all land areas within the Town. The purpose of this District is to provide opportunities to allow development on land areas within the Town which because of size, hillside location, unusual topography, natural resources, or aesthetic appeal cannot be developed through adherence to rigid development standards. The characteristics of these land areas require a flexible approach to provide logical and orderly development while promoting and protecting the public's health, safety, and general welfare. An SPD District refers to a specific plan development approved by the Town.

12.CF Community Facilities District. This District is displayed on the General Plan Land Use Map as "Community Facility." This District is generally applied to certain Town-owned property and allows for private use of said properties when appropriate.

The Town’s land development regulations have perpetuated a single-family detached development pattern, with most of the Town zoned in the R-1 single-family Zoning District which allows up to six dwelling units per acre. Development proposing 100 percent residential uses, with a maximum density of 20 dwelling units per acre, is currently allowed by-right in the Town’s R-3 multifamily district, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 35 and SB 330; allowed with a Conditional Use Permit in the commercial districts including the C-1, C-2, C-L, and C-3 districts; and allowed with a specific plan in the SPD district. The Town maintains the current Zoning Code with all zoning and development standards on the Town’s website.

Recognizing that additional density is needed throughout the community to accommodate additional housing in a manner that affirmatively furthers fair housing, the Housing Element includes Program 5.7 that will require the Town to amend the Zoning Code to accommodate higher density and affordable housing in the C-L, C-3, and SPD districts. The maximum density of the C-1 and C-2 districts will not be increased as the C-1 district is meant to be neighborhood scale commercial and mixed-use development while the increased density would not be complementary to the historic character of the C-2 district (Downtown San Anselmo). In addition, the Town will amend the Zoning Code as part of Program 5.7 and Actions 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.7a, 5.7b, 5.7c, 5.7d, and 5.7e to explicitly state that permitted uses are allowed by-right in accordance with California Government Code Section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i).

To better accommodate the densities needed to accommodate affordable housing development, the Housing Element include Action

5.3a that will establish an affordable housing overlay district to allow greater building height, density, and floor area ratio for multifamily and mixed-use developments that provide a specified percent of units as affordable to low- and very-low-income households. This overlay zone will be applied in addition to the rezonings proposed for the housing opportunity sites as stipulated under Action 5.7a, and it is not necessary to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Rather, the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will serve 105 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
908
102
as an additional tool to enhance the development of affordable housing in San Anselmo. The Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will apply to properties zoned SPD, C-3, and R-3. In addition, property owners will be able to request a zoning amendment to fall within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, and the Town will waive rezoning fees. Applicants seeking project approval within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone will have the option of utilizing the objective development and design standards (Action 3.2a) for ministerial project approval or pursuing development through the Town’s traditional permitting process described in Chapter 4, Housing Constraints (with changes proposed under Action 5.9e to remove subjective findings from project review).

Off-Street Parking Standards
San Anselmo requires off-street parking for all new residential development, as shown in Table 4.3 below. For mixed-use projects the parking requirement must be satisfied for all uses unless a parking variance is granted. If a mixed-use project cannot provide off-street parking, the Town supports shared parking arrangements. Variances are also granted to reduce the overall parking requirement or to allow tandem parking.

Table 4.3 Residential Off-Street Parking
Standards

RESIDENTIAL LAND USE REQUIREMENT
Single-Family Dwelling, Attached or Detached, and Located below 150 mean sea level elevation 2 spaces per living unit
Single-Family Dwelling, Attached or Detached, and Located above 150 mean sea level elevation 3 spaces per living unit
Residential unit associated with an application under
California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7. 1 space per living unit, except as provided in Title 10, Chapter 4 of the Town's Municipal Code
Accessory Dwelling Units 1 paved space per ADU
Multifamily Living Unit:

Studio or 1-bedroom living unit 1 space per unit
2-bedroom living unit 1.5 spaces per unit
3 or more-bedroomliving unit 2 spaces per unit
Source: Town of San Anselmo Municipal Code Parking Standards - Table 5A Although the Town does not allow overnight street parking in San Anselmo, variances or special permits for on-street overnight parking are granted.

In addition, the Police Department grants parking permits to downtown residents for overnight on-street parking if the distance to a public parking lot is greater than one block. The permit promotes safety for downtown residents by allowing them to park close to home at night when on-site parking is not an option. To improve the flexibility of the Town’s parking standards the Zoning Code, the Housing Element includes Action 5.2c to amend the Zoning Code to eliminate minimum parking requirements for new development and redevelopment within a half-mile of public transit in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 2097 and Action 5.2d which will amend the Zoning Code to include flexible parking requirements and reductions in areas outside of a half-mile of public transit under certain circumstances. 106 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
909
103
Provision of a Variety of Housing Types
Housing element law specifies that jurisdictions must identify adequate sites to be made available through appropriate zoning and development standards to encourage the development of various types of housing for all economic segments of the population including, but not limited to, multifamily rental housing, factory-built housing, mobile homes, emergency shelters, and transitional housing. The "Zoning Code” refers to Chapter 3 of Title 10 of the San Anselmo Municipal Code.

Table 4.4 summarizes the permitting status of each housing type based on San Anselmo’s zoning districts. Multifamily and single-family housing are conditionally permitted in all commercial zoning districts. While permitted uses (those uses marked as “P”) are considered by-right uses by the Town, the Town will amend the Zoning Code as part of Program 5.7 and Actions 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.7a, 5.7b, 5.7c, 5.7d, and 5.7e to explicitly state that permitted uses are allowed by-right in accordance with California Government Code Section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i).

Table 4.4: Permitted Housing Types by Zone3
Zoning District
Housing Types R-1-H R-1-C R-1 R-2 R-3 P C-1 C-2 C-L C-3 Single-Family Attached -- -- -- P P C C C C C
Single-Family Detached P P P P P C C C C C
Multifamily Residential P (9) P (9) P (9) - P C C C C C Accessory Dwelling Units1 P(10) P(10) P(10) P P -- -- -- -- -- Single-Room Occupancy Units2 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- C C C Supportive Housing3 P P P P P -- C C C C
Transitional Housing3 P P P P P -- C C C C
Residential Care Facility, Large4 C(8) C(8) C(8) C C -- -- -- -- -- Residential Care Facility, Small4 P P P P P -- -- -- -- -- Residential Care Facility for Persons with a
Chronic Life-Threatening Illness, Large4 C C C C C -- -- -- -- -- Residential Care Facility for Persons with a
Chronic Life-Threatening Illness, Small4 P P P P P -- -- -- -- -- Residential Care Facility for the Elderly, Large4 C(8) C(8) C(8) C C -- -- -- -- -- Residential Care Facility for the Elderly, Small4 P P P P P -- -- -- -- -- Drug and/or Alcoholism Treatment Facility, Small P P P P P -- -- -- -- -- Drug and/or Alcoholism Treatment Facility, Large C (8) C (8) C (8) C C -- -- -- -- -- Emergency Shelter5 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- P P
Low-Barrier Navigation Center6 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Mobile And Manufactured Homes P P P P P C C C C C
Employee Housing7 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Source: Town of San Anselmo Municipal Code Land Use Regulations - Table 3A 1 Action 6.2d will amend the Zoning Code to allow ADUs in accordance with State law. 2 Action 3.3c will amend the Zoning Code to allow single-room occupancy (SRO) units as a permitted use in the R-3 zone. 3 Action 5.8d will amend the Zoning Code to allow supportive and transitional housing in all zoning districts that allow residential uses in accordance with State law. 4 Action 7.2a will amend the Zoning Code to allow residential care facilities, both large and small, in accordance with State law. 5 Action 5.8e will amend the Zoning Code to allow emergency shelters in accordance with State law. 6 Action 5.7g will amend the Zoning Code to allow low barrier navigation centers in compliance with State law. 7 Action 5.8c will amend the Zoning Code to allow employee housing in compliance with State law. 8 Use is prohibited on lots created by California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7. 9 Two units permitted pursuant to Chapter 10-4.101, implementing California Government Code Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7. 10 No accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling shall be allowed for units on parcels that use both the authority contained in Government Code Section 65852.21 and the authority contained in Government Code Section 66411.7 (Urban Lot Split). "P" = Permitted by-right; "C" = Conditional Use Permit; and “–“= Not permitted Accessory Dwelling Units
An accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one 107 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
910
104
(1) or more persons and is located on the same lot as the proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. An accessory dwelling unit also includes an efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958.1 of the Health and Safety Code, and a manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.” In 2022, the Town adopted Ordinances Nos. 1172 and 1162 to further bring its administration and approval of ADUs in conformity with housing laws. The Town ministerially approves ADUs that comply with Government Code Section 65852.2(e) via a building permit.

The Housing Element includes Policy 6: Promote the Construction and Affordability of Accessory Dwelling Units and specifies 14 actions to undertake the implementation of three programs that will streamline the ADU and JADU permitting process and promote the construction of ADUs and JADUs (Policy 6) and maintain consistency with Government Code Section 65852.2(e). Program 6.1 will require that the Town adopt pre-approved ADU plans to expedite approval and lowers costs associated with ADU construction. Program 6.2 will further streamline the ADU and JADU permitting process. Program 6.3 will require the Town to update the Zoning Code to allow one JADU and multiple ADUs on lots one acre and larger in the R-1, R-1-C, and R-1-H districts. In addition, Action 5.1a will establish a renter match program with ADU owners and prospective tenants and Action 1.3b will monitor the production of ADUs to ensure the provision of an adequate supply of ADUs.

Multifamily Rental Housing
Multifamily housing accounts for about 18 percent of the housing stock in the town. The Zoning Code allows multifamily development by right in the R-1, R-1-H, R-1-C, and R-3 zones. The commercial zones encourage both 100 percent residential development and mixed-use development and conditionally permit multifamily development in the P, C-1, C-2, C-L, and C-3 zones.

To address the constraints to provision of multifamily housing in San Anselmo, the Town will amend the Zoning Code as part of Programs 3.1, 5.2, and 5.7 and to allow duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes by right in the R-1, R-2, C-1, and C-L zones. In addition, the Zoning Code will allow them by right in the C-2 and C-3 zones on the upper floors or behind a ground-floor commercial/office use. The Town will also amend the Zoning Code to allow developments proposing up to six residential uses by right in the C-1, C-2, C-L, and C-3 zones, with provisions to require the residential uses be located on upper floors or behind a ground-floor commercial/office use in the C-2 and C-3 zones.

Manufactured Housing/Mobile Homes
Section 65852.3 of the California Government Code requires jurisdictions to allow manufactured homes on lots zoned for single-family dwellings subject to the same development standards that apply to conventional single-family dwellings. Section 10-3.1702 of the San Anselmo Municipal Code states that a residential unit may be a manufactured structure or mobile home. As a result, manufactured housing is subject to the same standards and regulations that apply to other single-family homes. Therefore, manufactured housing is allowed by right in the R-1, R-1-H, R-1-C, R-2, and R-3 zones and with a Conditional Use Permit in the P, C-1, C-2, C-L, and C-3 zones. In order to be approved under a Conditional Use Permit, Title 10, Article 13 of the San Anselmo Municipal Code requires single-family uses, including manufactured homes, meet the following standard: “The establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, and general welfare of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the proposed use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the Town.” Given the provisions to allow manufactured housing as single-family dwellings in the town, there are no constraints associated with manufactured housing development standards or land use controls.

Residential and Community Care Facilities
The Community Care Facilities Act in the California Health and Safety Code requires that residential care facilities serving six or fewer persons (including foster care) be permitted by right similar to other residential uses. Residential care facilities serving more than six individuals can be permitted subject to a Conditional Use Permit. The Town allows residential care facilities serving six or fewer by right in residential zones and conditionally permits licensed large residential and community care facilities in residential zones.

Residential care facilities help persons with disabilities live in deinstitutionalized settings that facilitate integration into the community. The Town separates group homes into eight different categories based on occupancy size and characteristics: residential care facility (large), residential care facility (small), residential care facility for persons with a chronic life-threatening illness (large), residential care facility for persons with a chronic life-threatening illness (small), drug and/or alcoholism treatment facility (small), drug and/or alcoholism treatment facility (large), residential care facility for the elderly (large), and residential care facility for the elderly (small). Definitions for these categories specify state-licensed facilities. As 108 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
911
105
displayed in Table 4.4, all types are permitted or conditionally permitted in zones that allow housing. Therefore, the Zoning Code contains no provisions that impose additional development or standards on residential and community care facilities (licensed and unlicensed), including distance requirements, limits on capacity, and off-street parking. As demonstrated in Table 4.4, the Town does not discriminate in the commercial zones based on the characteristics of occupants and considers group homes as housing and subject to the same standards as other homes in their respective zoning districts.

The Housing Element includes Action 7.2a that will amend the Zoning Code and allow “Residential Care Facility, Small” in zoning districts that allow for single-family homes and Action 5.8a will amend the Zoning Code to define "group homes" to refer to residential and community care facilities.

Reasonable Accommodation
Both the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative duty on local governments to make reasonable accommodations (i.e., modifications or exceptions) in their zoning and other land use regulations when such accommodations may be necessary to afford disabled persons an equal opportunity to use and enjoy their home. For example, reasonable accommodation would allow covered ramps in the setbacks of properties that have already been developed to accommodate a resident’s mobility impairments.

HCD’s Group Home Technical Advisory (TA) states that “a request for a reasonable accommodation may only be denied if: (1) The individual on whose behalf the accommodation was requested is not an individual with a disability; (2) There is no disability-related need for the requested accommodation (in other words, there is no [connection] between the disability and the requested accommodation); (3) The requested accommodation would constitute a fundamental alteration of the services or operations of the person who is asked to provide the accommodation. (4) The requested accommodation would impose an undue financial and administrative burden on the person who is asked to provide the accommodation; or (5) The requested accommodation would constitute a direct threat to the health or safety of others (i.e., a significant risk of bodily harm) or would cause substantial physical damage to the property of others, and such risks cannot be sufficiently mitigated or eliminated by another reasonable accommodation.

The Town adopted the Reasonable Accommodation Ordinance in 2015, and subsequently updated it in 2018, to provide a procedure for people with disabilities to request reasonable accommodation in the application of zoning laws and other land use regulations, policies, and procedures.

Reasonable accommodations can be requested to exempt an applicant from various land use, zoning, or other regulations. Pursuant to Section 10-13.06 of the Municipal Code, a reasonable accommodation request must meet the following findings to be approved:

1. Whether the housing that is the subject of the request will be used by an individual considered disabled under the Acts.

2. Whether the request for reasonable accommodation is necessary to make specific housing available to an individual with a disability under the Acts.

3. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the Town.

4. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a Town program, policy, practice and/or regulation, including but not limited to land use or zoning.

5. Whether the requested reasonable accommodation would adversely impact surrounding properties or uses

6. Whether there are reasonable alternatives that would provide an equivalent level of benefit without requiring a modification or exception to the Town’s applicable programs, policies, practices and/or regulations.

7. Whether the accommodation would alter the significance of an historic structure.

8. An approved request for reasonable accommodation is subject to the applicant’s compliance with all other applicable regulations.

9. A reasonable accommodation approved is considered a personal accommodation for the individual applicant and does not run with the land.

The Municipal Code requires the Town to make a decision on a reasonable accommodation request within 45-days and requires notification to adjacent properties, or other properties as determined by the Planning Director, 10 days prior to the decision. Furthermore, the Town allows people who are not residing on the property to appeal the Planning Director’s decision. These findings and procedures may lead to decisions that contradict State law. Action 9.1e will amend the Zoning Code to remove barriers for the approval of requests for reasonable accommodation in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. In particular, the Town will revise the reasonable 109 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
912
106
accommodation procedures to comply with State law and remove Finding 5 required for reasonable accommodation approval which states “whether the requested reasonable accommodation would adversely impact surrounding properties or uses” to remove barriers to approval of reasonable accommodations."
Zoning Definition of Family
Under Adamson v. City of Santa Barbara (1980), definitions of family that discriminate against unrelated occupants does not serve any legitimate or useful objective or purpose recognized under the zoning and land planning powers of the Town, and therefore violates rights of privacy under the California Constitution. The San Anselmo Municipal Code does not include a definition for the term “family.” A residential unit is defined as a building, or portion thereof, for occupancy as living quarters for one household. A single-family residential unit is defined as a detached residential unit. San Anselmo’s definition encompasses persons not related by blood, marriage, or adoption and does not limit the number of unrelated persons living in a housing unit. Therefore, it is not a constraint to housing development in general or the provision of housing for persons with disabilities.

Transitional and Supportive Housing
The Town defines transitional housing, supportive housing, and target population in the Zoning Code as listed below:
• "Transitional housing" means buildings configured as rental housing developments, but operated under program requirements that require the termination of assistance and recirculating of the assisted unit to another eligible program recipient at a predetermined future point in time that shall be no less than six (6) months from the beginning of the assistance. • "Supportive housing" means housing with no limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the target population, and that is linked to an onsite or offsite service that assists the supportive housing resident in retaining the housing, improving his or her health status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when possible, work in the community. • "Target population" means persons with low incomes who have one (1) or more disabilities, including mental illness, HIV or AIDS, substance abuse or other chronic health condition, or individuals eligible for service provided pursuant to the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Service Act (Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code) and may include, among other populations, adults, emancipated minors, families with children, elderly persons, young adults aging out of the foster care system, individuals exiting from institutional settings, veterans, and homeless people.

Supportive housing services may include childcare, after-school tutoring, career counseling, etc. Most transitional housing includes a supportive services component. There are no known transitional housing facilities in San Anselmo. There are currently no site-based transitional or permanent housing projects, which includes supportive housing, for people experiencing homelessness in San Anselmo.

State law requires that supportive and transitional housing be considered a residential use of property and shall be subject only to those restrictions that apply to other residential dwellings of the same type in the same zone. In January 2015, the Town amended the Zoning Code to permit transitional and supportive housing by-right in all residential zoning districts and as a conditionally permitted use in all commercial zoning districts.

The amendments ensure that transitional and supportive housing is treated as a residential use in these zones, subject only to the same restrictions that apply to other residential uses in the same zone. The one exception to this is in the Professional (P) zoning district, in which single-family detached homes are conditionally permitted while transitional and supportive housing are not allowed. The Town also added definitions for supportive housing, transitional housing, and target population consistent with Government Code §65582(g), (j) and (i).The Housing Element includes Action 5.8d amending the Zoning Code to ensure compliance with State law and allow them in all zoning districts that allow residential uses in accordance with AB 2162.

Emergency Shelters
Emergency shelters are generally defined as a facility which provides immediate short-term housing for individuals experiencing homelessness.

Pursuant to SB 2, jurisdictions with an unmet need for emergency shelters are now required to identify a zoning district where emergency shelters will be allowed as a permitted use without the requirement for a Conditional Use Permit or other discretionary permit. The identified zone must have sufficient capacity to accommodate the shelter need and, at a minimum, provide capacity for at least one year-round shelter. Within the identified zone, only objective development and management standards may be applied, given they are designed to encourage and facilitate the development of or conversion to an emergency shelter. Emergency shelters may be an accessory to a public or civic type use. Permit processing, development, and management standards for emergency shelters must be objective and facilitate the development of or conversion to emergency shelters. 110 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
913
107
As discussed in greater detail in the Current Housing Conditions and Trends section of this Housing Element, there are 54 estimated unsheltered people experiencing homelessness that the Town needs to plan for. In January 2015, the Town amended the Zoning Code to permit emergency shelters for up to 17 beds by-right (i.e., without a Conditional Use Permit or other discretionary permit) in the Limited Commercial (C-L), General Commercial (C-3), and Public Facilities (PF) zoning districts, all of which allow various types of residential uses. Parcels with this zoning designation are located in the heart of the town near transit routes, commercial services, and other amenities of San Anselmo, ensuring that tenants in an emergency shelter would have access to all necessary resources.

Emergency shelters must be located within one-half mile of a transit stop. This 17-bed limit does not pose a constraint for the development of emergency shelters in San Anselmo, as they are allowed in multiple areas of the town (see Table 4.5). To further facilitate development, the Housing Element includes Action 5.8e to revise the Town’s definition for “emergency shelter” to ensure it is consistent with State law and does not create a barrier to emergency shelter development.

In addition, AB 2339 (Government Code Section 65583 (a)(4)) requires jurisdictions to provide a calculation methodology for determining the sufficiency of sites available to accommodate emergency shelters in the identified zoning designation. As shown in Table 4.5 below, the designated emergency shelter areas in San Anselmo include 16 vacant, undeveloped parcels with a total of more than 10 acres of land area and therefore have adequate land capacity to accommodate a year-round emergency shelter that could provide temporary lodging for 2,221 homeless individuals. The

0.27-acre parcel (APN 006-173-22), for example, at the intersection of Greenfield Avenue and Hillsdale Drive is located along a major transportation corridor with access to nearby amenities and transit stops, making it more likely to support an emergency shelter. The table below summarizes the vacant, undeveloped parcels per district and the number of people that could be accommodated.

Table 4.5: Potential Emergency Shelter Sites in San Anselmo Zone Vacant
Parcels
Site Size Total Acres Total Individuals
Accommodated Min. 1 Sq. Ft. Max. Sq. Ft.

C-L 0 n/a n/a n/a 0 people
C-3 6 1,742 28,750 1.75 381 people
PF 9 3,049 184,694 8.45 1,840 people
Total 16 1,742 184,694 10.20 2,221 people 1 In accordance with California Government Code Section 65583, the number of people experiencing homelessness that can be accommodated on any site shall be demonstrated by dividing the square footage of the site by a minimum of 200 square feet per person.

The Town’s Emergency Shelter Ordinance establishes standards for on-site management and security, exterior lighting, common facilities, parking and refuse areas, and a minimum distance between shelters. Emergency shelters are permitted by right if they meet the standards listed in Section 10-12.03 of the Municipal Code and identified below:

1. An emergency shelter shall meet the following development and performance standards:
i. On-site management and on-site security shall be provided during hours when the emergency shelter is in operation. ii. Adequate external lighting shall be provided for security purposes. The lighting shall be stationary, directed away from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way, and of intensity compatible with the surrounding area. iii. The development may provide one or more of the following specific common facilities for the exclusive use of the residents and staff:
d. Central cooking and dining room(s).
e. Recreation room.
f. Counseling center.
g. Childcare facilities.
h. Other support services.

2. Parking and outdoor facilities shall be designed to provide security for residents, visitors, employees, and the surrounding area.

3. A refuse storage area shall be provided that is completely enclosed with masonry walls not less than five feet high with a solid-gated opening and that is large enough to accommodate a standard-sized trash bin adequate for use on the parcel, or other enclosures as approved by the Planning Director. The refuse enclosure shall be accessible to refuse collection vehicles.

4. The agency or organization operating the emergency shelter shall comply with the following requirements:
111 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
914
108
i. Temporary shelter shall be available to residents for no more than six months. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter because of an inability to pay.
ii. Staff and services shall be provided to assist residents to obtain permanent shelter and income. iii. The provider shall have a written management plan including, as applicable, provisions for staff training, neighborhood outreach, security, screening of residents to ensure compatibility with services provided at the facility, and for training, counseling, and treatment programs for residents.

5. No emergency shelter shall be located within 300 feet of another emergency shelter site.

6. The facility shall be in, and shall maintain at all times, good standing with Town and/or state licenses, if required by these agencies for the owner(s), operator(s), and/or staff on the proposed facility.

7. The maximum number of beds or clients permitted to be served (eating, showering and/or spending the night) nightly shall not exceed seventeen people.

The Town’s regulations for emergency shelters are not compliant with State law because the Town imposes development standards beyond the objective standards allowed by State law. The Housing Element includes Action 5.8e to amend the definition of emergency shelter and update development standards in the Zoning Code to comply with SB 2, AB 2339, and AB 139.

Single Room Occupancy (SROs) Units
Single room occupancy (SRO) units are one-room units for occupancy by one or two individuals as their primary residence, which are occupied for periods not less than 30 days. SROs are different than studios or efficiency units because SRO units are not required to have a kitchen or bathroom.

The San Anselmo Zoning Code establishes provisions for SRO units to provide clear standards for these small units and support opportunities for the development of permanent, affordable housing in close proximity to transit and services for small households and for persons with special needs.

Development standards for SRO units are provided in Section 10-3.1901 of the Municipal Code as follows:
• A Conditional Use Permit is required for the use of any rooms or units as SROs. • An SRO shall not be located within 300 feet of any other SRO, emergency shelter, or other similar program, unless such program is located within the same building or on the same lot.
• Units shall have a maximum floor area of 400 square feet and accommodate a maximum of two persons. • One washer and one dryer shall be provided for every ten units. • SROs may contain partial or full bathroom facilities, however, are not required. If an SRO does not contain full bathroom facilities, common bathroom facilities shall be provided in accordance with the California Building Code for congregate residences with at least one full bathroomper floor. • SROs may contain partial or full kitchen facilities, however, are not required. If an SRO does not contain full kitchen facilities, common kitchen facilities shall be provided. For projects with more than 10 units, at least one full kitchen facility shall be provided per floor. • SRO units shall comply with all requirements of the California Building Code. • SRO facilities with seven or more units shall include twenty-four-hour on-site management, a dwelling unit designated for the manager, and a management plan.
• On-site parking must be provided as required for multifamily units. The Planning Commission may reduce parking requirements to one space per four units if the SRO is deed-restricted for extremely low-income housing or if alternative transportation is provided. With the exception of projects that allow only senior residents, projects with reduced parking shall provide one bicycle parking space per unit. • SRO units shall provide tenancy for a minimum of 30 days.

To make this affordable and efficient housing type more widely available throughout the community, the Housing Element includes Action3.3c that will require the Town to amend the Zoning Code to allow residential buildings containing the units as a permitted use in the R-3 zoning district.

Agricultural/Farm Employee Housing
State law asserts that employee housing for six persons or less shall be allowed in the same way residential structures are allowed in zones allowing 112 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
915
109
residential uses and that employee housing for up to 12 units or 36 beds shall be deemed an agricultural use and must be subject to the same regulations as any other agricultural use in the same zone. “No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance shall be required of this employee housing that is not required of any other agricultural activity in the same zone” (Employee Housing Act, California Health and Safety Code Sections 17021.5, 17021.6, and 17021.8). According to data derived from the 2020 American Community Survey and summarized in the Current Housing Conditions and Trends section of this Housing Element, no one in San Anselmo is employed in maintenance or production occupations in the agriculture/natural resources industry. In addition, there are no agricultural zones or uses in the Town. Therefore, the Town has not identified a need for specialized farmworker housing beyond overall programs for housing affordability.

The Town complies with the Employee Housing Act. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17021.5, the Town deems any employee housing providing accommodation for 6 or fewer employees as a single-family structure. No Conditional Use Permit, zoning variance, or other zoning clearance is required of employee housing serving 6 or fewer employees that is not required of a single-family dwelling in the same zone. To ensure that the Town is not responsible for any barriers to the establishment of employee housing, the Housing Element includes Action 5.8c to amend its regulations for compliance with the Employee Housing Act as needed to accommodate future updates to State law.

Affordable Housing
Inclusionary zoning, also known as inclusionary housing, refers to a range of policies and practices that mandate or provide incentives for the inclusion of affordable housing units in new developments. Inclusionary zoning is a tool that cities and counties can adopt to increase the supply and funding for affordable housing. Inclusionary zoning policies establish a variety of requirements for the development of new housing, such as the number of affordable units required to be constructed in an otherwise market-rate residential development project, the minimum project size where inclusionary housing requirements would apply, affordability targets, and alternative means of achieving affordable housing goals when constructing new residential development projects.

Adopted on June 21, 2023, the San Anselmo Zoning Code sets inclusionary housing regulations for residential development projects (Title 10, Chapter 21- Affordable Housing) in accordance with the 2015 Housing Element Program H3.3- Inclusionary Housing Regulations and Establish Housing Impact Fees). The inclusionary housing regulations established an Affordable Housing Fund and Affordable Housing in-lieu fees and non-residential/commercial linkage fees.

The inclusionary housing regulations were based on a coordinated effort that included joining six other Marin County jurisdictions to develop a common inclusionary policy among all participating jurisdictions. The purpose of the effort, to the extent practicable, was to reduce variation and complexity in the various inclusionary ordinances and make it easier for developers to assess project costs across jurisdictions. The intent of the coordinated effort was to also remove constraints to development by ensuring that its inclusionary requirements were not more restrictive than other jurisdictions’ ordinances and that the inclusionary requirements would not create a cost burden that rendered a project financially infeasible. The jurisdictions engaged an economic consultant to conduct stakeholder outreach and research and provide recommendations.

The ordinance established a 20% inclusionary requirement for both for- sale and rental development projects, consistent with the requirements of many other jurisdictions in the Bay Area. The Town also revised the minimum project size threshold from one unit to two (excluding new single-family dwelling units, ADUs, and up to one SB 9 unit).

The ordinance established affordability targets for both Rental Projects and For-Sale Projects as shown below:

Required Affordable Unit Set Aside for For-Sale Projects:

Inclusionary Units and In-Lieu Fee for Rental Projections- Option 1 Project Size Required Affordable Unit Set Aside
Low Moderate Above Moderate
2-4 units 20%
5-29 units 5% 5% 10%
30 or more units 5% 10% 5%
Project Size Required Affordable Unit Set Aside and In-Lieu Fee Very Low Low Moderate In-Lieu Fee
2-10 units 10% 10%
11-29 units 10% 10%
30 or more units 15% 5%
113 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
916
110
Inclusionary Units and In-lieu Fee for Rental Projects- Option 2 Project Size Required Affordable Unit Set Aside and In-Lieu Fee Very Low Low Moderate In-Lieu Fee
2-10 units 15% 5%
11-29 units 15% 5%
30 or more units 10% 5% 5%
Developers may choose between the two options for rental projects as shown above.

The ordinance also establishes the target Area Median Income (AMIs), which determines the maximum rent or sales price that can be charged for each unit required to be affordable pursuant to Town policies. The target AMIs are the same for rental projects and for for-sale projects and reflect the most recent AMIs for Marin County as published by HCD (see below table). The target AMIs for the low-, moderate-, and above moderate-income units are set at the mid-point within the income range. The target AMI for very low-income units is set at the upper end of the income range, which is consistent with State density bonus law.

Very Low1 Low Moderate Above Moderate2
50% 65% 100% 135% 1 Not applicable for for-sale projects. 2 Not applicable for rental projects.

In-lieu fees were also analyzed in the inclusionary study and revised in the updated ordinance. The affordable housing in-lieu fees are calculated based on the housing affordability gap – the difference between what households at various income levels (very low, low, and moderate) can pay for housing and the cost of developing market rate housing.

The in-lieu fees for the study were calculated for three development types: for-sale single- family subdivisions, for-sale condominium townhomes, and rental apartments. The prototypes evaluated in the study were informed by recently built and proposed development projects in Marin as well as conversations with developers with experience in Marin County. The in-lieu fees established for both Rental and For-Sale projects is $362,817. The inlieu fee is increased or decreased in accordance with the year over year increase or decrease in the California Construction Cost Index. In addition to an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee, the Town Council adopted an affordable housing non-residential/commercial linkage fee. The Commercial/non-residential linkage fee is a fee that is imposed on non-residential development in order to mitigate the housing-related impacts on the community of the nonresidential development. The fees are paid into the Affordable Housing Fund, which is dedicated to promoting and facilitating affordable housing within the Town. The following fees apply to Commercial/Nonresidential development projects in-lieu of the provision of on-site affordable housing units:

Type of Project Fee per Square Foot of Net New Gross Floor Area Office $10
Retail/Restaurant $8 up to 2500 square feet
$10 for over 2500 square feet
Hotel $5
Other Fees Calculated using Excel-Based Fee Calculator.

The adoption of the Town’s inclusionary zoning and regulations are consistent with Housing Element Program 3.3, Action 3.3b, Program 5.7, and Action 5.7f that establishes an inclusionary housing ordinance to require affordable housing be provided as part of all new multifamily and mixeduse development.

Building Code and Code Enforcement
The Town’s Building Code is based on the latest 2022 version of the California Building Code, along with all required updates. The Town has not adopted amendments to the 2022 California Building Code, but the Municipal Code preserves local amendments adopted in perpetuity to accompany previous versions of the Building Code. Local amendments have been made to the Building Codes for health and safety purposes. For example, the Town requires that new homes install Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) vents to improve fire safety and resilience. The Town also requires that new homes be constructed one foot above the base flood elevation, while the California Building Code requires that homes just be elevated to the base flood elevation. The additional foot of elevation reduces homeowners’ insurance rates, decreases structural damage and repairs needed due to flooding, and enhances overall resident health and safety. These amendments do not significantly diminish the ability to develop affordable 114 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
917
111
housing or accommodate persons with disabilities or other special needs groups.

In Section 9-4.01 of the Municipal Code, the Town has also adopted a Building Code amendment requiring that all electrical and communication service laterals, including those for cable television service, to any new building or building undergoing a substantial improvement be undergrounded. Many other jurisdictions require that utilities be undergrounded as well to improve resiliency and reduce the risk of hazards induced by wildfire, earthquakes, storm events, and other natural disasters. While this amendment may increase the cost of development, it ultimately preserves and improves the health and safety of San Anselmo residents. Regardless, the Town recognizes the increased cost burdens that this requirement places on housing development. To ensure that the Town is not responsible for barriers to affordable housing development, the Town will identify and seek grants and other potential funding sources to subsidize undergrounding utilities for affordable housing development (Actions 5.5a through 5.5d).

San Anselmo’s Building Code enforcement practices are complaint-driven, as are those of 70 percent of the local governments surveyed by HCD.

The usual process is for a code enforcement officer to conduct a field investigation after a complaint has been submitted. If the complaint is found to be valid, the immediacy and severity of the problem is evaluated, and the code enforcement officer reaches out to the property owner to ameliorate the issue. Town Staff report that the most common complaints received are from neighbors reporting unpermitted work on residential units. There is no indication that code enforcement practices unduly penalize older structures.

Site Improvements
Development of residential units involves connecting to utilities in the right-of-way. All electrical distribution lines, telephone, cable television, and similar service wires or cables, which provide services to new development, are to be installed underground. New subdivisions will require site improvements such as:
• Streets must be graded, have a rock base and be paved or surfaced to widths and grades as provided by the Town Municipal Code. • Structures shall be installed in accordance with the approved improvement plan. • Curbs and gutters to be required along the streets.
• Paved sidewalks shall be constructed where required by the Town Municipal Code. • Retaining walls may be required wherever topographic conditions warrant or where necessary to retain fill or cut slopes within the rights-ofway or slope easements. • Potable water must be provided by connection to the Marin Municipal Water District system or through approval of a water well permit. • Provisions shall be made for adequate sewage.
• Trees, shrubs, and ground cover will be required where there is insufficient vegetation. • Provisions shall be made for filling lands as required by the approved improvement plans. • Provisions shall be made for drainage and flood control in accordance with the approved improvement plans. • The faces of cut and fill slopes shall be prepared and maintained to control against erosion, both during and after construction. • All utility distribution facilities, with the exception of equipment appurtenant to such underground facilities, installed within and for the purpose of supplying service to any subdivision shall be placed underground. • Street signs shall be placed at all street intersections and shall be in accordance with specifications on file with the Town Engineer. Street Improvements:
• If the portion of the street upon which the parcel fronts require widening or extension to conform to the Streets and Highways Plan of the Town, rights-of-way for such widening and/or extension have been dedicated to the Town by the owner of the parcel; and • That frontage improvements in accordance with the current Town specifications in use by the Department of Public Works and at the location prescribed by the Town Engineer in accordance with the Streets and Highways Plan of the Town have been installed at no cost to the Town; or
• That such frontage improvements will be so installed as a part of the development applied for and prior to occupancy thereof; or • That in lieu of such improvements the applicant has deposited with the Town the estimated cost thereof; or 115 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
918
112
• That the improvement requirement should be waived or deferred due to extenuating circumstances. If the Town Engineer finds that improvements should be deferred, he shall require as a prerequisite to issuance of the permit that the owner agrees in writing to undertake the construction of the required improvements within ninety (90) days after written notice to begin construction is mailed to the owner at the premises or such other address as the owner may from time to time furnish the Town. Such agreement shall further provide that in the event of the owner's default in commencing and completing the improvements, the Town may at its option:
◦ Treat the agreement as a petition for installation of improvements pursuant to the provisions of Sections 5870 et seq. the Streets and Highways Code of the State; or
◦ Cause the work to be done and the cost thereof assessed as a lien against the owner's property. Such an agreement shall also run with the land and shall be recorded to constitute notice to prospective purchasers or encumbrances.

To ensure that required site improvements are not a barrier to development, the Housing Element will include Action 5.4b to evaluate its requirements for on- or off-site improvements to determine which are feasible to minimize or eliminate to reduce construction financing costs for affordable housing development projects.
116 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
919
113
Fees and Exactions
The Town collects fees to help cover the costs of application processing, inspections, and environmental review. Per State law, these fees are limited to the cost to the agencies of performing these services. Table 4.6 is an inventory of planning and zoning permit processing fees for housing developments. The table compares planning fees associated with housing development in the Town of San Anselmo and adjacent jurisdictions.

The Town’s application fees are comparatively low. The fee schedule for housing developments is predictable as it’s charged on a flat rate basis (regardless of number of units) and serves as a complete transaction, as compared to deposit fees. Planning fees are collected when the application is deemed complete. Compared to the Town’s fees, the table shows that nearby jurisdictions charge higher planning fees. The complete list of Town fees is accessible online at https://www.townofsananselmo.org/206/Fees. The Town also provides an online portal eTRAKiT (aspgov.com) where applicants can estimate fees prior to submitting their application.

Table 4.6: Comparative Housing Development Planning Fees Application Type San Anselmo Marin County Ross Fairfax
Administrative (Staff Level)
Design Review (Residential)
$ 1,200 $4,643 (Major)
$1,741 (Minor)
$8,351 (Major)
$5,924 (Minor)
$1,218 (Single Family)
$6,500 (Multifamily)
Planning Commission Public
Hearings $ 3,500 $ 8,125 $5,924 $ 2,550
Lot Line Adjustment
(Administrative) $1,200 $ 2,321 $ 320 $ 1,500
Administrative Lot Merger $ 500 $ 2,750 $ 2,750 $ 2,750 Administrative Minor Exception $ 500 $2,086 $5,924 $ 800 Source: Town of San Anselmo Fee Schedule (Effective July 2022). Application types shown for other jurisdictions represent the closest approximation to Town of San Anselmo’s process and procedures
Table 4.7 shows fees charged to prototypical single-family, multifamily, and ADU developments in San Anselmo. As shown in the table, the fees are established based on time and materials for processing the application. The hourly rate to process an application as established by the fee schedule is currently $136.00. It is estimated staff level reviews will take 4-12 hours to process an application and it is estimated that Planning Commission reviews will take 12-36 hours depending on the complexity of the project application or based on the number of units or unit size. Most of the Town’s planning fees apply to projects seeking discretionary approval of exemptions to the standards in the Zoning Code or the General Plan. Additional fees are assessed for developments, residential and non-residential, that would require actions set forth in the Subdivision Map Act. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exempts new construction of small structures in urban areas from environmental review, and therefore environmental review fees listed apply to major subdivisions. The Town has not adopted an ordinance for the purpose of administering development impact fees, aside from a road impact fee levied by the Building Department. The road impact fee covers the costs of maintaining and repairing damaged roads caused by construction activity. Building permit fees, including the road impact fee, are charged based on the valuation of the project.

Building permit fees are waived for ADUs deed-restricted to affordable for at least 55 years.

The Town relies on numerous agencies and special districts to levy fees on new developments for the provision of urban services, which adds to development costs. These agencies and special districts include Ross Valley School District, Tamalpais Union High School District, Ross Valley Fire Department, Marin Municipal Water District, Ross Valley Sanitary District, and Central Marin Sanitation Agency. The Ross Valley School District requires the payment of an impact fee of $3.48 per square foot for new construction over 500 square feet. The Ross Valley Fire Department charges minimum plan review fees of $369 for fire protection plans, $534 for sprinkler system plans for residential projects less than 5,000 square feet, $602 for sprinkler system plans for residential projects greater than 5,000 square feet, and $534 for fire alarm plans and $323 for fire alarm system modifications. The Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) adopted Ordinance 445 which amended the District’s code to comply with Assembly Bill 881 and does not require a separate meter or payment of a connection for JADUs and ADUs that meet the following criteria:
• Only one ADU or JADU exists on a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling; and • The ADU or JADU is within the proposed space of the single-family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure and may include an expansion of up to 150 square feet beyond the existing dimensions of an existing accessory structure for the purposes of ingress and egress; and
• The space has exterior access from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling; and • The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. 117 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
920
114
Table 4.7: Development Fee Example
Single Family Home 8-unit Multifamily ADU
Unit Size (sq. ft.) 955 7,640 700
Common area (sq. ft.) 0 0 0
# Bedrooms each unit 4 2 1
Cost of construction (sq. ft.) $400 $250 $250
Project Valuation $382,000 $1,910,000 $175,000
Town Fees
Design Review $955 $955 $955
General Plan Maintenance Fee $267 $47 $47
Technology Fee $587 $104 $104
Planning Training Fee $200 $35 $35
Building Permit $6,665 $1,179 $1,179
Plan Check $1,088 $1,088 $1,088
Energy Fee $1,000 $177 $177
Plumbing $1,000 $177 $177
Electrical $1,000 $177 $177
Mechanical $1,000 $177 $177
Road Impact Fee1 $5,730 $28,650 $2,625
TOWN FEES TOTAL $19,490 $32,766 $4,471
Estimated Fees of Other Districts
Water Connection – MMWD2 $16,027 $10,036 $0
Ross Valley Sanitary District3 $9,975 $8,067 $318
Central Marin Sanitation Agency4 $7,666 $7,666 $7,666
Ross Valley School District $3,323 $26,587 $2,436
Ross Valley Fire Department $328 $328 $328
DISTRICT FEES TOTAL $28,254 $52,684 $10,748
TOTAL FEES $56,810 $85,450 $17,489
TOTAL FEES (per unit) $56,810 $10,681 $17,489
Source: Town of San Anselmo
1 1.5% value of the project, collected by the Building Department at the time of issuance of a building permit. 2 Water connection fees are based on estimated consumption, which ranges from 0.8 to 0.24 acre-foot, depending upon area. This example uses 0.24 acre-foot for the single-family house and averages the high and low amounts for the multifamily unit. The Water District also charges for water meter installation and adds an additional $7,040 installation fee. 3 Sanitary district fees are based upon a number of fixture units, which range from one unit for a wash basin to three units for a toilet. The base capacity charge of $7,339 for any equivalent dwelling unit includes 23 fixture units. Additional fixture units are charged at the rate of $318 each. The single-family example assumes 29 fixture units. Additionally, a new connections permit is $728. Sewer Service Charges are $10,293 for a single-family home with a newly constructed detached ADU, an additional $318 dollars compared to sewer service charges for single-family homes ($9,975). ADU constructed within the existing interior space or converted of an existing, detached accessory structure are exempt from capacity charges, however, a $318 dollar fee is charged per additional fixture unit. 4 Regional Capacity Charges for a new residential sewer connection are $7,666.16 based on the Central Marin Sanitary District 2022-23 Fee schedule.

The Ross Valley Sanitary District charges sewer capacity charges for newly constructed residential units. The base charge of $5,987 includes 23 fixture units. Fixture units range from one unit for a wash basin to three units for a toilet. Additional fixture units are charged at the rate of $260 each.

A permit fee, which includes up to two inspections of $594 is also charged.

The Central Marin Sanitation Agency charges a regional capacity charge of $ $7,666.16 (indexed to inflation) for each new sewer connection serving a residential unit, whether that unit is in a single-family or multifamily configuration. The Agency has a policy to reduce capacity charges for ADUs, senior residents and affordable housing projects by the same proportionate amount as the member agency’s fee.

Table 4.8 shows the typical fees for new single-family and multi-family development. The fees for housing development do not represent a significant portion of overall cost, indicating that the Town’s fees do not pose a constraint on the development of housing. 118 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
921
115
Table 4.8 : Estimated Development Fees to Overall Housing Development Costs Housing Type Town Fees Other
District Fees
Total Fees Estimated Development
Cost per Unit1
Estimated Proportion of Fees to
Development Costs per Unit
Single-Family Unit $19,490 $37,320 $56,810 $382,000 15% Multifamily Unit $4,096 $6,585 $10,681 $238,750 4%
1 Valuation (construction costs)
Zoning Fees and Transparency
In order to comply with California Government Code Section 65940.1(a)(1), the Planning Department’s homepage provides clear, labeled links to all zoning and development standards at https://www.townofsananselmo.org/1021/Planning. From this page, the public has direct access to all information that the Town uses to evaluate housing developments for conformity to its land use and development regulations including:
• Application forms and requirements
• An itemized schedule of Town Council, Planning Commission, and other committee meetings • The Zoning Code
• An interactive zoning map
• General Plan.

The webpage also provides full disclosure of the Town’s ADU regulations and application permits, racial covenant modification procedures, proposed zoning amendments, fair housing resources, and handouts and forms. The webpage is updated as needed to remain current.

Environmental Review and Processing
The Town of San Anselmo processes typical small development in three to four months from the time of complete application submittal to building permit approval. This is due to the efficiency of a small-town government, the lack of an application backlog, and the fact that most public facilities are already in place. Single-family housing development applications generally take less time to review than multifamily proposals. When proposed single-family developments are in conformity with the General Plan and existing zoning, it is possible to process the required planning applications, once deemed complete, within a month. Some new single-family and all multifamily development proposals are subject to Design Review, but Town Staff note that the addition of Design Review does not typically lengthen the timeline of project review due to efficiencies in the Town’s established process for streamlined one-time project review from all required departments. Housing development proposals requiring discretionary approval also require environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. public hearings, and local review. The total review time for multifamily projects, from the initial developer contact with the Town to final approval, can take up to a year depending on the complexities or environmental constraints of the project.

Below are typical processing times and procedures for single-family and multifamily developments.

Single-Family Residence
• Administrative Design Review:
◦ Administrative design review, to ensure compliance with Objective Design Standards (Action 3.2a), will be required to construct new singlefamily residences. (See Action 3.2a) ◦ Staff will review the application for compliance with objective standards, adhering to timeline requirements pursuant to relevant State laws.

3.2a). If an applicant is requesting a variance, use permit, or floor area exception as part of the project, these applications are processed concurrently with the design review application. The applicant submits a completed application, filing fee and plans to the Planning Department who transmits it to other departments (generally Fire, Public Works and Building) for review and comment. ◦ Staff prepares a public notice which is sent out ten days prior to the Planning Commission hearing and a staff report analyzing the project and recommending conditions of approval is prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission. A public hearing is held where the applicant and members of the public may comment on the merits of the project. ◦ It typically takes two to four weeks from the time that the application for single-family residence is deemed complete until it is approved by the Planning Commission. Following approval, there is a ten-day appeal period; if no appeal is filed, the applicant may secure a building permit and commence construction.

Multifamily Residential
• Administrative Design Review:
◦ Administrative design review, to ensure compliance with Objective Design Standards (Action 3.2a), will be required of multifamily residential projects. (See Action 3.2a)
◦ Staff will review the application for compliance with objective standards, adhering to timeline requirements pursuant to relevant State laws.

Once the application is deemed compliant, the Planning Director will approve the project in accordance with State law. ◦ Given that Action 3.2a has not yet been implemented, the Town does not have an estimate for the permit processing timeline. However, Town staff anticipate that the timeline will be shorter than traditional design review due to fewer steps required for project approval. • Traditional Design Review:
◦ Traditional design review is required to construct new multifamily residential projects that do not comply with Objective Design Standards (Action 3.2a). If an applicant is requesting a variance, use permit, or floor area exception as part of the project, these applications are processed concurrently with the design review application. The applicant submits a completed application, filing fee and plans to the Planning Department who transmits it to other departments (generally Fire, Public Works and Building) for review and comment. ◦ Staff prepares a public notice which is sent out ten days prior to the Planning Commission hearing and a staff report analyzing the project and recommending conditions of approval is prepared for consideration by the Planning Commission. A public hearing is held, where the applicant and members of the public may comment on the merits of the project. ◦ It typically takes two to five weeks from the time that the application for a small multifamily residential project is deemed complete until it is approved by the Planning Commission. Following approval, there is a ten-day appeal period; if no appeal is filed, the applicant may secure a building permit and commence construction.

The information that follows shows the typical steps and processing time for various types of permits and housing development types in San Anselmo.

Typical Processing Time by Permit
• Ministerial Review: 2 - 6 weeks
• Conditional Use Permit: 4 – 6 weeks
• Variance: 4 – 6 weeks
• Zoning Change: 16 – 30 weeks
• General Plan Amendment: 16 – 30
weeks
• Architectural/Design Review: 4 – 6
weeks
• Initial Study/Negative or Mitigated
Negative Declaration: 4 – 6 months
• Environmental Impact Report: 6 - 8
months
Typical Processing Procedures by Project Type
New Single-Family Home: 4 - 6 weeks (this could include Traditional Design Review and Variances processed concurrently).

Duplex to Fourplex: 4 – 24 weeks (this could include Traditional Design Review, Variances, Conditional Use Permits, and environmental review are processed concurrently as well as a Tentative Parcel Map if they are to be for-sale units). 120 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
923
Multifamily (5 or more units): 8 – 10 months (this could include Traditional Design Review, Variances, Conditional Use Permits, and environmental review are processed concurrently as well as a Tentative Final Map if they are to be for-sale units).

The Town recognizes that the time required to process a development proposal can be a barrier to housing production if it is lengthy. The Town has streamlined the development review process over the years to make it more efficient, while still providing adequate opportunity for public re- view and input, as required for discretionary projects. In addition, much of the permit processing time frame is dictated by State-mandated noticing and processing procedures (i.e., SB 35) that help assure community review of projects. The Town has not adopted specific SB 35 regulations in the Zoning Code and follows State requirements to provide ministerial review of projects that meet SB 35 eligibility criteria. As part of Action 3.2a, the Town will develop specific written procedures for evaluation of ministerial housing projects, including projects that qualify for streamlined review under Senate Bill 35, for inclusion in the objective design standards that Town staff can use to formally process SB 35 applications.

Processing times for projects in San Anselmo are similar to, if not faster than, other jurisdictions in Marin County. Projects requiring documentation of environmental impact, including projects that are categorically exempt, are processed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. In addition, housing development applications are processed in the Town in amanner consistent with the Housing AccountabilityAct (HAA) and Permit Streamlining Act.

Title 10 Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code identifies a hierarchy of discretionary actions, which includes design review. Pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, the Town has a maximum of 30 days to conduct an initial review of the project and determine whether it is “complete,” or whether additional information is needed to evaluate the project. While this may seem like a long time, it includes time to refer the application to different departments and outside agencies involved in development review, and to receive and consolidate these comments. Staff tries to anticipate analyses that will be needed for environmental review or during the public hearing process (such as any special studies). If the project does not meet various Town standards, it may also need to be revised. In the past several years, the Town has improved the Town website, submittal checklists, and handouts to identify what information is required for an applicant to be deemed “complete.” The Town works closely with developers to expedite approval procedures so as not to put any unnecessary timing constraints on development. For a typical project, an initial pre-consultation meeting is held with the Planning Department, Building Department, Public Works Department, and the Fire Department to discuss the development proposal. Then, a description of the project and application must be filed with a site plan, which is first reviewed by the Planning Department and other departments and agencies (such as the Building Department) for consistencywith theMunicipal Code and General Plan guidelines. After the project is approved, the Building Department performs plan checks and issues building permits. Throughout construction, the Building Department will perform inspections to monitor the progress of the project. This process does not place an undue time constraint on most developments due to the close working relationship between Town Staff, developers, and the decision-making bodies (Planning Commission and Town Council). Discretionary projects that require design review or request a variance may require a Planning Commission meeting. Large-scale or complex projects may include additional public hearings to respond to comments and make modifications. The additional time, as well as the public hearing can pose a constraint to the development of multifamily projects. To mitigate this constraint, the Town recently implemented a pre-application process to review project proposals with applicants and identify any items of concern before application submittal.

To further streamline the approval process for new housing, the Housing Element will include Action 3.2a that will require the Town to adopt objective design standards for all housing types, Action 3.1C that will require the Town to adopt pre-approved plans for missing middle housing types, Program 6.1 that will require the Town to adopt pre-approved ADU plans. 117
121 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
924
118
Design Review
The Town of San Anselmo will offer two paths for the approval of residential development throughout the community. The first path will be an objective, ministerial approval process that relies on objective design standards for all housing types (Action 3.2a) as well as pre-approved plans for missing middle housing (Action 3.1c) andAccessory Dwelling Units (Program 6.1). The second path will continue to utilize the City’s existing, traditional Design Review process as detailed below.

The Town of San Anselmo Municipal Code provides standards and criteria for use by decision-makers when reviewing a project for design review approval. The Town also provides further Design Review details in handouts available on the Town website and at the Planning Department counter in Town Hall. The Planning Director or the Planning Commission serves as the review body for Design Review. Pursuant to Section 10-3.1504 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Director may approve Design Review applications for minor modifications to existing buildings and all additions in residential zoning districts. The Planning Commission shall review all other Design Review applications. The Town currently requires that new residential projects that trigger the Design Review requirement achieve the following findings:
• For qualifying Residential R-3 (four or more units, churches, convalescent homes) projects:

1. Is functionally and aesthetically compatible with the existing improvements and the natural elements in the surrounding area;

2. Provides for protection against noise, odors, and other factors which may make the environment less desirable;

3. Will not tend to cause the surrounding area to depreciate materially in appearance or value or otherwise discourage occupancy, investment, or orderly development in such area;

4. Will not create unnecessary traffic hazards due to congestion, distraction of motorists, or other factors and provides for satisfactory access by emergency vehicles and personnel;

5. Will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons using the improvement or endanger property located in the surrounding area; and

6. Is consistent with the Town General Plan.
• For qualifying Residential R-1, R-2, and R-3 (three (3) or fewer units) sites below one hundred fifty (150) feet Mean Sea Level (flatland) projects:

1. Conformance to Findings 1 through 6;

2. Will not unreasonably impair access to light and air of structures on neighboring properties;

3. Will not unreasonably affect the privacy of neighboring properties including not unreasonably affecting such privacy by the placement of windows, skylights and decks;(4)Will be of a bulk, mass and design that complements the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood; and(5)Will not materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in such neighborhood.
• For qualifying Residential R-1-H, R-1-C, and R-1 design review for lots that include any area at or above one hundred fifty (150) feet Mean Sea Level (hillside) projects:

1. Conformance to Findings 1 through 9; 11. Adequacy of screening; and

2. Selection of architectural features and colors that enable the structure to blend with its environment and which results in a low visual profile.
• For projects that request to exceed the maximum allowed dwelling size on residential lots that include any area at or above one hundred fifty (150) Mean Sea Level):

1. Conformance to Findings 1 through 12;

2. Will not be materially visible offsite;

3. Is of a scale, intensity, and design that integrates with the existing character of the surrounding neighborhood;

4. Internal efficiency and/or space utilization problems exist.

5. Required conditions if approval is granted to exceed the maximum dwelling size guidelines based on existing landscaping:
i. A landscape plan shall be submitted showing location, type and size of existing landscapes screening, and 122 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
925
119
ii. (Any existing landscape screening, which is part of an approved landscape plan, shall be maintained. If said landscaping is lost due to natural disaster, the owner shall replace it per the plan. If said landscaping is removed or neglected for any reason other than a natural disaster, the owner shall replace it per the plan and may be subject to either an infraction or a misdemeanor.

The criteria listed above are intended to decrease “uncertainty” for applicants, and as much as possible, provide objective and clear standards, considerations and expectations for new development. To more clearly communicate to the development community the design expectations of the Town and to streamline the development approval process, San Anselmo will evaluate and update the design review findings to be objective (Action 5.9e). In addition, as part of Program 5.7 and Actions 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.7a, 5.7b, 5.7c, 5.7d, and 5.7e, the Town will amend the Zoning Ordinance indicating that projects providing affordable housing in accordance with California Government Code Section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i), on sites identified in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory will not be subject to Design Review provisions that would constitute a “project” for purposes of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.

Evaluation of Inclusionary Zoning as a Constraint
Affordable Housing by Choice — Trends in California Inclusionary Programs (NPH, 2007) looked at housing produced through inclusionary programs from January 1999 through June 2006 and found that nearly one-third of California jurisdictions now have inclusionary programs, and more than 80,000 Californians have obtained housing through inclusionary programs. In 2021, a study1 of IH programs in local jurisdictions nationwide throughout 2018 and 2019. Some of the key takeaways found that:
• In 2019, there were 228 IH programs in California across 162 jurisdictions. As of 2022, that figure has grown to 239 IH programs, which accounts for approximately 23 percent of IH programs nationwide. In California, eight programs have created 1,000 or more affordable units since adoption and 57 programs have created between 28,960- and 29,180-units total per program. • Under the Duty to Serve Rule, legal agreements such as deed restrictions, deed covenants, ground leases, development agreements, or affordable housing agreements are necessary to establish price and rent restrictions, ensuring inclusionary units are affordable. These legal agreements need to have a resale formula that limits homeowners’ proceeds at resale. • Approximately 73 percent of IH programs nationwide can create affordable units directly without reliance on fees to fund projects.

Table 4.9 compares inclusionary housing requirements across multiple Marin County jurisdictions. Many communities offer a variety of concessions or incentives for construction of affordable units including, but not limited to, density bonuses or incentives of equal financial value, waiver or modification of development standards, provision of direct financial assistance, and deferral or reduction of payment of fees. Several jurisdictions in Marin County also require smaller projects that have an insufficient number of units to cover the full cost of constructing an affordable unit to pay a fee.
1 Inclusionary Housing in the United States, published by Ground Solutions in 2021. 123 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
926
120
Table 4.9: Inclusionary Housing Requirements in Marin
County
Jurisdiction Minimum Project
Size Percent Required
Corte Madera 2 units
2-10 units: Can either restrict 10% of the total development for very low-income households and pay a 10% in-lieu fee, or restrict 15% of the total development for low- income households and pay a 5% in-lieu fee.
11-29 units: Can either restrict 10% of the total development for very low-income households and pay a 10% of all proposed units for moderate-income housing or restrict 15% of the total development for low-income households and 5% of the total development for moderate-income households
<30 Units: Can restrict 15% of the total development for very low-income housing and pay a 5% in lieu fee or restrict 10% of the total development for very low-income households, 5% of the total development for low- income households, and 5% of the total development for moderate-income households.

Larkspur 5-14 units 5-14 units: 15% of the total development must be restricted for lower-income households. 15+ units: 20% of the total development must be restricted for lowerincome households.

Marin County 1 unit
Single-family homes with more than 2,000 square feet of conditioned floor area, and teardowns or major remodels of single-family homes that result in over 500 square feet of new space where the new total conditioned floor area is greater than 2,000 square feet:

Must pay an affordable housing impact fee of $6.69 per square foot for projects with conditioned floor area less than 3,000 square feet and $14.20 per square foot for projects with more than 3,000 square feet.

Multifamily housing (including condominiums, single-family conversions1, and subdivisions with a proposed development of one or more new dwellings) require 20% of the total development be restricted for lower-income households (in-lieu fee for below

0.5 unit) for projects proposing 2+ new units or lots.

Mill Valley 2 units 2-9 units: Must pay an in-lieu fee for the creation of affordable housing.

Novato 3 units
Dependent on number of units. At a minimum, projects providing 3-6 units must restrict 10% of all proposed units for lower-income households or pay an in-lieu fee. At a maximum, projects providing 20 or more units must restrict 20% of the total development for lower-income households.

San Rafael 2 units
2-15 units: Must restrict 10% of the total development for lower-income households. 15+ units: Must restrict 15% of the total development for lower-income households. 21+ units: Must restrict 20% of the total development for lower-income households.

Sausalito Multifamily and
mixed-use projects of 4+ units
4+ units: Must restrict 15% of the total development for lower-income households. Qualifying projects must provide at least one income-restricted unit.

Tiburon N/A
3-6 units: Must contribute pro rata funds to the Town's in-lieu housing fund. 7-12 lots or units: 10% of the total development must be designated for special needs households; 5% of all units must be handicapped accessible; and 15% of the total development must be designated as affordable units 1A single-family home conversion to multi-family residential, typically as a duplex or fourplex.

The Town of San Anselmo has not codified inclusionary housing requirements. However, the Town encourages developers to include affordable units in their projects. Sohner Court, a 22-unit condominium development, provided two ownership units affordable to moderate-income households in 1989. 600 Red Hill LLC, a 28-unit rental project provided two deed restricted very-low income units in 2021 and 1 Lincoln Park, a 16-unit senior housing rental project, also provided two deed restricted low income units in 2016. The 2015-2023 Housing Element included a program to align San Anselmo’s inclusionary policies with other jurisdictions and make the requirements more applicable to the types of development anticipated in San Anselmo. As of May 2023, the Town plans to adopt an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in the summer of 2023, and the Housing Element will include Action 5.7f to establish an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Additionally, the Town’s Housing Element will include Action 9.2a to establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District to further incentivize the inclusion of below market rate units in new housing development.

Density Bonus Ordinance
The Town’s Density Bonus Ordinance provides incentives to developers who comply with California Government Code Sections 65915 through 65918 (the State Density Bonus Law) to include a portion of the developments overall units to be affordable housing. Chapter 11 (Density Bonus) of 124 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
927
121
Title 10 of the Municipal Code establishes the standards and procedures for granting density bonuses for housing developments that comply with the Ordinance requirements. The Town’s Density Bonus implement the regulations of the State's Density Bonus Law. Applicants must fill out an application to request a State Density Bonus and indicate the manner to which the applicant will satisfy affordability requirements for the housing units proposed for a density bonus, a description of any requested incentives, concessions, or modifications to development standards, and the development must acknowledge that the project will be subject to a condition of approval and deed restriction to retain affordability of the affordable unit(s) for at least 55 years.
125 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
928
122
This page left intentionally blank
126 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
929
123
HOUSING 5

RESOURCES
127 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 930
124
Housing Resources
The extent to which San Anselmo can achieve its Housing Element policies, programs, and actions is due in part to the availability of financial resources for implementation. There are a variety of potential funding sources available for housing activities in San Anselmo. Due to the high costs of housing development and preservation and limitations on both the amount and uses of funds, a variety of funding sources may be required to support housing activities. A summary of major funding sources available to carry out housing activities in San Anselmo is listed below.

Funding sources are divided into three categories: federal, state, and local (County and Town) resources.

Federal Programs
Low Income Housing Tax Credit
The federal Low-income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program is the principal source of federal funding for the construction and rehabilitation of affordable rental homes. The tax credits provide a dollar-for-dollar credit against federal tax liability. Although the LIHTC is a federal program, it is administered principally through the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTCAC), overseen and based within California’s State Treasurer Office,
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
The CDBG Program provides funds for new construction, housing acquisition, housing programs, housing rehabilitation, public services, community facilities, economic development, and public works. CDBG activities are initiated and developed at the local level and are based on a community’s needs.

HOME Investment Partnership Programs (HOME)
The HOME Program provides formula grants to cities, counties, and states for building, buying, and/or rehabilitating affordable housing for rent or homeownership or providing direct rental assistance to low-income households.

Section 811
HUD provides funding towards the development and subsidizing supportive rental housing for very low- and extremely low-income adults with dis- abilities. This allows persons with disabilities to live as independently as possible through affordable housing and the appropriate supportive services.

Section 202
HUD provides grants to non-profit developers of supportive housing for very low-income seniors and provides rent subsidies to help make housing projects affordable.

Mortgage Credit Certificate
The Mortgage Credit Certificate program makes federal income tax credits available to low-income first-time homebuyers to purchase housing.

The County makes certificates available through participating lenders. 128 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
931
125
State Programs
CalHome Program
The CalHome program supports existing low- and very low-income households to become or remain homeowners. The program provides grants and/or loans to fund local public agencies, nonprofit corporations, and Federally Recognized and Special Government entities for first-time homebuyer mortgage assistance, owner-occupied rehabilitation assistance, technical assistance for self-help housing projects, technical assistance for shared housing programs, accessory dwelling unit/junior accessory dwelling unit assistance, and homeownership development project loans.

Infill Incentive Grant (IIG) Program
The IIG Program provides funding for capital improvement projects necessary to facilitate the development of a Qualifying Infill Project or a Qualifying Infill Area.

Local Housing Trust Fund Program (LHTF)
The LHTF program helps finance local and regional housing trust funds dedicated to the creation, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters. The program provides matching grants (dollar-for-dollar) to LHTFs that are funded on an ongoing basis from private contributions or public sources that are not otherwise restricted in use for housing programs approved activities include loans for multifamily rental housing projects with units restricted for at least 55 years. No more than 20 percent of each allocation may assist moderate-income households, and at least 30 percent of each allocation must assist extremely low-income households.

Multifamily Housing Program (MHP)
The purpose of the MHP is to provide loans to individuals, public agencies, or private entities for the development, rehabilitation, preservation, and/or acquisition of permanent and transitional rental housing, and the conversion of nonresidential structures to rental housing, for lower income households. Projects are not eligible if construction has commenced as of the application date, or if they are receiving 9 percent federal low-income housing tax credits. Eligible applicants (including local public entities, for-profit and nonprofit corporations, limited equity housing cooperatives, individuals, Indian reservations and Rancherias, and limited partnerships) must have successfully developed at least one affordable housing project.

SB 2/LEAP Grants
SB 2 funds are available as planning grants to local jurisdictions to increase the supply of affordable housing. For the second year and onward, 70 percent of the funding will be allocated to local governments for affordable housing purposes. A large portion of year two allocations will be distributed using the same formula used to allocate federal Community Development Block Grants (CDBG).

CalHFA Homebuyer’s Down Payment Assistance Program
The CalHFA Homebuyer’s Down Payment Assistance Program provides affordable loans of up to three percent of sales price to first- time homebuyers. The program operates through participating lenders who originate loans for CalHFA. Funds are available upon request to qualified borrowers.

Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) The AHSC Program provides funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF), an account established to receive cap-and-trade auction proceeds, for land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects. The fund must support projects that encourage infill and compact development that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 129 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
932
126
Golden State Acquisition Fund (GSAF)
GSAF lenders provide affordable housing developers with access to flexible acquisition capital for the development and preservation of affordable housing throughout California.

Benefits are aimed to serve projects in California with 100 percent of the units reserved for households at or below 60 percent of the area median income for rental units or households at or below 80 percent AMI for homeownership. For mixed-use and mixed income projects, no less than 75 percent of total square footage must be developed as affordable housing (at or below 60 percent AMI).

Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA)
The PLHA provides funding to local governments in California for housing-related projects and programs that help address the unmet housing needs of their local communities.

Homekey
Homekey provides grants to state, regional, and local public entities to develop a broad range of housing types including, but not limited to, hotels, motels, hostels, single-family homes, multifamily apartments, adult residential facilities, and manufactured housing, and to convert commercial properties and other existing buildings to permanent or interim housing for people experiencing homelessness.

Local Programs
Marin County Affordable Housing Fund
The Marin County Affordable Housing Fund provides a local funding source for financial and technical assistance to help affordable housing developers produce and preserve affordable housing. The fund was created to increase the stock of permanently affordable housing units in the county.

Marin Housing Authority (MHA) Below Market Rate (BMR) Home Ownership Program The BMR Home Ownership program, administered by MHA, provides low- and moderate-income first-time homebuyers with the opportunity to purchase specified condominium units in Marin County at below market value. MHA administers the sale of newly constructed units as well as previously owned units being offered for resale. There are approximately 340 homes in the program located throughout Marin County.

Housing Choice Voucher Program (formerly Section 8)
The Housing Choice Voucher Program provides rental assistance payments to owners of private market rate units on behalf of low-income (50 percent Median Family Income) tenants. The program is administered by MHA.

Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS Program (HOPWA) HOPWA provides rental assistance to individuals and families where a family member is HIV+ or has AIDS. HOPWA program participants lease privately-owned apartments and receive a rental subsidy based on their income level and family composition. MHA has designed this program to be flexible and client-friendly, prioritizing participant confidentiality. Program participants are also directed to community case management resources.

Shelter Plus Care Program
Shelter Plus Care provides rental assistance and supportive services on a long-term basis to individuals and families experiencing homelessness when the head of household has a serious mental illness (and may also have other disabilities). Shelter Plus Care participants lease privately-owned apartments and pay 30 percent of their income towards rent. MHA pays the remainder of the rent up to the maximum allowed by federal guidelines.

Participants also receive intensive support from MHA caseworkers and from a coalition of community-based service providers to assist them in 130 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
933
127
remaining successfully housed. This program is made possible through close collaboration with Marin County Community Mental Health Services.

Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Conventional building construction, use, and demolition - along with building material manufacturing- impose impacts on our environment. In the United States, the building industry accounts for a substantial portion of electricity consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, landfill waste, raw materials use, and potable water consumption1.

Many local building standards already consider energy and stormwater issues, and many jurisdictions have programs related to energy, recycling, water conservation, stormwater management, land use, and public health. The Town of San Anselmo adopted a Climate Action Plan in 2019 that sets forth policies and action to encourage energy-efficient buildings, promote the use of renewable energy sources, encourage less dependence on cars, promote water and resource conservation, reduce waste, and promote carbon sequestration strategies. One of the plan’s objectives is to create buildings that minimize the use of natural resources, are healthier and more comfortable for people, and reduce harm to the environment.

The Town administers Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations which sets forth mandatory construction standards for development. The homebuilding industry must comply with these standards while localities are responsible for enforcing the regulations. In 2011, the State added the Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen) to Title 24. Revised in 2021, the CALGreen code regulates new, remodeled, and expanded residential and non-residential buildings and requires green building practices for planning and design, energy efficiency, material conservation and resource efficiency, and environmental quality. In addition, SB 350 was signed in 2015 and increases California's renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030. This objective will increase the amount of eligible renewables resources, including solar, wind, biomass, geothermal and others that are sold to and used by retail customers per year. SB 350 also requires the state to double statewide energy efficiency savings in electricity and natural gas end uses by 2030.

In response to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, AB 32 which takes a comprehensive, long-term approach to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions monumentally, the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) 2022 Draft Scoping Plan sets a goal for carbon neutrality by 2045, along with encouraging local governments to adopt goals that reduce GHG emissions by 15percent below 1990's levels by 2020, 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

San Anselmo also administers a green building ordinance (Ordinance No. 1168) which requires green building standards beyond the State requirements. The 2022 California Green Building Code will be implemented starting January 1st 2023.

Energy Conservation Programs Offered through Local Utilities San Anselmo promotes energy conservation by advertising utility rebate programs and free energy audits available through Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). Lower-income households are also eligible for State-sponsored energy and weatherization programs. The Town enforces energy conservation standards enacted by the State. The standards may increase initial construction costs, but over time will result in energy savings.

PG&E provides several energy assistance programs for lower income households which help qualified homeowners and renters conserve energy and control electricity costs. These programs include the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) Program and the Relief for Energy Assistance through Community Help (REACH) Program. The CARE program provides a 20 percent monthly discount on gas and electricity rates to income-qualified households, certain non-profit organizations, agricultural employee housing, emergency shelters, hospices, and other qualified non-profit group living facilities. The REACH Program provides one-time energy assistance to customers who are at risk of losing their energy services due to an unforeseen or uncontrollable hardship. The intent of REACH is to assist low-income customers, particularly seniors, people with disabilities, people who have fallen ill, lower-income households, and unemployed individuals, who are unable to pay for their necessary energy needs.

Marin Clean Energy (MCE) is a public, not-for-profit local electricity provider that also promotes energy conservation and sustainability. MCE purchases power from clean, renewable sources, including solar, wind, geothermal, and bioenergy, and PG&E delivers it to a customer’s home or business through the PG&E distribution system and wires. MCE provides an option for customers to purchase electricity that comes from 100 percent renewable energy sources. MCE also pays premium rates to purchase excess electricity created by solar energy systems installed at customers’ homes and businesses and rolls credits over every month. 1 Information sourced from “Buildings and Climate Change”, Neil Hirst 2013 131 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
934
128
Conservation Rebates
PG&E offers a wide range of rebates for energy-efficient equipment and appliances including furnaces, duct sealing, whole house fans, air handler systems, swimming pool pumps and motors, water heaters, cool roofs, insulation, room air conditioners, clothes washers, dishwashers, computer monitors, energy-efficient lighting, and recycling of refrigerators, freezers, and room air conditioners. The Marin Municipal Water District (MMWD) also provides a variety of rebates for high-efficiency toilets, clothes washers, and water-conserving landscape practices. Both organizations promote their rebate programs through customer mailings, company websites, and point-of-sale information.

Rehabilitation Loans
MHA provides low-interest residential rehabilitation loans to very low-income homeowners to make basic repairs and improvements, correct substandard conditions, and eliminate health and safety hazards. Funds can also be used to include energy efficiency improvements.

Marin County Energy Watch (MCEW) Partnership
The MCEW brings together four elements to provide energy efficiency services and resources to single and multifamily residential units; small, medium and large commercial businesses; and public agencies and schools in Marin County as described:
• The Marin Energy Management Team (MEMT) acts as “energy manager” for public sector agencies including local governments, school districts and special districts, and specifically addresses the difficulty of reaching smaller public sector institutions. Services include audits, technical assistance, engineering, assistance in financing and obtaining incentives, specifying and managing projects, energy accounting and reporting, procurement, peer meetings and training workshops. MEMT also integrates other state, utility, and private energy efficiency programs, filling resource gaps, and addressing specific barriers as needed to provide as comprehensive and seamless a delivery of services as possible. • Smart Lights is designed to help small businesses become more energy efficient. The program offers free start-to-finish technical assistance and instant rebates to help defray the cost of upgrading and/or repairing existing equipment. Smart Lights can help with comprehensive lighting retrofits, refrigeration tune-ups, controls, and seals replacement, replacement of hot water heaters, and referrals to appropriate HVAC programs.
• California Youth Energy Services (CYES) provides no-cost green house calls to homeowners and renters, regardless of income level.

Professionally trained staff provide energy assessments and install free energy and water-saving equipment. CYES serves single-family dwellings, duplexes, and multifamily units.

Energy Upgrade California
Energy Upgrade California is an energy-efficiency program that provides rebates and resources to upgrade single-family and two-to-four- unit dwellings to save energy and water.

In addition to energy conservation programs and establishing programs that address new construction, decreasing each resident’s average daily vehicle miles traveled, which can be exacerbated by long commutes, is one of the most effective strategies to help reduce climate change impacts. Jurisdictions in Marin County can support this effort by promoting land use patterns that locate new development near jobs, transit, and services. The programs contained in the San Anselmo Housing Element focus new development in existing areas, promote land use and conservation strategies to address energy conservation and climate change, enact new initiatives to foster the community’s environmental sustainability, and provide energy conservation programs through the distribution of educational materials to homeowners and builders on an annual basis. In order to facilitate these actions, programs 2.1 and 2.2 offer outreach methods that will ensure the public is informed of the many strategies for increasing energy conservation at home. 132 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
935
133
HOUSING 6

OPPORTUNITIES
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
936
NOVEMBER 2023
134
Housing Opportunities
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
The Town of San Anselmo’s 6th cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is 833 net new units distributed over four income categories, as assigned by the Association of BayArea Governments (ABAG). The unit count and income assignments are based on the regional assignment methodology developed by ABAG for the 6th RHNA Cycle. The Town’s total allocation and unit count breakout by income level is detailed in Table 6.1.

Table 6.1: RHNA 6th Cycle Allocation Table
Income Level RHNA Allocation
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 253
Low-Income (51-79% AMI) 145
Moderate-Income (80-119% AMI) 121
Above Moderate-Income (120% AMI+) 314
Total 833
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
937
NOVEMBER 2023
135
Pipeline Projects
Housing Element law allows jurisdictions to count pipeline projects, or units constructed or under construction between the base year of the RHNA period (January 2022) and the beginning of the new planning period (January 2023), towards the RHNA. The projects shown in Table 6.2 are under construction or have been approved. As described in the table, the projects approved or under construction in the town are not subject to development agreements or conditions that would require project phasing or delayed timing requirements that would impact development in the planning period. All projects are pending because the Town is waiting for the applicant to complete the project next steps such as applying for a Building Permit, submitting project information needed to approve a Building Permit, or completing construction. The affordability level for the projects listed in the table are determined by the State density bonus law or the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and ABAG direction regarding safe harbor methodology to estimate the anticipated affordability distribution of ADUs. If a project does not utilize a density bonus or proposes an ADU, the Town assumes the unit will be developed for above-moderate income households.

Table 6.2: Pipeline Projects
Property
Address Unit Type
Total
Number
of Units
Income Level of
Units Status Remaining Steps to Occupancy
729 SFD Blvd Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
1214 San
Anselmo Ave
Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
Vacant Lot -
Sturdivant Ave
Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
61 Hillside Ave Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
63 Hillside Ave Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
1 Saunders Ave Single-family
detached
1 1 Above Moderate Approved by Planning
Commission
Applicant to apply for and
receive Building Permit.1
21 Santa Barbara
Ave, Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
40 SFD Blvd,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
1 The Alameda
Knolls, Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
344 Oak Ave,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
55 Avenue Del
Norte, Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
938
NOVEMBER 2023
136
Table 6.2: Pipeline Projects
Property
Address Unit Type
Total
Number
of Units
Income Level of
Units Status Remaining Steps to Occupancy
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
101 Cedar St,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
112 Crescent Rd,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
22 Belle Ave Multi-family unit 1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
3 Ray Ct, Unit A Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
9 Tomahawk Dr,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
15 Oak Springs
Dr, Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
20 Karl Ave, Unit
A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
11 Hooper Ln,
Unit A
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
939
NOVEMBER 2023
137
Table 6.2: Pipeline Projects
Property
Address Unit Type
Total
Number
of Units
Income Level of
Units Status Remaining Steps to Occupancy
100 Berkeley Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
49 Cedar St Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
600 Red Hill Ave Multi-family units 18 2 Very Low; 16
Above Moderate2
Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project
information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
65 Lincoln Park Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
43 Indian Rock
Ct
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
72 Oak Knoll Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
55 Avenue Del
Norte
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
78 Longwood Dr Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code1
16 Broadmoor
Ave
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
940
NOVEMBER 2023
138
Table 6.2: Pipeline Projects
Property
Address Unit Type
Total
Number
of Units
Income Level of
Units Status Remaining Steps to Occupancy
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
268 Brookside Dr Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
24 Ross Valley
Dr
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
151 Los Angeles
Blvd
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
10 Humboldt Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
53 Canyon Rd Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
88 Crooked Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
16 Berkeley Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Issued Applicant to construct unit and receive Certificate of
Occupancy once inspected and
deemed complete in
conformance with approved
plans and the adopted Building
Code.1
316 Greenfield
Ave
Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
6 Spruce Ave Accessory
dwelling unit
1 1 Above Moderate Building Permit Pending Applicant to submit project information requested from the
Building Department to ensure
project conforms with adopted
Building Code prior to Building
Permit issuance.1
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
941
NOVEMBER 2023
139
Table 6.2: Pipeline Projects
Property
Address Unit Type
Total
Number
of Units
Income Level of
Units Status Remaining Steps to Occupancy

1. No development agreements or requirements such as phasing or timing are required prior to occupancy.

2. The project is required to deed restrict the affordable units in accordance with the State density bonus law.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
942
NOVEMBER 2023
140
After accounting for the pipeline projects, the remaining RHNA units are as detailed in Table 6.3 below Table 6.3: RHNA 6th Cycle Less Pipeline Projects Delta Table Income Level RHNA
Allocation Pipeline Projects RHNA Less Pipeline Projects Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 253 2 251
Low-Income (51-79% AMI) 145 0 145
Moderate-Income (80-119% AMI) 121 0 121
Above Moderate-Income (120% AMI+) 314 52 262
Total 833 54 779
Accessory Dwelling Units
The Town of San Anselmo has a consistent track record of supporting and encouraging accessory dwelling unit (ADU) development. In response to changes in State housing law, the Town has seen an increase in ADU applications over the last eight years. The Town’s ADU permits issued by year during the 5th cycle planning period are displayed in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4: ADU Building
Permits Issued by Year
2014 1
2015 5
2016 6
2017 12
2018 37
2019 10
2020 12
2021 43
In the summer of 2022, the Town distributed an ADU questionnaire to residents to better understand what process improvements and development standard amendments could be made to further encourage ADU development. A summary of the results of this questionnaire can be found in Appendix A of the Housing Element. The Town already implements a successful ADU program and receives significant homeowner interest and construction resulting from current community education and outreach. The Town plans to further expand community outreach efforts and education to promote increased ADU development. The Housing Element includes Policy 6 to promote several ADU related programs and actions related to the construction and affordability of ADUs.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
943
NOVEMBER 2023
141
RHNA 6th Cycle ADU “Safe Harbor” Methodology
HCD and ABAG provide general direction regarding a “safe harbor” methodology that jurisdictions can use to estimate the number of ADUs likely to develop during the 6th cycle planning period and guidance on distribution of those units across the four income categories. This “safe harbor” methodology recommends that jurisdictions:

1. Determine the average number of ADUs permitted in the last three years.

2. Multiply that average by the eight years in the RHNA cycle to determine the estimated 8-year total.

3. Distribute the ADUs amongst the four income categories based on the methodology established by ABAG in their “Using ADUs to Satisfy RHNA” technical memo, which distributes projected units by percent as detailed below:
o Very Low-Income: 30%
o Low-Income: 30%
o Moderate-Income: 30%
o Above Moderate-Income: 10%
Using this methodology, the Town of San Anselmo projects a total of 160 ADUs will be built during RHNA 6th cycle. The 160 ADUs are distributed by income categories as detailed in Table 6.5.

Table 6.5: ADU Income Category Distribution Table
Income Level Projected ADUs
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 48
Low-Income (51-79% AMI) 48
Moderate-Income (80-119% AMI) 48
Above Moderate-Income (120% AMI+) 16
Total 160
After accounting for the pipeline projects and projected ADUs, the remaining RHNA units are displayed in Table 6.6 below.

Table 6.6: RHNA 6th Cycle Less Pipeline Projects and ADUs Delta Table Income Level RHNA Less Pipeline
Projects Projected ADUs RHNA Less Pipeline Projects and ADUs Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 251 48 203
Low-Income (51-79% AMI) 145 48 97
Moderate-Income (80-119% AMI) 121 48 73
Above Moderate-Income (120% AMI+) 262 16 246
Total 779 160 619
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
944
NOVEMBER 2023
142
20 Percent No Net Loss Buffer
The Town has accounted for a “no net loss” buffer (Government Code Section 65863), which provides housing sites to accommodate more units than required by the RHNA, to ensure development opportunities remain available throughout the planning period to accommodate San Anselmo’s 6th cycle RHNA, especially for lower- and moderate- income households. A summary of "no net loss" requirements is listed below:
• A jurisdiction must maintain adequate sites to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA by each income category at all times throughout the entire planning period.
• A jurisdiction may not take any action to reduce a parcel’s residential density unless it makes findings that the remaining sites identified in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory can accommodate the jurisdiction’s remaining unmet RHNA by each income category, or if it identifies additional sites so that there is no net loss of residential unit capacity. • If a jurisdiction approves development of a parcel identified in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory with fewer units than shown in the Housing Element, it must either make findings that the Housing Element’s remaining sites have sufficient capacity to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA by each income level or identify and make available sufficient sites to accommodate the remaining unmet RHNA for each income category. • A jurisdiction may not disapprove a housing project on the basis that approval of the development would trigger the identification or zoning of additional adequate sites to accommodate the remaining RHNA.

After accounting for pipeline projects and projected ADUs, the Town must plan for the remaining 619 units allocated to the local RHNA. The Town of San Anselmo has calculated and added a 20 percent “no net loss” buffer onto the remaining RHNA units. With the 20 percent “no net loss” buffer of 126 units, the Town must plan for 745 total units in the 6th cycle planning period, as shown in the table below.

Table 6.7: RHNA 6th Cycle Less Pipeline Projects and ADUs Plus 20% "No Net Loss" Delta Table Income Level
RHNA 6th Cycle Less
Pipeline Projects and
ADUs
20 Percent"No Net Loss"
Buffer
RHNA 6th Cycle Less
Pipeline Projects and
ADUs Plus 20 Percent
"No Net Loss" Buffer
Very Low-Income (0-50% AMI) 203 38.8 241.8
Low-Income (51-79% AMI) 97 17.6 114.6
Moderate-Income (80-119% AMI) 73 13.8 86.8
Above Moderate-Income (120% AMI+) 246 55.8 301.8
Total 619 126 745
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
945
NOVEMBER 2023
143
Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory
To plan for the remaining 745 housing units needed to meet San Anselmo’s 6th cycle RHNA and 20 percent “no net loss” buffer obligation, housing opportunity sites have been identified throughout the community. The Map Book included in Appendix B of this Housing Element identifies each parcel included in the inventory and associated information regarding current zoning, existing land use, vacancy, general plan land use, inclusion in past cycles, acreage, proposed density, realistic capacity, existing units, and net new units. The following process was utilized to identify and vet housing opportunity sites.

1. Preliminary housing opportunity sites were identified by Town Staff.

2. Staff-identified sites were brought to the HEAC for review during HEAC Meeting 2 for initial consideration.

3. Staff-identified sites were brought to the public at a virtual workshop for consideration.

4. Staff-identified sites were refined based on feedback from the HEAC and the public. For example, staff-identified sites in the R-1-H and R-1-C zoning districts were eliminated based on community concerns regarding environmental degradation, slope topography and instability, and wildfire hazard.

5. The refined sites were brought back to the HEAC for further consideration and revision.

6. An objective sites inventory analysis was conducted to determine whether the revised sites were appropriate for new housing, balancing a myriad of factors as detailed in the Sites Inventory Analysis subsection later in this section of the Housing Element.

7. The results of the sites inventory analysis were presented to the HEAC at HEAC Meeting 4 for further review and refinement. Zoning Code amendments needed to accommodate the proposed density on the identified housing opportunity sites were also presented to and discussed by the HEAC. The HEAC recommended the sites to the Town Council.

8. The Town Council considered the sites and made a motion to move forward with all sites with the exception of the dog park site and the Wade Thomas school site.

9. Town Staff conducted meetings with the local schools to discuss the potential of housing on the underutilized areas of the Town Council-approved housing opportunity sites. Based on the feedback received from these meetings, the remaining school sites were removed from the list of housing opportunity sites.

10. To make up for the deficit from eliminating the school sites, Town Staff reached out to Side by Side, a local nonprofit organization and major property owner in the community to determine whether they were still interested in constructing affordable housing on a portion of their site. Side by Side had originally proposed affordable housing be constructed on a portion of their site in RHNA 5th cycle but were met with barriers to development approval at that time. Side by Side expressed interest in development if the Town worked to eliminate the barriers to development approval that Side by Side had previously faced. Policy 5 of the Housing Element and the corresponding programs and actions will help to eliminate barriers to development.

11. The updated housing opportunity sites were brought to the HEAC for final review and consideration at HEAC Meeting 5.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
946
NOVEMBER 2023
144
Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory Analysis
Methodology in Identifying Sites
To supplement the local knowledge of Town Staff, the HEAC, elected and appointed officials, and the public, an objective sites inventory analysis was conducted to further understand whether identified sites have the potential to accommodate additional housing. The process of developing the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory involved identifying and eliminating sites with constraints to development. Properties that were impacted by various environmental constraints or hazards were excluded from the analysis. A weighted suitability model was used to evaluate multiple criteria influencing the likelihood of development on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Each property was assigned a total weighted score; higher scores indicate a greater likelihood of development during the 6th cycle planning period. The following factors were included in scoring criteria:
• Current Zoning. The Town allows a variety residential development types and densities by-right in residential districts and as a conditional use in commercial districts. Zoning districts were scored based on the allowed residential density and whether residential uses are allowed by-right or as a conditional use.
• General Plan Land Use. General Plan land uses were scored based on the residential densities supported by each category. • Lot Acreage. Based on HCD’s guidelines for sites suitable for affordable housing development, lots that are between half-an-acre and ten acres were scored higher compared to smaller or larger sites. • Vacancy. Lots were scored based on presence of any physical building or structure on them. This does not take into consideration potentially underutilized or vacant buildings/structures on lots that could be abandoned. • Residual Lot Coverage. Lots were scored based on how much land area is available to accommodate additional development. • Fire Hazard or Severity Zones. Lots were scored based on location within a Fire Hazard Severity Zone and the severity of the Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
• Slope. The lots were scored based on the average slope of the property, which would determine financial and structural feasibility of future development.

Identified Housing Opportunity Sites
The map on the following page identifies the location of the 63 housing opportunity sites identified by the Town. The 63 sites are comprised of 151 parcels.

Opportunity site characteristics are summarized in Table 6.8 and detailed in the Map Book appendix.

Location. San Anselmo's housing opportunity sites are concentrated along Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and Red Hill Avenue. The location of the sites is highly accessible to public transportation options, job opportunities, education opportunities, and recreation opportunities. Although housing opportunity sites are not identified throughout San Anselmo, the Town will create additional opportunity for housing development in other areas of the community by allowing missing middle housing types in all residential districts, adopting objective design standards for missing middle housing, and adopting pre-approved plans for missing middle housing (Program 3.1).

Underutilization. San Anselmo's housing opportunity sites are currently underutilized, primarily commercial properties. Since San Anselmo is a built-out community with very few vacant sites remaining for development, underutilized, nonvacant properties are the focus for housing opportunity sites as the redevelopment of underutilized nonvacant sites is more realistic during the RHNA Cycle 6. To encourage higher density redevelopment of utilized properties, the Town will allow missing middle housing types in all residential districts, adopt objective design standards for missing middle housing, and adopt preapproved plans for missing middle housing (Program 3.1).

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
947
NOVEMBER 2023
145
Figure 6.1: Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory Analysis Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
948
NOVEMBER 2023
146
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
1 1 9 Tamal
Ave
006-
042-28
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.3051967
98 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 3 1 2
2 2 300 Sunny
Hills Dr
006-
061-33
PPD/R1 Exemption
- Improved
SF No N N 5.33 01 Lower
Income
R-3/SPD 20 30 112 0 112
3 3 1019 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
042-05
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.2659636
71 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 2 1 1
4 4 1001 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
042-08
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.2832553
43 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 2 1 1
5 5 8 Sais Ave 006-
072-13
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.2474005
77 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 2 1 1
6 6 930 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
061-31
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.4034228
76 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 8 0 8
7 7 805 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
082-40
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.4320901
95 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 9 0 9
8 8 820 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
061-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.4871495
24 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 10 0 10
8 9 790 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
091-68
SPD Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.3048246
03 02
Moderate
Income
C-L/SPD 20 30 6 0 6
8 10 800 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
061-06
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.4207145 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 8 0 8
8 11 4 Loma
Robles Dr
006-
091-70
SPD SingleResid. -
Improved
HDR No N N 0.3675664
62 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3/SPD 20 30 7 1 6
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
949
NOVEMBER 2023
147
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
8 12 2 Loma
Robles Dr
006-
091-69
SPD SingleResid. -
Improved
HDR No N N 0.2152212
67 02
Moderate
Income
R-3/SPD 20 30 5 1 4
8 13 810 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
061-22
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.2882844
62 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
8 14 830 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
061-38
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.4800575
1 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 10 0 10
9 15 761 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
083-02
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.1642050
34 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
9 16 781 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
083-01
C-L Industrial -
Improved
LC No N N 0.3040489
67 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
10 17 727 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
083-07
C-L SingleResid. -
Improved
LC No N N 0.1110695
1 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 1 1
10 18 729 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
083-06
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.1079513
89 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 0 2
11 19 6 Bridge
Ave
006-
083-37
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.2636711
78 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 5 0 5
11 20 707 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
083-09
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.2106369
91 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
12 21 754 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
091-39
SPD Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.4620082
8 03 Above
Moderate
Income
C-L/SPD 20 30 9 0 9
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
950
NOVEMBER 2023
148
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
12 22 750 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
091-40
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.4788299
16 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 10 0 10
13 23 129
Spaulding
St
006-
091-65
SPD MultipleResid. -
Unimproved
LC Yes N N 0.4057087
4 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3/SPD 20 30 8 0 8
13 24 No Address 006-
091-05
R-1-H SingleResid. -
Unimproved
VLD Yes N N 0.28 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 5 0 5
13 25 113
Spaulding
St
006-
091-15
R-2 MultipleResid. -
Improved
MDR No N N 0.3286092
32 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 6 2 4
14 26 613 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
101-05
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2565457
33 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 5 0 5
14 27 100 Center
Blvd
006-
101-04
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 1.0204642
19 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 21 0 21
15 31 640 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
092-08
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.3059630
76 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
15 28 112
Spaulding
St
006-
092-3
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.1364699
6 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 1 1
15 30 606 Sir
Francis
Drake
006-
092-09
C-L Commercial
- Improved
LC No N N 0.4321581
19 03 Above
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 9 0 9
16 29 604 Red
Hill Ave
006-
091-57
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1234358
12 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
951
NOVEMBER 2023
149
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
17 32 5 Palm Ln 006-
121-05
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.2952326
37 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 1 5
17 33 504 Red
Hill Ave
006-
121-02
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.0959826
41 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 1 1
17 34 520 Red
Hill Ave
006-
091-09
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1726948
17 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 1 3
17 35 526 Red
Hill Ave
006-
091-60
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1295378
94 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 1 2
17 36 510 Red
Hill Ave
006-
121-01
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1665527
49 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
17 37 580 Red
Hill Ave
006-
091-61
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3759811
64 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 7 0 7
18 38 17 Buena
Vista
006-
121-17
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.0585399
45 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 1 1 0
18 39 9 Buena
Vista
006-
121-16
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.1043483
64 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
18 40 412 Red
Hill Ave
006-
121-14
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2660118
4 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
18 41 400 Red
Hill Ave
006-
121-15
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2117328
51 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
18 42 No Address 006-
121-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1768305
83 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
18 43 50 Essex
St
006-
121-12
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
SF No N N 0.2638780
19 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 6 0 6
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
952
NOVEMBER 2023
150
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
19 44 330 Red
Hill Ave
006-
121-31
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.5834070
21 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 12 0 12
19 45 306 Red
Hill Ave
006-
161-05
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3289410
08 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
20 46 292 Red
Hill Ave
006-
162-01
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1903176
75 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
21 47 100 Red
Hill Ave
006-
167-04
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.7717826
92 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 16 0 16
21 48 No Address 006-
167-06
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 1.2348467
46 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 26 26 25
22 49 6 Red Hill
Ave
006-
201-56
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.6716281
62 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 14 0 14
22 50 2 Red Hill
Ave
006-
201-01
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.0817784
21 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 0 2
22 51 90 Red Hill
Ave
006-
201-46
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2642032
44 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
22 52 60 Red Hill
Ave
006-
201-04
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2870765
18 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
22 53 50 Red Hill
Ave
006-
201-55
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1642818
86 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
23 54 275
Greenfield
Ave
006-
211-21
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No 28 N 0.2134203
7 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
24 55 230
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-
007
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No 27 N 0.4351127
57 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 9 0 9
24 56 208
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-11
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.5713416
28 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 11 0 11
24 57 270
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-22
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2856100
65 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 5 0 5
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
953
NOVEMBER 2023
151
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
24 58 224
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-17
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.5945143
98 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 12 0 12
24 59 210
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-04
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2380697
39 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
24 60 222
Greenfield
Ave
006-
173-16
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.5263845
14 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 11 0 11
25 61 5 W
Hillside Ave
006-
172-02
R-1 SingleResid. -
Unimproved
VLD Yes 26 N 0.7187211
09 01 Lower
Income
C-3 20 30 15 0 15
26 62 144
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-07
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.1659044
64 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 1 2
26 63 6 W
Hillside Ave
006-
171-08
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.5956641
5 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 12 1 11
26 64 128
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-05
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1588321
4 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
26 65 130
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-6
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No 25 N 0.5083515
45 01 Lower
Income
No
Change
20 30 10 0 10
27 66 60
Greenfield
Ave
006-
254-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2583598
4 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 5 0 5
27 67 118
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-03
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1867370
86 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
27 68 114
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-02
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1289639
4 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 3 0 3
27 69 70
Greenfield
Ave
006-
254-14
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1942142
89 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
27 70 No Address 006-
171-12
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2454340
85 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 5 0 5
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
954
NOVEMBER 2023
152
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
27 71 90
Greenfield
Ave
006-
171-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.0495894
45 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 1 0 1
28 72 316 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
251-03
C-2 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.1798402
38 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 3 0 3
28 73 312 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
251-02
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No N N 0.0702101
38 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 1 0 1
28 74 300 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
251-01
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No N N 0.1796047
88 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 3 0 3
28 75 340 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
251-05
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No N N 0.1511271
74 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 3 0 3
28 76 40
Greenfield
Ave
006-
251-10
C-3 Commercial -
Improved
GC No N N 0.3306681
52 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 6 0 6
28 77 34
Greenfield
Ave
006-
251-09
C-3 Commercial -
Improved
GC No N N 0.0735996
11 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 2 0 2
28 78 14
Greenfield
Ave
006-
251-28
C-3 Commercial -
Improved
GC No N N 0.1774236
82 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
28 79 324 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
251-27
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No N N 0.3465657
28 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 7 0 7
28 80 No Address 006-
251-08
C-3 Commercial -
Improved
GC No N N 0.2338035
96 02
Moderate
Income
No
Change
20 30 4 0 4
29 81 55 San
Rafael Ave
007-
211-04
R-1 Single- Resid.
- Improved
DMR No N N 0.3417289
22 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 2 1 1
29 82 43 San
Rafael Ave
007-
211-05
R-1 Single- Resid.
- Improved
DMR No N N 0.5258696
13 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 4 2 2
30 83 71 San
Rafael Ave
007-
211-01
R-1 Single- Resid.
- Improved
SF No N N 0.4863629
21 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 4 1 3
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
955
NOVEMBER 2023
153
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
30 84 76
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
211-36
R-1 Single- Resid.
- Improved
SF No N N 0.4030052
29 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-2 6 12 3 1 2
31 85 206 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
252-02
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No 36 N 0.1468495
86 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 3 1 2
31 86 214 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
252-03
C-2 Commercial -
Improved
CC No N N 0.1496882
84 02
Moderate
Income
C-3 20 30 3 0 3
32 87 43
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
212-13
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 31 N 0.1612940
13 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
32 88 41
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
212- 14
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1746332
5 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
33 89 50
Mariposa
Ave
007-
284-50
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.3649698
23 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 7 1 6
34 90 69
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
212-07
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 29 N 0.2265138
25 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 1 3
34 91 77
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
212-06
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1971871
07 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 1 3
34 92 63
Tamalpais
Ave
007-
212-09
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1776838
41 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 1 3
35 93 54
Magnolia
Ave
007-
212-50
R-3 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 30 N 0.1506438
41 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 0 3
35 94 58
Magnolia
Ave
007-
212-43
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1485538
71 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 1 3
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
956
NOVEMBER 2023
154
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
36 95 36
Magnolia
Ave
007-
212-37
R-2 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 32 N 0.1975216
62 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 2 2
36 96 30
Magnolia
Ave
007-
212-36
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1415769
88 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
37 97 69
Magnolia
Ave
007-
213-08
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 33 N 0.1802637
31 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
37 98 73
Magnolia
Ave
007-
213-57
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1284409
94 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
38 99 41
Magnolia
Ave
007-
213-17
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1063885
46 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
38 100 43
Magnolia
Ave
007-
213-16
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 34 N 0.1085541
94 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
38 101 47
Magnolia
Ave
007-
213-15
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.0965971
59 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
39 102 196
Tunstead
Ave
007-
213-50
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No 35 N 0.1609632
73 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
40 103 160 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
241-05
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No 37 N 0.4290003
01 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 9 0 9
40 104 130 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
241-56
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.7571078
35 01 Lower
Income
No change 20 30 16 0 16
40 105 190 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
241-06
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.4700749
15 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 9 0 9
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
957
NOVEMBER 2023
155
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
40 106 120 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
241-61
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.5190789
39 01 Lower
Income
No change 20 30 10 0 10
40 107 100 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
241-63
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.1453026
15 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 0 3
41 108 182 Pine St 007-
251-37
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1072029
85 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
41 109 170 Pine St 007-
251-34
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1059213
35 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
41 110 140 Pine St 007-
251-27
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1202614
6 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
41 111 160 Pine St 007-
251-32
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1053835
29 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
41 112 184 Pine St 007-
251-38
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1146340
14 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
41 113 150 Pine St 007-
251-29
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1054898
02 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
42 114 171 Pine St 007-
252-02
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.0909824
86 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 1 1 0
42 115 177 Pine St 007-
252-01
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.0959965
71 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
958
NOVEMBER 2023
156
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
43 116 155 Pine St 007-
252-06
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1052242
21 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
44 117 129 Pine St 007-
252-13
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1130604
29 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
45 118 110 Ross
Ave
007-
281-21
R-2 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.4014780
96 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 8 2 6
46 119 80 Ross
Ave
007-
281-13
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1730871
48 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 2 2
46 120 88 Ross
Ave
007-
281-14
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1265529
37 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
46 121 102 Ross
Ave
007-
281-19
R-2 Exemption
- Improved
DMR No N N 0.2029710
62 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 4 1 3
47 122 68 Ross
Ave
007-
281-12
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1211244
73 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
47 123 1 Cedar St 007-
281-11
R-2 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1616674
54 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 2 1
48 124 61
Woodland
Ave
007-
282-23
R-1 Exemption
- Improved
DMR No N N 0.1270624
52 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 0 3
49 125 50 Ross
Ave
007-
282-13
R-1 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.0961585
24 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
959
NOVEMBER 2023
157
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
50 126 21
Mariposa
Ave
007-
301-06
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3514344
73 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 7 0 7
50 127 121 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
301-19
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.6412015
61 01 Lower
Income
No change 20 30 13 0 13
50 128 115 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
301-18
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1300476
42 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 0 3
50 129 101 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
301-20
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3313489
44 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 6 0 6
51 130 55 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
302-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1617420
46 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 1 2
51 131 35 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
302-14
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1331947
48 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 1 2
51 132 29 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
302-15
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1286093
08 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 1 2
52 133 22
Mariposa
Ave
007-
284-22
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.0973449
62 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
53 134 217 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
284-17
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1146729
12 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 2 0 2
53 135 223 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
284-49
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.2025700
07 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 4 0 4
53 136 243 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
284-13
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3510729
56 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 7 0 7
53 137 15 Ross
Ave
007-
284-12
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1192829
04 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 0 3
53 138 233 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
284-14
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1143782
24 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 2 0 2
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
960
NOVEMBER 2023
158
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
54 139 98 Sir
Francis
Drake Blvd
006-
191-36
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.1436177
46 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 3 0 3
55 140 151 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
301-07
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3785806
56 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 7 7 0
56 141 25 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
302-16
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.1425617
91 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 2 0 2
57 142 19
Tamalpais
007-
212-20
C-2 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.1188818
55 03 Above
Moderate
Income
C-2/SPD 20 30 2 0 2
58 143 341 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
252-16
C-2 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.1919515
04 03 Above
Moderate
Income
C-2/SPD 20 30 4 0 4
59 144 23 Ross
Ave
007-
284-10
C-3 SingleResid. -
Improved
GC No N N 0.1828283
29 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
60 145 21 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
302-17
C-3 Commercial
- Improved
GC No N N 0.3102910
5 02
Moderate
Income
No change 20 30 7 0 7
61 146 305 San
Anselmo
Ave
007-
282-20
C-2 Commercial
- Improved
CC No N N 0.7521766
9 01 Lower
Income
C-3/SPD 20 30 16 0 16
62 147 71 Ross
Ave
007-
284-03
R-2 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1780958
77 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 2 1
62 148 73 Ross
Ave
007-
284-02
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1363581
41 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 2 1 1
62 149 70
Mariposa
Ave
007-
284-34
R-2 SingleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1496087
42 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 1 2
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
961
NOVEMBER 2023
159
Table 6.8: Opportunity Site Characteristics
Site Parcel
ID Address APN Current Zoning
Existing
Land Use
GP
Land
Use
Vacant
4th
Cycle
Site
5th
Cycle
Site
Acreage
Considered
Income
Supported
Proposed
Zoning
Proposed
Min.

Density
(DUA)
Proposed
Max.

Density
(DUA)
Realistic
Capacity
Existing
Units
Net
New
Units
63 150 51 Ross
Ave
007-
284-07
R-1 MultipleResid. -
Improved
DMR No N N 0.1851372
8 03 Above
Moderate
Income
R-3 20 30 3 2 1
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
962
NOVEMBER 2023
160
Realistic Capacity Assumptions
To calculate the realistic capacity for each site, a typical density of 70 percent of the maximum dwelling units per acre was assumed. This considers recent development trends in San Anselmo and other communities in the region and the typical percentage of land area that is dedicated to parking, hallways, utilities, and other non-dwelling unit spaces. The following developments, which represent all multi-family developments approved in San Anselmo, Sausalito, and Larkspur (both of which are similar communities to San Anselmo in population size and geographic positioning) between 2016 and 2023, informed the Town’s realistic capacity assumptions:
• The property at 600 Red Hill Avenue is zoned R-2/PPD/SPD and approximately 1.61 acres in size. The allowable maximum density for the project, given the lot size and zoning, was 21 units. The project was approved in 2021 to allow 28 units (including 7 density bonus units). which is 100 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site without consideration of the density bonus units. With density bonus units included, the property developed at 141 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site. • The parcel at 1 Lincoln Park is zoned C-3 and approximately 0.63 acres in size. The allowable maximum density for the project, given the lot size and zoning, was 12 units. The project was approved in 2016 to allow 16 units (including 4 density bonus units), which is 100 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site without consideration of the density bonus units. With density bonus units included, the property developed at 127 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site.
• The parcel at 1755 Bridgeway in Sausalito will develop 19 multi-family units on about 0.58 acres zoned for multifamily residential uses. The allowable maximum density for the project, given the lot size and zoning, was 5 units. The project was approved in 2023 to allow 19 units, which is 380 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site. The increased density was primarily attributed to a density bonus, regulatory incentives, and State streamlining provisions.
• The Magnolia Village project in Larkspur will build 20 townhomes on a mixed-use site with 4 retail spaces on the ground floor. The project is located on a 1.63-acre site that is currently zoned C-2, Commercial, and developed but blighted and underutilized. The allowable maximum density for the project, given the lot size and zoning, was 35 units. The project was approved in 2023 to allow 20 units, which is 57 percent of the maximum allowed density on the site.

The average density resulting from these four recent developments is 176 percent. Excluding the Sausalito project, which developed at a density significantly higher than the maximum density allowed, the average density resulting from the other three recent developments is 108 percent of the allowable maximum density of the underlying zone. In order to provide a conservative estimate of realistic development capacity, the Town has reduced the realistic development capacity on sites in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory to 70 percent of the maximum density allowed in the underlying zone. As detailed in Actions 5.2a and 5.2b, San Anselmo will establish a minimum density of 20 dwelling units per acre and require that at least 50 percent of the total floor area of a project be for residential use in the C-L and C-3 districts. Further, as detailed in Action 5.3a, the Town will establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District that could be applied to development in the SPD, C-3, or R-3 Districts that would incentivize the development of affordable housing by allowing greater density amongst other incentives. These actions further ensure housing development in the Town meets or exceeds the realistic capacity assumptions made for this analysis.

Suitability of Non-Vacant and Underutilized Sites
Nestled in the heart of the Ross Valley, the Town of San Anselmo is renowned for its blend of nature, community, and safe family-friendly living. The Town enjoys easy access to nature, as it directly borders generous open space areas in the shadow of Mt. Tamalpais. Since the Town’s first long range planning documents were adopted in May 1959, the vision for the Town has always been to plan for the physical growth and development of the community in a manner that provides the greatest degree of safety, service, economy, and convenience. Additionally, the Town’s objectives have been to balance and preserve the natural environment, varied topography, open space, and other natural amenities. Given these historical goals, wellintentioned preventative planning efforts aimed at preserving open space and small-town character resulted in slow residential growth. Despite the Town’s efforts to preserve and retain the community character, the result of these preventative planning efforts led to overly restrictive zoning regulations, such as low residential densities, limiting development standards (e.g., floor area, lot coverage, setback requirement, height limitation), single story and dated suburban development with large and expansive paved parking lots, limited land uses in commercial zoning, and discretionary permitting for consideration of any housing. The result of the past preventative planning efforts has led to dated, underutilized building sites that are partially or entirely vacant, and often appear as dilapidated and/or neglected building sites.

In contrast to the past, the Town’s current vision is one that values and promotes residential development as a key component of a vibrant community.

While preparing the Housing Element Update, and in response to recent state legislation, the community has had an opportunity to rethink its future and patterns of development. While community character and natural amenities are still a top priority for the Town, the Town is dedicated to unlocking the untapped potential within the community by increasing housing. The Town is committed to encouraging and facilitating housing by the redevelopment of underutilized properties and vacant sites. With a focus on sustainable and thoughtful urban planning, the Town envisions a future where underutilized Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
963
NOVEMBER 2023
161
and vacant spaces transform into vibrant, welcoming neighborhoods and celebrate inclusivity, economic vitality, and a more dynamic, diverse, and thriving community.

Mindful of the challenging market conditions, the Town is committed to taking actions that will attract residential development, and in fact, has already begun to take concrete steps to facilitate and ease housing production. To this end, the Town’s Housing Element prioritizes many strategic actions, such as zoning amendments to reduce barriers to housing, offering incentives to encourage development, providing continued outreach to encourage the redevelopment of unutilized properties, and a variety of other actions listed in Chapter 8, Policies, Programs, and Actions, of the Housing Element. The Town will expedite the residential permitting process and waive fees for lot consolidations sought on housing opportunity sites, as stated in Action 5.2e, which will encourage multi-family housing. Additionally, the Town has already adopted Objective Design and Development Standards as stated in Program 3.2, Action 3.2a for certain multi-family development, prohibiting the discretionary design review that can often be a barrier to housing development and thus, establishing a more efficient and streamlined permitting process.

The Policies, Programs, and Actions in the Housing Element, and the actions already taken by the Town, demonstrate the Town’s commitment to not only address the pressing need for housing opportunities, but also fosters a sense of community, revitalizing the Town and creating spaces where residents can thrive.

San Anselmo has little remaining vacant land suitable for development, and existing vacant sites in the community are severely constrained by the wildland urban interface, high Fire Hazard Severity Zones, and other environmental factors as discussed in greater detail in the Environmental Constraints section of Chapter 4: Housing Constraints. As such, the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory is comprised largely of non-vacant sites.

Most non-vacant opportunity sites in San Anselmo are underutilized and currently developed as commercial, downtown mixed residential or singlefamily residential land uses. The existing uses of these sites would not prevent redevelopment, as they provide marginal economic viability, as determined through an examination of specific factors for nonvacant parcels including the age of structures, improvement to land value ratio, unrealized potential, sites that are occupied by vacant or unutilized buildings, non-conforming structures, and developer interest. Opportunity sites received one point if they met one of the factors’ thresholds. If a site met at least three of the following factors, it was deemed suitable for residential development, as summarized in Figure 6.2 and detailed in Table 6.10. As shown in Figure 6.2, only four of the Town’s opportunity sites meet only four of the factors.

More than 89 percent of sites meet more than five factors. • Age of existing structure: If an existing non-residential building is 30 years or older, or if an existing residential building is 40 years or older it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. In general, buildings over 30 years begin to show signs of fatigue and often require significant investments to modernize. Advances in building technology and demands for residential and commercial space have drastically shifted in the past 30-40 years, making reuse of buildings that age and older unlikely. • Improvement to land value (ILV) ratio: If the existing building or structure on a site is worth less than the land of the site (i.e., the ILV ratio is less than 1.0), it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. Properties that are currently developed as high-quality, modern residential uses and commercial centers/office buildings typically have higher IVL ratio. Since land in the community is in such high demand, a site where the land is worth more than the existing building or structure is highly likely to redevelop rather than be reused.
• Unrealized potential: If a site zoned for residential uses has the potential to add two or more units based on the proposed maximum allowed density compared to the existing density, or if a site zoned for commercial uses has the potential to increase its FAR based on the currently maximum allowed FAR compared to the existing FAR, it was deemed suitable for redevelopment.

A property with a low improvement to land value ratio at 113 Spaulding Street.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
964
NOVEMBER 2023
162
• Vacant or underutilized buildings: The national transition from in-person shopping and work to online retail and remote work have shifted the physical landscape and economy, and the town has observed a similar decreased demand for the existing retail and office spaces in San Anselmo. This is evidenced by the growing number of chronically vacant or underutilized buildings in town, and property owners and real estate management offices have anecdotally shared their concerns with Town staff regarding increasing struggles to find tenants over the last few years that are interested in renting their spaces. Since land in the community is in such high demand, a developer is more likely to purchase a site with vacant or underutilized buildings for redevelopment with housing than purchase a vacant site with steep topography, wildfire risk, or other environmental impediments. If a nonvacant site is occupied by a building with a higher vacancy rate and does not command the rents associated with newer commercial buildings in San Anselmo, it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. Sites with partially vacant or underutilized buildings or parking lots not required for viable use received a score of 0.5. • Developer interest: If Town staff have received a formal inquiry from a developer for the development of residential uses on a site, it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. • Proximity to Transit. If the opportunity site is located within a quarter mile of a transit stop, it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. Per Government Code Section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) the Town cannot require parking for development within a quarter mile of a transit stop. This significantly increases the potential yield of redevelopment, making it more financially feasible to undertake. • Streamlined Permitting with ODDS. If the opportunity site is subject to the Town’s Objective Design and Development Standards (ODDS), it was deemed suitable for redevelopment. If a development utilizes the ODDS, development can occur by-right, significantly decreasing the time and cost associated with receiving development approvals, making redevelopment more financially feasible to undertake. Multiple developers and property owners in San Anselmo have expressed apprehension to redevelop their property with residential uses due to the discretionary review process. In conversations with developers and property owners, Town staff have received feedback that a ministerial path to project approval, such as the ODDS, would provide the developers and owners with adequate certainty in the development process to proceed with redevelopment of their property. Therefore, the developer risk mitigation resulting from a new objective review process significantly increases the potential for redevelopment on these sites.
• Non-Conforming Structures. As shown in the accompanying pictures in Appendix B, many buildings in San Anselmo have experienced deferred maintenance and would require significant reinvestment to improve and conform to today’s standards. Furthermore, buildings constructed prior to 1990 also are not compliant with ADA requirements. Any major improvements will require the buildings be brought up to codes regarding accessibility. This is often challenging financially in general and physically in particular for older buildings. Since land in the community is in such high demand, a developer is more likely to purchase a site with a non-conforming building and raze it rather than invest the money needed to bring it to today’s standards. If a property with nonconforming structures was identified as needing substantial reinvestment to conform with the Town’s Municipal Code, which regulates the built environment to ensure the public health, safety, and welfare are maintained as stated in Section 1-6.01 of the Code, then it was deemed suitable for redevelopment.

The nonvacant sites analysis summarized in the chart and detailed in the table below refined the Town’s Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory last submitted to HCD on February 20, 2023. The Town’s original submittal included 172 housing opportunity sites and the revised inventory presented in this document includes 151 sites. Over 20 sites were removed from the opportunity sites inventory because they met fewer than four of the factors described above.

A partially vacant building at 754 Sir Francis Drake
Boulevard.

Significant reinvestment would be necessary to construct housing at 19 Tamalpais Avenue.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
965
NOVEMBER 2023
163
There are multiple above-moderate income non-vacant
sites in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory that are located on properties that currently provide single-family residential housing. Recent market trends in San Anselmo indicate a rise in the redevelopment of lower-density singlefamily sites in walkable neighborhoods with higher-density residential uses. Since 2019, the Town has received,
approved, and issued certificates of occupancy for two
projects involving the redevelopment of lower-density
residential uses with higher-density residential units in San Anselmo. One project, located at 45 Ross Avenue, involved the demolition of one single-family residence and
warehouse and construction of six new residential units. The other project at 18 Mariposa Avenue involved the demolition of one single-family residence and construction of four new residential units. Given these recent development trends, the Town anticipates redevelopment of other lower-density single-family properties (as identified in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory) with higher-density residential uses.

There are multiple non-vacant sites in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory located on commercially-zoned properties adjacent to major transportation thoroughfares, including Red Hill Avenue, Sir Francis Drake Boulevard, and Greenfield Avenue, that currently contain commercial structures. As shown in Table 6.9 below, recent market trends throughout Marin County demonstrate a shift towards redevelopment of older, underutilized commercial and nonresidential strips near transportation corridors with higher-density residential uses.

Table 6.9: Recent Trends in Redevelopment of Commercial and Nonresidential Zoned Properties with Existing Uses in Nearby Jurisdictions
Project Zoning Previous Use (Year Built) Project Use Approved Number of Units
1131-1141 Magnolia
Avenue, Larkspur
Commercial Former hardware store and small
businesses such a salon/framing
store/bakery (1925)
Mixed use commercial and multifamily housing2023 20
1301 Grant Avenue,
Novato
Downtown Core
Retail
Office building (1956) Mixed use commercial and multifamily housing2021 3 101 Landing Court,
Novato
General
Commercial
RV, boat, and trailer storage facility
(1962)
Multi-family housing 2020 32
1107 Grant Avenue,
Novato
Downtown Core
Retail
Former hardware store (1907) Mixed use retail and multi-family housing
2019 32
1515 Fourth Street, San
Rafael
West End Village Bank building (date of construction
unknown) and large parking lot
Mixed use commercial and multifamily housing2023 162
88 Vivian Street, San
Rafael
Neighborhood
Commercial
Bowling alley (1959) Multi-family housing 2022 70
703 Third Street, San
Rafael
T5 Main Street Retail stores and parking lots (<1950) Mixed use commercial and multifamily housing2019 120 In addition, the Town has a demonstrated history of conversion of former gas stations and auto repair uses to other land uses, with remediation under the supervision of the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC), as listed below:
• 613 (formerly 631) Sir Francis Drake Boulevard: This site is zoned for commercial uses and was the site of a former Mobile Unocal gas station.

The project site removed the gas station and cleaned up the site after 1984 and now serves as an ancillary parking lot to an adjacent grocery store.
• 111 Red Hill Avenue: This site is zoned for commercial uses and was the site of a former Chevron gas station. The project site was redeveloped into a commercial building in 1990.
• 1535 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard: This site is in the Specific Planned Development (SPD) zone with an underlying Neighborhood Commercial land use designation and was the site of a former Mobile gas station. The project site was redeveloped into an eight-unit multi-family 0 5
10 15
20 25
30 35
40 45
50 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8
Number of Sites
Sum of Nonvacant Site Suitability Scores
Figure 6.2 Nonvacant Sites Suitability Analysis
Summary
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
966
NOVEMBER 2023
164
development in 2008.
• 100 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard: This site is zoned for commercial uses and was the site of a former auto repair shop with gas pumps. The project site was redeveloped with a commercial office building in 2003.

In a nearby jurisdiction, a site with an existing gas station at 1005 Northgate Drive in San Rafael received approval in 2019 to redevelop the site with 30 residential units. While many of the San Anselmo sites listed above were redeveloped with commercial uses, the Town’s Zoning Code at the time did not allow for by-right residential development in commercial zoning districts. The sites with gas stations or auto uses in the Housing Opportunity Site Inventory are proposed to be redesignated and rezoned to accommodate residential development to meet the identified housing need in Action 5.7a, creating an opportunity to redevelop with residential uses. Furthermore, Policy 5 programs and actions remove barriers from development and provide incentives including, but not limited to, density increases, reduced development standards, and the use of the ODDS.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) EPA developed the UST Finder, a web map application containing a comprehensive, state-sourced national map of underground storage tanks (UST) and leaking USTs (LUST). It provides the attributes and locations of active and closed USTs, UST facilities, and LUST sites. There are three total USTs in San Anselmo, as identified in Appendix B, and none of them are leaking, which would require remediation.

There are no sites in the Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory that are identified by DTSC or the Town of San Anselmo as having known or suspected contamination issues. If a site is determined to have environmental issues upon redevelopment, there are resources available to incentivize remediation and development. Redevelopment is encouraged by the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) petroleum and brownfields grant funding for cleanup and remediation through the State’s Brownfield and Environmental Restoration Program.1 The grants offered at the state level and federal level offset the costs of redevelopment. Furthermore, local market trends point to the redevelopment potential of sites with contamination (from previous uses) to housing. As an example, a mixed-use project at 999 Third Street in San Rafael (zoned T5 Neighborhood) received approval in 2020 for environmental remediation from previous uses as a gas plant (overseen by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control) and construction of research & development facilities, a senior center, and 67 units of affordable senior housing. The project is currently under construction. In addition, the Rose Garden project in Larkspur, approved in 2010, constructed 85 housing units following the environmental remediation of hazardous wastes left by previous uses, as overseen by DTSC.

The Town has also received feedback from several owners of the identified housing opportunity sites indicating that the proposed Zoning Code amendments (Policy 5) that would reduce barriers and incentivize development would encourage them to redevelop their properties with housing, further cementing the Town’s confidence that development will occur at the planned densities during the 6th cycle planning period.

Jurisdictions that rely on non-vacant sites to meet 50% or more of their lower income RHNA are subject to a requirement to provide “substantial evidence” that the sites are realistic and developable. San Anselmo is subject to the “substantial evidence” requirement, since more than half of the identified lower-income potential is on non-vacant sites. Examples of substantial evidence include structures that don’t conform with current building standards, uses with low improvement values (such as parking lots), property owner interest in developing the parcel, and higher building vacancy rates. Another aspect of substantial evidence is whether other projects in the town have recently developed (or been approved for development) at the presumed densities. While many of San Anselmo’s non-vacant sites have low value land uses such as parking lots or storage, some sites retain active uses. State law requires that these uses be considered “constraints.” Jurisdictions can mitigate such constraints by providing incentives for residential uses (such as greater height and floor area limits) and working with housing developers to facilitate development.

As required by Government Code § 65583.2(g)(2), the Town has included findings in the resolution adopting the Housing Element that existing uses do not impede additional residential development. The Town has provided incentives and actions to work with developers to ensure that such sites are developable. It has also provided a buffer of additional sites in the event non-vacant sites are not available during the planning period. 1 State-level grants are published here: https://dtsc.ca.gov/brownfields/loans-and-grants/ and https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/grants_loans/ Federal grants are published here: https://www.epa.gov/ust/petroleum-brownfields#federalprog Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
967
NOVEMBER 2023
165
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
1 9 TAMAL AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
2 300 SUNNY
HILLS DR 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 Yes
3 1019 SIR

FRANCIS DRAKE
BLVD
0 1 0 0 0.5 1 1 0 1 4.5 Yes
4 1001 SIR

FRANCIS DRAKE
BLVD
1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
5 8 SAIS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
6 930 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
7 805 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 0 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
8 830 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
8 820 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 6.5 Yes
8 810 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
8 800 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
9 781 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
9 761 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
10 729 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
10 727 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
11 6 BRIDGE AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
11 707 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
12 754 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
12 750 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
968
NOVEMBER 2023
166
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
13 113 SPAULDING
ST 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
14 100 CENTER
BLVD 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
15 112 SPAULDING
ST 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 5 Yes
15 606 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
15 640 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
16 604 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 7 Yes
17 580 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
17 526 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
17 520 RED HILL
AVE 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
17 5 PALM LN 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
17 510 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
17 504 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
18 412 RED HILL
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
18 NO ADDRESS 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
18 9 BUENA VISTA 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
18 400 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
18 17 BUENA VISTA
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
19 330 RED HILL
AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
19 306 RED HILL
AVE 1 0 1 0 0.5 1 1 0 0 4.5 Yes
20 292 RED HILL
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
969
NOVEMBER 2023
166
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
21 NO ADDRESS 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
21 100 RED HILL
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
22 90 RED HILL AVE 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
22 60 RED HILL AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
22 50 RED HILL AVE 0 0 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 4.5 Yes
22 6 RED HILL AVE 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 7.5 Yes
22 2 RED HILL AVE 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
23 275 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
24 208 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
24 210 GREENFIELD
AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
24 222 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 6.5 Yes
24 224 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 6.5 Yes
24 230 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
26 128 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
26 130 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
26 144 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
26 6 W HILLSIDE
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
27 60 GREENFIELD
AVE 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
27 70 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
27 90 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
970
NOVEMBER 2023
167
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
27 NO ADDRESS 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes Yes
27 114 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
27 118 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
28 300 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 1 6.5 Yes
28 312 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
28 316 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
28 324 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 Yes
28 340 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
28 14 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
28 No Address 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes Yes
28 34 GREENFIELD
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
28 40 GREENFIELD
AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
29 43 SAN RAFAEL
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
29 55 SAN RAFAEL
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
30 71 SAN RAFAEL
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
30 76 TAMALPAIS
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
31 206 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 7 Yes
31 214 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
32 43 TAMALPAIS
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
32 41 TAMALPAIS
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 6 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
971
NOVEMBER 2023
169
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
33 50 MARIPOSA
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
34 77 TAMALPAIS
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
34 69 TAMALPAIS
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
34 63 TAMALPAIS
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
35 54 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
35 58 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
36 30 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
36 36 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
37 73 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 Yes
37 69 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 5 Yes
38 47 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
38 43 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
38 41 MAGNOLIA
AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 65 Yes
39 196 TUNSTEAD
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 Yes
40 100 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
40 120 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 5 Yes
40 130 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 7 Yes
40 160 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
40 190 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
972
NOVEMBER 2023
170
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
41 140 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
41 150 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
41 160 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
41 170 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
41 182 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
41 184 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
42 177 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
42 171 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
43 155 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 Yes
44 129 PINE ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
45 110 ROSS AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
46 80 ROSS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
46 88 ROSS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
46 102 ROSS AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
47 1 CEDAR ST 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
47 68 ROSS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
48 61 WOODLAND
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
49 50 ROSS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
50 21 MARIPOSA
AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
50 121 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 6.5 Yes
50 115 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 1 0 6.5 Yes
50 101 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 1 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 6.5 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
973
NOVEMBER 2023
171
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
51 55 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 1 6.5 Yes
51 35 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 0 1 0.5 1 1 0 1 5.5 Yes
51 29 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 4 Yes
52 22 MARIPOSA
AVE 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
53 15 ROSS AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
53 243 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
53 233 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 8 Yes
53 223 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
53 217 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 1 6.5 Yes
54 98 SIR FRANCIS
DRAKE BLVD 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 7 Yes
55 151 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
56 25 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
57 19 TAMALPAIS 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 7 Yes
58 341 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
59 23 ROSS AVE 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 8 Yes
60 21 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 0.5 1 1 0 0 5.5 Yes
61 305 SAN
ANSELMO AVE 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 6 Yes
62 73 ROSS AVE 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 4 Yes
62 70 MARIPOSA
AVE 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 Yes
62 71 ROSS AVE 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
974
NOVEMBER 2023
172
Table 6.10: Non-Vacant Site Suitability
Site Address
Improvement
Ratio
Threshold
Met
Age Of
Structure
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Residential
Potential
Threshold
Met
Unrealized
Commercial
Potential
Threshold
Met
Sites With
Vacant
Buildings
Threshold
Met
Site
within
1/4
Mile of
a
Transit
Stop
Site
Within
ODDS
Focus
Area
Developer
Interest
NonConforming
Structures
Sum of
Nonvacant
Site
Suitability
Scores
Vacant
Site
Meets
Feasibility
for
Development
Threshold
63 51 ROSS AVE 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 6 Yes
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
975
NOVEMBER 2023
173
Replacement Housing Requirements
The Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory includes non-vacant sites, one of which currently provides housing to lower income households: Tam House II at 61 Woodland Avenue (part of Site 47). Action 4.1c requires replacement housing units when any new development (residential, mixed-use, or nonresidential) occurs on a site that has been occupied by or restricted for the use of lower-income households at any time during the previous five years.

Rezone Program for Adequate Sites
The Housing Opportunity Sites Inventory includes sites that will require rezoning or that text amendments be made to existing zoning district designations to accommodate the regional housing need, including for lower-income households. Program 5.2 and Program 5.7 and the associated actions require amendments to the Zoning Code to accommodate higher density and affordable housing San Anselmo’s rezoning program will meet all requirements of Government Code section 65583.2, subdivisions (h) and (i) as detailed below:
• Residential Density. As detailed in Actions 5.2a, 5.2b, 5.7b, 5.7c, 5.7d, 5.7e, the Town will establish a required minimum density of residential development and will allow a maximum density of 30 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the Affordable Housing Overlay District (Program 5.3) will be applied to properties zoned SPD, C-3, and R-3, and it will provide additional flexibility in development standards to encourage affordable housing in San Anselmo. Property owners will also be able to request a zoning amendment to fall within the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, and the Town will waive rezoning fees. However, the Affordable Housing Overlay District is not required to meet the RHNA or make development feasible at the densities prescribed by the base zone. • Mixed Use Development. As detailed in Action 5.2b, the Town of San Anselmo will require that residential use occupy at least 50 percent of the total floor area of a mixed use project.
• Residential Use by Right. The Town will not require a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other discretionary local government review or approval that would constitute a “project” for purposes of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. Any subdivision of the sites shall be subject to all laws, including, but not limited to, the local government ordinance implementing the Subdivision Map Act. As detailed in Actions 3.1b and 3.2a, the Town of San Anselmo will adopt objective design standards for all housing types, including missing middle housing types, which will be used as administrative design review for project approval. Due to the objective, nondiscretionary nature of the objective design standards, design review will not constitute a “project” for purposes of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code.

Infrastructure Availability
As detailed in Chapter 4, Housing Constraints, infrastructure providers in San Anselmo have sufficient capacity to meet the needs of development on the identified housing opportunity sites.

Housing Opportunities Conclusion
The Town of San Anselmo is committed to creating housing opportunities and choice throughout the community and has gone above and beyond the state mandate to do so. San Anselmo’s RHNA 6th Cycle obligation is a total of 833 total units. With 54 units in pipeline projects and 160 projected ADUs, the Town’s obligation is reduced to 619 total units. To plan for the remaining 619 units, the Town has identified 63 sites across 151 parcels that can reasonably accommodate 794 total units – providing the Town with nearly a 30 percent buffer. This significant buffer will ensure that the Town has the resources needed to fulfill its RHNA 6th Cycle obligation and more in the next eight years.

Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
976
NOVEMBER 2023
174
Table 6.11: RHNA 6th Cycle Allocation Compared to Opportunity Site Yield Income Level RHNA
Allocation
RHNA Less Pipeline Projects and ADUs
Plus 20 Percent "No Net Loss" Buffer
Opportunity Sites
Yield
Low Income 398 356.4 325
Moderate Income (80-119% AMI) 121 114.6 272
Above Moderate Income (120% AMI+) 314 301.8 197
Total 833 745 794
Table 6.12 and Table 6.13 below summarize the projected number of units that could be developed on parcels currently suitably designated and zoned to allow residential uses in relation to the RHNA and projected pipeline projects and ADUs. The sites currently suitably zoned to allow residential development are broken down into vacant and non-vacant sites. Redevelopment potential of the non-vacant sites is analyzed in this chapter. As shown in the table, San Anselmo’s RHNA of 833 units cannot be met by already suitably zoned land that allows residential uses.

Therefore, the Town proposes to redesignate and rezone sites to accommodate additional residential development at income levels that meet the identified housing need in Action 5.7a.

Table 6.12: Suitable Sites Zoned for Residential Uses Yield Analysis Very LowIncomeLowIncomeModerateIncomeAbove
ModerateIncome
Total
RHNA 253 145 121 314 833
Estimated Units Accommodated by Vacant
Land Zoned to Allow Residential Uses 0 16 10 26
Estimated Units Accommodated by Non-Vacant
Land Zoned to Allow Residential Uses 182 224 60 466
Projected Units to be Accommodated by
Pipeline Projects and ADUs 50 48 48 68 214
Remaining RHNA to be Accommodated by
Opportunity Sites 118 -167 (surplus) 176 127
Table 6.13: Housing Opportunity Sites Summary Table
Income Category Total
Sites
Total Net
New Units Total Acres Rezoned Sites Rezoned Sites: Net New Units Rezoned Acres Lower Income 16 325 15.80 3 143 6.80
Moderate Income 64 272 14.52 9 32 1.74
Above Moderate
Income 70 197 14.94 58 133 11.60
Total 150 794 45.26 70 308 20.14
Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
977
171
7 AFFIRMATIVELY

FURTHERING

FAIR HOUSING
175 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 978
172
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Introduction and Overview of AB 686
Assembly Bill 686 passed in 2017 requires the inclusion in the Housing Element an analysis of barriers that restrict access to opportunity1 and a commitment to specific meaningful actions to affirmatively further fair housing2 . AB 686 mandates that local governments identify meaningful goals to address the impacts of systemic issues such as residential segregation, housing cost burden, and unequal educational or employment opportunities to the extent these issues create and/or perpetuate discrimination against protected classes3 . In addition, it:
• Requires the state, cities, counties, and public housing authorities to administer their programs and activities related to housing and community development in a way that affirmatively furthers fair housing. • Prohibits the state, cities, counties, and public housing authorities from taking actions materially inconsistent with their AFFH obligation. • Requires that the AFFH obligation be interpreted consistent with HUD’s 2015 regulation, regardless of federal action regarding the regulation. • Adds an AFFH analysis to the Housing Element (an existing planning process that California cities and counties must complete) for plans that are due to begin in 2021.
• Includes in the Housing Element’s AFFH analysis a required examination of issues such as segregation and resident displacement, as well as the required identification of fair housing goals.

The Bill added an assessment of fair housing to the Housing Element which includes the following components: a summary of fair housing issues and assessment of the Town’s fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity; an analysis of segregation patterns and disparities in access to opportunities, an assessment of contributing factors, and an identification of fair housing goals and actions.

Analysis Requirements
An assessment of fair housing must consider the elements and factors that cause, increase, contribute to, maintain, or perpetuate segregation, racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty, significant disparities in access to opportunity, and disproportionate housing needs.4 The analysis must address patterns at a regional and local level and trends in patterns over time. This analysis should compare the locality at a county level or even broader regional level such as a Council of Government, where appropriate, for the purposes of promoting more inclusive communities.

For the purposes of this AFFH, “Regional Trends” describe trends the Bay Area (the members of ABAG) when data is available in the Data Needs Package as well as it could be gathered from the U.S. Census and trends within the boundaries of Marin County. “Local Trends” describe trends specific to the San Anselmo.
1 While the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) does not provide a definition of opportunity, opportunity usually related to the access to resources and improve quality of life. HCD and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC) have created Opportunity Maps to visualize place-based characteristics linked to critical life outcomes, such as educational attainment, earnings from employment, and economic mobility. 2 “Affirmatively furthering fair housing” is defined to mean taking meaningful actions that “overcome patterns of segregation and foster inclusive communities free from barriers that restrict access to opportunity” for communities of color, persons with disabilities, and others protected by California law. 3 A protected class is a group of people sharing a common trait who are legally protected from being discriminated against on the basis of that trait. 4 Gov. Code, §§ 65583, subds. (c)(10)(A), (c)(10)(B), 8899.50, subds. (a), (b), (c); see also AFFH Final Rule and Commentary (AFFH Rule), 80 Fed. Reg. 42271, 42274, 42282-42283, 42322, 42323, 42336, 42339, 42353-42360, esp. 42355-42356 (July 16, 2015). See also 24 C.F.R. §§ 5.150, 5.154(b)(2) (2016). 176 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
979
173
Sources of Information
The Town used a variety of data sources for the assessment of fair housing at the regional and local level. These include:
• Housing Needs Data Packets prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), which rely on 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) data by the U.S. Census Bureau for most characteristics ◦ Note: The ABAG Data Packets also referenced the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) reports (based on the 2013-2017 ACS) • U.S. Census Bureau’s Decennial Census (referred to as “Census”) and American Community Survey (ACS) • Marin County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice in January 2020 (2020 AI). • Local Knowledge
Some of these sources provide data on the same topic, but the resulting data differs due to different methodologies. For example, the decennial Census and ACS report slightly different estimates for the total population, number of households, number of housing units, and household size. The ACS provides estimates based on a small survey of the population taken over the course of the whole year.5 Since the survey size and seasonal population shifts, some information provided by the ACS is less reliable. For this reason, the readers should keep in mind the potential for data errors when drawing conclusions based on the ACS data used in this chapter. The information included provides an indication of possible trends. The analysis makes comparisons between data from the same source during the same time periods, using the ABAG Data Package as the primary source since ABAG has provided data at different geographical levels for the required comparisons. As such, even though more recent ACS data may be available, 2015-2019 ACS reports are cited more frequently (and 2013-2017 for CHAS data).

The Town also used findings and data from the 2020 Marin County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (2020 AI), which includes a variety of locally available information, such as surveys, local history, and events that have historically or currently affect fair housing choice. The Town also sourced regional findings and data from HCD’s 2020 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.

In addition, HCD has developed a statewide AFFH Data Viewer. The AFFH Data Viewer consists of map data layers from various data sources and provides options for addressing each of the components within the full scope of the assessment of fair housing. The data source and time frame used in the AFFH mapping tools may differ from the ACS data in the ABAG package. Time frames across data sources may differ by a few years when data from the same year was not available . As explained earlier, assessments are most useful when indicating possible trends.

For simplicity, this analysis will refer to various sections of the county as North Marin, West Marin, Central Marin, and Southern Marin. San Anselmo is part of Central Marin. These designations are shown in Figure 7.1 and include the following communities and jurisdictions:
• North Marin: Black Point-Green Point, Novato, Lucas Valley-Marinwood • West Marin: Dillon Beach, Tomales, Inverness, Point Reyes Station, Nicasio, Lagunitas-Forest Knolls, San Geronimo, Woodacre, Bolinas, Stinson Beach, Muir Beach
• Central Marin: Sleepy Hollow, Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross, Santa Venetia, San Rafael, Kentfield, Larkspur, Corte Madera • Southern Marin: Mill Valley, Tiburon, Strawberry, Tamalpais-Homestead Valley, Marin City, Belvedere, Sausalito 177 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
980
174
Figure 7.1: Marin County Communities
178 Item 2.5 - Attachment
6 981
175
Assessment of Fair Housing Issues
Fair Housing Enforcement and Outreach
Fair housing enforcement and outreach capacity relates to the ability of a locality and fair housing entities to disseminate information related to fair housing and provide outreach and education to assure community members are aware of fair housing laws and rights. In addition, enforcement and outreach capacity includes the ability to address compliance with fair housing laws, such as investigating complaints, obtaining remedies, and engaging in fair housing testing The Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California (FHANC) provides fair housing services, including fair housing counseling, complaint investigation, and discrimination complaint assistance, to Marin County residents. FHANC is a non-profit agency whose mission is to actively support and promote fair housing through education and advocacy. FHANC also provides fair housing workshops in English and Spanish. Workshops educate tenants on fair housing law and include information on discriminatory practices, protections for immigrants, people with disabilities, and families with children, occupancy standards, and landlord-tenant laws. FHANC also provides educational workshops on home buying and affordable homeownership. FHANC hosts a fair housing conference in Marin County annually.

The County of Marin works in close partnership with the Fair Housing Advocates of Marin (FHAM) (a division of Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California, FHANC). FHAM is the only HUD-certified Housing Counseling Agency in the county, as well as the only fair housing agency with a testing program in the county. Fair Housing Advocates of Marin (FHAM) provides free services to residents protected under federal and state fair housing laws. FHAM helps people address discrimination they have experienced, increasing housing access and opportunity through advocacy as well as requiring housing providers to make changes in discriminatory policies. FHAM provides the following services:

1. Housing counseling for individual tenants and homeowners;

2. Mediations and case investigations;

3. Referral of and representation in complaints to state and federal enforcement agencies;

4. Intervention for people with disabilities requesting reasonable accommodations and modifications;

5. Fair housing training seminars for housing providers, community organizations, and interested individuals;

6. Systemic discrimination investigations;

7. Monitoring Craigslist for discriminatory advertising;

8. Education and outreach activities to members of protected classes on fair housing laws;

9. Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) training and activities to promote fair housing for local jurisdictions and county programs;

10. Pre-purchase counseling/education for people in protected classes who may be victims of predatory lending; and

11. Foreclosure prevention.
179 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
982
176
Fair Housing Enforcement
Regional Trends
The 2020 Analysis of Impediments (AI) presented information on housing discrimination basis for the entire County. Discrimination complaints from both in-place and prospective tenants are filed with FHANC, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), or the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). Complaints filed through HUD/DFEH from 2018-2019, included in the 2020 AI are shown below. More updated FHANC clients (2020-2021) are also included in Table 7.1. A total of 301 housing discrimination complaints were filed with FHANC from 2020 to 2021 and 14 were filed with HUD from 2018 to 2019. Discrimination complaints by protected class are shown in Table 7.1. A majority of complaints, including 78 percent of complaints filed with FHANC and 57 percent of complaints filed with HUD, were related to disability status. This finding is consistent with federal and state trends. According to the 2020 State AI, 51 percent of housing-related complaints filed with DFEH between 2015 and 2019 were filed under disability claims, making disability the most common basis for a complaint. In addition to the complaints detailed in the table below, FHANC also received four complaints based on age, three based on sex, two based on color, one based on sexual orientation, and one based on marital status. Similarly, state trends show that race and familial status are among the most common basis for discrimination complaints (16 percent and 10 percent, between 2015 and 2019).

Table 7.1: Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class (2018-2021) Protected Class
FHANC (2020-21) HUD/DFEH (2018-19)
Complaints Percent Complaints Percent
Disability 235 78% 8 57%
National Origin 38 13% 4 29%
Race 22 7% 3 21%
Gender 19 6% 2 14%
Familial Status 13 4% 1 7%
Source of Income 28 9% N/A N/A
Total 301 N/A 14 N/A
Sources: Marin County Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, 2020; Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California (FHANC), 2020-21.

A reasonable accommodation, as defined in the 2020 AI, “is a change or modification to a housing rule, policy, practice, or service that will allow a qualified tenant or applicant with a disability to participate fully in a housing program or to use and enjoy a dwelling, including public and common spaces.” The 2020 AI reported that FHANC requested 35 reasonable accommodations for clients with disabilities between 2018 and 2019, 33 of which were approved. County staff also advise clients on reasonable accommodations requests. FHANC also provides funding for the Marin Center for Independent Living (MCIL). Since 2017, FHANC has provided funding for 13 MCIL modifications.

As described earlier, the County works with Fair Housing Advocates of Marin (FHAM) (a division of Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California, FHANC) to provide fair housing services to Marin residents. However, FHAM also provides services across a large service area that includes Marin County, Sonoma County, Santa Rosa, Fairfield, and Vallejo.

Historically, FHAM’s fair housing services have been especially beneficial to Latinos, African Americans, people with disabilities, immigrants, families with children, female-headed households (including survivors of domestic violence and sexual harassment), and senior residents; approximately 90 percent of clients are low-income. FHAM’s education services are also available to members of the housing, lending, and advertising industry.

Providing industry professionals with information about their fair housing responsibilities is another means by which FHAM decreases incidences of discrimination and helps to protect the rights of members of protected classes. 180 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
983
177
From 2017 to 2018, the FHAM served 1,657 clients (tenants, homeowners, social service providers, and advocates), a 22 percent increase from the previous year; provided counseling on 592 fair housing cases (a 26 percent increase), intervened for 89 reasonable accommodations granted (a 33 percent increase) of 97 (a 24 percent increase) requested for people with disabilities; funded eight (8) reasonable modification requests to improve accessibility for people with disabilities; investigated 71 rental properties for discriminatory practices, filed 15 administrative fair housing complaints (a 15 percent increase)and one (1) lawsuit; garnered $71,140 in settlements for clients and the agency; and counseled 71 distressed homeowners and assisted homeowners in acquiring $228,197 through Keep Your Home California programs to prevent foreclosure.

During Fiscal Year 2018 to 2019, FHAM counseled 393 tenants and homeowners in Marin County, screening clients for fair housing issues and providing referrals for non-fair housing clients or callers out of FHAM’s service area. Of the households counseled, 211 alleged discrimination and were referred to an attorney or bilingual housing counselor for further assistance (e.g. receiving information on fair housing laws, interventions with housing providers requesting relief from discriminatory behavior, making 35 reasonable accommodation requests on behalf of disabled tenants, four referrals to HUD/DFEH and representation in administrative complaints). Though the complaints FHAM received were on every federal and protected basis, the fair housing administrative complaints filed with the Department of HUD or the California Department of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity alleged discrimination on the basis of disability, race, national origin, gender, and familial status. 181 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
984
178
Local Trends
FHANC received 39 housing discrimination complaints from San Anselmo residents between 2016 to 2021, including five in 2021 (Table 7.2).

It is important to note that the sum of the complaints by protected class shown below will not equal the total as a single complaint may have been filed by a member of multiple protected classes. During this period, a large majority (74.4 percent) of complaints were related to disability status. Less common complaints related to race (7.7 percent), sexual orientation (7.7 percent), and gender (7.7 percent). Two complaints were filed by members of each of the following protected classes: source of income, age, marital status, religion, and national origin. One complaint was filed related to sex and familial status respectively. Consistent with the large proportion of persons filing on the basis of disability, 59 percent of complaints cited reasonable accommodation as a discriminatory practice. Other common discriminatory practices cited include different terms and conditions (15.4 percent), refusal to rent/sale (12.8 percent), and intimidation, interference, or coercion (12.8 percent).

Of the 39 complaints filed during this period, 27 (69.2 percent) were filed by White residents, four were filed by Black/African American residents (10.3 percent), three were filed by other/multiple race residents (7.7 percent), two were filed by American Indian/Alaska Native and White residents (5.1 percent), and two were filed by Asian and White residents (5.1 percent). Nearly 13 percent of complaints were filed by Latino residents. White residents were underrepresented in the pool of complaints, while all other races/ethnicities were overrepresented compared to the distribution of the population (see Table 7.3).

Table 7.2: Discrimination Complaints by Protected Class – San Anselmo (2016-2021) Protected Class 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Total
Disability 5 6 5 5 2 6 74.4%
Race 1 0 0 2 0 0 7.7%
Sexual Orientation 0 0 0 2 1 0 7.7%
Gender 0 0 0 0 2 1 7.7%
Source of Income 1 0 1 0 0 0 5.1%
Age 0 0 1 0 1 0 5.1%
Marital Status 0 0 1 0 1 0 5.1%
Religion 0 0 0 0 1 1 5.1%
National Origin 0 0 0 0 0 2 5.1%
Sex 1 0 0 0 0 0 2.6%
Familial Status 0 0 0 0 1 0 2.6%
Total 5 6 7 7 5 9 39
Note: Sum of complaints by basis will not equal total as a single complaint may be on the basis of multiple protected classes.

Sources: Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California (FHANC), 2020-21.

The HCD Data Viewer records HUD fair housing inquiries. Fair housing inquiries are not official fair housing cases but can be used to identify concerns about possible discrimination. According to 2013-2021 HUD data, there were 0.15 inquiries per 1,000 persons in San Anselmo. The fair housing inquiry rate in the town is like the nearby jurisdictions of Fairfax, Larkspur, and Ross, and lower than San Rafael and Corte Madera. There were two total inquiries from San Anselmo residents during this period, one related to disability status and one related to sex. 182 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
985
179
Fair Housing Testing
Initiated by the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division in 1991, fair housing testing involves the use of an individual or individuals who pose as prospective renters for the purpose of determining whether a landlord is complying with local, state, and federal fair housing laws.

Regional Trends
During the 2018-2019 FY, FHANC conducted email testing, in-person site, and phone testing for Marin County. FHANC conducted 60 email tests to “test the assumption of what ethnicity or race the average person would associate with each of the names proposed.” Email testing showed clear differential treatment favoring the White tester in 27 percent of tests, discrimination based on income in 63 percent of tests, and discrimination based on familial status in 7 percent of tests. Three paired tests (6 tests total) also showed discrimination based on both race and source of income. In 80 percent of tests (24 of 30 paired tests), there was some discrepancy or disadvantage for African American testers and/or testers receiving Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs).3
In-person site and phone tests consisted of an African American tester and a White tester. Of the 10 paired in-person site and phone tests conducted, 50 percent showed differential treatment favoring the White tester, 60 percent showed discrepancies in treatment for HCV recipients, and 30 percent showed discrimination on the basis of race and source of income.

The conclusions of the fair housing tests included in the 2020 AI are as follows:
• Housing providers make exceptions for White Housing Choice Voucher recipients, particularly in high opportunity areas with low poverty. • Email testing revealed significant evidence of discrimination, with 27 percent of tests showing clear differential treatment favoring the White tester and 63 percent of tests showing at least some level of discrimination based upon source of income. • Phone/site testing also revealed significant instances of discrimination: 50 percent of discrimination based upon race and 60 percent based on source of income.

In Fiscal Year 2018 to 2019, Fair Housing Advocates of Marin (FHAM) conducted systemic race discrimination investigations as well as complaintbased testing, with testing for race, national origin, disability, gender, and familial status discrimination. FHAM monitored Craigslist for discriminatory advertising, with the additional recently added protection for individuals using housing subsidies in unincorporated parts of Marin.

FHAM notified 77 housing providers in Marin during the year regarding discriminatory language in their advertisements.

The 2020 State AI did not report any findings on fair housing testing. However, the AI concluded that community awareness of fair housing protections correlates with fair housing testing as testing is often complaint-based, like it is for FHAM in Marin County. According to the 2020 State AI, research indicates that persons with disabilities are more likely to request differential treatment to ensure equal access to housing, making them more likely to identify discrimination. The 2020 State AI highlighted the need for continued fair housing outreach, fair housing testing, and trainings to communities across California, to ensure the fair housing rights of residents are protected under federal and state law. The 2020 State AI recommended that the state support the increase of fair housing testing to identify housing discrimination.

The 2020 State AI also reported findings from the 2020 Community Needs Assessment Survey. Respondents felt that the primary bases for housing discrimination were source of income, followed by discriminatory landlord practices, and gender identity and familial status. These results differ from the most cited reason for discrimination in complaints filed with DFEH and FHANC. The State survey also found that most (72 percent) respondents who had felt discriminated against did “nothing” in response. According to the 2020 State AI, “fair housing education and enforcement through the complaint process are areas of opportunity to help ensure that those experiencing discrimination know when and how to seek help.” 3 The Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program is the federal government's major program for assisting very low-income families, the elderly, and persons with disabilities to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. Since housing assistance is provided on behalf of the family or individual, participants are able to find their own housing, including single-family homes, townhouses and apartments. Participants are free to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing projects. Participants issued a housing voucher are responsible for finding a suitable housing unit of their choice where the owner agrees to rent under the program. A housing subsidy is paid to the landlord directly by the local Public Housing Agency (PHA) on behalf of the participant. The participant then pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program. Beginning on January 1, 2020, housing providers, such as landlords, cannot refuse to rent to someone, or otherwise discriminate against them, because they have a housing subsidy, such as a Housing Choice Voucher, that helps them to afford their rent. 183 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
986
180
Local Trends
During the 2018-2019 FY, FHANC conducted email testing in San Anselmo. FHANC conducted eight email tests to “test the assumption of what ethnicity or race the average person would associate with each of the names proposed.” Email testing showed clear differential treatment favoring the White tester in 50 percent of tests, discrimination based on income in 75 percent of tests, and there was also clear differential treatment based upon familial status. Four paired tests showed clear differential treatment based upon race and two paired tests based upon source of income.

In 100 percent of tests (eight of eight paired tests), there was some discrepancy or disadvantage for African American testers and/or testers receiving Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs).

Fair Housing Education and Outreach
Regional Trends
As stated earlier, the 2020 State AI has concluded that fair housing outreach and education is imperative to ensure that those experiencing discrimination know when and how to seek help. FHANC organizes an annual fair housing conference and resource fair for housing providers and advocates. Housing rights workshops are offered to landlords, property managers, and community members. Information on federal and state fair housing laws, common forms of housing discrimination, protected characteristics, unlawful practices, and fair housing liability is presented to workshop participants. The Marin Housing Authority website includes the following information in 103 languages:
• Public Housing, including reasonable accommodations, grievance procedures, transfer policies, Section 3, maintenance service charges, fraud and abuse, resident newsletters, forms and other resources; • HCVs, including for landlords, participants, fraud and abuse and voucher payment standards; • Waitlist information and updates;
• Resident Services, including the Supportive Housing Program and Resident Advisory Board; • Homeownership including Below Market Rate Homeownership Program, Residential Rehab Loan Program, Mortgage Credit Certification Program and the Section 8 Homeownership Program;
• Announcements and news articles, Agency reports and calendar of events.

The County established a Fair Housing Community Advisory Group in 2016. The Community Advisory Group provides advice and feedback on community engagement and communication strategies to County staff, participates in inclusive discussions on fair housing topics, identifies fair housing issues and contributing factors, and assists in developing solutions to mitigate fair housing issues. The County also established a Fair Housing Steering Committee consisting of 20 members representing public housing, faith-based organizations, the Marin Housing Authority, Asian communities, cities and towns, African American communities, business, persons with disabilities, children, legal aid, persons experiencing homelessness, Latino communities, and philanthropy. The Steering Community advises on community engagement strategies, identifies factors contributing to fair housing impediments, incorporates community input and feedback, and provides information on a variety of housing topics to inform actions and implementation plans.

From 2017 to 2018, Fair Housing Advocates of Marin (FHAM) educated 221 prospective homebuyers; trained 201 housing providers on fair housing law and practice, a 28 percent increase from the previous fiscal year. From 2017 to 2018, FHAM also reached 379 tenants and staff from service agencies through fair housing presentations and 227 community members through fair housing conferences (a 37 percent increase); distributed 4,185 pieces of literature; had 100 children participate in our annual Fair Housing Poster Contest from 10 local schools and 16 students participate in our first Fair Housing Poetry Contest from 11 local schools; and offered Storytelling shows about diversity and acceptance to 2,698 children attending 18 Storytelling shows.
184 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
987
181
As of 2021, FHAM agency reaches those least likely to apply for services through the following: · • Translating most of its literature into Spanish and some in Vietnamese; • Continuing to advertise all programs/services in all areas of Marin, including the Canal, Novato, and Marin City, areas where Latino and African-American populations are concentrated and live in segregated neighborhoods; • Maintaining a website with information translated into Spanish and Vietnamese; • Maintaining bilingual staff: As of 2021, FHAM has three bilingual Spanish speakers who offer intake, counseling, education and outreach to monolingual Spanish speakers; in addition, they have one staff member who is bilingual in Mandarin and another in Portuguese; • Maintaining a TTY/TDD line to assist in communication with clients who are deaf/hard of hearing · Offering translation services in other languages when needed;
• Conducting outreach and fair housing and pre-purchase presentations in English and Spanish; • Collaborating with agencies providing services to all protected classes, providing fair housing education to staff and eliciting help to reach vulnerable populations – e.g. Legal Aid of Marin, the Asian Advocacy Project, Canal Alliance, ISOJI, MCIL, Sparkpoint, the District Attorney’s Office, Office of Education, and the Marin Housing Authority.

Local Trends
As previously described in the Public Outreach Chapter, the Town held a series of Virtual Community Meetings and Housing Element Advisory Committee (HEAC) meetings. Both the Virtual Community Meetings and the HEAC meetings included an overview of fair housing issues, what AFFH is and how it relates to the town, current conditions within the town and potential actions to address AFFH issues. The Town is committed to continuing to engage the segments of the population that reside in the neighborhoods with a lower access to opportunity and more fair housing impediments for ongoing input related to housing and community development needs and access to opportunities. This includes access to economic, environmental, educational and transportation opportunities. The Town intends to complete additional outreach as it works to obtain certification of this Housing Element as well as continuing community engagement during the planning period.

Integration and Segregation
Race/Ethnicity
Ethnic and racial composition of a region is useful in analyzing housing demand and any related fair housing concerns, as it tends to demonstrate a relationship with other characteristics such as household size, locational preferences, and mobility. For example, prior studies have identified socioeconomic status, generational care needs, and cultural preferences as factors associated with “doubling up”- households with extended family members and non-kin.4 These factors have also been associated with ethnicity and race. Other studies have also found minorities tend to congregate in metropolitan areas though their mobility trend predictions are complicated by economic status (minorities moving to the suburbs when they achieve middle class) or immigration status (recent immigrants tends to stay in metro areas/ports of entry).5 To measure segregation in a given jurisdiction, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides racial or ethnic dissimilarity trends. Dissimilarity indices are used to measure the evenness with which two groups (frequently defined on racial or ethnic characteristics) are distributed across the geographic units, such as block groups within a community. The index ranges from 0 to 100, with 0 denoting no segregation and 100 indicating complete segregation between the two groups. The index score can be understood as the percentage of one of the two group that would need to move to produce an even distribution of racial/ethnic groups within the specified area. For example, if an index score above 60, 60 percent of people in the specified area would need to move to eliminate segregation.6 The following shows how HUD views various levels of the index:
• <40: Low Segregation
• 40-54: Moderate Segregation
• >55: High Segregation
4 Harvey, H., Duniforn, R., & Pilkauskas, N. (2021). Under Whose Roof? Understanding the living arrangements of children in doubled-up households. Duke University Press, 58 (3): 821–846. https://doi.org/10.1215/00703370- 9101102
5 Sandefur, G.D., Martin, M., Eggerling-Boeck, J. , Mannon, S.E., & .Meier, A.M. (2001). An overview of racial and ethnic demographic trends. In N. J. Smelser, W.J. Wilson, & F. Mitchell (Eds.) America becoming: Racial trends and their consequences. (Vol I, pp. 40-102). National Academy Press Washington, D.C. . 6 Massey, D.S. and N.A. Denton. (1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 185 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
988
182
Regional Trends
Non-Hispanic Whites make up 71.2 percent of Marin County’s population, a significantly larger share than in the Bay Area region7, where only 39 percent of the population is non-Hispanic White. The next largest racial/ethnic group in Marin County is Hispanic/Latino, making up 16 percent of the population, followed by Asian population (5.8 percent), and population of two or more races (3.8 percent) (Table 7.3). Of the selected jurisdictions surrounding San Anselmo, San Rafael has the most concentrated Hispanic population, where 31 percent of residents are Hispanic or Latino, while Ross has the smallest Hispanic population of only 3.5 percent (and inversely the largest White population of 89 percent). These trends differ from the Bay Area, where Asians make up the second largest share of the population (27 percent). While Asians make up the third largest share of the population in Marin County, they account for only six percent of the population.

Table 7.3: Racial Composition in Neighboring Cities and County (2019) Race Bay Area10 Marin
County
San
Anselmo
Corte
Madera Fairfax Larkspur Ross San Rafael
White, non-Hispanic 3,030,040
(39.3%)
185,079
(71.2%)
10,759
(85.9%)
7,723
(78.5%)
6,237
(82.3%)
9,597
(77.9%)
2,040
(89.1%)
33,502
(57.0%)
Black or African American, nonHispanic447,182
(5.8%)
5,459
(2.1%)
100
(0.8%)
226
(2.3%)
30 (0.4%)
86 (0.7%)
69 (3.0%)
764
(1.3%)
American Indian and Alaska
Native, non-Hispanic
15,420
(0.2%)
520
(0.2%) N/A N/A N/A
49 (0.4%) N/A 59(0.1%)
Asian, non-Hispanic 2,058,577
(26.7%1)
15,077
(5.8%)
413
(3.3%)
600
(6.1%)
326
(4.3%)
665
(5.4%)
87 (3.8%)
3,938
(6.7%)
Native Hawaiian and Other
Pacific Islander, non-Hispanic N/A 260
(0.1%) N/A N/A
30 (0.4%)
12 (0.1%) N/A N/A
Some other race, non-Hispanic N/A 2,339
(0.9%)
38 (0.3%)
157
(1.6%) N/A
62 (0.5%) N/A 234(0.4%)
Two or more races, non-Hispanic N/A 9,878
(3.8%)
326
(2.6%)
433
(4.4%)
242
(3.2%)
493
(4.0%)
11 (0.5%)
1,998
(3.4%)
Hispanic or Latino 1,811,856
(23.5%)
41,591
(16.0%)
698
(7.1%)
698
(7.1%)
712
(9.4%)
1,355
(11.0%)
80 (3.5%)
18,220
(31.0%)
Total 7,710,026 259,943 12,525 9,838 7,578 12,319 2,290 58,775

1. The “Bay Area” data covers the members of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) which are the counties of: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francis- co, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.

2. Asian and Pacific Islander combined; ABAG Data Package presented data with some races combined.

Sources: American Community Survey, 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates). ABAG Housing Needs Data Package.

As explained above, dissimilarity indices measure segregation, with higher indices signifying higher segregation. In Marin County, all minority (nonWhite) residents combined are considered moderately segregated from White residents, with an index score of 42.6 in 2020 (Table 7.4). Since 1990, segregation between non-White (all non-white residents combined) and White residents has increased. Dissimilarity indices between Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and White residents have also increased since 1990, indicating that Marin County has become increasingly racially segregated. Based on HUD’s definition of the index, Black and White residents are highly segregated and Hispanic and White residents are moderately segregated, while segregation between Asian/Pacific Islander and White residents is considered low.

Table 7.4: Dissimilarity Indices for Marin County (1990-2020) 1990 Trend 2000 Trend 2010 Trend Current
Non-White/White 31.63 34.08 35.21 42.61
Black/White 54.90 50.87 45.61 57.17
Hispanic/White 36.38 44.29 44.73 49.97
Asian or Pacific Islander/White 19.64 20.13 18.55 25.72 Sources: HUD Dissimilarity Index, 2020.
7 The “Bay Area” data covers the members of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) which are the counties of: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma. 186 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
989
183
In California, based on the figures provided in the 2020 State AI, segregation levels between non-White and White populations were moderate in both entitlement and non-entitlement areas. However, segregation levels in non-entitlement areas are slightly higher with a value of 54.1, compared to

50.1 in entitlement areas. Segregation trends Statewide show an increase in segregation between non-White and White populations between 1990 and 2017 in both entitlement and non-entitlement areas. The 2020 State AI found that California’s segregation levels have consistently been most severe between the Black and White populations, a trend paralleled in Marin County. Also, like Marin County, State trends show Asian or Pacific Islander and White residents are the least segregated when compared to other racial and ethnic groups, but levels are still increasing.

Figure 7.2 and Figure 7.3 below compare the concentration of minority populations in Marin County and the adjacent region by census block group8 in 2010 and 2018. Since 2010, concentrations of racial/ethnic minority groups have increased in most block groups regionwide. In Marin County, non-White populations are most concentrated along the eastern County boundary, specifically in North and Central Marin in the cities of San Rafael, Novato, and the unincorporated communities of Marin City and San Quentin (where a State Prison is located). Red block groups indicate that over 81 percent of the population in the tract is non-White. While non-White populations appear to be increasing across the Marin region, these groups are generally concentrated within the areas described above. However, minorities are more highly concentrated in jurisdictions east and south of Marin County. Most of the block groups along the San Pablo Bay and San Francisco Bay shores in Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Francisco County have higher concentrations of minorities (over 61 percent) compared to North Bay counties (Marin, Sonoma, and Napa).

Figure 7.2: Regional Racial/Ethnic Minority Concentrations by Block Group (2010) 8 Block groups (BGs) are the next level above census blocks in the geographic hierarchy (census blocks are the smallest geographic area for which the Bureau of the Census collects and tabulates decennial census data). A BG is a combination of census blocks that is a subdivision of a census tract or block numbering area (BNA). A county or its statistically equivalent entity contains either census tracts or BNAs; it can not contain both. The BG is the smallest geographic entity for which the decennial census tabulates and publishes sample data. 187 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
990
184
Figure 7.3: Regional Racial/Ethnic Minority Concentrations by Block Group (2018) 188 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
991
185
Figure 7.4 shows census tracts in Marin County and the neighboring region by predominant racial or ethnic groups. The intensity of the color indicates the population percentage gap between the majority racial/ethnic group and the next largest racial/ethnic group. The higher the intensity of the color, the higher the percentage gap between the predominant racial/ethnic group and the next largest racial/ethnic group. The darkest color indicator for each race indicates that over 50 percent of the population in that tract is of a particular race/ethnicity. Gray indicates a White predominant tract, green indicates a Hispanic predominant tract, purple indicates an Asian predominant tract, and red indicates a Black predominant tract. There are only four tracts in the county with non-White predominant populations. Three tracts in Central Marin and one tract in Southern Marin have predominant non-White populations. Two tracts in San Rafael have Hispanic predominant populations (green), one of which has a Hispanic population exceeding 50 percent (90 percent, darkest green), and one tract in the unincorporated San Quentin community has a Black predominant population (40 percent, red). In Southern Marin, one tract in unincorporated Marin City has a Black majority population (41 percent, red). In all other tracts countywide, Whites are the predominant race (grey). By comparison, many census tracts in Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Francisco County have predominant minority populations (shades of purple, green, and red).

Marin City, historically an African American enclave, has experienced significant declines in the local African American population. In 1990, the community was about 90 percent Black/African American, and is currently around 28 percent.

The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated these trends, highlighting communities that are increasingly at risk for higher infection rates. Hispanic/ Latino populations represent about 16 percent of the county and 34 percent of Rental Assistance requests, while Black/African American residents represent about two percent of rental assistance requests.

Figure 7.4: Regional Racial/Ethnic Majority Tracts (2018) 189 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
992
186
Local Trends
Like the county, San Anselmo’s population is mostly White (85.9 percent). As presented in Table 7.5, the town’s White population increased from 83.4 percent in 2010, while the Hispanic/Latino decreased from 7.4 percent in 2010 to 7.1 percent in 2019. Since 2010, the Asian population also decreased, currently representing 3.3 percent of the population. The share of Black/African American residents, American Indian/Alaska Native residents, and residents of two or more races has also decreased during this period. The population, but 8.5 percent of Rental Assistance requests.

Table 7.5: Change in Racial/Ethnic Composition (2010-2019) 2010 2019
Persons Percent Persons Percent
White, non-Hispanic 10,174 83.4% 10,765 85.9%
Black or African American, non-Hispanic 118 1.0% 96 0.8% American Indian and Alaska Native, non-Hispanic 12 0.1% 0 0.0% Asian, non-Hispanic 620 5.1% 418 3.3%
Some other race, non-Hispanic 8 0.1% 32 0.3%
Two or more races, non-Hispanic 371 3.0% 330 2.6%
Hispanic or Latino 900 7.4% 884 7.1%
Total 12,203 100.0% 12,525 100.0%
Sources: 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 ACS (5-Year Estimates).

ABAG provides segregation analyses for Bay Area jurisdictions for the purpose of this AFFH assessment. According to this report, dissimilarity indices between the population of people of color and White population of San Anselmo are lower than the Bay Area average (Table 7.6). Between 2000 to 2020, the White and non-White communities in San Anselmo have become less segregated, and segregation between White and non-White groups townwide is considered low based on HUD’s definitions for dissimilarity indices. Asian/Pacific Islander and White communities have become slightly more segregated during this period, while segregation between Black/African American, Hispanic or Latino, and White communities has generally remained constant. However, dissimilarity indices for San Anselmo may be inaccurate due to the small non-White populations residing in the town.

Table 7.6: Dissimilarity Indices for San Anselmo (2000-2020) San Anselmo Bay Area
2000 2010 2020 2020
Asian/Pacific Islander and White 17.8* 15.8* 18.6* 18.5* Black/African American and. White 19.4* 3.4* 19.2* 24.4* Latino and White 3.2* 5.1 3.3 20.7
People of Color and White 8.8 8.0 5.9 16.8
* Index based on racial group making up less than 5 percent of jurisdiction population. Estimates may be unreliable.

Source: ABAG/MTC AFFH Segregation Report, 2022.
176 San Anselmo Housing Element | Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 190 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
993
187
As presented in Figure 7.5, the entirety of San Anselmo is predominantly White, consistent with the surrounding jurisdictions.

Figure 7.5: Racial/Ethnic Majority Tracts (2018)
191 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
994
188
Figure 7.6 shows the racial/ethnic minority population by block group and the sites inventory used to meet the Town’s RHNA. Racial/ethnic minority residents represent less than 20 percent of the population in all nine block groups that make up the town. All block groups have remained predominantly White since 2010, while block groups in San Rafael, northeast of the town, have seen growing populations of people of color. As discussed previously, the White population townwide has increased since 2010.All units of all income levels generated from the RHNA opportunity sites are located in census tracts which all contain less than or equal to 20 percent non-White populations.

Figure 7.6: Sites Inventory and Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2018) 178 San Anselmo Housing Element | Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 192 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
995
189
Persons with Disabilities
Persons with disabilities have special housing needs because of the lack of accessible and affordable housing, and the higher health costs associated with their disability. In addition, many may be on fixed incomes that further limits their housing options. Persons with disabilities also tend to be more susceptible to housing discrimination due to their disability status and required accommodations associated with their disability. Actions outlined in Program 7.2 will support persons with disabilities in ensuring that new housing developments are accessible and affordable.

Regional Trends
Marin County’s population with a disability9 is similar to that in the Bay Area. As presented in Table 7.7, in Marin County, 9.1 percent of the population has a disability, compared to 9.6 percent in the Bay Area. Black or African American, American Indian and Alaska Native, and non-Hispanic White populations experience disabilities at the highest rates in both the Bay Area and the county (16 percent, 18 percent, and 11 percent in the Bay Area and 15 percent, 12 percent, and 10 percent in Marin County, respectively). Nearly 37 percent of Marin County’s population aged 75 and older and

14.6 percent aged 65 to 74 has one or more disability, lower shares than in the Bay Area. Ambulatory and independent living difficulties are the most common disability type in the county and Bay Area
According to the 2015-2019 ACS, populations of persons with disabilities in Marin County cities are generally consistent, ranging from 7.2 percent in Ross to 10 percent in Novato. Figure 7.7 shows that less than 20 percent of the population in all tracts in the county have a disability. Persons with disabilities are generally not concentrated in one area in the region. Figure 7.7 also shows that only few census tracts in the region have a population with a disability higher than 20 percent. However, multiple census tracts with a population with disabilities between 15 and 20 percent are concentrated along San Pablo Bay and San Francisco Bay in Napa, Contra Costa, and Contra Costa Valley.

Table 7.7: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – Marin County (2019) Bay Area Marin County
Percent with a Disability Percent with a Disability
Civilian non-institutionalized population 9.6% 9.1%
Race/Ethnicity
Black or African American alone 15.9% 14.8%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 17.5% 12.1%
Asian alone 7.3% 7.3%
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 9.3% 0.8% Some other race alone 6.8% 4.7%
Two or more races 8.2% 8.9%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 11.3% 9.9%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 7.9% 6.1%
Age
Under 5 years 0.6% 0.7%
5 to 17 years 3.8% 2.9%
18 to 34 years 4.6% 5.9%
35 to 64 years 8.0% 6.1%
65 to 74 years 19.6% 14.6%
75 years and over 47.8% 36.8%
Type
Hearing difficulty 2.7% 3.0%
Vision difficulty 1.7% 1.5%
Cognitive difficulty 3.7% 3.2%
Ambulatory difficulty 4.8% 4.3%
Self-care difficulty 2.2% 2.0%
Independent living difficulty 3.9% 4.3%

1. The “Bay Area” data covers the members of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) which are the counties of: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma.

Sources: American Community Survey, 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates). 9 The American Community Survey asks about six disability types: hearing difficulty, vision difficulty, cognitive difficulty, ambulatory difficulty, self-care difficulty, and independent living difficulty. Respondents who report anyone of the six disability types are considered to have a disability. For more information visit: https://www.census.gov/topics/health/disability/guidance/data-collection-acs.html#:~:text=Physical%20Disability%20Conditions%20that%20substantially,reaching%2C%20lifting%2C%20or%20carrying. 193 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
996
190
Figure 7.7: Sites Inventory and Racial/Ethnic Minority Population by Block Group (2018) 194 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
997
191
Local Trends
According to the 2015-2019 ACS, 7.6 percent of San Anselmo residents experience a disability, compared to 9.1 percent countywide. Disabilities are most common amongst elderly residents; approximately 39 percent of persons aged 75 and over and 11.5 percent of persons aged 64 to 74 experience a disability (Table 7.8). The most common disabilities in San Anselmo are ambulatory difficulties (3.6 percent) and hearing difficulties (3 percent). The population of persons with disabilities has generally remained constant since the 2008-2012 ACS (7.7 percent with disability). The proportion of elderly adults aged 65 and older who experience a disability in the town is lower than the county, but a larger proportion of youths (5 to 17 years old) and young adults (18 to 34 years old) experience a disability. There is a significantly higher rate of Black/African American residents (13 percent) and residents of two or more races (15.8 percent) who experience a disability compared to other racial/ethnic groups in San Anselmo.

Table 7.8: Populations of Persons with Disabilities – San Anselmo (2019)
Total Population Percent with a
Disability
Total civilian non-institutionalized population 12,487 7.6% Race/Ethnicity
Black or African American alone 92 13.0%
Asian alone 418 6.9%
Some other race alone 392 0.0%
Two or more races 342 15.8%
White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 10,735 7.8%
Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 880 2.8%
Age
Under 5 years 562 0.0%
5 to 17 years 2,195 6.5%
18 to 34 years 1,571 2.5%
35 to 64 years 5,815 4.7%
65 to 74 years 1,520 11.5%
75 years and over 824 39.1%
Type
Hearing difficulty N/A 3.0%
Vision difficulty N/A 2.1%
Cognitive difficulty N/A 2.8%
Ambulatory difficulty N/A 3.6%
Self-care difficulty N/A 1.4%
Independent living difficulty N/A 2.8%
Source: American Community Survey, 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates). 195 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
998
192
Figure 7.8 shows the population of persons with disabilities by census tract based on the 2015-2019 ACS. Three tracts make up San Anselmo: tract 1150 (northern San Anselmo), tract 1160 (central western San Anselmo), and tract 1170 (southern San Anselmo). Tract 1150 encompasses areas north of Sir Francis Drake Boulevard and Shaw Drive, including Sorich Ranch Park. It is important to note that this tract also encompasses much of the Sleepy Hollow community north of the town.

The southern San Anselmo tract (tract 1170) has a higher concentration of persons with disabilities compared to the northern areas (tracts 1150 and 1160). According to the HCD AFFH Data Viewer, 11.4 percent of the population in tract 1170 experiences one or more disability, compared to only

7.5 percent in tract 1160 and 6.1 percent in tract 1150. This trend may be due to the distribution of elderly residents. According to the 2015-2019 ACS, tract 1170 has an elderly population of 21 percent compared to 17.8 percent in tract 1160 and 19.1 percent in tract 1150. There is also one subsidized housing project in the town, Oak Hill Apartments. Oak Hill Apartments is located in the southern section of the town and serves the developmentally disabled population. Oak Hill Apartments includes 14 units, 13 of which are affordable units.

Sites Inventory
The distribution of units selected to meet the Town’s RHNA by income level and population of persons with disabilities is presented in Table 7.9 and Figure 7.8. Most RHNA sites are located in the southern tract (1170). As such, 84 percent of units yielded from opportunity sites are located in the tract where more than 10 percent of the population experiences a disability. A larger share of above moderate-income (97 percent) and moderateincome (97 percent) units are in this tract compared to lower income units (66 percent).

Table 7.9: Distribution of Opportunity Site Units by Population of Persons with Disabilities Percent with
Disability (Tract)
Lower Income Units Moderate Income Units AboveModerate Income Units All RHNA Units
Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent <10% 112 34% 8 3% 5 3% 125 16%
10-20% 213 66% 264 97% 196 97% 673 84%
Total 325 100% 272 100% 201 100% 798 100%
182 San Anselmo Housing Element | Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 196 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
999
193
Figure 7.8: Sites Inventory and Concentration of Persons with Disabilities by Tract 197 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1000
194
Familial Status
Under the Fair Housing Act, housing providers may not discriminate because of familial status. Familial status covers: the presence of children under the age of 18, pregnant persons, any person in the process of securing legal custody of a minor child (including adoptive or foster parents).

Examples of familial status discrimination include refusing to rent to families with children, evicting families once a child joins the family through, e.g., birth, adoption, custody, or requiring families with children to live on specific floors or in specific buildings or areas. Single parent households are also protected by fair housing law.

Regional Trends
According to the 2019 ACS, there are slightly fewer households with children in Marin County than the Bay Area. About 27 percent of households in Marin County have children under the age of 18, with 21 percent married-couple households with children and six percent single-parent households (Figure 7.9). In the Bay Area, about 32 percent of households have children and like the county, most households with children are married-couple households. Within Marin County, the cities of Larkspur and Ross have the highest percentage of households with children (50.1 percent and 40.6 percent, respectively). Larkspur, Corte Madera, and San Rafael have concentrations of single-parent households exceeding the countywide average.

Figure 7.10 shows the distribution of children in married households and single female headed households in the region.

Census tracts with high concentrations of children living in married couple households are not concentrated in one area of Marin County. Most census tracts have over 60 percent of children living in married-persons households. Regionally, children in married-person households are more common in inland census tracts (away from the bay areas). The inverse trend is seen for children living in single-parent female-headed households, is shown in Figure 7.11. In most tracts countywide, less than 20 percent of children live in female-headed households. Between 20 and 40 percent of children live in female-headed households in two tracts: one in Southern Marin in the unincorporated community of Marin City and one in West Marin near the unincorporated community of Bolinas. Regionally, tracts with a higher percentage of children in married-persons households are found along the San Pablo and San Francisco bays.
184
Figure 7.9: Households with Children in Marin County and Incorporated Cities (2019) Source: American Community Survey, 2015-2019 ACS (5-Year Estimates) San Anselmo Housing Element | Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing 198 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1001
195
Figure 7.10: Regional Percent of Children in Married Couple Households by Tract (2019) 199 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1002
196
Figure 7.11: Regional Percent of Children in Female-Headed Households by Tract (2019) 200 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1003
197
Local Trends
San Anselmo has seen a decrease in households with children in recent years (Table 7.10). During the 2006-2010 ACS, there were 1,807 households with children representing 35.3 percent of all town households. The most recent 2015-2019 ACS estimates show there is now 1,655 households with children in San Anselmo representing 31.7 percent of households townwide. Over five percent of households in the town are single-parent households, most of which are female-headed single-parent households (3.5 percent). Female-headed households with children require special consideration and assistance because of their greater need for affordable housing and accessible day care, health care, and other supportive services.

Table 7.10: Change in Household Type – Households with Children (2006-2019) Household Type 2006-2010 2015-2019 Percent
Change Households Percent Households Percent
Married-couple family with children 1,283 25.1% 1,268 24.3% -1.2% Cohabiting couple with children N/A N/A 38 0.7% N/A
Single-parent, male-headed 167 3.3% 87 1.7% -47.9%
Single-parent, female-headed 343 6.7% 181 3.5% -47.2%
Total Households with Children* 1,807 35.3% 1,655 31.7% -8.4% Total Households 5,118 100.0% 5,219 100.0% 2.0%
* Includes all households with one or more people under 18 years N/A: Data unavailable
Sources: American Community Survey, 2006-2010 and 2015-2019 (5-Year Estimates).

As shown in Figure 7.12, more than 80 percent of children in the northern and southern San Anselmo tracts live in married couple households compared to 69.8 percent of children in tract 1160 along the western town boundary. Despite the smaller proportion of children living in married couple households in this tract, there are no concentrations of children living in single-parent female-headed households in the town. In all San Anselmo tracts, fewer than 20 percent of children live in female-headed households. In tract 1160, 7.6 percent of children live in single-parent maleheaded households, 13.2 percent live in single-parent female-headed households, and 9.4 percent live in cohabiting couple households. While the concentration of children in female-headed households in tract 1160 is comparable to tract 1150 (11.6 percent) and tract 1170 (10.3 percent), a larger proportion live in male-headed households and cohabiting couple households.

Sites Inventory
A majority of units yielded from opportunity sites units (99 percent) are in tracts where more than 80 percent of children live in married couple households including 100 percent of lower income units, 100 percent of moderate-income units, and 98 percent of above moderate-income units (Table 7.11 and Figure 7.12). This trend is consistent with the overall composition of the town and does not disproportionately place units of any income level in tracts where fewer children live in female-headed households.

Table 7.11: Distribution of Opportunity Site Units by Percent of Children in Married Couple Households
Percent of Children in Married
Couple Households (Tract)
Lower Income
Units
Moderate
Income Units
Above
Moderate
Income Units
All RHNA Units
Units Percent Units Percent Units Percent Units Perce
nt
Less than 80% 0 0% 0 0% 5 2% 5 1%
Greater than 80% 325 100% 272 100% 196 98% 793 99%
Total 325 100% 272 100% 201 100% 798 100%
201 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1004
198
Figure 7.12: Sites Inventory and Percent of Children in Married Couple Households by Tract (2019) 202 Item 2.5 - Attachment 6
1005
199
Income Level
Identifying low or moderate-income (LMI) geographies and individuals is important to overcome patterns of segregation. HUD defines a LMI area as a Census tract or block group where over 51 percent of the population is LMI (based on HUD income definition of up to 80 percent of the Area Median Income).

San Anselmo City CouncilDecember 12, 2023

San Anselmo City Council
December 12, 2023